Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
Thursday, January 24, 2008
9:00 a.m. Session

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

09:00:15 >> CHAIRMAN GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called
09:04:06 to order.
09:04:07 The chair will yield to Ms. Linda Saul-Sena.
09:04:10 >> It is my pleasure this morning to introduce the
09:04:13 gentleman who will be providing the invocation for
09:04:16 City Council.
09:04:16 Mr. Lincoln Tamayo is the headmaster of Academy Prep,
09:04:22 a middle school in the historic Ybor City which
09:04:26 provides true opportunity for children who otherwise
09:04:29 wouldn't have the advantages of an enriched education.
09:04:33 The children go from Academy Prep to other prep
09:04:39 schools and colleges and it opens the world for them.
09:04:42 I want to thank you so much, Mr. Tamayo for being with
09:04:46 us this morning.
09:04:47 Let us stand for the invocation and remain standing
09:04:49 for the pledge of allegiance.
09:04:57 >> From the book of Proverbs, chapter 12 verse 18.
09:05:04 Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of
09:05:07 the wise brings healing. Bow with us.
09:05:15 Lord, today, let us commit to seriously considering
09:05:20 the power of our speech.
09:05:24 Show us ways we can speak words of healing, grace and
09:05:32 holiness.
09:05:33 Most of all, help us to think and to pray for wisdom
09:05:37 before we say and do anything.
09:05:42 Father God, in your great name, we pray, and we say
09:05:47 amen.
09:05:51 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
09:06:05 >>CHAIRMAN: Roll call.
09:06:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:06:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:06:13 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.

09:06:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:06:16 At this time, Mr. Miranda will present a commendation.
09:06:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:06:42 >> It's my pleasure to be here this morning to honor
09:06:45 an individual who has been with the city for 34 years.
09:06:49 First I have been told that he was a draftsman, then
09:06:56 engineer tech, then promoted to public works, project
09:07:00 coordinator, then a budget analyst, then he was public
09:07:04 works project coordinator.
09:07:06 Because of Dave's outstanding managerial skills he
09:07:10 then became fleet administrator and then fleet
09:07:13 manager.
09:07:13 He then again was promoted to contract administration
09:07:17 manager, public works and water, deputy director,
09:07:21 deputy director for redevelopment, and finally he
09:07:24 stands here today as the development service manager
09:07:27 for economic and urban development.
09:07:31 Dave, no wonder you're retiring.
09:07:33 You have got to be tired.
09:07:36 But he's done so much for the city in 34 years, and I
09:07:42 have known Dave for about 20 of those 34 years, and
09:07:46 he's always been a cordial individual who believes in

09:07:51 family, who believes in coming to work every day, no
09:07:57 matter what the weather is, no matter how he feels, he
09:08:00 shows up, and he is a tribute to the many wonderful
09:08:03 employees that the City of Tampa has.
09:08:05 And, Dave, if you will come forward I would like to
09:08:08 make this presentation to you.
09:08:11 And I see you have some of your family members.
09:08:13 Hopefully you can introduce them.
09:08:15 This goes to Mr. Dave Parkinson in recognition for
09:08:18 your 34 years of dedicated services in the City of
09:08:21 Tampa, during those years of service your judgment and
09:08:24 commitment have greatly demonstrated your keen ability
09:08:27 to accomplishing goals, the many successful projects
09:08:33 that were accomplished during your tenure, that left
09:08:38 your indelible mark on the city infrastructure, and
09:08:42 because of that, of this community, you will sorely be
09:08:46 missed.
09:08:47 It's an honor for me to stand here with a dedicated
09:08:50 individual, one who set the standard for many
09:08:53 employees in the city for many years to come.
09:08:56 [ Applause ]
09:08:57 >> I would like to introduce my family, Jan Parkinson,

09:09:10 David Parkinson, Dave Parkinson.
09:09:14 Reading all the classifications of jobs I had, I guess
09:09:17 another way to look at that is, you know, I just can't
09:09:20 hold a job.
09:09:21 [ Laughter ]
09:09:22 But I have had an opportunity to have a great career
09:09:27 with the city and it's been great for me.
09:09:29 I made a lot of friends.
09:09:30 A lot of friends that I will continue to have.
09:09:35 Now that I leave this career I'm planning to start a
09:09:38 new career.
09:09:39 On Saturday, February 2nd, I start school again to
09:09:42 get my teacher's certificate to teach in elementary
09:09:45 school in Hillsborough County.
09:09:46 So hopefully I will have another successful career
09:09:49 there.
09:09:49 And I thank you for this commendation and this
09:09:55 proclamation.
09:09:56 I appreciate it.
09:09:57 Thank you very much.
09:09:58 [ Applause ]
09:10:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Parkinson, could you come up to

09:10:04 the podium again?
09:10:05 I just wanted to join Mr. Miranda in saying I have
09:10:08 worked with you for decades.
09:10:09 One of your most wonderful qualities is in your quiet
09:10:15 diplomatic way you manage to unsnarl diplomatic
09:10:20 tangles.
09:10:21 When people need to put awnings over sidewalks and get
09:10:25 the Department of Transportation, you calm poem down.
09:10:30 If you weren't becoming an elementary teacher, I would
09:10:34 suggest you become a mediator because I think you
09:10:36 really have those skills.
09:10:40 They will be very fortunate children you teach and I
09:10:42 wish you all the best.
09:10:43 Thank you for all your years of service to the city.
09:10:47 [ Applause ]
09:10:48 >>MARK HUEY: Economic development administrator.
09:10:56 I have had the privilege to work with Dave for about
09:10:58 four and a half years.
09:10:59 When I came to the city four and a half years ago, a
09:11:01 lot of challenges were put into my lap.
09:11:04 And the first thing I had to figure out is how I was
09:11:07 going to -- for somebody who was new to a large

09:11:14 institution, very complex institution.
09:11:15 How were we going to move large projects forward?
09:11:18 I began to do a little detective work.
09:11:20 And in that I found out about everything that I need
09:11:22 to know about David Parkinson in those four and a half
09:11:26 years ago.
09:11:26 I began to ask people, who has the leadership ability
09:11:29 to get things done in the city?
09:11:31 Who has the breadth of knowledge?
09:11:33 Who has the credibility?
09:11:34 Who has the persistence?
09:11:36 Who has the demeanor to make things happen and the
09:11:39 track record?
09:11:41 First and foremost in every conversation, the name
09:11:43 that came up was David Parkinson.
09:11:45 He was just such a person.
09:11:48 A problem solver.
09:11:53 Some of you describe as diplomatic.
09:12:01 Dave joined the economic development team and he was
09:12:04 in fact the first member of the urban development
09:12:06 department, which is the department which supports our
09:12:08 most important redevelopment initiative, CRA,

09:12:12 redevelopment agency.
09:12:13 And during that time, he has done exactly as I was
09:12:18 told he would in fact do.
09:12:21 He has made dozens and dozens of important projects
09:12:25 happen ranging from creation like Drew Park, Heights,
09:12:33 Central Park, expansion of Ybor, creation of East
09:12:35 Tampa.
09:12:36 Dave was very integral to those.
09:12:38 All of the CRA policies that you have Dave was the
09:12:41 point person on those.
09:12:43 He developed our first attractive annual report last
09:12:48 year, the budgets that you have been getting.
09:12:49 Those were his.
09:12:51 But most importantly, he has shepherded some of our
09:12:56 most important redevelopment efforts through difficult
09:12:59 times, projects like SkyPoint, projects like the
09:13:02 Franklin Street city lots, projects like seaport, the
09:13:06 big apartment project under development in the Channel
09:13:08 District.
09:13:09 Recently, we had a ribbon cutting in the Heights,
09:13:15 another project that Dave shepherded through.
09:13:18 And through all of those projects that David has been,

09:13:21 just as he was billed, a doer, someone who was
09:13:26 positive, someone who got people to work together,
09:13:28 someone who is a creative problem solver.
09:13:31 And, Dave, you have quite a legacy with the city.
09:13:36 You have we appreciate that.
09:13:38 We appreciate personally, I appreciate your friendship
09:13:41 and your support, and your witness to me what really
09:13:47 great public service is all about.
09:13:49 Thank you.
09:13:50 You are going to be very much missed.
09:13:52 [ Applause ]
09:13:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Would the representative for Civitan
09:14:02 club please come forward.
09:14:08 It's my honor to present this commendation to some
09:14:20 great men standing up here, to the Tampa metro and
09:14:23 Clearwater Civitan club.
09:14:26 I am going to present a commendation to them.
09:14:29 Civitan club, the Tampa City Council congratulates and
09:14:32 applauds the Air Force Base and throughout the city to
09:14:40 the service of God and mankind.
09:14:42 February 3rd through 7th, 2008, is clergy
09:14:48 appreciation week, to promote brotherhood and

09:14:53 religious understanding among all people, beyond their
09:14:57 religious persuasion.
09:14:58 Individuals reflect individual religious beliefs and
09:15:01 promote understanding and acceptance of the rights of
09:15:03 others to participate in religion differences.
09:15:07 For these great accomplishments, we commend the
09:15:10 Civitan club for their long standing commitment to
09:15:14 improving the lives of citizens and families
09:15:16 throughout the Tampa Bay area.
09:15:17 Thank you for the hard work that you are doing.
09:15:19 We really appreciate it.
09:15:22 Would you like to say something?
09:15:23 >> Well, it's a great pleasure to come before the
09:15:30 Tampa City Council and accept this award along with my
09:15:33 counterpart Frank jolly from the Clearwater club.
09:15:38 This is going to be -- appreciation week is coming up
09:15:43 in February.
09:15:44 And it is very important for us to recognize our
09:15:48 people who give us the type of leadership that allows
09:15:53 us to deal with our forefathers and to deal with the
09:15:58 higher being.
09:15:59 We thank the City Council for the opportunity to are

09:16:05 more precious to the community and to work for those
09:16:07 that are less fortunate than ourselves, and that is
09:16:10 why Civitan thrives today, is because we believe in
09:16:14 helping those that can't help themselves.
09:16:20 >>> I would just like to mirror Steve's comments.
09:16:23 Civitan is a dynamic and important organization in a
09:16:26 lot of communities throughout the world today, and it
09:16:28 is indeed an honor to be honoring the chaplains from
09:16:33 MacDill Air Force Base, it is something we are
09:16:35 doing for the and they are very busy people and again
09:16:41 we are so fortunate that we are with our brothers and
09:16:47 sisters in Tampa so we can honor such a dynamic group
09:16:51 in MacDill that do such an important job both on
09:16:53 MacDill and further out into the war zones.
09:16:58 Thank you very much for this commendation.
09:17:01 [ Applause ]
09:17:03 >>CHAIRMAN: And nobody's left.
09:17:23 We now go to item number 3.
09:17:46 Someone from the administration, Picnic Island.
09:17:51 Item 3.
09:17:57 >> Good morning, council members.
09:17:59 Tony Rodriguez, public works, transportation division.

09:18:02 I'm here to speak to you today on item number 3, which
09:18:05 is to give you an update of where we are with respect
09:18:13 to creating safer pedestrian and bicycle passage to
09:18:17 the Picnic Island area.
09:18:28 Our transportation staff is working in conjunction
09:18:31 with the parks and rec department, has done some
09:18:34 extensive field work and analysis of the area.
09:18:37 And I would like to bring you up to date on some of
09:18:40 those activities.
09:18:42 First of all, it's just a way of background.
09:18:46 Commerce Street is the primary means of the direct
09:18:50 route, if you will, from getting to the Westshore
09:18:56 Interbay Boulevard intersection over to Picnic Island.
09:18:59 It's classified as a collector road, and on the
09:19:04 eastern end closer to Interbay it carries about 7900
09:19:10 vehicles per day, and further over to the west side,
09:19:15 it's around 1500 vehicles per day.
09:19:17 It's a two-lane undivided roadway, and the
09:19:21 right-of-way varies anywhere from 1900, which is very
09:19:27 narrow, to 30 feet, which is still fairly narrow.
09:19:35 We have a lot of truck traffic in conjunction with the
09:19:40 port activity down in the Port Tampa area.

09:19:43 We have also done some speed studies down there as
09:19:46 well, and we have a documented speed problem along
09:19:49 commerce Boulevard.
09:19:52 Our 85th percentile speeds are ranging from 39 to
09:19:56 47 miles per hour.
09:19:57 So we have a combination of heavy truck traffic as
09:20:02 well as speeding down there.
09:20:05 We did a three-year cross summary, and we noted 14
09:20:09 crashes, thank goodness none either involved
09:20:14 bicyclists oar pedestrians.
09:20:18 In the research we have seen that the Tampa
09:20:20 comprehensive plan, as well as the greenways and
09:20:23 trails master plan, does not have any improvements
09:20:29 listed or recommended for commerce Boulevard for
09:20:32 either on-road or off-road trails.
09:20:36 Normally in a situation like this, and the constrained
09:20:39 right-of-way is really from our last residential rode
09:20:44 roadway in Port Tampa over to the entrance of Port
09:20:46 Tampa to the Picnic Island park.
09:20:49 Normally what we would do is put up the "share the
09:20:54 road" signs which would make everyone aware that both
09:20:59 bicyclists and pedestrians should be sharing the road

09:21:03 with the vehicles.
09:21:04 But due to the truck traffic as well as the speeding
09:21:06 problem, we in transportation don't feel comfortable
09:21:10 channelizing folks through that corridor like that.
09:21:14 So since we do have a documented speed problem, we
09:21:18 will work with the Tampa Police Department to get
09:21:20 increased enforcement out in the area, and in addition
09:21:24 to that, we have some opportunities perhaps as we go
09:21:27 through the comp plan, update process, if it's the
09:21:31 will of the community, to put these corridors on the
09:21:34 comprehensive plan for bicycle/pedestrian improvements
09:21:40 and as well work that into the greenways and trails
09:21:43 master plan.
09:21:44 One of the options we do have, we do have a greenways
09:21:46 and trails master plan which essentially runs along
09:21:48 the north boundary of MacDill Air Force Base.
09:21:52 If we could somehow channelize that traffic through
09:21:56 our sidewalk system to the south, and through the
09:22:01 greenways and trails master plan alignment, that could
09:22:04 be a way to get that pedestrian/bicycle traffic out of
09:22:10 that and onto Picnic Island.
09:22:13 That's kind of a long-term solution and we are working

09:22:16 with parks and rec on solutions like that.
09:22:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have a report done by Roy
09:22:21 LaMotte in April of last year, and it said that the
09:22:26 transportation division is has recognized the speeding
09:22:30 problem, and one of the points was west McCoy Avenue
09:22:35 between Manhattan and Westshore as having a worst
09:22:40 speeding problem and says the traffic calming project
09:22:42 has been designed, which includes five speed tables
09:22:46 which will be installed later this fiscal year.
09:22:49 Was that done?
09:22:50 >>> Yes.
09:22:51 McCoy does now have speed tables.
09:22:53 >> Well, that's good.
09:22:57 Since Mary Helen Duke our greenways trails coordinator
09:23:00 is no long area city employee, who is handling the
09:23:02 greenways and trails planning?
09:23:04 >>> I do have a representative from parks and rec.
09:23:08 >> No, from the transportation side.
09:23:10 Actually, that should be a transportation -- I mean,
09:23:15 bicyclists are people who use the transportation
09:23:16 system.
09:23:18 They are people who are legitimately, you know,

09:23:21 transportation clientele.
09:23:23 So I know Jan Washington does sidewalks.
09:23:27 Who plans bike paths?
09:23:29 >>> We have a person in our planning, transportation
09:23:31 planning section, which coordinates with advisory
09:23:40 council, as well as Jan Washington does that as well.
09:23:42 We have a couple of people in the division that work
09:23:46 bike and ped issues.
09:23:50 >> That's great.
09:23:51 We have heard consistently from the people in Port
09:23:53 Tampa, the people that use Picnic Island, that they
09:23:55 want to the be safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.
09:23:58 And since as you point out the roads are constrained,
09:24:00 what can council do as a policy issue to encourage
09:24:04 this, the safer route to be created?
09:24:08 What can we do?
09:24:09 >>> Well, I would think designation of these roadways
09:24:12 within these various planning documents is a very good
09:24:15 first step.
09:24:16 >> That's very big picture.
09:24:18 >>> Sure.
09:24:18 Got to start somewhere.

09:24:19 >> Well, I believe we said we want safe ways for
09:24:23 people to ride their bikes to city parks, and Picnic
09:24:25 Island is really an outstanding park.
09:24:28 So is there anything more specific that we should do,
09:24:31 like request that transportation create a safe bicycle
09:24:36 and pedestrian connection for people to Picnic Island?
09:24:39 >>> From the public works perspective, we can develop
09:24:44 a project which would include right-of-way
09:24:47 acquisition.
09:24:48 >> Perhaps we could apply for SEMAC money or
09:24:52 something?
09:24:52 >>> Sure.
09:24:53 I'm not sure of the SEMAC funding mechanism.
09:24:56 I know that was cut back several years ago.
09:24:58 I know a lot of the greenways and trails did their
09:25:01 funding through SEMAC which are not available anymore.
09:25:04 >> I don't serve on the MPO but several of the MPO
09:25:07 members are here and they can go after those dollars,
09:25:09 and NINA has been excellent at writing grants and
09:25:12 receiving them and the city fared very well in getting
09:25:15 funding along those lines so I guess the motion would
09:25:18 be to request that the transportation department try

09:25:21 to secure funding to create a safe bike and pedestrian
09:25:25 connection to Picnic Island.
09:25:28 >>> Okay, sounds reasonable.
09:25:30 >> Thank you.
09:25:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Was that a motion?
09:25:32 >> Yes.
09:25:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:25:33 (Motion carried).
09:25:35 >>CHAIRMAN: Before we go into our workshop, our
09:25:42 attorney, Mr. Shelby.
09:25:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Good morning, Madam Chair, members of
09:25:46 City Council.
09:25:46 This morning, you have five remaining items to take
09:25:52 care of in your workshop before you take a lunch break
09:25:56 and are scheduled to come back at 1:30 to discuss an
09:25:59 additional item, the WMBE ordinance.
09:26:02 Council, I just want to remind you of your workshop
09:26:05 rules.
09:26:06 A workshop is defined as a meeting City Council has
09:26:08 for the purpose of council being informed on and
09:26:12 discussing matters of special concern that require
09:26:14 time.

09:26:16 And usually afforded for staff reports regular
09:26:20 meeting.
09:26:20 I should also like to remind you that any member of
09:26:23 council, City Council may ask questions of any person
09:26:26 present during the workshop.
09:26:29 And number 4 of section D, the public may be heard on
09:26:32 the matter which is the subject of the workshop if,
09:26:35 upon motion and vote of council, the chair opens the
09:26:38 floor for public comment during the workshop.
09:26:41 No official action on the matter which is the subject
09:26:44 of the workshop shall be taken during or after a
09:26:46 workshop unless the public is afforded the opportunity
09:26:48 to comment prior to action.
09:26:50 However, as we just saw, directions to staff resulting
09:26:54 from the workshop do not require public comment.
09:26:56 Council, it is your policy decision to not take public
09:27:02 comment at a workshop.
09:27:04 Hence, there is no sign-up sheet outside today, and
09:27:08 there is no time on the agenda for public comment,
09:27:12 unless council specifically chooses to do so.
09:27:15 A concern has been raised, council, I just want to
09:27:18 bring it to your attention, that with regard to

09:27:20 allowing the public comment, there's a concern raised
09:27:23 as to consistency and fairness.
09:27:26 Whereas some council members may feel more passionate
09:27:29 about hearing from the public on some items, and some
09:27:32 council members may feel passionate on other items,
09:27:35 that fairness requires a consistent policy.
09:27:38 So I would ask that council be mindful of that as it
09:27:42 moves forward.
09:27:43 Finally, council, you have, for this particular
09:27:47 workshop, scheduled things 15 minutes apart, 9:15,
09:27:50 9:30, 9:45, 10.
09:27:52 Some of them obviously take longer, some of them take
09:27:55 shorter.
09:27:55 And I was wondering if council would want to set time
09:27:59 parameters for each item up front or just remain
09:28:02 mindful of the time after a certain period of time so
09:28:05 it's able to get through all that it's supposed to in
09:28:07 the morning agenda before it takes a lunch break.
09:28:18 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm fine with just going along and
09:28:20 kind of keeping track.
09:28:21 I had a question on the first public comment thing.
09:28:24 You said we could ask questions.

09:28:26 If we have a question for a member of the public,
09:28:29 then, that would require us to -- no?
09:28:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Per council's rules, if you have a
09:28:39 specific question of a specific person, it says any
09:28:42 member of City Council may ask questions of any person
09:28:44 who is present during the workshop --
09:28:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, but without the whole opening
09:28:49 for public comment and everything.
09:28:50 >>>
09:28:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.
09:28:52 >> That's good to know.
09:28:53 Thank you.
09:28:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to open the workshop.
09:28:56 Item 4.
09:28:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
09:28:58 >> Second.
09:28:59 (Motion carried).
09:28:59 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Historic preservation manager.
09:29:08 There was a memo that was provided to you that
09:29:12 addressed some of the issues raised by council member
09:29:15 Miranda, and I'm happy to answer any questions that
09:29:17 you might have regarding that.

09:29:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, do you have any questions?
09:29:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I got the memo.
09:29:24 I read it.
09:29:25 When you talk about one of the costs, fire station 5
09:29:29 on 1910 North Florida Avenue, isn't that building
09:29:32 sold?
09:29:32 I thought I saw something in the paper a couple of
09:29:34 weeks ago that the building was sold and being
09:29:37 renovated by individuals evidently doing a fantastic
09:29:40 job there.
09:29:40 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: That's correct.
09:29:42 And that building has been sold since the original
09:29:46 securing of the facility happened.
09:29:47 That was previously owned by the city.
09:29:49 And that's one of the reasons that there was the
09:29:53 option at that point was to secure the building for a
09:29:57 shorter span of time, as we needed it there.
09:29:59 >> Thank you for doing that.
09:30:00 We are very appreciative of that.
09:30:02 And that's one building then that will be a success.
09:30:05 >>> It appears to be.
09:30:07 We are also financing that direct cost fund.

09:30:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Fernandez, do you think that
09:30:14 the appropriate option would be to -- since the HPC is
09:30:19 in charge of designating historic buildings, it would
09:30:22 be appropriate to ask the HPC to make a recommendation
09:30:25 to City Council in terms of the mothballing of
09:30:30 historic buildings?
09:30:32 >>> I think a recommendation would be appropriate.
09:30:34 I do think that the concept of mothballs as it is
09:30:38 presented in the brief technical brief number 31,
09:30:41 which is what we have been referring to, is somewhat
09:30:45 overly broad to be a successful policy incorporated
09:30:47 into the ordinances.
09:30:49 I think there needs to be some refinement because
09:30:52 these documents that are provided to us in the
09:30:55 National Park Service really pertain to the entire
09:30:57 country, and because of that, they cover a number of
09:30:59 issues that wouldn't really be relevant.
09:31:02 >> Like snow damage.
09:31:03 >>> Right.
09:31:05 >> Then perhaps the appropriate thing would be to ask
09:31:07 you, meaning the staff of the HPC and the board, to
09:31:11 look at Tampa and our issues and our concerns, and

09:31:15 then come back to council with a recommendation.
09:31:18 That would be my motion.
09:31:19 >>> Very well.
09:31:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Dice for lack of a second.
09:31:26 Mr. Miranda?
09:31:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wait.
09:31:33 Let me explain my motion and then repeat it.
09:31:36 The HPC has the responsibility of designating historic
09:31:40 buildings, and currently under our rules, Mr. Caetano,
09:31:43 you can't be designated unless you agree to it.
09:31:45 So everybody who is on the list has agreed to it.
09:31:51 But once something has been designated, if it isn't
09:31:53 used, it can be allowed to lapse.
09:31:57 It's called demolition by neglect.
09:31:59 And currently under our rules, demolition by neglect
09:32:04 happens.
09:32:04 It shouldn't, but it does.
09:32:05 We can look at many buildings and see that they are
09:32:08 falling apart because they have got holes and this and
09:32:11 that.
09:32:11 So rather than council taking action today, what I
09:32:13 would like to do is ask the HPC, which does the

09:32:18 designating, to take a look at the Secretary of the
09:32:21 Interior guidelines, take a look at the specific
09:32:24 conditions in Tampa where, for example, like mold and
09:32:28 rot would be worse than snow damage.
09:32:30 And come back to council within, let's say, 120 days
09:32:35 or however long it takes, just to come back to council
09:32:37 with the recommendation on how we can better secure
09:32:40 the buildings that we have designated as historic.
09:32:46 That's my motion.
09:32:46 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) I'll second that.
09:32:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Turn your mike on.
09:32:56 >> The standards we are using now are national
09:32:59 standards.
09:32:59 >> Don't have any standards.
09:33:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt but I was
09:33:04 handed by Mr. Martin the current code standards for
09:33:07 vacant structures, so council can have a copy.
09:33:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The distinction, if I can clarify,
09:33:13 is we don't have any special standards for historic
09:33:16 buildings.
09:33:17 We just have general standards for vacant structures.
09:33:20 And if you look around Tampa you can see that we

09:33:23 aren't doing such a great job, and we have a lot of
09:33:26 problems with something called demolition by neglect.
09:33:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
09:33:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So what I'm proposing is that the
09:33:32 HPC study Tampa and come back to us with a
09:33:34 recommendation.
09:33:35 As you all can see, number 1, A and B, we have no
09:33:39 specific standards for historic buildings, and we have
09:33:41 no reference for federal standards.
09:33:43 And I'm saying if we have gone through all the
09:33:46 hullabaloo to declare something historic, then perhaps
09:33:49 our standards for vacant structure should be a little
09:33:52 more protective.
09:33:53 >> And Mr. Fernandez, you would be doing that or you
09:33:58 are amenable to doing that?
09:34:00 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
09:34:00 I need to make one clarification before Mr. Fernandez
09:34:03 answers that, and that is currently in your ARC code
09:34:06 you do have a section regarding the prevention of
09:34:09 demolition by neglect, which does prohibit any owner
09:34:12 or tenant of a landmark, landmark site or property in
09:34:15 a historic district or any other designated district.

09:34:18 It requires them to keep in good repair all of the
09:34:21 exterior portions of the building and all the interior
09:34:23 portions which if not so maintained may cause the
09:34:26 building structure to deteriorate or become damaged or
09:34:29 otherwise fall into a state of disrepair.
09:34:32 Do you have that language currently.
09:34:33 I'm not speaking to whether or not it might be
09:34:36 appropriate to have other regulations but I just
09:34:38 wanted to clarify do you have something currently in
09:34:41 your code.
09:34:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Have we ever, ever, ever cited
09:34:45 anybody for that?
09:34:47 >>REBECCA KERT: Not to my knowledge, no.
09:34:49 >> So what we have isn't effective.
09:34:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano.
09:34:54 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Fernandez, the green
09:34:56 ordinance that the city is considering, how is it
09:34:59 going to affect one of your buildings that's not on
09:35:01 the historic register?
09:35:04 >>> Something that was not designated?
09:35:07 >> It's going to be designated to be on a historic --
09:35:10 we have like 2,000-something historic buildings?

09:35:14 >>> That consists of the districts as well, which is
09:35:17 the comprehensive number.
09:35:19 But the buildings that would be designated, as I
09:35:24 understand, would perhaps have a more enhanced level
09:35:29 of securing, if they were not designated then they
09:35:33 would just meet the building standards in chapter 19.
09:35:37 >> So they wouldn't be in compliance.
09:35:39 They don't have to comply with the green ordinance if
09:35:41 we pass that?
09:35:42 >>> The green ordinance?
09:35:43 I don't think there's a relationship between the two.
09:35:49 >>CINDY MILLER: Director growth management development
09:35:51 services.
09:35:51 When it comes to I think what we'll be discussing
09:35:55 later today, I believe, councilman, what you are
09:36:00 referring to is if there is a LEED standard
09:36:02 established for commercial.
09:36:03 >> Right.
09:36:04 >>CINDY MILLER: We are not, I believe this is the
09:36:08 case, not advocating a mandate for LEED certification
09:36:10 for privately owned structures.
09:36:13 We are looking at the goal of a LEED standard for

09:36:16 city-owned structures when it comes to new
09:36:19 construction.
09:36:20 I think the best thing to say about historic
09:36:22 preservation, and basically this comes right from
09:36:28 preservation magazine frankly, when it comes to
09:36:30 historic preservation, that it's probably the best
09:36:33 example of reuse, and it automatically provides
09:36:37 sustainability factor, because you are preserving a
09:36:40 building.
09:36:40 So, therefore, you might incorporate some energy
09:36:43 savings and things of that nature that are still very
09:36:45 compatible with historic preservation.
09:36:47 So we do not believe that there will be a negative
09:36:49 effect on historic preservation.
09:36:51 We think they work hand in hand.
09:36:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Fernandez, on your packet that
09:37:01 you gave us, if I am reading it correctly, you have a
09:37:03 number of contributing buildings in the historic
09:37:06 districts, and it lists the four districts, and it
09:37:10 goes on to say that there's 2,820.
09:37:14 Is that correct?
09:37:18 >>> Yes.

09:37:19 >> Then it says here along with Mrs. Saul-Sena, and I
09:37:21 agree some of these things should be looked at but I
09:37:23 don't want a misconception.
09:37:25 It says current code enforcement violation for
09:37:27 deteriorated or dilapidated structures, there have
09:37:30 been cited, I guess, because it says local historic
09:37:34 districts, and it names them by districts, and the
09:37:38 number that I come up with, you have 22 violation that
09:37:41 is were cited.
09:37:42 Is that correct?
09:37:42 >>> That's correct.
09:37:44 According to the code enforcement.
09:37:45 >> According to the report.
09:37:46 >>> Right.
09:37:47 >> So then I have to assume that something is being
09:37:49 done to some degree, whether it's the greatest degree
09:37:52 or not, that I can't tell you.
09:37:54 >>> That's right.
09:37:55 >> But there is some movement in that direction.
09:37:58 And I know that some of us are going to frown at what
09:38:02 I am going to say.
09:38:03 I voted to save one of the most historic buildings in

09:38:07 the city and that's the Tampa Theatre, on a 4-3 vote.
09:38:11 But I also say -- let's use this building as an
09:38:17 example.
09:38:17 It's historical.
09:38:19 This building never had air conditioning in the 30s
09:38:20 and 40s.
09:38:21 This building didn't have the amenities that it has
09:38:23 now.
09:38:25 But, on the other hand, we spend tens of thousands of
09:38:28 dollars every 10 or 12 years repairing the windows.
09:38:33 20 years ago we didn't have this technology.
09:38:38 We contradict, in my own mind, I contradict myself,
09:38:41 and there's an internal battle going in, and I think
09:38:44 I'm losing -- these are all single-pane glass windows.
09:38:49 What do they do?
09:38:50 They create higher electrical use both in the summer
09:38:54 and in the fall and the winter, but yet we can't
09:38:58 change the window because it says you are going to
09:39:01 have just the exact window wood.
09:39:03 Well, right now there is plastic and there is aluminum
09:39:06 windows that does the same thing, and you put a double
09:39:08 window next to a single pane window and no eye can

09:39:12 tell you the difference.
09:39:13 And that saves electricity, it saves wear and tear,
09:39:18 and it saves tens of thousands of dollars to the
09:39:20 taxpayer.
09:39:21 Yet we are not allowed to change the windows in this
09:39:24 building.
09:39:25 Is that correct?
09:39:28 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: That would be correct if these
09:39:30 were the original windows but these were not the
09:39:32 original windows of the building.
09:39:33 So according to the Secretary of the Interior
09:39:34 standards, these windows could be changed to a more
09:39:39 modern type of material.
09:39:40 >> You are the first one that's ever told me that.
09:39:43 You win the con congressional medal of honor in my
09:39:46 book.
09:39:47 The 7th and 8th floor, they are gone over
09:39:52 every ten years at a great cost with zero benefit, not
09:39:56 only the workers that work here, but to the taxpayers
09:40:01 that are paying the bill.
09:40:02 So I'm glad you said that.
09:40:04 Now I have a better understanding of what original and

09:40:08 replacement you have the original window and you
09:40:11 replace it with another window just like it, later on
09:40:14 you can change that window?
09:40:15 >> You lose the original window, for instance, from
09:40:20 the building and that is no longer considered a
09:40:22 historic component of the building and that can be
09:40:25 changed, upgraded to a more contemporary material that
09:40:28 still reflects the historic --
09:40:30 >> The same design, the same look.
09:40:32 It's hard.
09:40:33 I have seen buildings that have been remodeled, and
09:40:36 the cigar factories, and I can't tell the difference.
09:40:38 And, I mean, they look beautiful.
09:40:40 >>> That's correct.
09:40:41 >> And I'm happy to see that.
09:40:42 Thank you very much.
09:40:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Miranda, I think that's a really
09:40:45 good point and especially since we have so many
09:40:48 historic buildings.
09:40:49 And I'm not sure whether this, Ms. Miller, or Linda,
09:40:55 or Mr. Dingfelder might know, but that might be
09:40:57 something that you could contribute to the green

09:41:00 building ordinance that we look at those historic
09:41:03 structures, and in every way we can bring them up to
09:41:07 better, you know, modern efficiency, energy efficiency
09:41:12 standards.
09:41:12 I don't know if that's in there.
09:41:14 Maybe in the draft.
09:41:15 Did you hear what I said, John?
09:41:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A little bit.
09:41:19 >> Charlie was talking about how historic buildings
09:41:22 need to -- like this one, for example, is not energy
09:41:28 efficient because the old windows.
09:41:30 And I was wondering if in the draft for the green
09:41:33 building ordinance that that's a draft that in
09:41:38 historic older buildings there's some way to encourage
09:41:41 that we use some modern materials to update their
09:41:48 energy conservation.
09:41:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think we have addressed it
09:41:53 directly.
09:41:55 Perhaps indirectly.
09:41:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Public buildings, city buildings.
09:42:01 >>CINDY MILLER: Director growth management development
09:42:08 services.

09:42:08 I think this is one example of as I do my
09:42:11 presentation, I am going to talk about how we need to
09:42:14 look at howl all of our various code sections
09:42:16 including chapter 27.
09:42:17 And we need to do it in a very methodical way.
09:42:20 I think that would be probably the best opportunity
09:42:22 then for various members of my staff.
09:42:26 Chapter 27, historic preservation components are
09:42:28 within that chapter, and that's where I think we need
09:42:31 to just make sure as we are looking at it from a
09:42:33 sustainable standpoint as well as historic standpoint
09:42:36 that we are considered most those various code
09:42:41 sections and when it comes to utilizing new, more
09:42:44 modern materials, I'm sure that's something our staff
09:42:46 will be very happy to investigate from both ends of
09:42:49 the spectrum.
09:42:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to restate my motion
09:42:54 for Mr. Dingfelder who walked in, which is the request
09:42:58 of the HPC, staff and board, look at better ways to
09:43:01 protect vacant structures and come back to council
09:43:04 with a recommendation.
09:43:05 >> Second.

09:43:08 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
09:43:14 (Motion carried).
09:43:16 >> Question concerning process, and maybe Terry can
09:43:23 answer this. At our workshop, remember before we
09:43:23 talked about not taking action so a motion would carry
09:43:23 over to our regular meeting --
09:43:25 (off microphone)
09:43:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member Scott, pursuant to
09:43:34 council's rules, no official action on the matter
09:43:38 which is the subject of the workshop shall be taken,
09:43:41 official action, unless the public is afforded the
09:43:44 opportunity to comment prior to action.
09:43:46 However, in council's rules, directions to staff
09:43:48 resulting from the workshop do not require public
09:43:50 comment.
09:43:51 So if it's merely administerial direction to staff.
09:43:57 Again, two council members were absent when I
09:44:01 mentioned the fact that there is no sign-in sheet.
09:44:04 There is no opportunity for public comment per
09:44:07 council's rules.
09:44:07 However, it may be open upon motion, vote of council.
09:44:15 My concern was, and I expressed it to the council

09:44:18 member, to council members, that council should be
09:44:21 consistent in fairness to all parties.
09:44:24 The other thing that is a reminder that council would
09:44:28 find helpful is that any member of City Council may
09:44:30 ask questions of any present person who is in council
09:44:35 chambers during the workshop without having to open it
09:44:37 up to the public.
09:44:39 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the workshop.
09:44:41 >> So moved.
09:44:42 >> Second.
09:44:43 (Motion carried).
09:44:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We now go to item 5.
09:44:46 We need to open that one.
09:44:47 >> Move to open.
09:44:48 >> Second.
09:44:48 (Motion carried)
09:44:52 >>CHAIRMAN: Comprehensive plan by the Planning
09:44:54 Commission.
09:44:58 >>> Good morning, council.
09:44:59 Glad to be here today.
09:45:01 I want to talk a little bit about the comprehensive
09:45:03 plan and tell you where we are in the process.

09:45:06 Just to let you know because I know there will be
09:45:08 questions.
09:45:08 The plan has been uploaded onto a web site, the latest
09:45:12 draft, which we just finished.
09:45:15 Our hard copies are still at the print shop.
09:45:17 You will be receiving a hard copy on Monday.
09:45:19 But if you want to go to the web site ahead of time at
09:45:33 If you go to that web site you can see the latest
09:45:35 draft.
09:45:35 I want to warn you ahead of time in my presentation we
09:45:37 are going over some of the things that still need to
09:45:39 be done because you will find things that are still
09:45:41 being worked on.
09:45:43 But it is substantially more complete than the draft
09:45:46 that was done prior to the holidays.
09:45:50 And I think you will begin to see the organization of
09:45:52 what we are trying to do with the plan.
09:45:54 With that, what I want to do in the presentation today
09:45:56 is highlight some of the differences between your
09:45:58 existing plan and the new plan in the area that we are
09:46:03 going to be looking at that are somewhat different.

09:46:06 I am for once not going to use the PowerPoint.
09:46:08 I am just going to talk to you about that.
09:46:10 It's probably the first time I have ever done that.
09:46:12 But I think it will be better to focus on the words,
09:46:14 really, for what we are trying to get across.
09:46:17 The biggest point I want to get across is the entire
09:46:19 focus of this plan based on more citizen participation
09:46:23 than we have ever had in a plan update process, both
09:46:26 in the city's plan and the county's plan is the idea
09:46:29 of livability.
09:46:30 The idea of a holistic approach to planning rather
09:46:33 than segmenting the plan into very distinct elements.
09:46:37 Not that that won't exist and not that it won't be
09:46:40 organized in that way but we have tried to weave
09:46:44 things together because one action in one part of the
09:46:46 plan does affect things in another part of the plan
09:46:48 and we tried to bring that together more.
09:46:51 Cities are made up of very complex systems, and the
09:46:53 ideas are to create a living environment that helps
09:46:57 people who live and work there a Chief their highest
09:46:59 potential.
09:46:59 What is the livable community feels like?

09:47:02 It feels safe, offers economic opportunity, attractive
09:47:05 healthy open spaces, choice of lifestyles, and
09:47:09 integrates a complete mix of uses, provides mobility
09:47:12 options and really fosters a sense of place and
09:47:15 community that are unique to that community.
09:47:19 The idea of a livable city is a global movement.
09:47:22 As we change to the perception where people more and
09:47:24 more in the future are going to be able to live where
09:47:27 they want and still work.
09:47:29 It becomes important to become competitive with other
09:47:33 communities worldwide to make sure that the community
09:47:35 we have is a desirable place and a place where people
09:47:37 do want to live.
09:47:39 This ties in with the whole idea of sustainability,
09:47:42 the idea of sustainability really in a very simple way
09:47:45 is sustainability is thriving without compromising the
09:47:50 ability of future generations to meet their needs, and
09:47:52 that's what we are trying to do with this plan.
09:48:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question --
09:48:02 >>CHAIRMAN: No, Mr. Dingfelder, we said we are not
09:48:04 going to interrupt the speaker.
09:48:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The reason I'm opening my mouth is

09:48:08 I just saw the TECO folks come in, and this part of
09:48:12 our workshop is two hours.
09:48:14 I didn't want the TECO folks to sit here for two
09:48:17 hours.
09:48:18 >>GWEN MILLER: No, we said we are going to try to move
09:48:21 them on.
09:48:21 >> My presentation is more like 20 minutes.
09:48:25 I think all the other workshops if you add all of them
09:48:28 together, I think maybe that's what the two hours is.
09:48:31 >>
09:48:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So what's staff's part in this,
09:48:36 Cindy in, terms of response or your participation in
09:48:38 this?
09:48:41 Timewise.
09:48:42 >>> We are doing no presentation.
09:48:48 >> I wanted to be courteous to our friends at TECO.
09:48:52 >>> Thank you.
09:48:53 Growth management strategy we base the plan on, again
09:48:56 when we do the plan, is based on 92,000 approximately
09:48:59 additional people moving to Tampa, is what is
09:49:02 projected.
09:49:03 And 132,000 additional people working in Tampa.

09:49:07 And that's an interesting concept that you have to
09:49:10 understand makes Tampa different than most places.
09:49:12 You will have more people actually employed in the
09:49:14 City of Tampa in the future than you actually have
09:49:16 residents, because it is the center of a growing,
09:49:21 large region.
09:49:22 There's obviously not enough vacant land to
09:49:24 accommodate all that new population in employment, so
09:49:27 throws a shift, really.
09:49:28 For the first time ever Tampa's future will be guided
09:49:32 more by redevelopment than Greenfield development.
09:49:34 This is going to occur over the next 20 years.
09:49:37 It's not a path uncharted because we have already seen
09:49:40 that happen, begin to happen in Pinellas County, where
09:49:42 a lot of the focus now is becoming more redevelopment
09:49:46 as their county is almost completely built out.
09:49:49 What we need to do is use this growth that's going to
09:49:52 occur to actually make Tampa more livable than it is
09:49:54 now.
09:49:55 That's our challenge.
09:49:55 What do we keep?
09:49:56 What do we change?

09:49:58 There has been a backlash against growth and change in
09:50:00 many of our stable neighborhoods.
09:50:03 We believe in a lot of that backlash is because either
09:50:06 the growth that took place or the change that took
09:50:10 place was perceived as not advancing or making the
09:50:13 neighborhood better.
09:50:15 What we have got to do is make sure that the growth we
09:50:17 are bringing here -- R Hoe I mean the fundamental
09:50:20 question is if growth is not making the community
09:50:22 better, why growth?
09:50:23 So we have to make the community a better place.
09:50:26 And that's what we need to look at differently than
09:50:28 what we have done in the past.
09:50:30 The plans fundamental growth, management strategy, and
09:50:34 something that the old plan did not have, is to try to
09:50:37 define areas where we are going to focus growth.
09:50:40 In some areas of the city, to create this change and
09:50:43 to relieve some of the growth pressures in other areas
09:50:46 of the city that are stable and don't really need
09:50:48 massive changes in density to provide good
09:50:51 neighborhoods.
09:50:53 The new plan recognized the patterns of development in

09:50:55 the city.
09:50:57 We have an urban forum.
09:51:00 Plan proposes really five poses to the urban forum.
09:51:04 One is business centers, such as downtown, Westshore
09:51:07 and the USF area, urban villages, such as Tampa
09:51:09 Heights, Davis Island or Ybor City, mixed use
09:51:13 corridors such as Florida Avenue or Nebraska or
09:51:17 Hillsborough, our proposed rail stationary -- in is a
09:51:22 new neighborhood type that will develop as we move
09:51:24 towards having a rail transit system hopefully in the
09:51:27 future -- and stable neighborhoods such as Beach Park,
09:51:29 Forest Hills, Tampa Palms.
09:51:32 Pieces of the urban form are tied together in two
09:51:34 types of planning areas.
09:51:36 One is a planning district, like the university
09:51:38 district, the downtown heritage district, Westshore
09:51:41 district, the remainder of the city is a separate
09:51:44 planning district called suburban neighborhood because
09:51:46 many of those neighborhoods do have suburban
09:51:48 characteristics.
09:51:50 One thing I want to say, just because a neighborhood
09:51:52 might be in a district where we are proposing growth

09:51:55 doesn't mean a particular small area of that district
09:51:57 is appropriate.
09:51:58 I mean, it's never a yes or no answer.
09:52:01 There's always a nuance to it and the plan tries to
09:52:05 give guidelines to what that nuance is.
09:52:08 The plan focuses growth in areas in and around the
09:52:12 areas and mixed use corridor villages and eventually
09:52:15 rail transit stations.
09:52:17 The growth and development in the urban villages will
09:52:19 be guided by the underlying neighborhood plans that
09:52:22 were first used to define them.
09:52:24 So this is not going to change the neighborhood plans
09:52:26 such as David island that have already been done.
09:52:29 It just reinforces those plans as the guiding
09:52:32 principal for the future.
09:52:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ray, do you have that map for to us
09:52:37 see today?
09:52:37 >>> I don't have a smaller map, no. I believe in the
09:52:40 hard copy that you get, we'll have maps of the
09:52:42 districts that are more blown up.
09:52:43 This is just a general map.
09:52:46 Because I really only planned on talking on a pretty

09:52:49 conceptual level today.
09:52:54 I want to point out that as we talk about the
09:52:56 district, the city has seven CRAs that all fall into
09:53:01 these districts.
09:53:02 So, again, these are areas where we said he would want
09:53:05 redevelopment to occur.
09:53:06 We are not going to be making any changes to the
09:53:09 future land use map.
09:53:10 There's some small map amendments.
09:53:12 You will be hearing about them probably privately
09:53:16 initiated.
09:53:16 Also the one probably most major change, we have a
09:53:19 particular category that's been somewhat problematic
09:53:21 called heavy commercial 24.
09:53:23 This is going to be renamed community commercial 35,
09:53:27 and the residential density will be to increase from
09:53:30 24 to 35 dwelling units per acre, it's a maximum in
09:53:33 those areas.
09:53:34 This is to encourage change in our heavy commercial
09:53:36 corridor, to start to bring the opportunity
09:53:39 economically for residential to mix in some of these
09:53:43 corridors.

09:53:44 The real majority of change in the plan is in the
09:53:46 philosophy and policy.
09:53:49 Form-based approach.
09:53:50 This is something that is coming in, the idea of
09:53:52 character of a neighborhood, form and character are
09:53:55 very important, considerations that the city will be
09:53:57 largely driven by redevelopment.
09:54:00 Again, this is really getting into a concept of
09:54:02 redevelopment.
09:54:03 Design elements, the public realm, natural and manned
09:54:07 made landscaping, massing land buildings are examples
09:54:11 of form based planning and zoning and there are
09:54:14 character considerations.
09:54:14 We are going to have a character description for the
09:54:17 different types of development patterns.
09:54:18 For example, pre-world War II, suburban, is a
09:54:22 particular type, post World War II suburban and other
09:54:24 types, contemporary suburban, and the city is already
09:54:28 actually moving ahead into this form base approach in
09:54:31 the land development regulations already so they are
09:54:33 anticipating the plan's change of direction.
09:54:36 Mobility is another area that we have looked at.

09:54:39 A livable city has many different ways in which people
09:54:41 can move around and connect with each other.
09:54:43 The diversity of these choices is key because no one
09:54:46 system can do it all.
09:54:49 There's got to be a very direct and important link
09:54:52 between mobility and a healthy economy and a healthy
09:54:54 environment and healthy society.
09:54:55 The experience needs to be safe, pleasant and
09:54:58 efficient.
09:54:59 Mobility in the plan is going to talk about different
09:55:02 choices, pedestrian, bicycle, automobile, mass transit
09:55:05 which includes both bus and rail.
09:55:07 And what we experience in the public realm as we move
09:55:10 about the city, how it feels, what type of feeling we
09:55:14 have in walking, and the different types of
09:55:16 development patterns around the mobility system.
09:55:18 We have a new section in the plan on the economy.
09:55:20 This is a brand new part of the plan, the economic
09:55:23 well-being of the city, the is vitally important
09:55:26 without healthy economy, there is no city, no nice
09:55:30 neighborhoods, all the other things that we look to
09:55:32 like jobs.

09:55:33 Tampa has a very diverse and strong economic engine,
09:55:38 business center like downtown, Westshore, USF, port,
09:55:42 Tampa international center, hospital, Busch Gardens to
09:55:45 name a few.
09:55:46 We have a wide group of economic engines in our
09:55:50 community.
09:55:51 To complete global, you create a very livable city
09:55:56 with a great business climate.
09:55:57 That's the idea of this plan.
09:55:59 City has an important role in this such as making sure
09:56:01 we have the infrastructure to make this happen,
09:56:06 building community institutions such as the new art
09:56:08 museum and things of that nature, and building strong
09:56:10 neighborhoods.
09:56:12 Neighborhood planning.
09:56:13 This is an important component.
09:56:14 We are going to emphasize neighborhood planning more
09:56:16 in the new plan.
09:56:17 We are planning on working with the city to try to
09:56:20 include the appropriate parts of the neighborhood plan
09:56:22 into the comprehensive plan.
09:56:24 Tampa is a city of neighborhoods, residential and

09:56:26 businesses, going from the more traditional urban
09:56:29 villages to the new linear corridor villages to the
09:56:32 variations of our suburban neighborhoods and business
09:56:34 centers.
09:56:35 Neighborhood planning to form-based codes in the
09:56:38 future.
09:56:38 It's looking at larger areas, several neighborhoods
09:56:41 together, in identifying patterns of development, upon
09:56:44 those assets of the neighborhood, and is creating a
09:56:47 form-based approach to guide future change in that
09:56:49 area.
09:56:51 Existing neighborhoods that have neighborhood plans as
09:56:54 I mentioned are recognized as urban villages, unique
09:56:58 characters, again he would want to reinforce in this
09:57:00 plan.
09:57:01 Sustainability, back to that concept.
09:57:04 Tampa has beautiful, natural amenities.
09:57:06 We want to sustain those features, integrate them into
09:57:10 our daily lives.
09:57:11 And again our man made environment needs to work more
09:57:14 in harmony with the natural environment, whether it be
09:57:17 building green buildings, cleaning up our waterways,

09:57:19 recycling, cleaner mobility options or education
09:57:22 programs.
09:57:23 None of this is really new but recognition we need to
09:57:26 be sustainable is very new.
09:57:28 There's a lot of discussion again on this.
09:57:29 It's a worldwide movement.
09:57:31 That is a major theme to the whole plan.
09:57:33 Build livable cities that are sustainable and
09:57:38 practiced.
09:57:38 Where do we go next?
09:57:39 These are some of the new ideas we are recommending in
09:57:41 this comprehensive plan.
09:57:43 We really tried to be futuristic.
09:57:45 The next workshop we have scheduled with you is on
09:57:48 February 28th.
09:57:50 At that workshop, we are actually going to go through
09:57:52 the plan which you will have some time to have looked
09:57:55 at by then, about a month, so you should be fairly
09:57:59 familiar and he would should be able to be very
09:58:01 specific with answers to your questions at that time.
09:58:04 Just to let you know, the Planning Commission hearing
09:58:08 on the plan is scheduled for March 24th.

09:58:10 Tampa City Councils public hearing to transmit to the
09:58:12 state is planned for April 10.
09:58:17 I would like to just briefly in summary just go over
09:58:21 some of the areas where still work needs to be done.
09:58:24 Again this draft is about 90% complete.
09:58:26 We want to still do some structuring on the idea of
09:58:29 livability, and make sure it's built into the plan.
09:58:35 We want to include -- we haven't included all of
09:58:37 MacDill joint land use study, policies with the
09:58:40 correct language in the plan.
09:58:41 That's still being finalized.
09:58:44 With the city.
09:58:44 We are working with city departments on different
09:58:47 things, sustainable infrastructure for stormwater,
09:58:50 some of the transportation issues, making sure
09:58:55 minority affairs, includes all the appropriate
09:58:59 policies, working with Tampa International Airport to
09:59:01 interface their master plan and the appropriate
09:59:03 policies out of that plan, and just a lot of different
09:59:07 things like completing the definition section on some
09:59:11 of those.
09:59:12 So you might still find some redundancy in the plan,

09:59:15 some internal consistencies, but we are going to be
09:59:17 working over the next month to get that done before
09:59:20 our next draft is released to you which we would like
09:59:27 to have before that February 28th meeting.
09:59:29 Our deadline is March 21st so we should be very
09:59:32 close to having that done.
09:59:33 With that, if you have any questions, I would be happy
09:59:35 to answer them.
09:59:36 We have somewhat diminished Tampa staff that seems to
09:59:40 have the flu running through the Tampa staff.
09:59:45 First Tony and now Terry.
09:59:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mrs. Saul-Sena.
09:59:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thank you for this very exciting
09:59:56 proactive, creative plan.
09:59:58 I think it's going to be great.
10:00:00 I know that we don't have a complete plan before us
10:00:03 now.
10:00:04 I know that the public wants to have the ability to
10:00:07 see this and chat with us.
10:00:08 And my question to you is, do you think it would be
10:00:11 more productive to wait until our next meeting, and
10:00:15 then after that have more of a workshop -- have a

10:00:19 special discussion meeting where the public is allowed
10:00:21 to really participate, or to do it between now and the
10:00:23 next draft?
10:00:26 >>> That would be fine.
10:00:28 Okay, would rather wait.
10:00:31 >> Okay, that's great.
10:00:32 I just needed some direction from you.
10:00:33 >>> Because I think some of the questions will be
10:00:35 answered.
10:00:35 >> And one other quick question.
10:00:37 Yesterday at our livable roadways committee, I
10:00:41 understand that you will be incorporating a lot of
10:00:43 those concepts into this and --
10:00:46 >>> I believe that that has already been incorporated.
10:00:49 So what I would ask you to do since I know you are
10:00:51 interested in that would be to look at the policy that
10:00:53 is we have in the land use section of the plan, even
10:00:56 though they are related to roadways, we felt they were
10:00:59 more related --
10:01:02 >> Well, it's all interconnected.
10:01:03 >>> It's all interconnected, you are correct.
10:01:06 If you want to go ahead you can go to that web site,

10:01:08 and we will give you the hard copy on
10:01:16 that from the print shop.
10:01:17 It's about 500 pages so substantially bigger than our
10:01:20 draft from December.
10:01:21 >> Will you be presenting this to Tampa homeowners
10:01:24 association of neighborhoods?
10:01:25 >> I think we would want to present it to anyone who
10:01:28 would like to have it presented.
10:01:30 So we are certainly open to do that.
10:01:32 And it is available for them to look at now on the web
10:01:35 site.
10:01:36 And if we need to get a copy to them, we can do that,
10:01:39 too, as we have them printed out.
10:01:43 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to follow up.
10:01:46 It might be a good idea to schedule with the T.H.A.N.
10:01:51 people presentation to one of their regular meetings.
10:01:53 >>> That would be great.
10:01:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:02:02 Ray, you mentioned about the people moving into Tampa.
10:02:05 What area does that cover?
10:02:06 >>> 2025.
10:02:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 2025.

10:02:11 And at the same time, the county expects about
10:02:15 400,000.
10:02:15 >>> Right.
10:02:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 2025.
10:02:18 >>> That probably would include I think the 92,000.
10:02:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You mention the fact about the growth
10:02:30 that we have to look at redevelopment.
10:02:35 And that you have 132,000 that will be employed in
10:02:38 downtown Tampa, right?
10:02:40 >>> In the employment centers of Westshore, downtown,
10:02:43 and USF primarily.
10:02:45 But in other parts of the city, too. But those are
10:02:46 the primary employment areas.
10:02:49 >> Have you looked at how that compares with the
10:02:51 county and the growth that is taking place?
10:02:54 >>> In employment or population?
10:02:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In terms of employment.
10:02:57 >>> The interestingly enough, Tampa pretty much keeps
10:03:02 pace with the county even though Tampa is only one
10:03:04 tenth of the land area, basically, I believe that the
10:03:06 numbers aren't that different.
10:03:07 The county will probably be growing by about the same

10:03:10 amount.
10:03:10 Maybe a little bit more but considering it's 900
10:03:14 square miles whereas Tampa is 100 something.
10:03:17 And that's one thing that people noticed to
10:03:19 understand.
10:03:19 Tampa is relatively unique in that.
10:03:22 Even big cities like Chicago don't have that kind of
10:03:25 employment growth.
10:03:26 I mean, their suburban areas are outpacing the growth
10:03:29 in the city by vast amounts, whereas Tampa is somewhat
10:03:34 different.
10:03:35 And it is the center for a very large region and will
10:03:39 remain that way and that's unique for big cities.
10:03:41 It's not losing jobs.
10:03:42 >> You do have your growth outnumbering the county 3
10:03:49 to 1 almost in terms of population, but yet at the
10:03:52 same time, your employment is keeping pace, if not
10:03:57 maybe slightly a head.
10:03:59 >>> I believe at this point in time, I'm not sure, but
10:04:02 I think Tampa does have more employees than the county
10:04:06 does right now.
10:04:07 I think it will be more even in the future.

10:04:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.
10:04:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple of questions.
10:04:14 Thanks, Ray, and your team, and this city team on
10:04:17 this.
10:04:21 Ray, obviously the comp plan is a tool for the
10:04:24 community, and often a tool for council.
10:04:30 It hasn't been a great tool for council in the past,
10:04:34 you know, in terms of the rezonings that are in front
10:04:37 of us, for the comp plan amendments that are in front
10:04:40 of us.
10:04:41 And I'm just wondering, do you envision this document?
10:04:46 I haven't had a chance to look at the draft yet,
10:04:49 except in the very early stages.
10:04:51 But do you envision this document to be a better tool
10:04:54 for council during the growth management process?
10:04:59 >>> Maybe I'm being prejudiced but I believe the
10:05:02 document will be light years ahead of the Tampa plan.
10:05:06 To give you a little history on the existing plan, I
10:05:09 mean it really has not changed very much in the last
10:05:12 15 years.
10:05:12 In fact, you know, about ten years ago, it was
10:05:17 substantially watered down in previous administrations

10:05:22 and a lot of guidance was taken out of it in about
10:05:25 1995.
10:05:26 That was a different time.
10:05:28 You know, we were still coming out of kind of a
10:05:30 recession of sorts that occurred in the early '90s
10:05:34 and there was a big push to anything we could do to
10:05:36 get the development to come back and the city did, but
10:05:39 a lot of detail was taken out of the plan.
10:05:41 So it really has not been revised for a long time.
10:05:43 This is very much a big jump forward.
10:05:47 You know, I always felt working on both plans and the
10:05:50 counties plan tended to be more of the cutting edge,
10:05:52 but far goes beyond what the new plan in my opinion
10:05:56 for the county does.
10:05:57 So we kind of jumped two steps ahead to get out front.
10:06:02 My dream is the plan wins some kind of national award.
10:06:05 I don't know that's going to happen but I'm hoping it
10:06:08 does.
10:06:08 >> And to elaborate on that a little further.
10:06:10 When Tony is here or whoever you send over to evaluate
10:06:13 the rezonings, I often have the sense that, you know,
10:06:19 some of his comments might lean toward recommending,

10:06:23 you know, denial of a rezoning, but there's nothing to
10:06:27 grab hold on in the plan, to recommend that denial, so
10:06:32 therefore he recommends -- but then our staff might
10:06:34 recommend denial, or we might deny it on certain
10:06:39 community.
10:06:39 >> Right.
10:06:39 And that's appropriate.
10:06:40 Remember, when we look at the zonings, and maybe
10:06:44 sometimes there's reluctance because council tends to
10:06:47 be careful, because sometimes whether we like it or
10:06:51 not, this is a legally adopted plan and, now, that
10:06:58 probably comes across sometimes, but that's why I'm
10:07:00 excited that we are going to have more tools, not so
10:07:03 much to turn things down but to be able to craft them
10:07:06 into something better, you know, to take that energy
10:07:10 of something a developer wants to do and turn it into
10:07:12 something positive.
10:07:12 >> When I say turn things down, I mean turn them down
10:07:16 when they are inconsistent or incompatible with what's
10:07:18 going on around them.
10:07:19 >>> Right.
10:07:20 >>

10:07:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Another question I have is you
10:07:22 mentioned the form-base that you are putting a lot of
10:07:26 this form-based concepts and language into the comp
10:07:30 plan.
10:07:33 Right now, and this might be a question more for you,
10:07:35 Cindy, but right now the only area that I'm aware of
10:07:38 that the city is doing form based in Seminole Heights
10:07:41 is sort of a prototype area.
10:07:43 But I guess is there a longer-term plan, Cindy, to
10:07:49 take that form-based concept and spread it out into
10:07:53 other parts of the city?
10:07:57 >>CINDY MILLER: Growth management, development
10:07:58 services.
10:08:00 This sort of even goes into the next item on the
10:08:02 workshop schedule.
10:08:04 The Seminole Heights and local planning community
10:08:09 planning through form based codes.
10:08:11 I don't want to keep focusing on the title form base.
10:08:14 But it is really going to be in our view the pilot
10:08:16 program for Seminole Heights is our first initial
10:08:18 program.
10:08:18 We have to see how it works.

10:08:20 And how we do it as a city and how it does interrelate
10:08:24 with going from a comprehensive plan to a community
10:08:27 plan that you can all utilize for zoning decisions and
10:08:32 it can be utilized for development decisions and
10:08:34 planning.
10:08:35 When it comes to that, yes, we do believe that we will
10:08:38 then go neighborhood by neighborhood.
10:08:39 I'll give you one example.
10:08:42 The 40th Street corridor is probably a perfect example
10:08:46 of where we want to then look at it, assuming our
10:08:51 program goes well with the three neighborhoods and
10:08:52 includes Seminole Heights.
10:08:54 With 40th Street when do have to wait until all the
10:08:56 real estate acquisition is actually done for that
10:08:58 project before we consider any land use changes or
10:09:00 rezoning.
10:09:01 But that is probably a perfect example.
10:09:04 We have a much improved transportation corridor.
10:09:06 We have very energetic and interested neighborhoods in
10:09:10 looking at both the commercial as well as the
10:09:11 residential form.
10:09:12 And so, therefore, that's one example and it won't be

10:09:16 just one neighborhood.
10:09:17 We really have to work with all the various
10:09:19 neighborhood associations in the area.
10:09:21 We are basically, we don't know how many, say, plans
10:09:25 or neighborhood areas we look at.
10:09:28 The concept we think of is somewhere between 12 and
10:09:30 15.
10:09:31 On a city-wide basis.
10:09:33 But if Seminole Heights and this project goes well we
10:09:37 will probably go neighborhood by neighborhood until we
10:09:40 are able to cover the entire city.
10:09:41 >> And is this, the concept -- you call it community
10:09:46 based plan which I heard before, previously four or
10:09:49 five yourself ago we were doing a lot of the
10:09:51 neighborhood planning that Ray referred to.
10:09:54 Sounds like neighborhood planning and community based
10:09:56 planning are pretty much synonymous, right?
10:09:59 >> Neighborhood planning, I think sort of what Ray is
10:10:02 talking about goes a couple more light years ahead
10:10:05 with the comprehensive plan.
10:10:06 When it comes to community plan through form based
10:10:09 code I think the one dilemma we had in the past is

10:10:11 neighborhood planning, it was sort of broad-based
10:10:14 concepts but it wasn't carried then from that plan to
10:10:19 looking at zoning and looking at code.
10:10:22 I think what is the particular benefit of community
10:10:26 planning through form-based code is that you are
10:10:28 looking at the character of the neighborhood as it
10:10:31 exists now, working with the residents, working with
10:10:34 the businesses, to be able to identify what they want
10:10:38 their neighborhood to look like in the future.
10:10:41 And so, therefore, it is really going to be much
10:10:44 further down the road and much more comprehensive than
10:10:48 anything we have done with our previous neighborhood
10:10:49 planning.
10:10:51 Those will be a good starting pointed but we need to
10:10:54 go much further.
10:10:55 >> And I think it's a good direction because a lot of
10:10:57 the frustration in the neighborhoods, as we are doing
10:11:01 neighborhood planning, was it got to that certain
10:11:03 point of broadness and then they wanted to refine,
10:11:07 Tampa Heights, refine it and put it into the code, and
10:11:09 we kind of had the brakes on them.
10:11:12 So now I guess the indication is we will be back to

10:11:15 those neighborhoods to take that neighborhood planning
10:11:17 effort and put it into that community plan and codify
10:11:20 it.
10:11:20 >>CINDY MILLER: What we heard the other evening,
10:11:23 members of my staff attended the Seminole Heights
10:11:26 neighborhood association meeting, had very tremendous
10:11:28 turnout including from other neighborhoods.
10:11:31 I think our only dilemma will be how many
10:11:33 neighborhoods we can do as quickly as we can.
10:11:35 But it will take -- I don't want folks to think this
10:11:37 is like a six-week processor even a six-month process.
10:11:41 Since we are looking at things comprehensively, and
10:11:44 looking at community planning, it will be a multi-year
10:11:47 process as he would work through the entire city.
10:11:49 So I don't want people to have expectations that this
10:11:52 is something quick.
10:11:53 It takes a lot of work on the part of the community,
10:11:56 both residents as well as businesses, and a lot of
10:11:59 work on the part of city staff, because it includes
10:12:01 city staff from all departments that I can identify.
10:12:05 So I don't want to make it sound like we are going to
10:12:07 be out there in six weeks and have everything ready,

10:12:10 the neighborhoods.
10:12:11 It will take us multiple years.
10:12:13 We will work on that as we develop this pilot program.
10:12:15 This will give us the first starting point with the
10:12:17 three neighborhoods in the Seminole Heights area, and
10:12:22 we will go on from there.
10:12:23 At least that's our hope.
10:12:24 >> And my last question is for Ray.
10:12:29 Ray, you mentioned the as one of the areas, I don't
10:12:34 know what you call it, the rail -- the rail -- you
10:12:44 used the term rail.
10:12:45 >>> Yes, I did.
10:12:46 >> But do he would want to be a little broader and
10:12:48 call them transit lane development or was there a
10:12:50 reason you chose not to?
10:12:52 >>> Not to call it transit oriented development?
10:12:55 No particular reason, no.
10:12:57 I just wanted to be clear that it would be around
10:12:59 those rail stations, I mean, realistically.
10:13:05 I think to get into the nuance of it, I think you will
10:13:09 have transit-oriented development, it will occur
10:13:13 throughout the corridor villages and things like that.

10:13:13 I mean, this is a specific difference.
10:13:16 Rail transit does cause a different development
10:13:18 pattern, the buses simply don't do, because it's a
10:13:21 permanent infrastructure investment that causes
10:13:24 developers to react.
10:13:25 >> But some places might be a combination where you
10:13:28 have a bus terminal combined like downtown and
10:13:31 Franklin, North Franklin.
10:13:33 You are going to have a rail station perhaps with
10:13:35 buses, radiating off of there, and that's the way all
10:13:38 of them should be.
10:13:39 And when Mary and I were down at Railolution, a number
10:13:43 -- a couple spoke to the fact you want to get your
10:13:48 TODs.
10:13:51 One of the concepts in some cities around the country
10:13:51 is get those TODs in place even before the rail is
10:13:54 there, and you can even start building your higher
10:13:58 density there, and that way the when the rail comes,
10:14:03 it's sort of a built-in audience.
10:14:05 >>> We built policies into the plan to do that.
10:14:07 Then once a decision is made, okay, we are going to
10:14:09 have a rail station here, then that can open up

10:14:14 actually implementing those how we are going to use
10:14:16 them in that particular area.
10:14:17 The plan will call for a plan to be done once a
10:14:20 decision like that is made to bring those policies
10:14:23 into fruition by a combined kind of community plan
10:14:26 around that rail, proposed rail station, you know,
10:14:28 once we have funding and we know, okay, the year 2015
10:14:32 or whatever we are going to have a station.
10:14:33 >> And you are back to us on the 28th of February?
10:14:37 >>> Yes.
10:14:37 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say to Ms. Miller
10:14:42 that I'm really excited this is getting started in
10:14:44 Seminole Heights.
10:14:44 I would also like to ask that council be invited to
10:14:49 the meeting, because I have been discussing a lot of
10:14:53 these issues with Seminole Heights, and I just read
10:14:56 about that meeting in the paper like the day before
10:14:58 and couldn't attend because I had another commitment.
10:15:01 But I would love especially Seminole Heights to be
10:15:06 included, and I know the Seminole Heights, Reverend
10:15:08 Scott, has part of that district, and councilman
10:15:13 Caetano, too.

10:15:15 And I don't know if any of you had a meeting this week
10:15:19 to discuss that.
10:15:20 And the other thing I wanted to say is just to let you
10:15:22 know that I'm hearing from the historic -- other
10:15:27 historic districts who are jealous.
10:15:30 Like "what about us?"
10:15:32 Especially Hyde Park and West Tampa really want in on
10:15:35 the action.
10:15:36 So as you move forward and think about who is next, it
10:15:39 might be something to give the historic district maybe
10:15:44 a lead-in to that, maybe put them at the top of the
10:15:48 list.
10:15:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to go back to this whole issue
10:15:52 of community based planning which, Ray, I was very
10:15:56 familiar with at the county level and you are
10:15:57 absolutely right.
10:15:58 I know some of those community based plans took as
10:16:03 long as three years.
10:16:04 Also keep in mind as well, they can be very divisive
10:16:08 when you point to a community as well, because we have
10:16:11 had neighborhood in the community split right down the
10:16:15 middle on some of those issues.

10:16:18 Ray may recall that.
10:16:23 So it's going to be a real challenge, I will tell you
10:16:26 that.
10:16:26 And eventually, though, what came forth was whatever
10:16:31 they proposed to the county commission, it got adopted
10:16:34 into the plan, and we use that for the zoning as it
10:16:38 came forth.
10:16:38 So it allows the opportunity for the neighborhoods or
10:16:41 the community to have input, and to craft something
10:16:47 that the county could use.
10:16:50 And so I'm hearing -- so what's going to happen here
10:16:55 should be good.
10:16:55 But I think also important for you to understand that
10:16:57 once you develop that and do that, then we have to use
10:17:00 that document, and neighborhoods have to be very
10:17:04 careful that when we use that document and you want
10:17:07 something based on that document, we have some real
10:17:09 issues and problems.
10:17:10 Do you understand what I'm saying, Ray?
10:17:13 >>> Yes, absolutely.
10:17:14 >> And be very clear when you start talking about
10:17:17 neighborhood base planning because that becomes your

10:17:19 document, the document to go forward, you look at, and
10:17:22 when do you zoning, that's what you're looking at.
10:17:24 Okay.
10:17:25 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to wrap it up now.
10:17:27 We need to close the workshop.
10:17:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
10:17:31 Thank you, Ray.
10:17:32 (Motion carried).
10:17:33 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 6.
10:17:37 I have a motion and second.
10:17:38 (Motion carried).
10:17:39 >>> The next item, item 6, adaptive reuse of
10:17:48 buildings.
10:17:53 When it comes to the adaptive reuse of buildings, my
10:17:55 understanding from when this motion was made in
10:17:57 November was discussing some of the same kinds of
10:18:00 neighborhoods we have just been talking about.
10:18:02 We had neighborhoods that were developed decades ago
10:18:06 where you had buildings that could be far better
10:18:09 utilized for small businesses, things of that nature,
10:18:11 but our current code as an example are very confusing
10:18:14 and they conflict on things of that nature.

10:18:16 So I'm going to make the -- the first thing I am going
10:18:20 to say before we get back to the form-based discussion
10:18:22 is that one thing I have learned the last couple of
10:18:26 years is our codes are extremely confusing, especially
10:18:29 for a small business owner, someone who wants to
10:18:32 develop a neighborhood-based type, whether it's a
10:18:34 restaurant or other type of small business, and we
10:18:37 have found that sometimes folks do need a little bit
10:18:41 of help going through our maze.
10:18:43 So Thom Snelling does not believe I am really going to
10:18:46 do this but I am really going to do this.
10:18:48 If we could put -- what is the word for the Elmo on?
10:18:55 Thomas Snelling is the deputy director of growth
10:18:58 management services and I will tell you, we have
10:19:01 already said this to -- and please keep that on his
10:19:03 name and number and e-mail -- we have offered Thomas
10:19:08 the contact for our department.
10:19:09 Now, it will take working with other departments but
10:19:14 especially if there are individuals or small business
10:19:16 owners, particularly that are trying to develop in
10:19:19 some of our commercial corridors, that have a lot of
10:19:24 code issues.

10:19:25 We have to always provide with long code.
10:19:27 But perhaps if we have somebody who is going to help
10:19:29 us, Thom is the person who contact.
10:19:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Should say for a good conversation
10:19:35 call Thom.
10:19:38 Frankly you have already talked about, I think, the
10:19:45 broader picture when it comes to planning form based
10:19:49 code because this is how you are able then to look at
10:19:52 such corridors as Florida and Seminole Heights, look
10:19:54 at the intersection of Hillsborough, look at
10:19:57 transportation.
10:19:58 Look at parking.
10:19:59 Look at all of the other various enhancements that
10:20:01 need to be done.
10:20:02 And make the code more adaptable as opposed to the
10:20:10 neighborhood to the code.
10:20:12 I think that will be helpful in the future.
10:20:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to thank you so much for
10:20:16 doing this, and encourage you to let council know what
10:20:19 resources you need to do this.
10:20:21 We have heard this from every single neighborhood in
10:20:23 town.

10:20:24 The other thing is, you need -- you meaning land
10:20:28 development -- need to have as much weight in
10:20:34 negotiating this stuff as transportation.
10:20:36 I feel like so often, not our department, but cars
10:20:41 dictate our urban slum, and I think this is the
10:20:45 conversation that's an appropriate part of our comp
10:20:46 plan, and reworking our code so that parking isn't the
10:20:51 determinant to our urban form, and that's really the
10:20:54 sticking point.
10:20:54 Pappi's pizza was the catalyst to this conversation
10:21:00 and that's why you are here today and it's all about
10:21:03 parking and stormwater, and that somehow what we have
10:21:05 to wrestle with so it not only includes you, it
10:21:09 includes transportation and it includes public works
10:21:11 and stormwater.
10:21:12 But I think urban form nodes to be the policy
10:21:16 determinant.
10:21:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Linda, I think we need to look at all
10:21:23 of our parking code and we need to look further than,
10:21:26 you know, having to -- our transportation people are
10:21:31 just going by the code we have.
10:21:33 I think we need to update that parking code.

10:21:36 And I think they are working on that, aren't you?
10:21:40 >>CINDY MILLER: They are.
10:21:40 And from a broader picture, just this whole
10:21:43 conversation this morning just fits perfectly.
10:21:45 Comprehensive plan is critical.
10:21:48 Transit, keeping in mind transit isn't just rail.
10:21:51 We need to look at transit opportunities.
10:21:54 Because you can't eliminate parking needs if you don't
10:21:56 have the other transportation to be able to supplement
10:22:00 and to replace it.
10:22:02 So, therefore, transit becomes all the more important
10:22:05 as we enter this discussion in the coming months.
10:22:07 So hopefully we will be able to do that.
10:22:10 >> The other thing that was interesting, Ray left but
10:22:15 he was talking about developing economic development
10:22:17 into the comp plan, and I think that is something
10:22:19 that -- I don't know how it fits together with you,
10:22:22 but really a lot of the times when the small
10:22:27 businesses, which are the one that is provide the most
10:22:30 employment and put the most back into our city, they
10:22:33 are the one that is are suffering, and they are the
10:22:36 ones that are really going to make the city come back,

10:22:40 especially downtown and the historic neighborhoods.
10:22:42 So I feel like they need the economic development part
10:22:50 of the zoning changes needs to have more weight than
10:22:53 it has.
10:22:54 And I think, also, along with neighborhoods you are
10:22:57 mentioning, I think one of the key areas that we will
10:23:00 be looking at as we look at transit corridors is look
10:23:04 at East Tampa, and economic development through East
10:23:07 Tampa, because of the opportunity for transportation
10:23:10 enhancement I think is going to be critical.
10:23:13 So I think this is a great opportunity for all of us
10:23:15 to work together on.
10:23:16 >>GWEN MILLER: In East Tampa we really need it.
10:23:21 Don't stop.
10:23:21 >>> A perfect opportunity for job creation.
10:23:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's start and get this going.
10:23:29 Okay, need to close the workshop.
10:23:30 >> Move to close.
10:23:31 >> Second.
10:23:32 (Motion carried).
10:23:32 >>CHAIRMAN: We need to open item number 7.
10:23:37 >> So moved.

10:23:38 >> Second.
10:23:38 (Motion carried)
10:23:44 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:23:45 I'm here to attempt to try to make some sense out of
10:23:48 what is a fairly complicated process.
10:23:51 You received a letter from me pretty recently, but the
10:23:55 letter in my opinion is not very helpful and it's not
10:23:58 very helpful because the complexity almost requires a
10:24:02 reiteration of what's in the document so let me try to
10:24:04 do a better job.
10:24:05 I think it's easier when we can have a colloquy to
10:24:09 make sense out of things that are a little bit
10:24:11 difficult to understand.
10:24:12 I can try to figure out what portion I'm not making
10:24:14 sufficiently clear and I can try to understand what
10:24:17 portion you may have the understanding.
10:24:19 >> What is colloquy?
10:24:20 >>> Dialogue between two people or more.
10:24:22 Sorry.
10:24:24 I don't know where I get that old habit from.
10:24:27 Let me also indicate some of the people who have been
10:24:29 involved in this so you know if you have questions who

10:24:31 you can talk to.
10:24:32 I have been involved extensively, as has Sal Territo
10:24:37 and Justin Vaske.
10:24:39 Also, we have Tom Cloud who is right behind me who is
10:24:42 a state-wide expert in this area.
10:24:44 I think I circulated to you council members earlier a
10:24:48 copy of an article he wrote in a recent law review.
10:24:52 Tom is an ex-law partner of mine although the
10:24:56 selection of him for this job was not mine, it was
10:24:59 done by a committee.
10:25:00 I think an excellent point.
10:25:01 Sharon fox is involved and she has a great deal of
10:25:03 information about city processes, and exactly how the
10:25:07 relationship with Tampa Electric and the City of Tampa
10:25:10 operates, and that's something you may want to know
10:25:13 more about as we go.
10:25:15 Rich ZAMBO is an attorney on the east coast.
10:25:18 He and Nancy McCann are involved in our refuse to
10:25:23 energy which we call McKay Bay and I'll explain its
10:25:26 relevance in a minute.
10:25:27 Rich is the person he would may want to hear from.
10:25:30 Jan Washington is a city employee, I believe used to

10:25:32 be an employee of TECO, excuse me, Tampa Electric, and
10:25:35 she has been very involved in what we call the
10:25:37 lighting agreement.
10:25:39 I'll explain that as well.
10:25:40 Steve Daignault and many of the people in public works
10:25:42 were involved in looking at this document, so that we
10:25:46 could determine whether the terms and provisions
10:25:49 address issues that can come up in the interface of
10:25:53 the day-to-day activity in our rights-of-way.
10:25:57 Finally, Darrell Smith was involved as well,
10:26:00 particularly Mr. Smith was the emergency preparedness
10:26:04 in the participation by Tampa Electric in that.
10:26:10 Let me help you appreciate how significant this is.
10:26:14 For example, I asked Jim Stefan to provide me some
10:26:19 information which I will share with you.
10:26:20 I just got it yesterday.
10:26:22 In fiscal year '05 the city, which is a huge consumer
10:26:25 of electric services, paid $16.778 million.
10:26:31 That was all electric bill.
10:26:32 That's probably not entirely complete because there
10:26:34 are some other places where bills are paid and it's
10:26:38 very close to being complete.

10:26:40 In '06 we paid 18 million and 11,000.
10:26:47 Projected for '07 the city will pay 19,203,000.
10:26:51 So this is a huge item in the city's budget.
10:26:55 On the other side of the ledger, the franchise fees --
10:27:00 and in fiscal year '05 we collected 21.6 million.
10:27:05 In '06, 24.2 million, and projected for '07 is roughly
10:27:13 26 million.
10:27:13 In addition to that, however, under the McKay Bay
10:27:17 refuse to energy contract, we receive payments from
10:27:21 Tampa Electric for the energy that is generated, and
10:27:24 those payments in '05 were 7,315,000.
10:27:29 In '06 they were 7,716,000.
10:27:32 In '07 they are projected to be 7,902,000.
10:27:37 I mention this to you simply to help you know the
10:27:41 facts that are relevant to determine the importance of
10:27:43 this for the city.
10:27:45 I know you know it's important.
10:27:46 But I wanted to try to provide you some approximation
10:27:51 in terms of the scale and the significance.
10:27:57 Let me try to clarify something that was probably not
10:28:00 very artily clarified in the letter, and that is the
10:28:04 relationship of these three documents.

10:28:06 I mean the franchise agreement, which you have before
10:28:08 you which is about 20 pages and has attachments.
10:28:11 The other document is what we call the lighting
10:28:13 agreement.
10:28:14 Now, this is an agreement between the city and Tampa
10:28:16 Electric that deals with how lighting is provided in
10:28:20 various areas of the city.
10:28:21 Essentially, we have a customer provider relationship
10:28:26 under the lighting agreement.
10:28:28 And lastly we have the McKay Bay agreement.
10:28:30 It has another name but we all know it as McKay Bay.
10:28:33 That's probably the easiest way to follow it.
10:28:36 The McKay Bay agreement and the lighting agreement
10:28:41 all related to the franchise agreement.
10:28:44 They are not in the franchise agreement but we think
10:28:46 it's important to try to provide on a parallel path
10:28:49 with all you three of these.
10:28:51 I want to make it clear, however, that it is not the
10:28:53 intent to hold up the franchise agreement, waiting
10:29:00 Public Service Commission approval of any
10:29:02 modifications in the McKay Bay agreement.
10:29:05 What we are talking about with McKay Bay is the city

10:29:09 generates electricity.
10:29:11 Tampa Electric is our customer.
10:29:13 If something happens when this contract expires, and
10:29:17 Tampa Electric were either to choose not to buy it or
10:29:21 wasn't able to buy it or something of that nature, the
10:29:23 city has a problem with generating all this power.
10:29:25 We have two options.
10:29:26 We can sell it to somebody, or we can use it
10:29:28 ourselves.
10:29:29 Now, in the industry, using it ourselves is what we
10:29:33 call self-wheeling and I'm sure if we have questions
10:29:39 Thom can respond to that but in order to self-wheel we
10:29:41 have to be able to deliver that power to some facility
10:29:44 of ours that can use it.
10:29:45 That generally requires using the facilities of Tampa
10:29:47 Electric.
10:29:50 That's not necessarily insurmountable but it does
10:29:52 require Public Service Commission approval.
10:29:55 So that's an issue of some concern.
10:29:57 The city obviously wants to make sure we protect that
10:29:59 asset as part of this process.
10:30:02 We are not saying that Tampa Electric has been an

10:30:04 impediment.
10:30:04 They haven't been.
10:30:05 And they have been a consumer of that excess power for
10:30:07 a long time and it's our understanding it continues to
10:30:12 do so.
10:30:13 The issue about retail wheeling comes up if there's a
10:30:17 deregulation of the market.
10:30:18 Now, it's not necessarily relevant to the city from
10:30:22 the standpoint of what we do with our pow fer we have
10:30:25 an agreement with Tampa Electric and they are buying
10:30:27 our power.
10:30:28 As far as the protection of the city's McKay Bay
10:30:32 asset that would be the way we would address that
10:30:35 issue.
10:30:35 This document -- well, I don't want to get into that
10:30:40 detail.
10:30:41 Let's proceed in an orderly fashion that will help
10:30:43 make sense out of this more readily for you.
10:30:45 In order to do that, what I would request is that we
10:30:47 have Tom Cloud -- it is Tom Cloud, by the way.
10:30:52 I think we referred to him as Tom McLeod.
10:30:55 That's the cowboy.

10:30:56 He will provide you a little history as to what has
10:30:58 transpired between the city and Tampa Electric that
10:31:01 will provide the context and it will be brief.
10:31:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may ask a couple of questions
10:31:11 because it sounded direct and maybe I miscalculated
10:31:14 some of these numbers.
10:31:14 If I recall what you said, sir, in 05 the electric
10:31:18 bill of the city was 21 million -- excuse me, was, ins
10:31:23 positive '07, the total cost to the city is about 19
10:31:26 million in electrical charge and use, right?
10:31:29 >>> Yes, sir.
10:31:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The taxes that we collected under
10:31:32 4.6, I guess is what you are talking about, went from
10:31:36 '05 of 21 million to '06 of 24.2 million, and in 07 to
10:31:41 26 million.
10:31:42 Am I correct?
10:31:43 >>> Yes, sir.
10:31:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And if you look at the refuse to
10:31:47 energy in '05 that was about 5 million, in 06 was 7.61
10:31:52 million and in 07, 7.29 million.
10:31:54 Am I correct?
10:31:55 >>> With the exception of 05 was 7.3.

10:31:58 >> If you look at the aggregate numbers, if you add
10:32:01 the '07 revenues from the franchise fees, and if you
10:32:06 add the sale of the energy from refuse to energy, the
10:32:09 26 and roughly 8, let's say, you have got about 34
10:32:14 million in revenues.
10:32:16 And 19 million in expenses.
10:32:18 Is that correct?
10:32:18 >>> Yes, sir.
10:32:19 >> So we are doing pretty good?
10:32:20 >>> Yes, sir.
10:32:21 Let me ask Tom Cloud to provide a little bit of
10:32:24 background for you and then we'll talk in more detail
10:32:28 about the document.
10:32:30 >>> My name is Tom Cloud.
10:32:35 The best way to understand the franchise is to
10:32:38 understand the historical antecedent.
10:32:42 The first were charters from the King of England to
10:32:43 people who wanted to set up colonies.
10:32:46 In this country, when privileges were given to operate
10:32:50 businesses, like an ice house or streetcar line or
10:32:53 even streetlights down a city street, franchises were
10:32:57 granted.

10:32:57 And in Tampa, it happened that way in 1891.
10:33:01 A one-page franchise was issued to the predecessor of
10:33:04 Tampa Electric Company.
10:33:08 The next franchise wasn't signed until 1968.
10:33:11 And that's when franchise fees began to be collected
10:33:13 by the company.
10:33:15 Understand the company doesn't pay these franchise
10:33:18 fees out of their pocket.
10:33:20 They are collected out of your commerce' pocket and
10:33:22 their commerce' pocket.
10:33:24 And then transferred to the city.
10:33:27 The franchise you have been operating under was issued
10:33:29 in 1986.
10:33:31 It actually expired in 2006 while we were in the
10:33:35 middle of these negotiations.
10:33:37 These have been lengthy negotiations.
10:33:39 They started in the summer of 2005.
10:33:43 It's January of 2008.
10:33:45 23 drafts later, we have a draft ready to present to
10:33:48 you.
10:33:49 These were not easy negotiations.
10:33:53 To understand why they are not easy, it's perhaps

10:33:56 important to view the entity you are negotiating with.
10:34:00 Tampa Electric, they are not a charitable
10:34:04 organization.
10:34:06 Their main goal is to protect their stockholders, and
10:34:09 to address the questions of the appointed regulators
10:34:13 that control their operation.
10:34:20 One service that they provide, that's electric power.
10:34:23 So you can understand when you have an entity that is
10:34:26 a state monopoly, they have a parathyroidism directive
10:34:28 and those to serve power to the City of Tampa.
10:34:31 They do a fantastic job doing that.
10:34:33 But they are not a City Council.
10:34:36 You have responsibility for regulating and controlling
10:34:38 your rights-of-way.
10:34:40 And in fact historically, granted the right to do
10:34:43 business at all.
10:34:44 At least that's what the Florida supreme court says.
10:34:46 And so within that context, these negotiations occur,
10:34:51 well, just about once a lifetime, once every 25 years.
10:34:54 And so when you look at this as the back drop, perfect
10:35:00 agreement?
10:35:00 No.

10:35:01 An agreement we can recommend?
10:35:02 Yes, it is.
10:35:04 There were some big issues that had to be worked out.
10:35:07 I think that people dealt with each other in good
10:35:09 faith.
10:35:11 We didn't always agree, but I think people were not
10:35:13 disagreeable.
10:35:14 And if there are specific issues that you have got any
10:35:18 questions about, we'll be happy to answer.
10:35:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Tom?
10:35:26 Mr. Cloud?
10:35:28 >>> Yes, sir.
10:35:29 >> David might be getting into this.
10:35:32 Although I read through the agreement last night and
10:35:35 tried -- and then I read your summary, David, as well,
10:35:38 tried to make the most of it.
10:35:42 I didn't see anything in there specifically about
10:35:46 conservation, and about conservation programs.
10:35:50 And I know that Tampa Electric has conservation
10:35:53 programs now.
10:35:54 I've been told there are other utilities around the
10:35:58 state, and maybe some of which you are dealing with in

10:36:00 other jurisdictions, that have perhaps more aggressive
10:36:06 conservation programs, and that sort of thing.
10:36:09 And so I have several questions based on that.
10:36:12 Number one, is there a conservation requirement in
10:36:15 here in terms of, you know, in terms of incentives to
10:36:22 our community, you know, to mandate that, in the
10:36:26 franchise agreement?
10:36:27 And also not just where we are today, but to make sure
10:36:31 that over the next 25 years that those conservation
10:36:35 efforts will increase dramatically, which I think is
10:36:38 the direction that everybody in the community would
10:36:41 think we should go, especially with our reliance on
10:36:45 foreign oil and where that's gotten us and everything
10:36:47 else.
10:36:48 So that's my first question.
10:36:49 Is there anything in there right now that I have
10:36:51 missed?
10:36:53 >>> The short answer is no, because under a 1984
10:36:59 Florida supreme court ruling involving city of Lake
10:37:03 Mary, certain issues are preempted from cities,
10:37:07 anything having to do with the setting of the roads,
10:37:11 or the delivery of service.

10:37:14 In the Lake Mary case, what was involved was a local
10:37:17 government trying to acquire Florida power corporation
10:37:22 now known as Progress Energy to bury its line.
10:37:25 Supreme court said, no, you can't.
10:37:28 The Florida legislature, in their wisdom, has decided
10:37:32 to delegate that power exclusively to the appointed
10:37:37 Florida Public Service Commission, and so you are
10:37:44 without power to require TECO to set conservation
10:37:46 goals.
10:37:47 I'm not asking you to like that.
10:37:50 I'm asking you to understand that it is what it is.
10:37:54 Based on the law.
10:37:55 We can't do that.
10:37:56 >> Did that discussion come up?
10:37:58 >> Yes, sir.
10:37:59 It was an issue discussed.
10:38:04 But of course if I was an investor in the utility I
10:38:06 would rely on the statewide preemption to be regulated
10:38:11 on that issue by the appointed Florida service Public
10:38:15 Service Commission.
10:38:16 >> Isn't it possible there could be language in there
10:38:18 if they to agreed to it that they make their best

10:38:21 efforts to continue to improve conservation incentives
10:38:26 to our community over the years?
10:38:27 >>> Well, of course, if they agreed to it, you could
10:38:32 have a best efforts language in there.
10:38:34 Frankly --
10:38:35 >> I mean, I saw some of that language as related to
10:38:38 other provisions.
10:38:38 >>> Yes, sir.
10:38:42 Every time he would came close to an area that related
10:38:44 to operating protocols, they were very resistant.
10:38:51 And I'm not criticizing them for that.
10:38:53 That's their legal prerogative.
10:38:56 I have I believe they are correct in that position.
10:38:59 We were trying to nail down issues that we could have
10:39:06 an impact on and it seemed to me anyway that was one
10:39:10 that we couldn't.
10:39:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm gust just going to follow up on
10:39:15 that same issue of conservation, and also perhaps
10:39:21 incentive for requirements for alternative energy,
10:39:26 research and development.
10:39:30 It took two years to come up with it.
10:39:32 It's going to take us a little time to digest it.

10:39:35 >>> Yes.
10:39:36 >> And obviously I haven't been able to do that.
10:39:39 But I do know from people who have done the research
10:39:42 for us, FP&L and Progress Energy do have more
10:39:51 requirements for conservation in their agreement and
10:39:51 -- I mean, we are going to need to research that but
10:39:57 if the other power companies in Florida have been able
10:39:59 to do that, it seems we should be able to work on that
10:40:02 with TECO.
10:40:03 >>> I'll be honest with you, I have not sat down and
10:40:06 compared the big three investor-owned utilities.
10:40:10 I do know in terms of service area, both FP&L and
10:40:16 Progress Energy have significantly larger service
10:40:18 areas, and significantly larger fleets of power
10:40:23 plants.
10:40:25 So when you have a larger fleet of power plants you
10:40:28 are able to utilize a different, perhaps more blended
10:40:31 mix of power sources.
10:40:34 The minute you start talking about alternative
10:40:36 sources, of course, you run right smack dab into the
10:40:41 Public Service Commission's authority, which is why we
10:40:46 had no success in achieving any kind of gains in that

10:40:49 area.
10:40:49 >>MARY MULHERN: You talked about, you know, the
10:40:54 discussion over the two years on the agreement.
10:41:01 Was energy savings and conservation, was that
10:41:03 something that the city was trying to negotiate?
10:41:08 >>> Yes, ma'am.
10:41:10 But to be honest with you, we tried to break this down
10:41:15 to the big picture.
10:41:16 And from the standpoint of the city, there's really
10:41:20 three big issues on the franchise.
10:41:22 One is, reserving and preserving your police power
10:41:27 over the rights-of-way, because, as you know, when
10:41:31 things go awry, people turn to you, because you are
10:41:34 the police in every sense of the word, and you do
10:41:37 protect and serve the rights-of-way.
10:41:41 They are city rights-of-way.
10:41:42 So that's a big issue.
10:41:44 Issue number 2 was to preserve the stream of revenue
10:41:48 that comes from this agreement.
10:41:50 Think of it as a very long-term lease, because those
10:41:53 how the supreme court uses it in this state.
10:41:56 And third was to make sure that there were appropriate

10:42:00 operating protocols forts two entities as they work
10:42:03 within the right-of-way.
10:42:05 And that's what we really tried to focus on in putting
10:42:09 this agreement together.
10:42:10 Did we talk about conservation?
10:42:11 Yes, ma'am, we did.
10:42:13 But that's an area legally we would have spent, I
10:42:17 believe, hours and hours organizing over something
10:42:20 that we could never prevail upon if we had to go
10:42:24 through that in court.
10:42:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can only tell you my experience
10:42:30 the last 60 days.
10:42:32 I called a family member in TECO for energy audit of
10:42:36 the house.
10:42:36 They came out, a young man, did -- I didn't know I was
10:42:40 that bad off.
10:42:42 I mean, I needed insulation more in the roof, the
10:42:46 doors needed to be further insulated, and the windows
10:42:50 were of my vintage.
10:42:54 In other words, they had cracks all over the place.
10:42:59 [ Laughter ]
10:43:03 They were prehistoric, yes.

10:43:05 They were the old up and downwind oh.
10:43:08 And although I didn't qualify for the window rebate,
10:43:13 because that was coming up in January through the
10:43:16 Public Service Commission, and sometime in early
10:43:20 December or late November, we installed all the
10:43:23 windows new.
10:43:26 And we installed in the attic needed another inch of
10:43:34 insulation which was done and there was a rebate
10:43:37 program.
10:43:37 They send you 15 or 20 individuals for you to call,
10:43:40 and I advise everyone to do that to call because they
10:43:44 do range from the high 40.
10:43:47 400s to the middle 250 and that was done and I did
10:43:51 that with a contract.
10:43:52 In other words, you pay up to whatever the cost minus
10:43:54 100, and then they pay the contract contractor.
10:43:57 That was done.
10:43:58 I can tell you that the energy in the house has gone
10:44:02 down to some degree.
10:44:05 And there's other things you can do on your own that
10:44:09 you don't need TECO.
10:44:16 There's some new things on the market that I am going

10:44:18 to test that is -- it's called ceramic dust, and it's
10:44:26 made, they tell me, and notice I said they tell me
10:44:29 because I didn't go out and test the space shuttle,
10:44:31 where they paint going up.
10:44:32 Whether it's true or not I don't know.
10:44:34 But it forms a molecule base on the outside of the
10:44:37 house, and it prevents heat from coming in.
10:44:39 It does not work so well in the winter.
10:44:42 But since we are in Florida, it works every day, just
10:44:45 about.
10:44:47 It has a difference of about 35 degrees in and out,
10:44:50 and it should be an additional savings, and the cost
10:44:53 of that is about $12 a gallon to paint your house.
10:44:57 If you need 15 gallons you multiply 15 times 12 and
10:45:01 those how you get the cost.
10:45:02 I have not done that.
10:45:03 The product is in the house.
10:45:04 It's sitting there.
10:45:05 And in due time, when I get the energy to pressure
10:45:11 wash the house and to clean and put it on, that will
10:45:15 be done.
10:45:16 But there's other things that are on it, and there was

10:45:20 an article in both newspapers, the Tampa Tribune, the
10:45:23 St. Pete Times, about two individuals that did some
10:45:28 solar paneling to their homes.
10:45:32 And it was very interesting.
10:45:33 The cost is about 40,000 in one instance, which you
10:45:38 never get your money back if you look at it that way.
10:45:41 But the total cost was about 15.
10:45:44 They said that there was some rebate and some
10:45:46 incentives and so forth and so on.
10:45:49 I have not looked into it.
10:45:51 I am going to start looking into it.
10:45:56 To do that, that would then reduce, and in one case it
10:45:59 said the individual who put it on, the gentle who did
10:46:02 the solar paneling for electricity, to do the whole
10:46:07 house, the first month bill came in, and the electric
10:46:09 company paid him five dollars because it went back to
10:46:14 the grid.
10:46:14 So those are things that we the homeowners can do on
10:46:17 our own.
10:46:19 And I understand what the contract is about.
10:46:23 But I think that the homeowners can do little things
10:46:26 to solve a lot of the main problems without depending

10:46:30 on big government.
10:46:32 Even though there's rebate programs out there to get
10:46:35 the thing done.
10:46:38 I'm going to do that if I can get it done for anywhere
10:46:41 from 13 to $16,000.
10:46:44 But that that's just me.
10:46:46 I'm a little goofy at times and I like to take
10:46:48 chances.
10:46:52 But there are things that need to be -- in this
10:46:56 contract is there a any addressing to the city in the
10:47:00 power structure to create the electricity for
10:47:02 streetlighting and for traffic signalization, that
10:47:07 they use their own -- there's nothing from us doing
10:47:11 our own paneling and putting in to create the
10:47:13 electricity and offset the 19 million that we are
10:47:16 paying?
10:47:16 >>> There is a provision that deals with that, and I'm
10:47:19 glad that you brought that up.
10:47:22 In order to -- for to us recommend they get a slightly
10:47:25 longer term, 25 versus 20, we needed to give a renewal
10:47:31 of the alternative to energy contract.
10:47:37 The green in contract, if you will, that you create

10:47:41 through McKay Bay.
10:47:42 This is something the City of Tampa is doing to help
10:47:47 save and conserve, is your McKay Bay plant, which
10:47:52 your plant is producing about $8 million, and this
10:47:56 agreement, as well as a companion extension to that
10:48:00 agreement, allows that to go forward.
10:48:03 That is a significant benefit to the city.
10:48:06 It is reutilization of power, in effect, because once
10:48:12 the power goes into the wires, it doesn't know where
10:48:17 it came from.
10:48:18 It's got water that goes into a water system, you may
10:48:20 have three water plants that are connected to the
10:48:23 overall water system.
10:48:24 But when you connect all of them to pressurize the
10:48:28 water system, the water molecules, it might be from
10:48:33 this plant or that plant.
10:48:34 You can't tell, once it goes into the system.
10:48:37 What you can tell is the input that you make into that
10:48:40 system, and you have something to be proud of in that
10:48:44 you are helping conservation to the tune of about $8
10:48:48 million as well as reducing, in effect, your own
10:48:50 electric bills by that amount of money.

10:48:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One more question.
10:48:56 I know there's a significant amount of homes that are
10:48:57 powered out of that McKay Bay refuse to energy.
10:49:01 And I might be a little off base.
10:49:03 About 30,000 homes?
10:49:05 >>> I couldn't tell you.
10:49:06 >> I know it's somewhere, it's a high number.
10:49:09 And that's a great thing for all of us.
10:49:17 Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:49:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Cloud, my questions are big
10:49:22 picture.
10:49:23 Since this negotiation began in 2005, the whole
10:49:26 conversation, the whole public conversation about
10:49:28 energy has changed.
10:49:30 We suddenly recognize that we have a crisis with
10:49:33 global warming.
10:49:34 We are looking as a nation and as a state to creating
10:49:37 alternative energy sources.
10:49:39 We are looking at conservation in a much more serious
10:49:42 way than we have previously.
10:49:46 Based on that extremely dynamic situation in terms of
10:49:50 creating and using energy, are there any provisions

10:49:56 that you have included that reflect that if new modes
10:50:01 of energy creation come to be, for example, we spend a
10:50:06 lot on lighting in the city.
10:50:08 Perhaps five years from now, there will be an
10:50:11 opportunity to provide lighting at a much less cost
10:50:14 for TECO to provide.
10:50:15 There will be some new form of energy productions
10:50:19 available, some new form of -- some technical
10:50:24 improvements that will allow them to save significant
10:50:26 money.
10:50:26 Are we fixed with our commitments to them in terms of
10:50:30 how much we'll pay for light over the next 25 years?
10:50:33 >>> You know, I hate to disappoint you, but I would
10:50:37 have to say no, I feel sort of like mark Clark in
10:50:40 Italy.
10:50:41 He was contacted by Churchill, when can I go through
10:50:44 Rome?
10:50:44 And his response was, don't know if we'll ever get
10:50:47 there.
10:50:49 Too far to go.
10:50:50 We work very hard to deal with the issues we could
10:50:54 deal with.

10:50:56 To attempt to address an issue like global warming,
10:51:00 and the mix of power --
10:51:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Or just the cost to the City of
10:51:06 Tampa.
10:51:07 What I'm interested in is protecting the City of Tampa
10:51:11 and City of Tampa taxpayers, and I'm saying that we
10:51:14 pay so much for streetlighting now, that if in the
10:51:17 future they are able to realize great savings in their
10:51:20 cost of providing the power, do we the city realize
10:51:24 those savings?
10:51:25 >>> Yes, if the costs go down, then by their tariffs
10:51:29 the rates will go down.
10:51:32 >> Is there any incentive for them to bring costs down
10:51:35 so that he would pay less?
10:51:36 >>> By this document, no.
10:51:38 By their tariff and by the policies of the Public
10:51:44 Service Commission as well as our current sitting
10:51:47 governor, yes.
10:51:49 There are incentives.
10:51:51 >> Is there anything we can do as a city to encourage
10:51:54 conservation alternative energy sources?
10:52:03 >>> Yes.

10:52:04 A constant presence at the Public Service Commission.
10:52:06 >> I have been there.
10:52:07 And when I went, it was interesting.
10:52:09 I was the first elected official to show up in who
10:52:12 knows how long?
10:52:13 They acted really surprise.
10:52:18 One last question.
10:52:20 We all received a letter from a very articulate woman,
10:52:24 Nicole Kibert, who asked us to look at a variety of
10:52:28 provisions, one of them was about tree trimming,
10:52:32 things like that.
10:52:33 They seem like microissues but they are part of the
10:52:35 whole franchise conversation.
10:52:38 Is this the place to have a conversation about those
10:52:40 things, as lighting standards, tree trimming, tree
10:52:45 lights, or could we have some sort of more workshoppy
10:52:51 meeting with the -- where the public is allowed to
10:52:53 talk and discuss those issues?
10:52:55 >>> Well, of course.
10:52:58 This council is free at workshop to do that.
10:53:04 The legislature place certain requirements and
10:53:08 standards on tree trimming during the pendency of this

10:53:11 negotiation, that hamstrung local government a little
10:53:16 bit, and we have addressed those standards through the
10:53:18 operating agreement, consistent with what they have
10:53:23 been in the past, with a couple of minor changes.
10:53:26 I really do believe, after I believe it's called Egypt
10:53:31 lake, that the power company in Florida has been
10:53:35 sensitized to that issue.
10:53:37 We have tried to maintain through the operating
10:53:40 agreement that is attached to the franchise those
10:53:44 issues pretty much status quo.
10:53:50 So they have been addressed in the document.
10:53:51 And if you would like further discussion, of course,
10:53:54 we can do that at our later workshop.
10:54:00 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dingfelder?
10:54:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On the tree trimming issue, section
10:54:05 16 in the agreement, it appears to me that what that
10:54:11 does is just basically reference the ANSI A-300
10:54:15 standard, which all evening long I have been trying to
10:54:18 Google and see what the ANSI A300 standard actually
10:54:22 is, and you can't really find it.
10:54:26 And the ANSI organization charges you to even know
10:54:30 what it is.

10:54:34 Mr. Cloud, can you tell us what that is?
10:54:37 >>> I'm not an expert in ANSI but I have seen the
10:54:41 documentation.
10:54:42 I believe that there are people on your staff that
10:54:44 could much better explain this than me, because we
10:54:48 involved them when they had the discussions regarding
10:54:51 this section.
10:54:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because one of the things, you say
10:54:56 it's the status quo.
10:54:58 But I don't really think it's the status quo.
10:55:00 I mean, the status quo, for one thing, there's a
10:55:06 blanket exemption in here to our tree code, including
10:55:10 grand trees.
10:55:10 Now, I know you are not an expert on our tree code or
10:55:13 grand trees in our tree code, but there are others in
10:55:15 the room who are very familiar with it.
10:55:19 That I think is new.
10:55:21 >>> I don't think that's entirely correct.
10:55:24 I think the provision in here says that we are not,
10:55:28 the city is not, going to plant trees that create
10:55:39 problems or conflicts with the power line.
10:55:41 >> True.

10:55:42 >>> Now, we both know that's not the entire problem.
10:55:48 Sometimes power lines go in there in areas where there
10:55:50 are trees.
10:55:51 That happens.
10:55:51 And nobody is perfect.
10:55:54 We aren't either.
10:55:55 Sometimes we put little trees and they grow up
10:55:58 underneath the power lines.
10:55:59 >> Section 16, line 27, it says the parties agree that
10:56:03 Tampa Electric is exempt from any requirement to
10:56:06 obtain from the city or any permit or other approval
10:56:10 for the trimming of the trees, provided that such
10:56:12 trimming is performed in accordance with the ANSI
10:56:15 A300.
10:56:16 >>> This is consistent with the statute.
10:56:23 >> Statute preempts our tree code?
10:56:25 >>> Our tree trimming, yes, sir.
10:56:27 >> Our existing --
10:56:29 >>> If they follow that standard.
10:56:36 >> For grand trees?
10:56:37 I mean --
10:56:42 >>> Not the tree entirely but tree trimming.

10:56:44 >> David, maybe you want to speak to this.
10:56:46 Because I think it's real important.
10:56:48 It's a little bit eye opening when I read that and I
10:56:51 read your summary in regard to that, because I didn't
10:56:54 know we were going there.
10:56:56 I knew that the MBA 300 standard was being proposed,
10:57:00 whatever it is, but, you know, in terms of our grand
10:57:05 trees, you know, it's kind of a sacred cow around the
10:57:10 city.
10:57:11 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:57:12 I am familiar with the status of grand trees.
10:57:14 I do know what he would attempt to do with our
10:57:16 ordinance.
10:57:18 The problem is as Tom has indicated, the legislature
10:57:21 has probably because of the four hurricanes, we had in
10:57:23 that one year there, were some issues that came up,
10:57:26 and the decision was that it made sense to preempt
10:57:31 those sorts of requirements, which I believe is
10:57:37 exactly the situation we ran into.
10:57:38 >> What does it say?
10:57:39 >>> I did not bring it with me and I do not have it.
10:57:42 But that's certainly an important question, and you

10:57:46 should see exactly what the state statute says.
10:57:48 >> Because further in reading that provision, I mean,
10:57:52 apparently we had this operating procedures manual
10:57:56 that has been in existence for awhile.
10:57:58 And the operating procedures manual doesn't speak to
10:58:02 the MBA 300 standard at all, it speaks to a different
10:58:05 standard, and it speaks to coordination, you know, and
10:58:10 cooperation between the city staffs, and on page 3,
10:58:16 trimming and removal standards.
10:58:20 But then if you go to section 16 of the proposed
10:58:23 franchise agreement, basically it says that this would
10:58:28 supersede -- this would supersede this provision of
10:58:31 the operating agreement if they are in conflict.
10:58:33 And I think they probably are in conflict.
10:58:37 >>DAVID SMITH: You are absolutely correct.
10:58:39 That's a discussion that Mr. Hernandez and I had
10:58:41 recently, and the problem was the operating procedures
10:58:43 manual has not been updated, and unfortunately there
10:58:45 are provisions in there that have been preempted by
10:58:48 state law.
10:58:48 This would be one example.
10:58:50 And it is the desire to make sure we go through the

10:58:54 operating procedures manual, and purge things that we
10:58:58 cannot enforce, unless it's this council's rule that
10:59:00 we should keep them in there to the extent that they
10:59:02 are still preempted, we can't do it, but if that law
10:59:05 changes, it comes back into effect.
10:59:07 But right now, you are correct.
10:59:09 We do have a conflict.
10:59:10 And the conflict is resolved -- has been resolved by
10:59:13 the state legislature.
10:59:14 >> So the legislature specifically references the MBA
10:59:18 300 standards, all local governments will use this --
10:59:21 I mean all utilities will use this and --
10:59:24 >>> I think that's correct.
10:59:25 >>> To a large degree, yes, sir, that is accurate.
10:59:29 >>DAVID SMITH: And the second part of Mr. Cloud's
10:59:31 recommendation of what you can do in this regard, the
10:59:33 first one, the Public Service Commission.
10:59:35 The second one is to do the same with regard to the
10:59:37 legislate.
10:59:38 Legislature.
10:59:39 I think this was probably a product of a lot of
10:59:45 concerns that as I say generated out of the hurricanes

10:59:47 and there were public health, safety and welfare
10:59:50 consideration that is were important at the time, but
10:59:52 what happens, you tend to go in one direction when the
10:59:56 crisis of the moment seems to suggest that.
10:59:59 >> I think certain councilmen trying to get active in
11:00:05 Tallahassee we are told he would don't speak for the
11:00:07 city.
11:00:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:00:11 I have a question.
11:00:13 And this is after the hurricanes of '05.
11:00:16 I think it's Florida Power and Light said that they
11:00:19 would pick up 25% of the tab on undergrounding.
11:00:24 Now, were they precluded from doing that?
11:00:27 >>> No.
11:00:27 >> So could TECO say that?
11:00:32 >>> Yes.
11:00:32 >> Did you have that conversation with them?
11:00:35 >>> No, specifically we did not, because that is an
11:00:39 issue.
11:00:40 We did talk about underground.
11:00:43 We had lengthy discussion about undergrounding in
11:00:46 certain parts of the city.

11:00:47 >> Is there anything in our document that addresses
11:00:51 that?
11:00:52 >>> I think that there is some language on it, Ba it's
11:00:56 basically best efforts kind of thing.
11:00:58 >> There's nothing that they are doing?
11:01:00 >>> Right.
11:01:01 >> Or saying that they'll do.
11:01:02 >>> Correct.
11:01:03 And understand, cities have one way to address
11:01:07 undergrounding.
11:01:10 If the supreme court said cities cannot make investor
11:01:16 owned utilities bury their cables.
11:01:18 >> But Florida Power and Light did it on their own?
11:01:20 >>> No.
11:01:21 Florida Power and Light offered to pay 25% of the cost
11:01:24 of undergrounding.
11:01:26 I don't know that they have had any takers on that,
11:01:29 because some of the municipalities, the cost would be,
11:01:33 even with the 25% kick-in, astronomical.
11:01:37 The only city that's gone out and is in the process of
11:01:41 successfully undergrounding is Winter Park.
11:01:47 They had a purchase option.

11:01:48 They had the same problem you are describing.
11:01:50 They are a smaller city.
11:01:51 And municipal loins and the moneys that were going to
11:02:01 Raleigh, North Carolina, to underground utilities.
11:02:04 The only effective way of doing it.
11:02:06 If a city is going to make it happen, because you
11:02:08 can't make it happen at the Public Service Commission.
11:02:11 >> Thank you.
11:02:11 >>> Yes, ma'am.
11:02:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Along those lines, when you say
11:02:17 Florida power or whoever is going to pick up 25%,
11:02:20 that's a blanket statement.
11:02:22 Does that mean that they are going to take it out of
11:02:25 their operating profits, or that means in their
11:02:31 overall scheme of billing, somebody is paying more for
11:02:35 the undergrounding?
11:02:36 >>> I believe -- and it's been awhile since I looked
11:02:38 at that document -- but I believe that was a
11:02:42 below-the-line contribution that was put into their
11:02:47 tariff.
11:02:48 In other words, let's say gone through -- they agreed
11:02:55 to invest, which means of course they'll get a return

11:02:58 on that investment, 25%.
11:03:01 The public service agreement agreed that it would be a
11:03:03 prudent expenditure of their investment.
11:03:08 >> So if I heard you right, my mind sometimes don't
11:03:10 work too well, and it's 10:30 in the morning or so, if
11:03:14 I heard you right, that means that although it comes
11:03:19 from the profit, the profits are coming from the
11:03:21 people and the people are paying for the
11:03:22 undergrounding.
11:03:23 >>> Remember how we started this conversation.
11:03:26 They are a monopoly.
11:03:27 They do not manufacture money.
11:03:29 Money comes from one source.
11:03:30 >> Right.
11:03:31 >>> And the source is the customer.
11:03:32 So, yes, in that sense, everything they earn is from
11:03:36 the customer pursuant to tariff.
11:03:39 What the Public Service Commission did, which I think
11:03:43 is to their credit, was for them to rule, to take as
11:03:47 much as 25% of the cost up front, and invest that in
11:03:50 undergrounding, would be deemed to be a prudent
11:03:55 investment, thereby enabling them to make the

11:03:57 investment, and upfront that.
11:03:59 >> And I have got no qualms with that scenario,
11:04:02 providing that it's specified that it come from
11:04:05 somewhere else other than just the company.
11:04:08 If I'm looking at something, I can only feel that I am
11:04:13 not going to go out and do undergrounding in an area
11:04:15 where the whole city is paying for some area whether
11:04:18 it's West Tampa, East Tampa, New Tampa, which already
11:04:21 has it, or they paid it at the time of the new
11:04:23 construction that was going on, or any other area,
11:04:29 where the taxpayers are going to pay and sub decide
11:04:32 somebody else's undergrounding when they are never
11:04:35 going to get it themselves.
11:04:36 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:04:38 An additional clarification to your question,
11:04:40 councilman Miranda, I was advised by Mr. Hernandez of
11:04:45 Tampa Electric Company than what Florida Power and
11:04:47 Light is doing is they are not investing the 25% as
11:04:51 yet.
11:04:52 It will be part of the tariff that will essentially be
11:04:55 part of what rate payers will pay.
11:04:57 And when they have approval they will in fact spend

11:05:00 the money in that fashion.
11:05:01 I can't personally tell you either way what's
11:05:05 happened.
11:05:05 But that will at least give you the information
11:05:07 according to Mr. Hernandez.
11:05:10 >> Thank you.
11:05:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: One more follow-up to Mr. Miranda's
11:05:14 comment, if I could.
11:05:15 Charlie, you mentioned, are there ways that we can
11:05:20 generate our ow own power for our own streetlights, to
11:05:24 at least move that money where it is or reduce it.
11:05:28 And Linda's assistant back here just pulled this, but
11:05:33 apparently down in Dania, Florida, south Florida,
11:05:41 Miami, the town of Dania has taken a page decided that
11:05:46 solar powered street lights would be a good investment
11:05:51 concerning the threat of hurricanes causes power
11:05:53 outages, officials believe money spent caused by the
11:05:58 hurricane, yada yada. Anyway, apparently, throws some
11:06:03 solar paneled street lights that are municipal, we all
11:06:10 see them in a residential setting but in terms of
11:06:13 commercial, municipality setting, it might be
11:06:16 something we can look at.

11:06:17 The only question with regard to franchise agreement,
11:06:20 David, I want to make sure worry not precluded from
11:06:23 heading in this direction, if our public works folks
11:06:27 think this might be a way to go in terms of new
11:06:30 streetlights that we are adding or retrofitting old
11:06:33 streetlights.
11:06:33 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:06:35 To the extent we own those lights we certainly would
11:06:37 not be precluded.
11:06:39 Now, to the extent Tampa Electric Company owns the
11:06:41 streetlights, I'm not sure.
11:06:43 So we'll have to look at that question whether or
11:06:45 not -- what I have been told, generically by Tampa
11:06:48 Electric, is they don't typically care what type of
11:06:54 light we choose, we just have to pay for it if we vary
11:06:57 from the standard.
11:06:58 So it may very well be that they would not have a
11:07:01 problem with even converting existing streetlights and
11:07:06 solar power if that's in fact what the city --
11:07:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, we just need to make sure
11:07:11 before we sign on the dotted line that we have the
11:07:13 flexibility to go in this direction, regardless of how

11:07:17 you get there.
11:07:17 >>> I understand.
11:07:19 And I can't give you that right now so we'll look at
11:07:22 it.
11:07:23 It is part of the lighting agreement but we are trying
11:07:27 to make sure we handle all of these issues that were
11:07:32 addressed because this as you heard before is a
11:07:34 25-year document.
11:07:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll send these over to Steve
11:07:38 Daignault and make sure he looks at them.
11:07:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Smith, when you were talking
11:07:45 about the three areas of concern, you mentioned -- you
11:07:48 didn't mention aesthetics.
11:07:51 And certainly one of our responsibilities for the
11:07:54 state is to address -- and for the city is to address
11:07:58 making the aesthetics as positive as possible.
11:08:01 I have been told by some urban planners and landscape
11:08:04 architects that they are limited in terms of lighting
11:08:09 standards.
11:08:09 You don't have to answer this now.
11:08:10 But it's something I want us to look into.
11:08:13 That whatever attractive lighting standards people

11:08:16 want to put in, as long as they pay for the power to
11:08:20 keep them running and pay for them to be installed,
11:08:23 that they are not precluded from making those sorts of
11:08:26 selections.
11:08:27 Again, I would like Wilson Stair to be part of this
11:08:29 conversation.
11:08:29 I just want to ensure that in the lighting agreement,
11:08:32 which you want which we will be addressing, that
11:08:37 private property owners are allowed to make whatever
11:08:39 choices they want as long as they pick up the tab on
11:08:42 it.
11:08:42 In other words, we are not mandating it.
11:08:44 But then they are not precluded from making those
11:08:47 choices.
11:08:47 >>> We'll get that answered for you.
11:08:49 >> And also with trees.
11:08:51 And this is something -- the species are currently
11:08:56 limited to like two or three.
11:08:57 And there's some other trees that are now in
11:08:59 propagation, that some people feel this is from
11:09:03 landscape architects, that we should expand the
11:09:08 vocabulary of trees that are considered.

11:09:10 That needs to be part of the conversation.
11:09:12 Thank you.
11:09:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?
11:09:17 >>> Well, I think we have probably exhausted your time
11:09:19 for today.
11:09:20 I was going to go through the agreement in somewhat
11:09:22 more detail, but it might be more helpful at this
11:09:24 juncture to schedule some one-on-one meetings with
11:09:27 each of you so that we can have some candid
11:09:29 discussions about issues that may be of concern to
11:09:31 you.
11:09:31 And what I will do is I'll schedule some time with Mr.
11:09:34 Cloud so he can be here, because he is the expert in
11:09:38 this area and will be able to answer your questions.
11:09:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question of Mr. Hernandez,
11:09:43 if I could.
11:09:49 First off thanks for coming.
11:09:51 I now it's been several years in the making.
11:09:53 I want to put a caveat in regards to the energy
11:09:56 conservation program.
11:09:56 Because you and I have had discussion busy this, Mr.
11:10:01 Frazier and I have had lengthy discussions about this.

11:10:04 In this year TECO has I think made great strides in
11:10:11 the conservation energy program so I don't want to
11:10:14 leave that unsaid.
11:10:15 You know, I noted, we are heading in the right
11:10:18 direction in that regard.
11:10:19 I don't -- not necessarily aware -- one or two other
11:10:25 utilities are around the state in that regard but I'm
11:10:28 sure you will try to strive to get there.
11:10:30 With that said, I mentioned earlier, and you were in
11:10:35 the room, if it's possible that we could put some
11:10:39 language in the agreement.
11:10:42 It's not binding by any means in terms of there's no
11:10:44 codification but language in there that says TECO will
11:10:50 continue to make its best efforts to ensure that we
11:10:52 improve our conservation programs, that we have
11:10:57 incentives for the community to go in that direction,
11:11:00 whatever type of language would be appropriate.
11:11:04 And I would hope that Tampa Electric would be amenable
11:11:07 to putting that language in there voluntarily, that
11:11:12 would he have been advised it's preempted by the state
11:11:14 and he would can't force to you do that but it just
11:11:17 seems like it's a win-win for everybody including

11:11:19 Tampa Electric.
11:11:21 >>> Thank you for the opportunity, councilman
11:11:23 Dingfelder and Madam Chair.
11:11:25 Let me first say to this conservation issue, this all
11:11:29 started as Mr. Cloud referred to the Florida
11:11:32 legislature said it's something called Florida energy
11:11:35 and efficiency conservation act, which we supported.
11:11:38 That was in the late 70s.
11:11:40 And then when they set out the guidelines in 1981 to
11:11:44 1982, we put together programs starting back then.
11:11:49 We are already doing some things.
11:11:50 Now it's a much more aggressive approach just like we
11:11:52 are talking about now.
11:11:53 I believe that we were the first utility to actually a
11:11:57 Chief all of the goals to load reduction and energy
11:12:00 reduction through a variety of conservation and
11:12:05 management type programs.
11:12:06 So very successful today.
11:12:08 What you all are talking about are some recent
11:12:11 discussions, increased interest in renewable energy
11:12:16 efficiency programs, and we have since developed
11:12:18 numerous programs between 12 and 18 that are new

11:12:23 programs but plus our existing programs that continue
11:12:26 to go to that effort, and our intent is to reflect
11:12:29 that in future planning, additional demand and energy
11:12:33 reductions and probably hearing more about that from
11:12:35 late they are year, these programs are approved by the
11:12:39 Public Service Commission.
11:12:40 >> We'll go back and talk about it but I don't want to
11:12:46 tie the hands -- certainly can't do anything out of
11:12:48 Florida statute or Public Service Commission.
11:12:50 They have every five years a hearing, review the new
11:12:56 programs, review the effectiveness of existing
11:12:58 programs, to defer new generating plant and reduce
11:13:02 energy consumption which is good for everyone, reduces
11:13:04 the environmental footprint, which we are clearly on
11:13:06 board with doing, with the conversion of or units and
11:13:13 application and success of our conservation and load
11:13:16 reduction programs.
11:13:18 That said, we will continue to support those
11:13:20 initiatives.
11:13:21 When folks were talking about, by the way, maybe
11:13:23 getting rid of those goals, we were the one utility
11:13:25 that stand up first to say we have to continue doing

11:13:29 this, this is good business, good for our customers.
11:13:32 So we'll see if we can do something if necessary to
11:13:36 make a change.
11:13:37 We clearly support the negotiated agreement as
11:13:40 written.
11:13:40 We believe that flexibility that addresses is in there
11:13:45 that addresses a lot of your questions that I heard
11:13:47 today.
11:13:47 And I think with some additional information and
11:13:49 clarification, you will feel better about what you
11:13:52 have before you.
11:13:53 >> When you and I are long gone out of the scene, you
11:13:56 know, Tom mentioned this is a 25 you're document, you
11:14:00 know, I think it would be great if there's language in
11:14:04 there to just sort of goal type language,
11:14:10 encouragement, best management practices, best
11:14:12 practices is encouraging us to do, you know, that type
11:14:15 of thing.
11:14:16 So I would urge go back to your team.
11:14:19 I'm sure the mayor wouldn't have any problem with
11:14:20 including language like that, and maybe you all can
11:14:24 come up with something that can work for you and for

11:14:25 the community.
11:14:26 >>> I think I understand what you are looking for.
11:14:28 Thank you.
11:14:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I think I would like to have some time
11:14:36 where we are talking about when we are coming back
11:14:38 with this?
11:14:46 I want to make sure from our administration or Mr.
11:14:48 Cloud, I think you said you did look at other local
11:14:56 power companies, franchise agreements with
11:14:58 municipalities.
11:14:59 You hadn't done that as far as the conservation issues
11:15:05 that we have been talking about.
11:15:08 >>> Well, actually, I have.
11:15:10 I looked at every electric franchise in the State of
11:15:12 Florida.
11:15:13 I had to in order to put the case on in the Winter
11:15:16 Park case to validate the fee that the court
11:15:19 validated, and we found one.
11:15:22 It's very unusual.
11:15:23 It is in fact unique.
11:15:24 It is the town of Fernandina.
11:15:27 You know where Fort Clinch is, the old pre-civil war

11:15:33 fort that's supposedly haunted.
11:15:35 There's a small investor-owned utility in that town
11:15:38 and that's basically their only service area.
11:15:40 And as a part of the declaratory statement that was
11:15:43 issued in March of 1982, the Public Service Commission
11:15:47 approved a franchise that had a requirement for
11:15:51 conservation rates in it.
11:15:54 They haven't done it before or since.
11:15:56 I think the members of the commission probably would
11:15:58 like to ignore that declaratory statement was ever
11:16:03 issued, but it is nonetheless there and it is the only
11:16:05 example that I am aware of in Florida.
11:16:07 There are other states that have them but just the one
11:16:11 in Florida.
11:16:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:16:14 I would just like the opportunity before we have our
11:16:16 next public meeting to discuss this to look at some
11:16:22 local ones, maybe a St. Pete, and Clearwater, and see
11:16:26 if they were able to include any kind of language in
11:16:29 there that we could do that would encourage
11:16:32 conservation and alternative energy use.
11:16:35 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.

11:16:37 I think also the issue originally calm up in context
11:16:40 in the FPL agreement so we should probably get those
11:16:43 and show you what they say.
11:16:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.
11:16:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Smith, when were you -- will
11:16:53 you have lighting agreement and the other agreement,
11:17:00 the McKay Bay agreement?
11:17:02 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:17:03 I'm looking at Mr. Territo because he is helping us to
11:17:06 negotiate that as we speak, and I need to speak with
11:17:09 Mr. ZAMBO, the attorney in south Florida who is
11:17:13 working on the McKay Bay agreement.
11:17:15 >> I think what would be helpful after you have those
11:17:19 to us and after you chat with each council member
11:17:21 individually, I would like to have an opportunity to
11:17:23 have some kind of forum where the public can be heard.
11:17:27 Council members, I started working on looking at
11:17:34 different issues 12 years ago.
11:17:37 I literally waited 12 years for this to come up with
11:17:40 this franchise agreement.
11:17:41 And one of the things that I think we need to consider
11:17:43 very carefully is the length of this agreement.

11:17:47 We all know how dynamic the world of energy is today.
11:17:51 Originally, TECO wanted a 30-year agreement.
11:17:55 The city wanted a 20-year agreement.
11:17:57 I personally think a ten-year agreement would be the
11:17:59 most prudent.
11:18:00 And I am not making any motions or anything like that
11:18:03 but I would like that to be something we look at
11:18:05 because of the dynamics in this area, because it's
11:18:10 such a large responsibility we have to our
11:18:12 constituents, the City of Tampa taxpayers, to make the
11:18:15 rates the lowest they can be to make things fair for
11:18:18 our constituents, and to be prudent in terms of the
11:18:22 environmental concerns.
11:18:23 I think that's something we should consider as these
11:18:26 conversations go on.
11:18:26 >>CHAIRMAN: Are we going into a public hearing or
11:18:33 workshop?
11:18:34 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:18:35 Really the council needs to decide that today whether
11:18:38 you want to have a subsequent workshop or whether you
11:18:40 want to schedule your public hearing and having
11:18:43 briefings in between.

11:18:45 It's entirely within this council's discretion,
11:18:49 according to the calendar and docket.
11:18:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know of a great number of people
11:18:54 in the community that want to have input that would
11:18:57 effect what people bring to council to discuss at our
11:18:59 council meeting.
11:19:00 In recognition of council's time and to be considerate
11:19:03 in terms of conserving our time, I would like to
11:19:05 suggest a special discussion meeting, perhaps the end
11:19:09 of February, where we have the public, and let them
11:19:12 air things and discuss some things, and then schedule
11:19:16 our public hearings after in a.
11:19:17 And I was trying to get, Mr. Smith, where we have the
11:19:20 other two legs of this stool ready by then, by the end
11:19:23 of February.
11:19:26 The lighting franchise and the McKay Bay, or March?
11:19:32 >>DAVID SMITH: I think we would have it done sooner
11:19:34 than that.
11:19:35 I just asked Mr. Territo where he would stand on the
11:19:37 lighting agreement.
11:19:38 We have a document that has gone out.
11:19:40 We are waiting comment.

11:19:42 If we don't go through 23 iterations we should be
11:19:45 ready very quickly.
11:19:46 I believe I understand what the snag is with regard to
11:19:49 the McKay Bay agreement pursuant to a discussion
11:19:51 this morning with Mr. Hernandez.
11:19:54 So I am going to talk to Mr. ZAMBO and find out if
11:19:58 throws some other issue.
11:19:59 But that has been in the offing for awhile.
11:20:02 So I think we could have those done certainly --
11:20:05 >> Mid February?
11:20:07 February 13th?
11:20:09 >>DAVID SMITH: I think we need to have a target.
11:20:11 It should be an aggressive target and I think that
11:20:13 helps get things done.
11:20:14 >> Then I would like to make a motion we have a
11:20:16 special discussion meeting on Wednesday --
11:20:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Wait?
11:20:19ave we have some more
11:20:22 Reverend Scott.
11:20:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The original agreement was for how
11:20:26 long?
11:20:26 20 years?

11:20:28 >> The most recent one was 20 years, yes, sir.
11:20:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And you have been working on this for
11:20:34 how long now?
11:20:35 >>DAVID SMITH: We started in 2005.
11:20:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: About three years.
11:20:39 Okay.
11:20:40 >>> Two and a half years, yes, sir.
11:20:42 >> Two and a half years.
11:20:43 All right.
11:20:47 I have concerns that we are going to beat this thing
11:20:49 to death.
11:20:53 I think it's important for each council member to be
11:20:56 briefed individually.
11:20:57 I think that needs to be done.
11:21:00 We will have public hearings on this.
11:21:03 I am particularly for being briefed, bringing it back,
11:21:08 doing the public hearing and moving forward on it.
11:21:10 I'm just one vote on this board but that's where I am.
11:21:15 That's why you have public hearings.
11:21:17 And then when you get into all these other things that
11:21:20 drag out the process and makes it this and this, we
11:21:22 are already beyond the contract, or the franchise

11:21:25 agreement.
11:21:28 And so that's where I am on it.
11:21:30 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes, sir.
11:21:33 I can probably explain when a franchise expires, by
11:21:35 substitute law, in essence the parties are like
11:21:38 holdover tenants.
11:21:39 You continue under your existing terms.
11:21:41 >> I'm aware of that.
11:21:43 >>> But that should be said public.
11:21:44 I don't want anyone thinking we are in chaos.
11:21:47 We are not.
11:21:52 >> That's one of the problems with government, is that
11:21:55 the wheels of government turn slow.
11:21:56 And sometimes that's good and sometimes not so good.
11:22:06 And if you have been washing working object this
11:22:08 documents almost three years as legal counsel, at some
11:22:12 point he would need to have public hearings so the
11:22:14 public can have input.
11:22:16 And how many public hearings are required, two?
11:22:18 >>DAVID SMITH: This is an ordinance process.
11:22:20 You will have two.
11:22:21 >> You will have two public hearings.

11:22:23 >>> Yes, sir.
11:22:24 >> Where the public will have input into this
11:22:26 ordinance.
11:22:27 At some point, listen, you have to bring closure.
11:22:30 That's one of my problems is that we never move beyond
11:22:35 first base a lot of times.
11:22:37 I am a person that believes in looking at the hard
11:22:39 issues, dealing with them, tackling them, so everybody
11:22:42 has input, but at some point we have to move forward.
11:22:44 We can't stay on this inform another three years.
11:22:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
11:22:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:22:49 I usually agree with you on process.
11:22:51 But considering that the conservative estimates say
11:22:55 that if we don't significantly change our way of
11:23:01 consuming energy and creating energy that in 12 years
11:23:05 it will be too late, and nothing will be done.
11:23:07 So -- and that two years ago, we have lost two years,
11:23:15 hundreds of billions of gallons of COT and greenhouse
11:23:19 gases getting spewed into the atmosphere.
11:23:29 We have this wind this window right now, this week,
11:23:32 this month, to look at our agreement with the company

11:23:37 that produces our energy, which is the -- one of the
11:23:41 greatest contributors to gren house gases.
11:23:44 So I think we should have a public hearing.
11:23:46 I don't think it nodes to be a special discussion
11:23:48 meeting.
11:23:49 But I don't think that we need to rush to approve this
11:23:53 particular agreement.
11:23:54 I would like to have the public be able to express
11:24:05 their input into this especially because it doesn't
11:24:08 seem like the administration has put a lot of thought
11:24:10 about the environment into this agreement.
11:24:12 And I am not convinced we have looked at it from that
11:24:18 perspective exhaustively.
11:24:20 So, fine, let's have a public hearing.
11:24:22 But I don't think we need to vote at the public
11:24:25 hearing.
11:24:28 >>CHAIRMAN: We have two public hearings, not one.
11:24:30 We'll have two.
11:24:31 The second one we will be voting.
11:24:32 Mr. Miranda.
11:24:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
11:24:34 I agree to some extent with the honorable council

11:24:38 member of district 5, that's Mr. Scott.
11:24:42 However, there's two items here that I think are
11:24:46 together but separately at the same time.
11:24:49 That sounds like a political statement, and it is.
11:24:52 When you look at the basic agreement, and then you
11:24:55 look at the McKay Bay refuse to energy, there is a
11:24:58 distinct difference.
11:24:59 I think that the refuse to energy -- and please
11:25:03 correct me if I am incorrect here -- has to be
11:25:05 approved by the Public Service Commission.
11:25:10 >> Yes, sir.
11:25:18 >> All right. So then are we taking them both
11:25:21 together even knowing that one has to be taken to
11:25:21 Public Service Commission, are we taking this first
11:25:22 and let the other rest until it's approved, we approve
11:25:25 and it's sent up and comes back?
11:25:26 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:25:27 The context that we are trying to employ is we are
11:25:29 trying to take them in parallel paths.
11:25:31 This council, however, has the ability to approve the
11:25:34 franchise agreement, and it is not our intent to wait
11:25:37 until we hear from the PSC on the McKay Bay

11:25:41 agreement.
11:25:42 >> That's what I want to make sure.
11:25:43 >>> As long as we get an agreement with Tampa Electric
11:25:46 as to what we can submit, then we are comfortable that
11:25:48 we have got that commitment on their behalf.
11:25:50 >> Yes, that happened.
11:25:54 >>> By the way, Mr. Fernandez would like an
11:25:57 opportunity to say a couple things if he could.
11:26:01 >>> Thank you, Madam Chair.
11:26:03 Tom Fernandez, vice-president, I apologize for not
11:26:09 introducing myself properly earlier.
11:26:12 Real quickly, Florida Power and Light is asking for a
11:26:15 cost recovery mechanism, to recover those costs to
11:26:17 other rate payers from where they are intending to
11:26:21 underground. We will also do the same thing in the
11:26:23 language that we put -- I'm sorry, in the franchise
11:26:28 agreement, provide that flexibility that we will
11:26:32 underground anything, subject to the applicable rules
11:26:35 and cost recovery mechanisms approved by the Public
11:26:37 Service Commission.
11:26:39 Very broad like in undergrounding.
11:26:41 Conservation.

11:26:42 And to just address this a little bit.
11:26:44 Conservation programs are subject to Public Service
11:26:45 Commission review and approval to determine the
11:26:50 prudency.
11:26:51 There's three cost recovery paths that I won't get
11:26:53 into, but there are mechanisms that make sure to
11:26:54 ensure that the general body of customers are
11:26:58 benefiting from the results of the energy efficiency
11:27:00 program, or new green power, renewables program.
11:27:04 You all have the ability to implement whatever energy
11:27:06 conservation, energy reduction programs at your will.
11:27:10 You can do that today.
11:27:11 You could have done that yesterday.
11:27:12 And we'll support that.
11:27:14 But what you are talking about, and why it doesn't
11:27:16 necessarily belong in terms of constricting the
11:27:18 ability for you to do that doesn't belong in the
11:27:20 franchise agreement.
11:27:21 Any program that we provide, that's what the intent is
11:27:24 try to marriage your programs and initiatives with
11:27:28 ours, or in terms of developing new programs, we'll
11:27:31 put them before the Public Service Commission but we

11:27:33 cannot codify a program -- in terms of getting cost
11:27:38 recovery and understanding what it's going to
11:27:40 effectively reduce emissions or effectively reduce the
11:27:43 energy consumption without Public Service Commission
11:27:44 giving approval.
11:27:46 But clearly you can do whatever you want, independent
11:27:49 of the franchise.
11:27:53 Just so you understand, we have agreed in principle,
11:27:56 business concept with the standard tariff lighting
11:27:59 agreement.
11:27:59 If you sign that today we don't even have to take that
11:28:02 to the Public Service Commission for approval.
11:28:04 If you change it.
11:28:05 Any changes to the standard tariff, the services, the
11:28:08 costs, the types of things you are looking for, if
11:28:10 it's different from what the standard tariff is, we
11:28:13 have to go and get again approval by the Public
11:28:14 Service Commission.
11:28:15 If you don't change it, we can agree to it today.
11:28:18 The cogeneration, McKay Bay cogeneration is based on
11:28:22 the standard offer, reviewed and approved by the
11:28:25 Public Service Commission.

11:28:26 What we did prior to and separate and apart from the
11:28:30 franchise agreement, in August 2006, we entered into a
11:28:34 new agreement with the city for supplemental capacity,
11:28:37 independent of the franchise agreement.
11:28:39 It's done.
11:28:39 And we negotiated those terms. We went up and got
11:28:43 reviewed and approved independent of the franchise.
11:28:46 While we agree in principle to propose something to
11:28:49 the Public Service Commission, clearly it's subject to
11:28:51 review and approval, which is why they are not -- we
11:28:55 addressed those two issues.
11:28:56 The mayor, and chuck, our president, met with David
11:29:00 and myself, we have agreed in concept to move forward
11:29:02 as David said, parallel paths.
11:29:04 There's no reason to tie the two together and hold up
11:29:06 the franchise agreement.
11:29:07 Let's get this done.
11:29:09 >>CHAIRMAN: Council, we need to move on.
11:29:11 We have another --
11:29:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: After Mr. Miranda.
11:29:14 I am going to hold you to it.
11:29:20 This has to do with process in response to councilman

11:29:24 Scott and others.
11:29:27 Tom, normally I would say, now what?
11:29:29 If it's just a regular ordinance that we are drafting,
11:29:33 that we can modify during those -- the first public
11:29:36 hearing, and which we often do and that sort of thing,
11:29:40 we get public input and we can tweak the ordinance or
11:29:43 tweak the zoning, and what have you, that's fine.
11:29:46 The problem is -- and we ran into this with Verizon.
11:29:49 I don't know if you guys did Verizon over at the
11:29:51 county commission.
11:29:52 But we ran into this, was that what happened was is
11:29:56 David brought the agreement that had been negotiated
11:30:01 completely, now, in the four corners of the agreement,
11:30:03 this is what the mayor brought and negotiated.
11:30:07 Yes or no?
11:30:08 No okay, no tweaking.
11:30:10 So the public input that we got, during that hearing,
11:30:13 we were being advised by David, don't mess with that
11:30:16 agreement because it's already what the mayor
11:30:20 negotiated because the charter and the division of
11:30:23 powers, et cetera.
11:30:24 So I thought it was wonderful that we are everything a

11:30:26 workshop.
11:30:27 And frankly, in line with what Mary said, I think we
11:30:30 should have another workshop to make sure we are all
11:30:35 on the same page before we go into that public hearing
11:30:37 process.
11:30:37 Because once you go into that public hearing process,
11:30:40 it's kind of just a formality of voting yes or no on
11:30:43 that document.
11:30:45 And that's what I'm saying.
11:30:47 It's a little different than what you are used to --
11:30:50 it's different than a lot of the other ordinances we
11:30:52 are dealing with.
11:30:53 Because and David, you even said it in writing in your
11:30:57 summary that it's your recommendation that all these
11:30:59 things have been negotiated, and don't mess with them.
11:31:02 We have come up with a couple of interesting ideas,
11:31:04 that TECO said they would explore, okay, and I'm not
11:31:10 saying you committed, but explore, and I think they
11:31:14 are worth exploring.
11:31:16 You know, one of which was the solar powered
11:31:19 streetlights, the other was the possible conservation
11:31:21 paragraph, that type of thing.

11:31:23 You know, and there might be other things that the
11:31:25 public, when we hear from the public -- and I don't
11:31:28 know why we are not hearing from the public today so
11:31:31 we can get through -- perhaps get some more input.
11:31:34 But when we do that, there might be some other things
11:31:37 that we can tweak this, all right?
11:31:39 And I'm not saying not to change it or anything like
11:31:41 that.
11:31:42 But we could tweak it.
11:31:43 And Tom, further -- and everybody got really mad
11:31:48 including Verizon was at the last minute there was a
11:31:50 significant change, a monetary change in the favor of
11:31:53 the city taxpayers that council put Verizon's feet to
11:31:57 the fire, but it was during the public hearing
11:31:59 process, and it was very awkward and sort of
11:32:02 cumbersome and annoying to legal staff.
11:32:05 So I am trying to avoid that.
11:32:06 So I think not to try and belabor this, but I think
11:32:09 that we should have a public hearing where we actually
11:32:13 hear from -- excuse me, I think we should have a
11:32:16 workshop where we specifically anticipate hearing from
11:32:18 the public, having a little bit more additional

11:32:20 discussion on some of these issues, and then go into
11:32:24 the public hearings.
11:32:25 And for that reason.
11:32:26 Normally, I wouldn't say it.
11:32:28 But for that reason.
11:32:29 Otherwise, we are going to be stuck with our hands
11:32:32 tied in two public hearings and just say you vote yes
11:32:37 or no.
11:32:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, then I have a problem with
11:32:40 process, because why have public hearings if the
11:32:42 public come address at the public hearing and you
11:32:45 can't make an adjustment and change?
11:32:46 Those something wrong with that process.
11:32:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree.
11:32:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: One half of public hearing.
11:32:52 Something is wrong.
11:32:53 I will tell you -- I understand what state law says,
11:32:56 but the reason is because you want the public to talk
11:32:58 to you about that so that you can make recommendations
11:33:00 to go back and make those adjustment and changes.
11:33:04 Now, so that raises another issue to a point.
11:33:07 I mean, why -- I keep raising, why have this council

11:33:11 if you cannot have input?
11:33:14 Why?
11:33:17 And we keep going through the motions.
11:33:19 Listen, I have better things to do than go through the
11:33:22 motions, okay?
11:33:23 I want to know that what I am doing is representing my
11:33:27 constituency and the citizens of Tampa, Florida and be
11:33:29 able to have input into the process.
11:33:32 That's why you are having the public hearing so the
11:33:34 citizens can come and talk to you and give you their
11:33:36 opinion.
11:33:37 And then if we get to the first public hearing and we
11:33:43 have a lot of issues then we need to send it back.
11:33:47 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:33:52 Sometimes these things seem like -- I realize that,
11:33:56 and maybe my articulation isn't the best.
11:33:59 But I think what happened at the cable franchise
11:34:02 approval process was during the ordinance review.
11:34:05 It was fine.
11:34:07 And it was legal.
11:34:08 And it happened.
11:34:08 It might have been awkward.

11:34:10 It might have been difficult.
11:34:11 But I think that is what rightly or wrongly that's how
11:34:16 the charter contemplates your participation.
11:34:17 If you have another workshop, I think it loss more
11:34:20 like negotiating or trying to negotiate the franchise
11:34:24 agreement, whereas your process is the legislative
11:34:27 process of adopting an ordinance.
11:34:29 You are entitled during that process to say whatever
11:34:31 it is that you think is relevant to the adoption of
11:34:35 that ordinance.
11:34:35 And if it necessities a second first reading, or
11:34:40 whatever it necessities, then so be it.
11:34:42 But I think one of the advantages of that is you have
11:34:44 the entire public down there, it will be televised,
11:34:49 not trying to constrain your hands, but you need to
11:34:53 focus on your legislative imperatives, and then the
11:34:57 process fits with the charter.
11:35:00 You are not rubber stamped.
11:35:02 No one should ever presume that.
11:35:04 You won't.
11:35:04 And you need to have answers to your questions.
11:35:06 But I think it's contemplated that we would do that as

11:35:09 part of a legislative ordinance process rather than a
11:35:12 workshop.
11:35:13 Now, that may make know difference in terms of what
11:35:17 you are going to say but it is at lowest compliant
11:35:20 with the process the charter created.
11:35:22 So I don't think it really prevents you from having
11:35:25 your concerns addressed and having the briefing, I
11:35:30 think a private briefing in which each of you, and
11:35:36 Tom, gets the answer questioned and to know what you
11:35:40 need to know to take action as a legislative or.
11:35:42 I would suggest -- and it's your call -- that when
11:35:44 call schedule this for an ordinance public hearing,
11:35:46 but with sufficient time for us to have those
11:35:48 briefings to get your questions answered, and if they
11:35:52 are not answered we can delay the ordinance if we have
11:35:54 to.
11:35:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me say one thing in response.
11:35:57 As long as you just now on the record unshackle our
11:36:00 hands, okay, because I do remember, Dave, with all due
11:36:03 respect, gout very upset when we started doing the --
11:36:06 during the public hearing on the Verizon process.
11:36:10 You don't have to respond.

11:36:11 I'm just saying you did.
11:36:12 You did.
11:36:13 You weren't comfortable with it.
11:36:14 Just now, you gave us permission.
11:36:17 Not that we need your permission but you gave us your
11:36:20 legal opinion that at first reading, okay, after we
11:36:23 hear from the public, we can do something, we don't
11:36:25 have to accept the four corners of that document.
11:36:27 >>> I do want to make sure I am clear because I don't
11:36:30 want to misrepresent anything to you.
11:36:33 I believe the charter contemplates that you are
11:36:34 supposed to vote it up or down.
11:36:36 Now, what you do at the table meeting is said I'm not
11:36:41 prepared to approve it unless it has X.
11:36:43 Ultimately it got X.
11:36:44 But, again, it may seem like a distinction with no
11:36:47 difference but I think it's important that we
11:36:50 recognize that you are not necessity renegotiating the
11:36:55 franchise agreement.
11:36:55 You may want X.
11:36:56 You may have two votes for X.
11:36:58 You may have no votes other than your own for X.

11:37:02 As long as that's the process, I am not trying -- all.
11:37:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A franchise or ordinance agreement?
11:37:09 >>> They are both.
11:37:10 >> And they are the same document, I think.
11:37:12 >>> Yes.
11:37:12 >> The ordinance is our legislative prerogative.
11:37:14 >>> Yes, it is.
11:37:15 >> Which means to me that we have the right to do
11:37:18 whatever we wish with that ordinance because it's a
11:37:22 legislative document.
11:37:22 >>> And just to recall what I did say, perhaps not as
11:37:25 gently as I should have, over the cable franchise, one
11:37:30 of the, I think, policies contemplated by the charter
11:37:33 is that when people deal with the city, they can be
11:37:36 comfortable that it won't get retraded so I think it
11:37:40 does contemplate that contracts in particular, and
11:37:42 franchises are a little bit of a hybrid so perhaps a
11:37:45 little different, but contracts in particular aren't
11:37:47 renegotiated here, they are either voted up or down,
11:37:50 so that people can count on whoever they are dealing
11:37:52 with in the city to get a fair deal rather than hold
11:37:56 things back and renegotiate.

11:37:59 That having been said --
11:38:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Priorities are sometimes slightly
11:38:03 different than council's.
11:38:05 Not totally different but slightly different.
11:38:07 >>> I realize that.
11:38:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we are going to move on.
11:38:09 We are going to come up with a date for a public
11:38:11 hearing.
11:38:11 So how many weeks do you need to have a public
11:38:14 hearing?
11:38:18 >>> What are your meetings in February?
11:38:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The 21st.
11:38:24 Regular meeting.
11:38:27 >> We don't want a regular meeting.
11:38:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think city clerk should provide
11:38:36 legal with the calendar.
11:38:40 >>> The 7th through the 21st.
11:38:43 The 7th might be very ambitious.
11:38:48 >>GWEN MILLER: The 7th --
11:38:50 >>> our schedules don't always mesh very well.
11:38:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's do the 23rd.
11:38:56 One second.

11:39:01 Will be out of town on the 21st.
11:39:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question regarding
11:39:06 scheduling.
11:39:07 You are suggesting that you are going to meet with
11:39:09 each of us individually before the public hearing?
11:39:13 >>> Yes, ma'am.
11:39:13 >>GWEN MILLER: With council members and then have the
11:39:16 public hearing.
11:39:17 >>> I would rather meet with you after that first
11:39:19 public hearing.
11:39:21 >>DAVID SMITH: You can do both if you like.
11:39:23 We would certainly be happy to do that.
11:39:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Then we'll know what the public's
11:39:29 concerns are and we can talk to you about it.
11:39:31 >>> I wouldn't courage you to do both.
11:39:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:39:37 And then I want to ask that you provide us today as
11:39:39 soon as possible an electronic version of this draft
11:39:44 agreement.
11:39:46 >>> Certainly.
11:39:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.
11:39:48 >>> I thought we did but I'll make sure --

11:39:50 >>MARY MULHERN: No, we just got papers that we had
11:39:53 copied.
11:39:53 Do we have it?
11:39:54 >>> It should be in your -- an electronic package.
11:39:58 But we'll get you another --
11:40:01 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:40:02 >>GWEN MILLER: What about March 6th?
11:40:06 As the public hearing?
11:40:07 Is that too long?
11:40:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: At 1:30?
11:40:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Is that too much time?
11:40:13 >>DAVID SMITH: Well, if you can't do it on the
11:40:14 21st.
11:40:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.
11:40:19 The 7th when you have 14 staff reports and 15
11:40:23 second hearings.
11:40:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Too soon.
11:40:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I will not be here but 21st is
11:40:30 fine if you want to do it.
11:40:32 I will be out of town.
11:40:34 >>GWEN MILLER:
11:40:39 >> That is the first public hearing.

11:40:42 That's fine.
11:40:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We will do it the 21st.
11:40:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move we have it the 21st at
11:40:49 10:30 time certain because there's going to be a lot
11:40:51 of public that wants to come.
11:40:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 1:30 time certain, why not 11?
11:40:58 >> I want it to be convenient for the public.
11:41:00 >>GWEN MILLER: I think if we put it at the end of the
11:41:03 agenda.
11:41:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam motion, my motion is 1:30.
11:41:07 >>GWEN MILLER: We didn't get a second on it.
11:41:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Take a vote on it.
11:41:12 >>GWEN MILLER: It dies.
11:41:16 We are going to get another motion.
11:41:18 Mr. Dingfelder, do you have another motion?
11:41:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think procedurally she made a
11:41:25 motion.
11:41:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am not going to argue about that.
11:41:28 Let's take a vote.
11:41:29 If it was or wasn't I don't want to go on all day.
11:41:31 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion for 1:30 on
11:41:34 February 21st say Aye.

11:41:38 Opposed?
11:41:42 >> Miranda, Miller, Caetano, Scott voting no.
11:41:51 >> Who voted yes?
11:41:52 >> I did and Mary.
11:41:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Dingfelder voting no.
11:41:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we should put it for time
11:42:01 certain, if you want a time certain, maybe 10:30 in
11:42:03 the morning.
11:42:04 That is an hour and a half before lunch.
11:42:06 >> Second.
11:42:07 (Motion carried).
11:42:08 >> On the 21st.
11:42:12 >>GWEN MILLER: 21st of February.
11:42:14 All in favor of the motion.
11:42:16 Question?
11:42:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just so the clerk and public are
11:42:19 clear, is it council's intention to stop whatever
11:42:21 business it's doing at 10:30 and take up that matter?
11:42:27 Or wrap it up?
11:42:31 [Motion carried]
11:42:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If the public wants to share their
11:42:36 ideas, they should send e-mails to council members.

11:42:38 >> Are we allowed to talk about this publicly with
11:42:43 constituents?
11:42:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
11:42:45 >>> Legislative.
11:42:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I don't know about the rest of
11:42:56 you all.
11:42:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to clarify.
11:43:03 >>DAVID SMITH: I appreciate if they copy me, I'll copy
11:43:08 everyone so we have participation.
11:43:10 Mr. Hernandez wants to say one last thing.
11:43:12 >>> Thank you for allowing us to represent our
11:43:15 position on this, and I respectfully request if you
11:43:20 have ideas that we can create new programs and
11:43:22 services, be it conservation or energy, efficiency,
11:43:25 lighting programs, give them to us now.
11:43:27 We'll get working on it.
11:43:29 That's what we mean -- it doesn't have to go through
11:43:32 the franchise.
11:43:33 We have other ways of getting to. This so let's not
11:43:35 wait till then.
11:43:36 Thank you.
11:43:36 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the workshop.

11:43:39 >> So moved.
11:43:39 >> Second.
11:43:40 (Motion carried)
11:43:42 >>CHAIRMAN: We need to open item number 8.
11:43:44 >> So moved.
11:43:44 >> Second.
11:43:45 (Motion carried).
11:43:45 >>CINDY MILLER: Director of growth management,
11:43:54 development services.
11:43:55 The item I am here for is to discuss the
11:43:58 sustainability and green initiatives.
11:44:00 And it was myself with other city staff requested to
11:44:06 compile the sustainability and green initiatives
11:44:08 developed by the fact finding task force, along with
11:44:11 the matrix and time line for proposed code
11:44:13 modifications that have arisen from the fact finding
11:44:17 task force.
11:44:18 I need to clarify something.
11:44:19 What I am presenting to you is the first portion of
11:44:21 our motion is correct.
11:44:23 I have sent to you what I consider a key -- the key
11:44:28 areas that were distributed or submitted from various

11:44:31 members of the task force and I am just going to put
11:44:33 this on the Elmo so that folks see how extensive some
11:44:36 of this information is.
11:44:41 It included a variety of documents that were submitted
11:44:44 by the various subcommittees.
11:44:46 This information has been filed with the clerk's
11:44:49 office.
11:44:50 There was also a web site that was established, but
11:44:53 very frankly those of us that are not as technically
11:44:57 attuned have not been able to access that but we do
11:44:59 have CDs available if other folks would like to do
11:45:02 that.
11:45:03 So what I submitted to council last Friday was the
11:45:07 background information, including these various items,
11:45:11 including presentations by my staff as well as
11:45:14 information from various members.
11:45:20 In order to discuss the second portion, members of my
11:45:24 staff, particularly Thom Snelling, deputy director,
11:45:28 and I have been working the last few weeks in putting
11:45:32 together information, including a resolution regarding
11:45:37 sustainability efforts.
11:45:41 During the same time period, we also have received

11:45:45 information from councilman Dingfelder as well.
11:45:48 And what I am going to put again on the Elmo so that
11:45:50 the public is aware of it is the information that
11:45:53 comprised the second portion, or will present the
11:45:57 second portion of my presentation.
11:46:01 What is in the second booklet that I submitted to you
11:46:05 into the clerk's office is a proposed green building
11:46:08 resolution and other relate items, and I will walk
11:46:10 through some of those.
11:46:12 Tab 2 is a time line that my staff and I have been I
11:46:15 have put together regarding Tampa as a sustainable
11:46:19 city not necessarily just looking at this resolution
11:46:21 but other aspects.
11:46:23 Tab 3 is a list of code chapters to be reviewed and
11:46:25 updated.
11:46:26 And then tab 4 is information as to other Florida
11:46:29 governmental units, whether they be cities, counties,
11:46:32 or other authorities, that either adopted an ordinance
11:46:35 resolution, or if we had information on one particular
11:46:39 policy.
11:46:41 As I mentioned, councilman Dingfelder had put a lot of
11:46:44 work into putting together a resolution that we also

11:46:52 had been reviewing.
11:46:55 And what I would like to basically walk through for
11:46:57 you is what is included in the resolution that's in
11:47:03 the package I submitted to you.
11:47:05 And a lot of the similarities.
11:47:08 Because I think we are about 80% of the way from what
11:47:10 my staff was working on.
11:47:12 And what I would like to be able to start with is a
11:47:18 concept of the city being a certified local government
11:47:22 for sustainability.
11:47:23 And I am frantically looking for a piece of paper.
11:47:27 There it is.
11:47:27 Florida green local government standards is a
11:47:34 certification offered to the Florida green building
11:47:36 coalition, Inc., which is a nonprofit organization.
11:47:39 And I just want to read the heading from their web
11:47:42 site so that you get a foal for how key this
11:47:45 designation can be for the City of Tampa.
11:47:47 The Florida green building -- excuse me, the Florida
11:47:51 green building local December for example nation is an
11:47:53 opportunity to set goals for sustainable environmental
11:47:55 practice that can be carried out on a systematic

11:47:58 basis.
11:47:59 The designation allows the community to be recognized,
11:48:02 while at the same time assuring that the stewardship
11:48:05 measures are significant and persistent.
11:48:08 So even though within both of our resolutions they are
11:48:11 only basically one or two phrases within the
11:48:14 resolutions, stepping forward to obtain the
11:48:19 designation as a green local government is very
11:48:23 important to all of the efforts.
11:48:25 So I did want to point that out.
11:48:27 That is probably one of the more key areas for this
11:48:32 entire effort that I think we are all joining into.
11:48:35 Let me go through again some of the things that we
11:48:37 have a lot of similarities.
11:48:40 When it comes to the various duties that are outlined
11:48:42 for sustainabilities officer, which is also very
11:48:45 consistent with the Florida green local government
11:48:47 standards, and that this be a signed to a senior staff
11:48:51 member.
11:48:52 And I think we concur that he would need to have that
11:48:56 for current staff member of senior level along with
11:48:59 other current duties.

11:49:01 Affordable housing.
11:49:02 We still have to look at how we specifically say this.
11:49:06 But I think one thing I would like to mention to you
11:49:08 is we already have some of this incorporated into our
11:49:11 single-family homes.
11:49:13 Our East Tampa design already requires energy star
11:49:17 appliances.
11:49:18 We are already doing that with those properties that
11:49:20 we have made available to not for profits and
11:49:22 for-profit contractors.
11:49:24 I think we noticed to do a bit more, and we need to
11:49:27 look at that, because as we do requests for proposals,
11:49:30 for whether it's multifamily housing or single-family,
11:49:32 I think it's important that we incorporate
11:49:34 sustainability, energy savings, what exact criteria we
11:49:39 look at, I think we have to work with the federal and
11:49:42 state agencies that provide us the money, but the key
11:49:44 is to help save the money for the folks that are
11:49:46 buying these houses so that they are able to either
11:49:49 afford more house or reduce their cost once they move
11:49:52 in.
11:49:53 Also when it comes to down payment assistance, in the

11:49:55 future, this is something that again we can show that
11:50:00 the cost of a house is lower after it's constructed
11:50:02 because of energy savings, we can offer a little more
11:50:04 flexibility for down payment assistance.
11:50:06 So that is something I think we all are on the same
11:50:09 page for.
11:50:10 When it comes to city buildings, the resolution that I
11:50:14 have in our packet includes that for new construction
11:50:17 there would be a LEED standard that we would apply, a
11:50:21 template that we would look at, because we basically
11:50:24 would be looking at new construction to commercial
11:50:26 buildings.
11:50:27 When it comes to renovation, the wording I have
11:50:30 incorporated, again we still have to work on it, is
11:50:33 that items that will be replaced, say if you have a
11:50:37 renovation, change out a carpet, something of that
11:50:39 nature, will be replaced with energy efficient
11:50:41 equipment and recycled and other materials recognized
11:50:44 for sustainable qualities.
11:50:45 I think we still need to talk about a few definitions,
11:50:48 but I think we are in great shape from that
11:50:50 standpoint.

11:50:52 Also, I have an educational component for employees.
11:50:55 Again that is something that is certified green local
11:50:57 government requires.
11:50:58 And that we would become as a city a member of a U.S.
11:51:02 green building coalition and the Florida green
11:51:04 building coalition.
11:51:05 Also provide web site information. It seems like
11:51:10 everything is web site information now, and we will be
11:51:11 looking at providing that for the citizens in the
11:51:14 community at large.
11:51:15 Establishing benchmarks for how we will be going.
11:51:20 Again that is something necessary for a green
11:51:22 certified government.
11:51:23 We do have a lot of tweaks to make in definition but I
11:51:26 think we have a very good start.
11:51:28 Some of the other supplemental information that I have
11:51:32 mentioned over and above the resolution is that there
11:51:35 are various codes we need to look at.
11:51:38 Chapters 27 is one.
11:51:39 And I think throws been much discussion over the last
11:51:42 few days from what I've heard regarding bonus density
11:51:47 and with LEED certification should bonus density be

11:51:49 awarded.
11:51:49 We already have it in chapter 27 for the Channel
11:51:51 District.
11:51:52 That is something that council can already consider.
11:51:55 And I think again, the presentations earlier from our
11:51:58 comprehensive plan standpoint is we are not talking
11:52:01 about looking at density or high-rises in our stable
11:52:05 neighborhoods.
11:52:06 But what we are looking at is potential for increased
11:52:09 density where there's LEED certification, where there
11:52:11 should be transit oriented design, things of that
11:52:13 nature.
11:52:15 Sprawl is not sustainable.
11:52:16 So, therefore, density along various corridors that
11:52:20 are appropriate for density is something we need to
11:52:22 look at as we develop chapter 27 and as we develop our
11:52:26 plans.
11:52:27 Chapter 13, tree and landscape code.
11:52:30 We already know that it is extremely confusing when
11:52:33 you look at how we go through permitting and tree and
11:52:37 landscape and irrigation.
11:52:39 Landscape architects have already told us, it is

11:52:42 extremely difficult, like for our code, you have to
11:52:46 squint really well to get the codes to all align
11:52:49 properly.
11:52:50 We have already started to look at chapter 13, tree
11:52:52 and landscape code as a staff.
11:52:54 Things that we did not include in the resolution that
11:52:59 I'm presenting to you as a draft is that when it comes
11:53:01 to stormwater incentives, I believe the councilman
11:53:05 included a reduction of 20% in the annual stormwater
11:53:10 fee.
11:53:11 That is something I think we need to at this point
11:53:15 hold off on, keep it on the table.
11:53:18 However, the concern we have is, even if someone put
11:53:23 pervious materials or components into their
11:53:26 construction, since this would be a permanent
11:53:29 reduction of a stormwater fee, it's sort of like we
11:53:33 use a nonrecurring expense, or recurring expenses,
11:53:37 this is something where if someone has installed
11:53:40 something, we would have to monitor extensively in the
11:53:42 future to make sure it stays that way.
11:53:44 So again I think it's something we need to keep
11:53:47 stormwater code is something we need to continually

11:53:49 look at.
11:53:50 And sort of put it there, and look at it, because we
11:53:53 are concerned about the reversibility.
11:53:56 And this is something that chuck Walter had mentioned.
11:54:00 Gasoline consumption for vehicles, we do not
11:54:02 specifically include in our resolution because that is
11:54:05 something that he would need to take up as part of the
11:54:07 certified green local government.
11:54:08 Whether we already have a program for hybrids, we
11:54:11 already are looking at much smaller vehicles.
11:54:13 You will hopefully, in the next couple of years, not
11:54:15 see an F-150 that has growth management and
11:54:18 development services on it.
11:54:20 We have already reduced the products that we will be
11:54:24 purchasing.
11:54:26 The other item that we have not incorporated is a
11:54:31 waiver of either impact fees, connection fees for
11:54:35 water, or reduction of permit fees.
11:54:36 We are looking for sustainable or green construction.
11:54:41 What we would like to do is take another look at it in
11:54:44 a couple of years.
11:54:45 I came to you just a few months ago regarding

11:54:47 construction to the permit fee.
11:54:49 And from that standpoint we are trying to be
11:54:52 self-sustaining.
11:54:54 With those jurisdiction that is may already have aware
11:54:56 of permit fees, they are already self-sustaining.
11:55:01 So from that standpoint, I feel we need a bit more
11:55:03 time before we contemplate that, because it would have
11:55:06 an effect on the general fund if there was a waiver at
11:55:09 this time.
11:55:11 Things that we have added.
11:55:12 Again I mentioned one of our tabs is to look at an
11:55:15 entire survey of code, all of the land development
11:55:18 regulations, I think there's probably a dozen listed,
11:55:21 not just for the those codes that are under my
11:55:24 department, but city-wide.
11:55:26 We have incorporated a bit more education for
11:55:28 employees particularly growth management development
11:55:31 services.
11:55:32 We believe that basically every employee that touches
11:55:36 work within our department need to be educated on
11:55:39 sustainability.
11:55:40 And that's historic preservation, permitting, land

11:55:45 development, all the way across the board.
11:55:47 We also intend to plagiarize extensively an item that
11:55:51 I included this in your first package which is to
11:55:54 assemble a broad range of federal and state rebates
11:55:58 and other related incentives.
11:56:00 Sometimes we forget that the incentives don't have to
11:56:05 come from local government, they can come from other
11:56:07 places.
11:56:08 So we intend to dramatically plagiarize Chicago's
11:56:11 outline so we can adopt it for our purposes.
11:56:13 The other item, and I am almost finished, is that
11:56:16 there was also a contemplation that Mr. Dingfelder had
11:56:19 in his draft for reducing or expediting rezonings and
11:56:26 plan amendments.
11:56:27 From our standpoint of what is being contemplated
11:56:29 there, it's to shorten the time period for rezonings
11:56:33 and plan amendments from when they are submitted and
11:56:35 coming to you.
11:56:36 We already have basically a four-month deadline for
11:56:39 rezonings from when it's submitted to my staff and
11:56:41 when land development to when it is available for your
11:56:44 consideration.

11:56:46 We believe that if we further reduce that kind of
11:56:49 time, first of all we are one of the shortest periods
11:56:51 of time statewide.
11:56:54 But if we did try to shorten that time, there's due
11:56:56 process issues, there's approximate necessity notice
11:56:58 issues for the neighborhood, the surrounding business
11:57:01 owners or homeowners, so therefore we do not believe
11:57:04 reducing that is at this point something we should
11:57:07 consider.
11:57:10 When it comes to -- the time is really short.
11:57:14 And I will wrap it up in one or two minutes.
11:57:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
11:57:21 >>> There is a lot of information.
11:57:22 There's been numerous meetings.
11:57:25 Just the booklets alone.
11:57:27 I apologize because I felt like I was killing more
11:57:29 trees than was warranted but I wanted to make sure
11:57:31 that everyone had the information.
11:57:36 What we normally do, say if Rand Development
11:57:38 Corporation is coming to you with a change in code,
11:57:40 chapter 27 sort of has its own rules but if we are
11:57:43 coming to you with, say, chapter 13, what we normally

11:57:47 do working with land development, in that case would
11:57:49 be parks and recreation, is we would develop a draft,
11:57:53 develop a resolution, have a workshop so that you can
11:57:58 see the language, you can be able to respond to what
11:58:03 we are looking at.
11:58:04 We also like to circulate to T.H.A.N., to builders
11:58:08 associations, through a variety of organizations, and
11:58:11 individuals that have an interest in what we are
11:58:12 doing.
11:58:13 So what I would really like to be able to ask you to
11:58:17 do is give us some more time to work on this
11:58:20 resolution.
11:58:22 The resolution will be the first step.
11:58:24 We then would have a methodical way of going through
11:58:28 the various other codes.
11:58:29 That will take longer.
11:58:30 We have it in the time line.
11:58:31 We hope it will not be the year and a half that we
11:58:34 have in there.
11:58:35 We hope to have some in 60 days.
11:58:39 Tree and landscape I hope to be back to you with
11:58:41 something in, say, 60 days that you were able to

11:58:44 review.
11:58:44 But we want to be able to vest through the broader
11:58:50 public and have final language. With that I basically
11:58:53 conclude my presentation.
11:58:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:58:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
11:58:57 Procedurally, I need to know where we are going on
11:58:59 this because it is the witching hour of noon.
11:59:05 The bottom line is we have a rule that says we are
11:59:08 supposed to break for lunch.
11:59:09 >>CHAIRMAN: You can make a motion to continue.
11:59:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a lunch appointment actually
11:59:14 and Tom had a lunch appointment.
11:59:15 I think we have a problem with this.
11:59:16 There are folks in the audience who have -- who I had
11:59:19 a few questions for that I think is allowed by our
11:59:22 rules that will take a little more time.
11:59:27 This some something that's important.
11:59:28 And it's something that we need to dedicate a little
11:59:31 more time to, probably about a half hour.
11:59:34 And I would suggest we do it after lunch.
11:59:41 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a 1:30.

11:59:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can put that off.
11:59:44 I think we can do this for 30 minutes.
11:59:47 We can do this for 30 minutes after lunch and then we
11:59:49 can go into the WMBE.
11:59:52 I think it's fair.
11:59:53 A lot of people put a lot of time like this just like
11:59:56 the WMBE.
11:59:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I can't be here past 2:30.
12:00:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Start WMBE at 2.
12:00:12 I don't think anyone wants to go here past 3:30
12:00:19 anyway.
12:00:22 For positive minutes from 1:30 to 2, end the
12:00:26 discussion then move on to WMBE.
12:00:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
12:00:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think he would need a
12:00:32 motion.
12:00:33 If you want a motion that's fine.
12:00:37 >>CHAIRMAN: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
12:00:38 Opposed, Nay.
12:00:42 >> 1:30.
12:00:44 >>CHAIRMAN: Councilman Scott will not be at the night
12:00:49 meeting.

12:00:49 He's to go out of town.
12:00:51 I want you to know that when we come back.
12:00:53 We are adjourned until 1:30.

Tampa City Council
Thursday, January 24, 2008
1:30 p.m. session

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

13:31:54 (Sounding gavel)
13:31:55 >>CHAIRMAN: Tampa City Council is called back to
13:31:56 order.
13:31:56 Roll call.
13:31:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
13:32:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
13:32:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
13:32:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

13:32:10 If Mrs. Miller will come back and finish her report.
13:32:14 >>CINDY MILLER: Director of growth management,
13:32:16 development services.
13:32:17 I am pretty much concluded.
13:32:19 I just wanted to clarify a couple of things from this
13:32:22 morning, because I think I was unclear as to what I
13:32:24 was talking about with time lines and such.
13:32:27 When it comes to the passage of an overall resolution
13:32:29 regarding sustainability, that is something I think in
13:32:36 a matter of weeks we are ready for the conclusion on
13:32:38 that.
13:32:38 It also means we are not going to postpone doing
13:32:41 anything that I have outlined.
13:32:42 Starting membership, applications, to start our
13:32:46 certification process.
13:32:47 We intend to do that.
13:32:49 That we would do without a resolution, from our
13:32:51 standpoint.
13:32:52 Way was referring to -- and I will go back to the Elmo
13:32:55 again, if the mole can be brought up -- these are the
13:33:04 chapters or the codes that we are looking at that we
13:33:11 wanted to do very methodically.

13:33:12 I know it caused some concerns in the one and a half
13:33:16 years to look at these.
13:33:17 But what we are looking at is just not a few phases
13:33:19 and a couple parts of code.
13:33:21 We have to make sure that it all works.
13:33:23 Some of these codes are under my department's
13:33:26 jurisdiction from the standpoint of directives, some
13:33:29 are other departments.
13:33:30 Can we do it in less time?
13:33:32 I believe we will do it in less time but you don't
13:33:34 want to stand here and make a commitment to you that I
13:33:37 have to say I can't meet.
13:33:39 A year and a half I think we can meet.
13:33:41 And what Leer looking at, and let me tell you the goal
13:33:44 here, is to remove the barriers for lode certification
13:33:47 for commercial building, and to remove any barriers
13:33:50 that there may be for single-family homes as well,
13:33:53 when it comes to sustainability practices, whether
13:33:56 that's the Florida green building standard or however
13:33:59 is an acceptable model.
13:34:00 So what we are talking about is multiple efforts,
13:34:05 multiple departments, even from the standpoint of

13:34:08 public process, I think you all know and spend more
13:34:10 time than I do in the public hearings, whenever we do
13:34:13 a code change.
13:34:14 So, therefore, if we are even looking at one code
13:34:17 change we know that takes probably four months to do.
13:34:20 What we want to do is look at all of these various
13:34:22 codes.
13:34:23 So I'm sorry if the 18 months sounds like it's a long
13:34:27 time but I really think to do an appropriate process,
13:34:30 appropriate due diligence, looking at this many codes,
13:34:32 we need to be take that kind of time F.there are any
13:34:37 questions I will be glad to address them.
13:34:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think what you presented us today
13:34:42 is excellent.
13:34:43 It's comprehensive.
13:34:45 It's what we need to do.
13:34:52 I think we need to move full speed ahead.
13:34:56 We have known that we needed to work on this for a
13:34:58 year.
13:34:59 We began work a year ago.
13:35:00 Council has already come up with many of the
13:35:02 recommendations.

13:35:04 And I totally commend you for this.
13:35:07 And we will be pushing this along.
13:35:10 Thank you.
13:35:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We are moving at a glacial pace.
13:35:22 Anyway, Cindy, I appreciate the response of
13:35:29 administration and your response to this.
13:35:31 I just wanted to clarify a couple things, through your
13:35:35 presentation and perhaps others.
13:35:37 You say, you know, Mr. Dingfelder's presentation, Mr.
13:35:42 Dingfelder's document, et cetera.
13:35:44 I need to clarify that it's not just mine.
13:35:48 As you know, there are many, many folks in our
13:35:52 community who have been working on these issues for
13:35:55 several years in terms of the local chapter of the
13:36:00 USTBC, you know, and then encouraging Linda and other
13:36:07 council members that the city should get involved in
13:36:11 this.
13:36:11 But I think that started a couple of years ago.
13:36:14 And coming to us and then working with our committee,
13:36:17 which you and I worked on together, you know, and that
13:36:20 sort of thing.
13:36:21 So ultimately, when we put this document together, it

13:36:24 was in response to the community.
13:36:27 Many of that community is the building community.
13:36:30 The architects and developers and contractors who
13:36:33 participated to a great extent in this process, as
13:36:35 well as, you know, regular citizens and neighborhoods
13:36:39 and that sort of thing.
13:36:42 They have written e-mails encouraging us to move
13:36:44 forward at the quickest pace possible.
13:36:50 And even the home builders, who I don't necessarily
13:36:53 always, you know, we don't always see eye to eye but
13:36:58 in this case we got an e-mail from the home builders
13:37:00 association to encourage us to, you know, to adopt
13:37:04 what the committee, you know, has put together and
13:37:07 move forward as fast as possible.
13:37:09 So I just wanted to clarify, this is not the
13:37:12 Dingfelder plan, this is the -- what I have compiled
13:37:16 as a result of many, many hours of working with the
13:37:19 community.
13:37:21 Instead of going into the nitty gritty and with
13:37:24 deference to other council members who haven't had a
13:37:26 chance to digest the administration's response package
13:37:30 here, which you just got this week, what I would like

13:37:33 to do -- and I'm going to work with Cindy on that, and
13:37:35 I promise you that.
13:37:36 Way would like to do is I am going to create a matrix
13:37:39 and I am going to compare what I have in this document
13:37:42 here with what the administration's response was in
13:37:45 this document, and then I'll share it with Cindy
13:37:48 before I bring it back to council.
13:37:50 And then that way we can make some decisions.
13:37:52 Because at the end of the day, as Marty and David
13:37:55 Smith have told us, this is a legislative process.
13:37:58 We are a legislative body.
13:37:59 If we want to pass an ordinance or as Cindy suggested
13:38:03 a resolution, it's our prerogative to do so.
13:38:07 And to move through this is really our prerogative as
13:38:15 well.
13:38:15 We are the policy-making body of this city.
13:38:17 And David has reminded us of that numerous times.
13:38:23 With that said, what I would like to do is come back
13:38:26 two weeks, or when is our next regular meeting?
13:38:30 The 7th?
13:38:31 Okay, I can come back on the 7th with that matrix,
13:38:34 and we can look at it.

13:38:36 I'm sure Cindy will be here and we'll have a little
13:38:38 chance to look at it, talk about the pros and cons of
13:38:41 each line item, and make some decisions on where we
13:38:44 want to go with this.
13:38:46 So I'll make that motion.
13:38:48 >>CHAIRMAN: Ms. Mulhern.
13:38:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Sorry, I walked in a little late.
13:38:54 But if someone already brought this up let me know.
13:38:58 But I haven't had a chance.
13:38:59 What I have seen is all great stuff in here, and what
13:39:03 I have seen John come up with, my concern -- and I
13:39:06 hope this will be part of your matrix -- is that when
13:39:09 I look at the timetable for the administration's plan,
13:39:14 there's actually no action even taken until 2010.
13:39:20 So we are talking about two years from now before
13:39:23 anything actually -- any kind of action takes place.
13:39:26 And the conservative estimate, my concerns over the
13:39:33 lunch hour, these most conservative estimate for the
13:39:36 time frame, when we have to turn around the curve of
13:39:44 our emissions and greenhouse gases, in order to change
13:39:49 the path, the inevitable path that otherwise we are
13:39:52 going on, where we are all going to change our climate

13:39:56 beyond recognition, is ten years, so that's
13:39:59 conservative.
13:40:00 So we can't afford to wait two years.
13:40:04 >>> And may I clarify that, Madam Chair?
13:40:07 Councilwoman, that is not the intention of the time
13:40:09 line.
13:40:09 The time line, although we did this in, say, a broad
13:40:13 area going from, say, 2008 to 2009, looking at
13:40:18 assembling, say, federal, state and local developer
13:40:22 incentive package, we intend to start that
13:40:24 immediately.
13:40:24 We intend to have products all the way along that
13:40:28 continuum.
13:40:29 So we are not anticipating that we are going to start
13:40:33 now, and the next time you see anything coming is in
13:40:36 2010.
13:40:37 We intend to start immediately.
13:40:38 When it comes to all of these items.
13:40:45 This is a time line we looked at from our staff
13:40:48 standpoint.
13:40:48 When we intend, as I said, to start the certification
13:40:50 processes, local green government, we intend to start

13:40:54 that immediately.
13:40:55 And it does take time based upon reporting, the things
13:40:58 that have to be put together.
13:41:00 Land development regulations, I put on the Elmo before
13:41:04 you, arrived here roughly 12 different code sections
13:41:09 we have to look at.
13:41:10 We intend to be back to you as an example with the
13:41:12 tree and landscape draft in the next couple of months.
13:41:16 We are not intending that to take 12 months or 18
13:41:18 months.
13:41:19 We intend to come back to you periodically throughout
13:41:21 all of these yellow continuum that you see.
13:41:24 We don't intend for anything to take, where you see us
13:41:27 now and you don't see us till 2010.
13:41:29 We intend to be working all the way through this.
13:41:31 >> I'm sure you will be.
13:41:33 It's the work that you are going to be doing that I'm
13:41:35 questioning.
13:41:38 Review current land development regulations, assemble
13:41:42 developer-user incentive package, develop training
13:41:45 programs, evaluate inventory, all these things,
13:41:50 benchmark, none of those are actually action.

13:41:52 It's just more study and looking at things.
13:41:56 >>>
13:42:00 What I admire about the way Congressman Dingfelder
13:42:03 approached this he looked at what other cities are
13:42:05 doing, because this is of such an urgent nature and
13:42:09 because there are so many other cities that have
13:42:11 already done this, St. Pete, Miami, all kinds of
13:42:16 people in Florida have already done this.
13:42:18 I don't think we need to do all this review.
13:42:22 I just don't think it's necessary.
13:42:24 >>> And perhaps the problem is we need to clarify the
13:42:27 wording on the time line.
13:42:29 It's not our intention to look at all we are doing is
13:42:32 reading a bunch of things.
13:42:33 The intent is to start taking action so I need to
13:42:36 clarify for you what the wording is there.
13:42:38 That is certainly not our intention.
13:42:45 >> (off microphone) The only action I see on this
13:42:50 whole time line is 2009, new construction for city
13:42:56 owned building to meet LEED certification.
13:42:58 The only see thing I see on there that's an actual
13:43:00 action.

13:43:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could somebody hand me one of those
13:43:08 sustainability brochures?
13:43:10 There's one in front of Mr. Dingfelder.
13:43:16 A little show and tell.
13:43:17 This is the third year of the sustainability
13:43:19 conference.
13:43:19 I went the first year and felt it was so valuable that
13:43:21 I invited and encouraged Mrs. Miller to go and Mr.
13:43:25 Snelling. They went last year.
13:43:26 It was great.
13:43:27 We learned lots of things.
13:43:28 We found out all the things that Sarasota is already
13:43:31 doing, and they went to Sarasota.
13:43:33 I went to Sarasota.
13:43:33 We this is going to be another week, I understand
13:43:42 commissioners Ken Hagan and Rose Ferlita will be
13:43:45 there.
13:43:45 It's next Thursday.
13:43:48 We can go in St. Petersburg.
13:43:49 There is no reason why we need to keep studying this.
13:43:52 We need to get going.
13:43:53 We really, really do.

13:43:55 We have part of a report from the head of solid waste
13:43:59 who says that every department is going to have a
13:44:02 committee that's going to look at how they can do
13:44:04 green things.
13:44:04 Well, you guys, if you go downstairs right now in this
13:44:07 building and you open the door on the first floor, you
13:44:09 will be knocked over by fumes, because the City of
13:44:11 Tampa is still buying carpeting with toxic fumes.
13:44:15 I mean, we have got to get on it.
13:44:17 So I'm just encouraging us to get going.
13:44:20 Mr. Dingfelder, I appreciate your matrix.
13:44:22 Bring it back.
13:44:24 We'll start working.
13:44:25 I appreciate you doing this, Ms. Miller.
13:44:28 I want to put get going faster.
13:44:31 Thanks.
13:44:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So my motion --
13:44:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
13:44:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Also let me just say that just
13:44:38 recently in the Hope VI authorization in Congress,
13:44:42 there was an amendment added to that Hope VI, I
13:44:45 believe it was last week, regarding green ordinances

13:44:49 for the government.
13:44:49 So the federal government is serious about this, and
13:44:54 there's something in the pipeline there might be some
13:44:56 funding going along with that so I will be looking at
13:44:59 that to report back to you.
13:45:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
13:45:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So I'll move that we put this issue
13:45:05 back on our agenda as the first staff report on the
13:45:08 February 7th.
13:45:10 And I'll come back to include a matrix, and I'm sure
13:45:13 Mrs. Miller will be here to join us.
13:45:15 >> Second.
13:45:21 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:45:22 (Motion carried)
13:45:26 We will be in recess until 2:00.
13:53:00 (Recess)

13:53:02 DISCLAIMER:
13:53:02 The following represents an unedited version of
13:53:02 realtime captioning which should neither be relied
13:53:02 upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
13:53:02 transcript.
13:53:02 The original of this file was produced in all capital
13:53:02 letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
13:53:02 third party edits and software compatibility issues.
13:53:02 Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
13:53:02 proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
14:02:22 [Sounding gavel]
14:02:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
14:02:24 order.
14:02:25 Roll call.
14:02:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
14:02:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
14:02:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
14:02:31 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
14:02:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
14:02:36 We need to open the workshop object item 9.
14:02:39 >> So moved.
14:02:40 >> Second.
14:02:40 (Motion carried).
14:02:40 >> Who is starting?

14:02:47 >>GREGORY HART: Manager, minority business
14:02:57 development.
14:02:57 I am going to ask attorney David Smith to come forward
14:03:02 and preview the draft ordinance which has been
14:03:09 provided to council.
14:03:13 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
14:03:20 As than I had an opportunity, with one council member,
14:03:25 I think it's important we try to move this forward
14:03:29 much like we did on the discussion today with TECO. I
14:03:31 think we need to get it to the public process.
14:03:34 We need to have more than one first reading on the
14:03:37 ordinance and we'll do that.
14:03:38 At lowest that way you will get a broader input in
14:03:41 terms of what our processes are, and we can try to get
14:03:44 to a final ordinance.
14:03:45 By way of information, we currently have an executive
14:03:54 order which is being implemented in any event as we go
14:03:58 at least with respect to the SBE portion.
14:04:00 I sent you some changes last week which were a product
14:04:02 largely of a discussion -- largely of a discussion of
14:04:05 what I would call the manager of the program and
14:04:10 others who are expert in those areas, and contract

14:04:13 administration.
14:04:16 Part of the concerns are the way this articulates
14:04:18 itself into the city process.
14:04:21 We want to make sure we do it in a way that minimizes
14:04:24 things like bid challenges and litigation in terms of
14:04:26 contracts that are awarded so we want to make sure
14:04:28 that people are clear, especially the requirements,
14:04:31 and that they will know whether they are a responsive
14:04:36 bid oar not a responsive bidder depending on what they
14:04:39 do or do not provide throughout the process.
14:04:42 So a little bit of a natural tension between
14:04:47 efficiency and other policy objectives contained in
14:04:50 this ordinance.
14:04:51 But this ordinance is intended to provide the
14:04:54 supremacy of those objectives.
14:04:56 Let me take you through those changes, but and I would
14:05:03 like to talk about each provision and have an
14:05:05 opportunity for council to ask questions and provide
14:05:08 any input.
14:05:08 If you have your ordinance with you that was in your
14:05:11 packet I will walk you through each of those.
14:05:12 The first change is on page 7.

14:05:14 They will show up in underlining, and deletions will
14:05:19 be stricken through text.
14:05:21 If you look at page 7, you will see the Equal Business
14:05:24 Opportunity Advisory Committee, or EBOAC, I'm not sure
14:05:29 how mellifluous that is, but that is the acronym for
14:05:32 it, a citizen task force of 12 to 14 members.
14:05:36 >> David, you make these words up, mellifluous.
14:05:44 That's all right.
14:05:45 I expand my vocabulary just listening to you.
14:05:48 >>> But it is a citizen task force.
14:05:52 It's 12 to 16 members.
14:05:54 That's something you may want to address.
14:05:56 Appointed by the mayor. Another issue you may want to
14:05:57 address.
14:05:59 Representing a cross-section of contractors, service
14:06:02 providers and stakeholder organizations.
14:06:04 The purpose of the EBOAC is to serve as a citizen
14:06:09 advisory board to promote the participation and use of
14:06:11 SBE and WMBE-businesses in city contracting and
14:06:16 procurement.
14:06:16 So this I believe is the external advisory board that
14:06:20 I believe Commissioner Scott mentioned last time,

14:06:23 councilman Scott, mentioned last time.
14:06:26 And this is the articulation of that policy in the
14:06:29 ordinance.
14:06:30 Now, that's as it stands today. We can come back and
14:06:33 talk about that later if you like.
14:06:34 I can show you how it filters throughout the process.
14:06:37 If you turn to page 12, the addition here is the small
14:06:43 business enterprise committee will determine subpart
14:06:48 5.
14:06:48 We did not have any entity determining when discounts
14:06:54 in nonsheltered market would apply.
14:06:56 It was identified.
14:06:58 And it needs to be somewhere we are proposing the
14:07:00 small business enterprise committee.
14:07:02 Now, what they'll do is they'll set those for a period
14:07:05 of time, meaning if we have an issue we want to
14:07:08 encourage the additional utilization of SBEs, the
14:07:12 discounts are intact and in effect until they are
14:07:14 taken out of effect because the program has been
14:07:16 successful.
14:07:16 So that is not a case-by-case basis.
14:07:19 That is a durational determination made by the SBE

14:07:23 committee.
14:07:23 And you of have seen the makeup of that committee.
14:07:27 Other places look at it as possibly a manager, that
14:07:31 the manager mayor somehow -- well, other types of
14:07:34 committees but that's the recommendation.
14:07:36 You turn to page 21.
14:07:39 The change here, this deals with general bidding and
14:07:43 procurement, and this is called nonsheltered markets.
14:07:46 And this talks about the bid discount.
14:07:49 Rather than making it mandatory, it says it may apply,
14:07:54 and in the last portion of that paragraph, it says
14:07:57 when the applicability of same is determined by the
14:07:59 SBE committee.
14:08:00 So you have this committee that will make that
14:08:02 determination on an ongoing basis, and the ordinance
14:08:05 reflects that concept.
14:08:06 In paragraph B there, it says the discounts are
14:08:09 established as applicable, again by the SBE committee.
14:08:12 That's a conforming change, if you will, with the
14:08:15 first one I told you about.
14:08:16 Now, if you will turn to page 23, and this is a little
14:08:23 bit complicated because the language that was used was

14:08:28 felt by contract administration to be unclear.
14:08:31 They didn't feel they knew exactly what it meant.
14:08:34 So I have attempted to rewrite it.
14:08:37 And here's what it does say.
14:08:41 Essentially, the provisions of 26-5.29 which is
14:08:45 certification -- and you will see that follows
14:08:47 immediately -- in 26-5.30 which is outreach, apply
14:08:51 immediately.
14:08:51 Okay.
14:08:52 So that applies immediately upon the effective date of
14:08:55 this ordinance and we get this ordinance at first
14:08:56 reading, and perhaps pursuant to an ordinance
14:09:01 doctrine.
14:09:01 The information provisions, 26.5-35, 36, and 37, which
14:09:09 require bidders and people competing for government
14:09:13 contracting procurement, to provide a lot of
14:09:16 information.
14:09:17 Why is this important?
14:09:18 This is important because this is the data that will
14:09:21 allow us to take additional action, and also to assess
14:09:26 the accuracy or remedial character of the action you
14:09:30 take.

14:09:30 So all of that applies immediately.
14:09:33 What comes in to play, however, is the specific
14:09:37 setting of mandatory WMBE goals.
14:09:40 Rather than SBE goals, the WMBE goals become
14:09:43 mandatory. If the existing disparity persists, what
14:09:47 new disparities are detected then these goals are
14:09:51 mandatory meaning you must comply with those
14:09:53 thresholds.
14:09:54 You provide us all the information on what you are
14:09:55 doing prior to that.
14:09:57 But they become mandatory if you are unable to remedy
14:10:00 the disparity, or we create a knew one.
14:10:04 If you look at 26 -- on page 24, 26-530, there's a
14:10:10 small change to the first paragraph up there and it
14:10:12 talks about a meeting with the manager and the SBE
14:10:17 committee will meet with EBOAC.
14:10:20 Again this is carrying out the terms of EBOAC's role
14:10:24 and rather than just meeting with the manager in a
14:10:26 subsequent meeting with the SBE committee, they meet
14:10:29 jointly.
14:10:29 I think that would be it.
14:10:31 The perception is that would be a more effective

14:10:33 way --
14:10:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
14:10:36 Point of order; just a question on the best way to get
14:10:39 through this.
14:10:42 David.
14:10:43 And I'll go by your judgment.
14:10:45 You're telling us about a change and then we move to
14:10:48 the next page and then another change and the next
14:10:50 page.
14:10:50 Might it be easier if you tell us about the change and
14:10:53 then if we have a question on that particular change
14:10:55 we can ask you before we move to the next one?
14:10:59 >>> I would be happy to do that.
14:11:00 >> I'm just saying, I have got -- a question came up
14:11:04 on this last one but you are going to move 20 pages
14:11:06 later and, you know, I'm just thinking --
14:11:09 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to wait your turn then.
14:11:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I will wait my turn. Can we do it
14:11:13 that way?
14:11:14 >> Let me come back and do them one at a time.
14:11:17 >> I thought we would do it now.
14:11:19 >> I was but probably too specific.

14:11:20 >> Okay.
14:11:22 >>> What we have done in here is later on you will see
14:11:24 that we have broken down the time periods for the
14:11:27 submittal of information, meaning you must provide
14:11:29 certain information with your bid.
14:11:32 Now, the problem is, the way the bidding process works
14:11:35 in the real world is frequently bidders don't have
14:11:37 everything nailed down.
14:11:39 They have estimates to what they think the
14:11:41 subcontracts will be, who the subcontractors may be,
14:11:44 things of that nature.
14:11:45 So we want to give them the opportunity to correct
14:11:47 that.
14:11:47 So at bid you provide certain information.
14:11:52 Prior to the award, however, you are going to have to
14:11:56 update that information, and after completion of the
14:11:58 contract, if you receive the award, you have to update
14:12:01 it yet again.
14:12:01 So this is again to make sure we have all of the
14:12:03 information we need to go through the assessment
14:12:06 process.
14:12:07 So with the exception of the EBOAC SBE committee

14:12:12 that's probably the primarily conceptual set of
14:12:15 changes here.
14:12:16 So now it might be best if we take each of these
14:12:18 changes one at a time and see if it conforms to this
14:12:23 council's understanding of what they would like to do.
14:12:27 And if that's the case, the very first issue is the
14:12:30 EBOAC committee itself, on page 7.
14:12:37 This is a citizen task force.
14:12:39 It does not contemplate any council member
14:12:43 participation.
14:12:43 It doesn't contemplate any administration
14:12:48 participation.
14:12:49 At least not on the committee by any means.
14:12:51 And it says 12 to 16 members appointed by the mayor.
14:12:56 And then it indicates the areas from which these
14:12:58 people will come.
14:13:00 Any questions or comments on that?
14:13:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
14:13:06 Oh, I'm sorry.
14:13:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I thought earlier on we set the
14:13:09 parameters, the presentation, then questions.
14:13:12 But now we are changing that format.

14:13:14 Because I have a whole list of issues that I'm
14:13:16 concerned about.
14:13:19 And unfortunately I am I have a time constraint.
14:13:21 And I wanted to pass that out that information.
14:13:26 That's why I much prefer you complete it.
14:13:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Want to follow your lead because
14:13:33 you put a lot of work into it.
14:13:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Why don't you go through your issues
14:13:38 and --
14:13:39 >>> let me give you just a couple more points and then
14:13:42 I think -- if you look at page 20, one of the other
14:13:44 changes we made, we have annual goals that are
14:13:47 estimates set at the beginning.
14:13:49 Then under page 20 we are going to set projects to
14:13:53 specific goals.
14:13:53 That means for each contract, we will set goals for
14:13:57 each area of contracting.
14:13:59 And I think that's important to distinguish between
14:14:02 project goals and annual goals.
14:14:05 The rest of the things, I won't mention at this
14:14:08 juncture.
14:14:08 The breakdown I told you about in terms of the timing

14:14:11 of information is on page 30 and 31.
14:14:19 And I think -- another issue of importance for you is
14:14:24 on page 35.
14:14:26 And it talks about reports to council.
14:14:28 And put this in its own category, because that's an
14:14:31 easy way to locate it.
14:14:33 And making additional tweaks.
14:14:35 It says the manager shall prepare semiannual reports
14:14:38 for City Council delineating the utilization rates of
14:14:42 WMBEs and SBE on the basis of procurement and total
14:14:48 dollars.
14:14:48 Reason that's important is there's a lot of discussion
14:14:50 in the case law that deals with the appropriate
14:14:52 methodology and statistical measurement, and looking
14:14:56 at contracts and total dollars is important.
14:14:59 Because you can have a lot of awards and the total
14:15:01 dollars may be very different.
14:15:03 Or vice versa.
14:15:05 So it's important to get that information.
14:15:07 That's kind of a general overview.
14:15:11 I think it gives you an understanding of what the
14:15:14 changes are.

14:15:14 And however you want to proceed from here.
14:15:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I would like to do, Madam Chair,
14:15:21 is hand out to the city attorney and council members
14:15:25 an outline that I have gone through, has gone through
14:15:30 the ordinance and noticed some changes and so forth.
14:15:33 So what you should have primarily is three tick
14:15:38 documents or paper that I have outlined.
14:15:40 One is going back to the December 6th meeting
14:15:43 where we had a response from Mr. Smith, and I guess
14:15:46 from staff at that time on the first draft.
14:15:51 If you will note with me on that first document, first
14:15:55 sheet, ordinance as revised 11-2007, that appointments
14:16:04 to the EBOAC are made by the mayor and City Council.
14:16:09 Well, what has happened is under the new ordinance,
14:16:12 all that's been taken out.
14:16:14 So you have to understand that.
14:16:15 And that's what I think they may have been referring
14:16:17 to earlier.
14:16:19 But I am going back, the original document, when we
14:16:22 raised those earlier questions, it was referenced that
14:16:25 we were both making appointments.
14:16:30 I wanted to reference that.

14:16:32 On question 3, here again what is the City Council
14:16:35 role of electing the ordinance?
14:16:38 And he makes a recommendation there on how we will be
14:16:42 participating.
14:16:43 That is fiscal year, the goal will be recommended to
14:16:47 City Council for review and approval.
14:16:49 All that's out under the new proposal.
14:16:52 >>> And there's no legal reason for that.
14:16:55 There's not a legal reason.
14:16:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Also.
14:16:59 Going to the last page of the first document, question
14:17:01 6, why doesn't the City Council set the goals at a
14:17:04 public meeting instead of the city manager?
14:17:08 The City Council will review and approve goals.
14:17:12 That's -- fiscal year goals.
14:17:15 That's not in the ordinance.
14:17:15 All that's been taken out and removed.
14:17:17 Now you go to the second document.
14:17:19 I want to highlight this so you will see what I see
14:17:21 has been changed from the original draft of what you
14:17:24 have now, as the draft, okay?
14:17:27 So the second document, it talks about -- Mr. Smith,

14:17:30 do you have those concerns?
14:17:32 I have concerns, outlined the section, the definitions
14:17:35 and all that there, and then proposed solution, how to
14:17:37 address those concerns.
14:17:40 And this is what I am recommending in terms of how he
14:17:44 would should proceed.
14:17:45 And I agree with you, Mr. Smith, that when do need to
14:17:48 proceed, but the problem I have, when you look at this
14:17:51 whole ordinance, you still have an SBE ordinance.
14:17:54 Do you not have a WMBE ordinance.
14:17:58 Let me take them one at a time and go down so you will
14:18:00 understand.
14:18:01 Okay?
14:18:01 Number one concern there as you can see, the equal
14:18:04 business opportunity advisory committee is appointed
14:18:06 solely by the mayor and has a limited role, and no
14:18:11 interaction with City Council.
14:18:13 Which we said we want to have to make appointments and
14:18:16 that sort of thing.
14:18:17 Okay?
14:18:18 Proposed solution, change appointment process, include
14:18:20 greater oversight responsibility for the advisory

14:18:22 board.
14:18:24 Two, the manager responsible for successful
14:18:27 implementation has in the chain of command and those
14:18:32 who must report and respond, and I will tell you, of
14:18:35 course, difference all across the spectrum, but your
14:18:39 manager, committee and everybody got more -- you know
14:18:44 and I know not going to get too much done.
14:18:47 I'm just telling you.
14:18:49 You all can do what you want with it, but I'm just
14:18:51 telling you what I see.
14:18:54 And what I propose, that is that he needs to move up
14:18:57 in order to report directly to the mayor, or somewhere
14:19:00 in that chain where there's some accountability, for
14:19:06 him to do -- I say he or she.
14:19:12 Their concern is the geographical areas, to assist
14:19:18 local women and minority owned business, and which I
14:19:21 did talk to St. Pete and he was saying he has
14:19:27 things -- and I kind of want to work with them, so why
14:19:30 not adopt the county's language, which has that
14:19:33 process already that's effective in place.
14:19:38 Are you all following me?
14:19:39 Ricardo, do you want to come and speak, you or someone

14:19:51 who understands what the county process is?
14:19:53 >>> Good afternoon, Council. My name is Ricardo --
14:19:54 assistant county attorney.
14:19:57 With me is Felix Bratslavsky, he's the manager with
14:20:04 the MBE program.
14:20:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did you understand the question?
14:20:12 >> Could you please repeat the question?
14:20:13 >>MARY MULHERN: About the geographic area.
14:20:15 >>> I think Hillsborough County is the geographical
14:20:23 area that would allow WMBE and MBEs to receive
14:20:27 certification.
14:20:29 I don't believe that the county extends its
14:20:35 certification beyond a certain area, because, as Mr.
14:20:38 Scott stated, it would dilute the pool.
14:20:45 There are certain types of criteria that a person must
14:20:50 meet in order to clarify, certify from.
14:20:56 I believe there is also a six-month temporary
14:21:01 certification that one may attend, one-time.
14:21:07 >> A one-time reciprocal.
14:21:10 >>> After this one time they must comply with
14:21:12 Hillsborough County's criteria.
14:21:15 So there is an opportunity for outside residents to

14:21:20 actually enjoy the benefits of the Hillsborough County
14:21:24 economic development sources, but we want them also to
14:21:30 actually apply with our requirements.
14:21:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Do you give a preference to ones that
14:21:37 are from Hillsborough County?
14:21:42 >> No.
14:21:42 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
14:21:45 That's not part of the --
14:21:48 >>> Felix Bratslavsky, with Hillsborough County
14:21:55 Economic Development, Minority Business and Small
14:21:57 Business Program.
14:21:59 The businesses located in Hillsborough County are the
14:22:02 ones that are eligible to participate in the program.
14:22:05 The reciprocal certification is for those businesses
14:22:09 not registered, that can be registered with the state
14:22:14 or any other agency that we approve of.
14:22:17 And once they are awarded a bid, they are no longer
14:22:22 eligible for this reciprocal certification.
14:22:24 >>MARY MULHERN: So it's a one-time only for each
14:22:27 bidder?
14:22:28 >>> Correct.
14:22:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Move to number 4, in your handout

14:22:33 there.
14:22:33 It says, number 4 there, the bid bond is a restraint
14:22:40 in participation.
14:22:41 Again if you look at the proposal, performance and
14:22:45 payment bond requirement, bonds created and
14:22:48 educational component to the capacity of the SBE fund.
14:22:52 And what you have on one hand, this ordinance, turn
14:22:54 around talking about waiver, on the other hand turn
14:22:56 around and taking it back.
14:22:58 You know, so what you have to do is also when you keep
14:23:02 in mind about bid bond, it hurts those WMBEs and
14:23:06 those small businesses in the whole process because
14:23:10 they have to go out and already have a bid bond, and
14:23:14 so as a result of that, that creates a hardship.
14:23:17 Okay?
14:23:21 Number 5, in terms of the shelter market, oversight,
14:23:26 tighter controls and leading to triggering a new
14:23:29 request proposal over to proposers.
14:23:32 What I am talking about that is that what they have
14:23:35 pretty much said, once you do, and the bid is too
14:23:42 high, then you open it up to everybody, okay?
14:23:44 And I'm saying that you need to look at that and

14:23:47 consider require all bids to be -- for rejection
14:23:52 require the user of those departments to obtain
14:23:58 approval.
14:23:58 You have to really watch all this stuff because, you
14:24:00 know, bids come out, and they go out, then everybody,
14:24:05 open up to everybody.
14:24:06 You understand what I'm saying?
14:24:08 Okay.
14:24:09 I assume that you all do.
14:24:12 On number 6.
14:24:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We are trying to keep up.
14:24:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
14:24:18 And number 6 there, and I have again the whole area,
14:24:22 section outlined.
14:24:23 In its current configuration the ordinance primarily
14:24:26 for SBE, and what you still have is the SBE ordinance,
14:24:33 and what they are doing is if the SBE fails, then you
14:24:36 fall back to the WMBE.
14:24:38 And my belief is -- and to me this is primary, the
14:24:42 number one issue here, the number one issue, and that
14:24:47 is you need to break out, have an SBE and WMBE
14:24:50 ordinance which was recommended out of the disparity

14:24:55 study.
14:24:55 That is the recommendation by the disparity study.
14:24:58 So what you have is an SBE ordinance with a fallback
14:25:01 to the WMBE, should it not work.
14:25:03 And I believe that you should follow the model of the
14:25:08 county, and that is out there and has been working
14:25:14 successfully and has been tested in the court of law.
14:25:17 And so I would suggest again that we need to draft a
14:25:22 WMBE as well as SBE to complement each other which can
14:25:25 be done.
14:25:25 All right?
14:25:27 Seven, the goal-setting committee, City Council needs
14:25:31 to provide the administration with performance goals
14:25:33 or to approve the performance goals, and my
14:25:36 recommendation is SBE committee should bring the City
14:25:41 Council goals for approval subject to approval of the
14:25:44 City Council.
14:25:45 Now, the county commissioners set the goal for
14:25:49 Hillsborough County and then staff worked those goals,
14:25:53 and set individual goals on each subcontract, okay.
14:25:57 Do you understand?
14:25:58 >>MARY MULHERN: So City Council would set the goals

14:26:06 for the --
14:26:07 >> You can set the overall goal or you can allow the
14:26:09 recommendation, the SBE committee to formulate the
14:26:12 goals and bring them back to you for your approval.
14:26:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Each have its own goals.
14:26:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, you will have goals for your SBE
14:26:24 and WMBE committee would bring recommendations back to
14:26:28 this body.
14:26:30 That's how the county does that.
14:26:33 Those are set by the county commission, okay.
14:26:43 Eight, report to City Council and annual report need
14:26:46 to be clearly delineated.
14:26:48 Okay.
14:26:49 Determine the goal, report to City Council that it
14:26:55 wants measure and reporting, can't wait till the end
14:26:58 so we fail.
14:27:01 So you have to have something in place there and
14:27:03 clearly defined.
14:27:04 Okay?
14:27:04 And then ninth, last one is, there are no goals or
14:27:09 targets for subcontractor opportunities, if commission
14:27:13 does not make the ordinance comprehensive.

14:27:15 And again, the important thing you have to keep in
14:27:18 mind here again is that you need to have some goals
14:27:24 set up or created for your subcontractor.
14:27:31 Mary, you were not here, last week we dealt with the
14:27:34 museum issue, a good example right there.
14:27:39 There were no goals or anything set for your
14:27:42 subcontractors.
14:27:43 So I am saying you need that.
14:27:45 Now, the third document, Mr. Smith, that is, I went
14:27:50 and pulled out from the county's ordinance, and point
14:28:00 out to you in terms of each of these items like number
14:28:03 one, if you look at number one, and subsection 16,
14:28:08 point out the kind of language that needs to be there
14:28:10 for issue number one.
14:28:12 Issue number three on the next page.
14:28:13 And issue number four on the next page.
14:28:15 Give you the kind of language that could be inserted,
14:28:19 six, seven, eight, on the last page that will help us
14:28:21 move forward.
14:28:22 Now, I recognize Mr. Smith is taking a conservative
14:28:28 approach.
14:28:28 He's very conservative in his approach in this whole

14:28:32 issue and ordinance.
14:28:33 And I'm saying that for me it does not get to us where
14:28:38 we need to be in order to have the kind of goals that
14:28:41 we want, in order for you to participate as a City
14:28:43 Council, and also an ordinance that will help WMBE and
14:28:50 SBEs to be successful.
14:28:52 We want a program that's going to be successful.
14:28:54 We don't want to have something that is not going to
14:28:56 be successful.
14:28:57 So something that's successful beyond the current
14:28:59 administration over the years to come.
14:29:01 So that's why I have gone through this extensively,
14:29:04 and worked on it extensively, and I wanted to share my
14:29:12 concern with you.
14:29:13 Now, Mr. Smith may be prepared to address some of
14:29:16 this.
14:29:17 I don't know. But I'll just tell you my issues are.
14:29:19 Now, I will tell you this, Mr. Smith.
14:29:22 I thank you, Ricardo, by the way.
14:29:28 I invited the county to come in case there were a
14:29:31 couple of issues in terms of their ordinance.
14:29:33 And I have ten years of experience in working with the

14:29:35 county and their ordinance, so that's why I reference
14:29:39 that a lot.
14:29:40 And also appreciate them being here today as well.
14:29:47 So, Mr. Smith, I guess from here -- my recommendation
14:29:53 is to take a low at those nine items and see how they
14:29:56 can be incorporated into this ordinance change.
14:30:03 I think if you move forward the SBE as it is now, I
14:30:06 think that we are setting ourselves up for failure.
14:30:09 That's my personal opinion.
14:30:12 Of course, I have talked with other persons who have
14:30:17 involved with the issue and they pretty much agree
14:30:20 with what I'm saying here.
14:30:23 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
14:30:25 Thank you very much for the work.
14:30:27 This is a tremendous amount of work, believe me.
14:30:29 I know what you have to do to create a document like
14:30:31 this.
14:30:32 It's not easy, requires a lot of concentration going
14:30:34 back and forth between different document and keeping
14:30:36 track of what you are trying to think through.
14:30:39 So I do appreciate that.
14:30:40 And I also appreciate your experience, because you do

14:30:42 have a lot of experience in this area, and I want to
14:30:44 make sure that we benefit from that experience.
14:30:48 I just got this about 15 minutes.
14:30:50 Minutes ago so I haven't had a chance to really digest
14:30:53 it but I heard your description.
14:30:54 A lost issues, I don't know about a lot but a fair
14:30:56 number of them are things that I think we were
14:30:59 attempting to do.
14:31:00 It may not have been sufficiently clear about that.
14:31:03 So we'll look at that issue as well.
14:31:05 And a fair number of these are policy issues that
14:31:10 don't have a legal component, and it's whatever this
14:31:13 board wants to do.
14:31:14 The composition of the EBOAC committee, whatever you
14:31:19 guys want to suggest.
14:31:20 If you want to talk about that, and talk about -- we
14:31:24 have 12 to 16 members, you want to have a certain
14:31:27 number, a certain number appointed by whomever, those
14:31:30 are whatever, you know, there's no legal impediment to
14:31:33 that.
14:31:35 And I don't want to -- because this is an important
14:31:38 area and because we not only want to have a successful

14:31:40 ordinance, we want to have a sustainable ordinance, I
14:31:43 want to think carefully about many of the things you
14:31:45 have here.
14:31:45 I didn't hear anything that really posed a significant
14:31:48 problem, I don't believe.
14:31:51 But that's off the top of my head.
14:31:55 But I would like the chance to think through this, and
14:31:58 also Greg, who is very experienced in this area both
14:32:00 here and in Ft. Lauderdale, and I don't know if you
14:32:03 had a chance to digest some of that.
14:32:05 Greg was talking to me as we were listening some of
14:32:07 the things we do have in here or thought we had in
14:32:10 here, maybe not sufficiently clarified.
14:32:13 But I can attempt to respond to some of this, sort of.
14:32:20 I know that you are right about the bid bond.
14:32:22 The bid bond was not waived and waived the performance
14:32:25 bond.
14:32:26 Again, I don't believe that was a legal prohibition.
14:32:28 I believe that was a policy issue that was discussed
14:32:31 because the bids were --
14:32:39 >>GREGORY HART: David, I believe that may be something
14:32:42 you may want top revisit.

14:32:44 There may be some statutory threshold where bid bonds
14:32:49 are required versus when it's waivable.
14:32:52 >> Good point.
14:32:53 And I did ask Justin of course Vaske on this.
14:32:57 Whether it's waivable or not to a stent not waived by
14:33:00 law.
14:33:01 We can put in that provision.
14:33:02 Because we had 25, $50,000 issue.
14:33:06 I believe the bid however, when you talk about a
14:33:10 sheltered market, I don't believe when we have one
14:33:14 response, we have at least three bidders and then
14:33:16 select whoever the bidder is the best of those three.
14:33:18 I don't think he would throw them all out.
14:33:20 But we will look at your concern and make sure we
14:33:22 address that issue.
14:33:26 Any relationship between the SBE and the WBE program
14:33:29 is the sticky issues here.
14:33:32 And let me tell you what my understanding is.
14:33:35 And I will revisit this again.
14:33:39 I like to keep my mind open and see if there's another
14:33:42 way to do things.
14:33:43 The problem we have is our disparity study came up

14:33:46 with a disparate in contracts.
14:33:52 The problem with that is the procuring entity in prime
14:33:56 contract is the city.
14:33:57 The case law is not helpful in a lot of ways, to
14:34:01 finding disparities and finding them to be actionable.
14:34:07 The problem we find particularly with no additional
14:34:09 evidence that the city is actively discriminating is
14:34:13 you need to employ some less race gender neutral
14:34:21 first, over a limited period of time.
14:34:23 Downtown want to extend this over a long period of
14:34:24 time.
14:34:25 And if they are unsuccessful, or if other disparities
14:34:28 develop -- because our biggest problem in the past has
14:34:30 been subcontractors.
14:34:32 And the reason that's more likely to be sustainable is
14:34:35 because that's not the city, that's someone else, and
14:34:39 you can look almost solely at statistical data.
14:34:42 But when you have the city as the ostensive
14:34:45 discriminating party, you need a little more than
14:34:48 that.
14:34:48 And the city has the ability to choose to use Docs,
14:34:53 SBE programs, no discounts, a variety of measures to

14:34:57 solve that problem, sort short of race and gender
14:35:01 based goals.
14:35:02 However, this ordinance clearly contemplates that if
14:35:05 we do not get rid of those disparities that were
14:35:09 showing up in the initial analysis by NTA, or others
14:35:12 developed, they do become mandatory.
14:35:14 That relationship is a little sticky.
14:35:16 Let me try to elaborate that for you.
14:35:18 I have a memorandum I have been preparing for myself
14:35:20 to make sure I understand this, and I will get that to
14:35:24 council, and there's also an excellent law review
14:35:29 regard, not a Harvard law review article but still
14:35:32 good and I will get that.
14:35:34 Reporting requirements for council, that is however
14:35:37 you believe that needs to occur.
14:35:41 There are clearly some differences in the ordinance
14:35:42 because of the differences in the structure of
14:35:43 government.
14:35:45 It's a little more executive oriented government.
14:35:48 But council has the right to monitor programs and
14:35:51 policies that are included in its ordinances.
14:35:53 And whatever kind of reporting process you would like

14:35:57 to provide, you should provide.
14:36:00 So that's just a question of you talking about it and
14:36:03 deciding what you think is sufficient information and
14:36:06 how often.
14:36:10 We do actually have goals for said contracting.
14:36:12 One of the comments is we had no goals for
14:36:14 subcontracting.
14:36:15 That's part of what we do when we do a
14:36:17 project-specific goal setting.
14:36:19 And it may be a little confusion because I was
14:36:23 confused for awhile.
14:36:24 Annual goals which are set at the beginning -- and I
14:36:27 think that primarily what you are talking about,
14:36:29 council's participation in setting the annual goals
14:36:32 and getting reports in terms of the progress towards
14:36:34 those annual goals.
14:36:35 But what also happens, particularly what happened to
14:36:38 the manager and I guess now we have a goal setting
14:36:40 committee.
14:36:41 And then the goal setting committee is the manager,
14:36:43 the procuring department, and I think someone from my
14:36:45 office, that goal setting committee sets a specific

14:36:49 project goal, project by project.
14:36:52 One of the things Greg mentioned is, when contracts
14:36:54 come before you that may be a piece of information, a
14:37:00 bit of information, that you would like to see on this
14:37:04 kind of submittal.
14:37:05 Another way to monitor what's going on.
14:37:07 So I think we do set the subcontracting goals.
14:37:10 It's just sort of immersed in the project goals.
14:37:12 And I really think that -- well, I shouldn't speculate
14:37:18 what we are going to find but I suspect we are going
14:37:21 to be doing a lot more in the subcontracting area than
14:37:25 as time progresses.
14:37:27 Let me see what else I have here that I can respond to
14:37:31 approximately in a meaningful way.
14:37:33 I think those are conceptually some of the main
14:37:36 points.
14:37:37 Let us go through in a little more detail.
14:37:39 Let us analyze it carefully and get back to you and
14:37:42 let's not take too long to do that.
14:37:44 I don't think it will take too long.
14:37:46 I will answer any other questions you have got and I
14:37:48 think we need to talk about a time frame.

14:37:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I wanted to thank Reverend Scott
14:37:52 for his careful analysis of what's before us, and
14:37:58 particularly the format that you presented it in was
14:38:01 clear and easy to understand.
14:38:02 You raised the issue, and you proposed a solution.
14:38:06 Frankly, I wish that all of our information was
14:38:08 presented this crisply.
14:38:10 It was really easy towns.
14:38:12 And what you have done philosophically is include
14:38:15 council, and therefore the public of points along the
14:38:17 way.
14:38:18 And I think that is critically important.
14:38:19 And I thank you for your clarity and leadership.
14:38:24 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dingfelder.
14:38:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Definitely ditto those comments to
14:38:30 you, Tom.
14:38:31 A couple things.
14:38:32 On page 7, in the EBOAC committee, it mentions
14:38:39 possibility of 16 members.
14:38:40 That works out pretty good actually.
14:38:42 We have some other boards like that.
14:38:44 We could do 7 from council and we could each appoint

14:38:47 one, and then the mayor could appoint the balance of
14:38:49 the nine.
14:38:50 That would still give her a weighted majority on that.
14:38:54 Just as an idea to toss around.
14:38:59 Another question I had was in regard to timing.
14:39:05 It's unclear to me, David, in the existing draft, the
14:39:08 current draft right now, I understand the SBE
14:39:12 committee gets together to periodically review this
14:39:15 and see at a certain point if we haven't met the goals
14:39:22 after X period of time that it's going to trigger the
14:39:26 opportunity to establish, you know, additional
14:39:29 parameters, that sort of thing.
14:39:31 But what I couldn't find here is when.
14:39:35 Is there a time frame from this point forward, after
14:39:40 we adopt the ordinance, that that review -- I mean, I
14:39:44 know the review occurs periodically but is there a
14:39:46 time frame when there's a decision made to trigger
14:39:49 this?
14:39:50 I know you have to have a comfort level with that
14:39:52 based upon the case law.
14:39:54 So we are sort of walking that --
14:39:59 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.

14:40:00 From a legal standpoint, I was looking at we needed at
14:40:03 least 12 months which we are about six to twelve
14:40:06 months into the process already because we have a
14:40:08 current object order but it might be helpful for Greg
14:40:11 to respond a little bit because the issue is
14:40:13 information driven.
14:40:16 The sooner we have good information, the sooner we can
14:40:19 act.
14:40:21 This, you need to realize, is a huge information
14:40:24 burden here.
14:40:26 What's in here is going to be excellent in terms of
14:40:31 what we will know and who is seeking to provide work
14:40:35 and services to the city and who is getting that work.
14:40:37 You will have great information.
14:40:39 But the problem is the gathering of it, it's going to
14:40:42 be Greg's burden.
14:40:43 And we don't have it automated right now.
14:40:46 And so it's being done by hand.
14:40:48 And in all candor, I doubt they have sufficient staff
14:40:52 to do that very quickly at this juncture.
14:40:54 But I should like Greg to respond to that.
14:40:58 >>GREGORY HART: Management business development.

14:41:01 I will simply add to what David just stated, which is
14:41:04 we have got to allow a sufficient amount of time to
14:41:06 elapse upon which we can collect utilization data,
14:41:11 availability data, to be analyzed and determine the
14:41:14 rate of utilization in any given year, 12 or 18-month
14:41:18 period, and then benchmark that and measure that
14:41:21 against a base data.
14:41:24 So it is quite common that you have got to take -- and
14:41:27 in this case I have already very, I guess in a liberal
14:41:32 way, suggested that we need at least 18 months of
14:41:36 real, hard, good data to analyze the extent to which
14:41:40 we have women and minority businesses participating,
14:41:45 based upon the goals that he would set by project, and
14:41:48 then measure that against the collective goals for the
14:41:51 year, benchmark that against base data from the
14:41:56 disparity study.
14:41:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When will that 18 months start,
14:42:00 Greg?
14:42:01 >>> Well, October 1st of a lot of year, we began
14:42:03 our manual data collection based on what we have been
14:42:06 referring to as the diversity management information
14:42:09 system which is basically our management information

14:42:11 system.
14:42:12 So October 1, we began manual collection of data
14:42:18 collection based on new rules and guidelines.
14:42:21 So that would be the time upon which the clock began.
14:42:25 So 18 months from that I did ding March of '09 or
14:42:30 something like that.
14:42:31 Another question, sort of a two-part question.
14:42:33 Maybe you can help us on the first part.
14:42:35 Council has had some discussion in different contexts
14:42:39 about giving local bay area preference and I think
14:42:43 that you or David have sort of discouraged this to get
14:42:48 too local, because we could actually discourage
14:42:52 minority participation if we get too tight.
14:42:54 But I thought we had a discussion on sort of maybe
14:42:58 like bay area preference, you know, so we don't get
14:43:02 into a cross-the-bay war or anything like that but
14:43:06 sort of a geographic radius of maybe 50 miles or
14:43:09 something like that.
14:43:09 The reason I mention that is every now and then he
14:43:12 would approve all these contracts week in and woke out
14:43:14 and you see these bids and bidders coming in from
14:43:18 elsewhere, you know, who buy a hundred from the

14:43:26 panhandle and that doesn't help our local economy,
14:43:28 doesn't help our WMBE issue or SBE issue.
14:43:32 So, anyway, I would like to know that we have explored
14:43:37 that and exhausted that, and if we can include that
14:43:42 not only in our WMBE, SBE process, if it's
14:43:47 appropriate, but also in our general purchasing
14:43:49 process as well.
14:43:51 That's number one.
14:43:52 And I'll say number two, which is closely tied to it.
14:43:54 We were at a CRA meeting in East Tampa, a week or two
14:44:00 ago, and the same issue came up, and then the question
14:44:04 again came up, which I promised the folks out there I
14:44:06 would bring up to you guys, which is, can we, within
14:44:10 the CRA context, the CRA bidding and purchasing
14:44:13 context, can we create some local preference so that
14:44:18 the money tries to stay within the CRA?
14:44:24 A lot of -- not a question to answer today because I
14:44:26 am just throwing it out of nowhere the.
14:44:30 >>DAVID SMITH: We did do some research on it and we
14:44:32 found both an AGO and some case law the AGO is based
14:44:37 on which is you can provide a preference based on
14:44:39 geographic locality.

14:44:41 Now, the problem is, I'm not sure how it's done
14:44:45 jurisdiction wide.
14:44:46 I believe it was a city on the oath east coast.
14:44:49 We start breaking it up within the city.
14:44:51 I'm not sure it continues to be defensible.
14:44:54 I have to look at the case itself.
14:44:55 But we did find some support for the concept of
14:44:57 geographic preferences.
14:45:00 And we'll provide you that, just an AGO on the case.
14:45:04 >> And really it might be two separate issues.
14:45:06 If we think we can create maybe a bay area preference
14:45:12 as a purchasing policy, maybe that's something we can
14:45:15 do.
14:45:15 But then in the CRA side, maybe it's just sort of a
14:45:19 rule within the CRA, you know, a guideline or
14:45:24 something like that, to our CRA contractor, the city,
14:45:28 that when you guys go out and spend the CRA money that
14:45:31 you will give some type of local preference, and it
14:45:33 would be defined and that sort of thing.
14:45:36 And --
14:45:38 >>DAVID SMITH: I understand the question.
14:45:39 I am not as clear on that one narrow question.

14:45:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
14:45:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I have several things.
14:45:45 But thanks for bringing that up, John.
14:45:47 And my thinking on local preferences and small
14:45:51 business, and I had some conversation with Mr. Hart
14:45:55 about this, is a big part of what should be our
14:46:01 economic development strategy in the city, which I
14:46:04 don't think it is.
14:46:06 So it fits in very well with discussion of CRAs, and
14:46:11 economic development in general, especially at a time
14:46:14 where we might be going into a recession, that we need
14:46:16 to -- the business that we are giving should go local,
14:46:22 because the money will stay here.
14:46:24 And that creates jobs, and that keeps money in our
14:46:27 economy.
14:46:27 So that may be something we need to discuss.
14:46:30 I think that's a great idea to do it in terms of the
14:46:33 CRAs.
14:46:33 But I think overall something to discuss with economic
14:46:37 development and purchasing, and it might be separate
14:46:41 from this.
14:46:44 Then overall, I'm having this deja vu all over again

14:46:50 thing, because I think my first council meeting, which
14:46:52 would have been like nine months ago, we talked about
14:46:55 this, and we have the update on the disparity study
14:47:01 monthly, I believe, and all of these questions that
14:47:07 councilman Scott went to all this work to pull
14:47:11 together, maybe it wasn't so much work, because I
14:47:14 think he brought them all up.
14:47:16 We have all been bringing them up.
14:47:18 Mostly councilman Scott earlier, as we have looked at
14:47:20 drafts of this ordinance.
14:47:22 So I really feel like, for some reason, our
14:47:27 recommendations aren't happening.
14:47:28 And Mr. Smith, you tell us these are policy questions.
14:47:32 I think we could probably vote on all of these right
14:47:35 now, and recommend them.
14:47:40 All of councilman's Scott's recommendations.
14:47:43 And -- I'm not done yet.
14:47:48 As far as the idea of compliance, and subcontracting,
14:47:53 this applies to both.
14:47:55 I heard from a minority business owner just this week,
14:48:01 just in a conversation that her business had been
14:48:05 named -- and this isn't a city thing or a county

14:48:08 thing -- but she had been named as a anyone minority
14:48:11 contractor in a contract with a government entity, and
14:48:17 she found this out just by accident, that her company
14:48:23 had made $10,000 on this contract.
14:48:25 Well, she hadn't even had a contract with this
14:48:30 company.
14:48:31 So I think our compliance, following up on the
14:48:35 compliance on this is absolutely essential, and it's
14:48:37 not just them telling us.
14:48:39 I mean, we have to go to the point where we are making
14:48:42 sure that they are actually employing these
14:48:44 subcontractors, and paying them.
14:48:47 But for them just to say I am going hire so-and-so,
14:48:50 and that may be written, that may be something that
14:48:53 you do already, but, you know, it's that important
14:48:57 that we are going to need to follow up to that point.
14:49:00 Then the other thing, what I just said about passing,
14:49:03 you know, us agreeing on these solutions that
14:49:07 councilman Scott came up with, and his number one
14:49:10 concern, that's the number one thing that would he
14:49:12 have been talking about for all along.
14:49:16 And I was so happy to see that we had gone back to

14:49:19 using that language, and that we heard from the
14:49:24 Aviation Authority and the county about their language
14:49:26 and how it's working.
14:49:27 So I wish we could just put that in there.
14:49:30 We would like to have this done.
14:49:33 I think as much or more than you would.
14:49:35 So that we can actually -- I don't know how you are
14:49:38 ever going to start benchmarking and keeping track if
14:49:41 we don't actually put the ordinance into effect.
14:49:45 Then, finally, I just want to say, I cannot believe
14:49:49 that we only have manual records.
14:49:52 I mean, who keeps manual records?
14:49:56 You know, I have had my own three different small
14:49:59 businesses, so small that it was me and an council
14:50:03 small subcontractor and I had a database for every
14:50:06 single one of them.
14:50:07 So the thought that we can't record this on a
14:50:09 database, that it's going to take us two years for the
14:50:12 City of Tampa to get this information into a database,
14:50:16 or 18 months or whatever, to me it's just not
14:50:19 acceptable.
14:50:23 So when we are ready I am going to move to --

14:50:27 >>GWEN MILLER: I need a clarification on
14:50:29 subcontractors.
14:50:31 Do they have to bid from or do a company bring them in
14:50:35 or what?
14:50:35 >>GREGORY HART: Manager, minority business
14:50:38 development.
14:50:38 In terms of subcontractors, the prime contractors
14:50:42 solicits quotes to WMBE subs who in turn respond, that
14:50:50 prime contractor is required to confirm that response,
14:50:54 by two things, listing that WMBE on the schedule of
14:50:58 participation and also executing a letter of intent,
14:51:02 which means should they be awarded the contract, that
14:51:04 sub would in fact be used, no turning back.
14:51:08 As Ms. Mulhern mentioned the compliance and monitoring
14:51:11 is critical, and we do that by requiring those prime
14:51:16 contractors to submit on a monthly basis, when they
14:51:19 submit their pay application, what we refer to as a
14:51:22 utilization or payment utilization form, so that they
14:51:27 list all those subs that they committed to utilize,
14:51:30 and whether they perform in that given 30-day period
14:51:33 or not, WMBE ABC is listed, did they perform in the
14:51:39 month of March?

14:51:40 No, but they may show up in the month of February.
14:51:43 And so we are able to, going forward with the new
14:51:46 ordinance, we'll be better able to track that and
14:51:49 monitor it to ensure who is noted and able to
14:51:57 participate and is in fact brought onto the project by
14:52:00 that prime, and then payment is verified in most cases
14:52:05 concurrently and at the end of the project, too.
14:52:07 So payment is one thing.
14:52:08 Monitoring for compliance is a second thing.
14:52:13 But, yes, they are intertwined.
14:52:18 >>CHAIRMAN: Do the subcontractors work on the prime --
14:52:22 >>> Yes, the subcontractor works under the prime, in
14:52:25 many cases under an umbrella surety that that prime
14:52:29 would have.
14:52:30 In some case it is sub is asked to bring forward a
14:52:34 separate surety or bond so that the prime doesn't have
14:52:36 to carry that particular sub under his coverage.
14:52:42 We encourage the prime to take everybody understood
14:52:44 their coverage.
14:52:44 Doesn't always happen.
14:52:45 >> So if they cannot afford a bond would you waive the
14:52:49 fee or waive the bond or something?

14:52:54 >>> David, correct me if I am wrong.
14:52:57 It would not be up to the city under a subcontract
14:53:00 arrangement to waive a sub's prime.
14:53:03 We would encourage the prime to do so, or consider
14:53:06 conditions which would make it easier for the prime to
14:53:11 waive the sub's bond.
14:53:13 Again, have that bond included under a surety, and if
14:53:18 necessary build any costs into the bid, or have that
14:53:27 sub pay that prime directly for covering a bid.
14:53:30 There are all kind of ways to try to make that an
14:53:32 easier, pall palatable situation.
14:53:34 >> In that case, do you have some goals set for
14:53:38 subcontractors, too, that you have for the women and
14:53:42 SBE?
14:53:43 >> We do currently set goals on all construction
14:53:46 projects.
14:53:48 As has been mentioned, when a disparity or significant
14:53:56 underutilization occurs over a period of time, those
14:53:59 goals that we set now could in fact become mandatory,
14:54:05 and the prime would have to make every effort to meet
14:54:07 that goal or explain the very detail why they weren't
14:54:11 able to.

14:54:11 So he would do set subcontract goals.
14:54:14 >>CHAIRMAN: Reverend Scott.
14:54:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All I'm saying is, number one, the top
14:54:21 issue is number six on that list, and that is you need
14:54:23 a WMBE SBE ordinance.
14:54:26 Okay?
14:54:27 Secondly, the county has their ordinance in effect
14:54:31 since, what, 1989, '87, something like that and has
14:54:36 been approved, already has a model and the language,
14:54:40 and that's what I'm suggesting there.
14:54:43 The other issue is, if we look at the bid bond again,
14:54:47 the whole idea of this whole ordinance or program is
14:54:49 to help small business and minorities, okay?
14:54:54 And the way this ordinance is, you are not doing that.
14:55:01 I'm just telling you.
14:55:03 The other issue, I will say, I don't think he would
14:55:06 want to vote on this today, in all fairness to Mr.
14:55:08 Smith.
14:55:10 I think he would should let him take this back and
14:55:12 give him an opportunity to review this and look at it.
14:55:14 But again, as I said at the last meeting, I can't
14:55:18 support it, if we don't have a SBE or WMBE because it

14:55:25 complements each other and the way you have it now you
14:55:28 have a SBE with a ball bat to WMBE.
14:55:31 And then also in the ordinance, also is raised was you
14:55:36 only have a contract up to $200,000.
14:55:40 Downtown address anything above that.
14:55:42 That's the other issue.
14:55:43 That's out there.
14:55:44 Okay?
14:55:45 So there are some issues.
14:55:47 Now, one of the things, Mr. Smith, I would say,
14:55:52 probably is number two.
14:55:53 Number two, he would can't tell the mayor how to
14:55:55 arrange the staff or what order in terms of that, but
14:55:58 that's just a suggestion from my standpoint, that if
14:56:01 you want the program to be effective you have to have
14:56:03 somebody there, you have to have the SBE manager, the
14:56:07 WMBE manager be somewhere up the ladder where he can
14:56:10 make this successful.
14:56:11 That's all I'm saying.
14:56:13 And I think Pinellas, I think theirs report directly
14:56:20 to the mayor as well likewise.
14:56:22 But here again we can't tell the mayor how to

14:56:25 structure her organization.
14:56:27 I will say that.
14:56:27 But I will say that I think what we need to do is
14:56:30 allow Mr. Smith to go back and look at this again,
14:56:32 since he is just getting it.
14:56:35 And I want to say to the council, an opportunity to
14:56:43 meet with a couple people out in the community who are
14:56:46 not employed by the city nor the county who understand
14:56:50 the whole program, we kind of spent a day working on
14:56:55 this last week, last Friday, I think it was, and on
14:56:59 Tuesday going through it.
14:57:00 So a few community people that I really appreciate
14:57:03 working with me helping me as when look through all
14:57:05 these different drafts and look at the county and so
14:57:07 forth.
14:57:08 So I did want to mention that as well.
14:57:12 But it does require a lot of time and work.
14:57:15 But Mr. Smith, I think in all fairness do you need to
14:57:18 take it back and look at it and come back to council.
14:57:21 But I do think that given that we can develop a
14:57:27 successful program and move forward.
14:57:32 With that --

14:57:34 >>CHAIRMAN: Clerk, I think we need to have a public
14:57:36 hearing so the public can have a chance to speak.
14:57:39 And they can bring it back to get some ideas and we
14:57:46 need to set a date for a public hearing so we can give
14:57:48 the public a chance to speak, too.
14:57:51 Mr. Dingfelder.
14:57:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree with that.
14:57:55 Sometimes, legal seeks direction from us in the form
14:58:00 of motions because that way, you know, it lets them
14:58:04 know that there's at least four of us, you know, to
14:58:07 direct them to move forward.
14:58:09 And in total support of what you have done here, Tom,
14:58:13 I think a motion is in order and I'll just throw it
14:58:18 out and let you all comment on it.
14:58:19 I scribbled down.
14:58:21 I said the motion is that legal amend the ordinance to
14:58:24 incorporate your, quote, proposed solutions one
14:58:29 through nine, with the caveat that if David conclude
14:58:35 that there's a legal justification of why we can't or
14:58:39 shouldn't do that, from a legal perspective, not a
14:58:43 policy perspective, but a legal perspective, he can
14:58:45 put in the writing in response to -- I'm sure

14:58:51 councilman Scott can e-mail you this and then you can
14:58:53 just plug in your responses, and each one do a little
14:58:58 Word Perfect.
14:58:59 So that's my motion, that we actually give them
14:59:01 direction to amend this ordinance, to address each of
14:59:05 your nine proposed solutions and incorporate each of
14:59:08 those nine proposed solutions unless David has legal
14:59:11 reasons why he can't, and then you can come back and
14:59:13 tell us why you can't.
14:59:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Don't you think we need to have the
14:59:16 public hearing first and might have some more comments
14:59:18 in the public?
14:59:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can do that too and then that
14:59:22 would be over and above but if he would don't as Mary
14:59:24 said we are going to keep spinning our wheels.
14:59:26 >>MARY MULHERN: If could you bring back the language,
14:59:29 that would be at a public hearing.
14:59:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right, bring back that language
14:59:33 with the proposed changes at the next meeting or
14:59:35 hearing or whatever we want to call it, include the
14:59:38 public to get comments from the public.
14:59:40 So that will be my motion.

14:59:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I just want to express a
14:59:47 concern because basically as Mr. Smith said, several
14:59:49 times relating to what Mr. Scott put forth, they are
14:59:53 policy decisions.
14:59:54 And you are asking -- you are actually -- by this
14:59:58 motion you would be making a policy decision.
14:59:59 I'm just concerned about the fact that -- and perhaps
15:00:02 there's another way of dealing with it.
15:00:04 But --
15:00:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's a direction to staff.
15:00:07 It's not a policy decision.
15:00:08 It's a direction to staff, which you told us about two
15:00:11 hours ago is appropriate.
15:00:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Direction to staff resulting from the
15:00:14 workshop do not require public comment.
15:00:16 So then it's your position then this is a direction to
15:00:21 staff and the public will have a comment and the
15:00:23 opportunity when it's set for public hearing?
15:00:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
15:00:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Obviously giving Mr. Smith the
15:00:30 latitude to be able to address or look at these items.
15:00:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Then he has to go back and if they have

15:00:37 to some things, have to go back.
15:00:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have to keep moving forward.
15:00:42 >>MARY MULHERN: We are going to have a public hearing
15:00:44 on --
15:00:45 >>GWEN MILLER: But you want to keep moving.
15:00:47 If he hears from the public and do all this coming
15:00:49 back, and incorporate in the there, then you have the
15:00:53 ordinance for the first time.
15:00:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Haven't we had public hearings?
15:00:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.
15:00:59 No.
15:01:00 We can open it up right now by council motion, waive
15:01:02 our rules.
15:01:03 I'm comfortable with that.
15:01:04 We have at least 15 minutes till you have got to go.
15:01:11 I'm trying to move us forward.
15:01:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have 15 minutes left.
15:01:16 And
15:01:24 I just want to make sure that we not vote on any
15:01:28 issue, though, according to our own process, our own
15:01:34 rules.
15:01:35 I want to be comfortable with that.

15:01:37 I'm a stickler about process.
15:01:39 That's what I'm concerned about.
15:01:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, council, let me share with you
15:01:42 the philosophy as I understand of a workshop.
15:01:45 A workshop is to be able to gather the information,
15:01:47 have a vetting of the issues, to have the opportunity
15:01:50 for reflection upon those issues, and for an
15:01:53 opportunity for it to come back for a point of
15:01:56 official action on a regular agenda.
15:01:58 So you have the opportunity based on perhaps Mr. Smith
15:02:01 first getting it now, council is being asked to make a
15:02:05 decision based on some things that have just been
15:02:08 brought before you today.
15:02:11 It would be my belief that the -- the role of a
15:02:15 workshop is to inform council, to give it the
15:02:18 opportunity to have reflection, to give the
15:02:19 opportunity to talk to your constituents, to get
15:02:22 additional input so when it does come back on the
15:02:25 agenda, as an agendaed item, people will have the
15:02:27 opportunity to discuss it and take action.
15:02:30 That is ideally what a workshop --
15:02:36 >>MARY MULHERN: How about a substitute motion that we

15:02:38 put this on the agenda for discussion at our next
15:02:41 regular meeting?
15:02:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: February 7?
15:02:45 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
15:02:46 Let me suggest.
15:02:47 I haven't heard any descent from the suggestions and
15:02:50 the summary that Reverend Scott has provided.
15:02:52 I don't know that you need to take a motion.
15:02:54 I heard what you would like to see occur, and I'll
15:02:57 come back with that exact response.
15:02:59 I don't know what your issue is with regard to taking
15:03:03 action or not taking action in workshops.
15:03:05 But I can hear what I am hearing.
15:03:07 So I know what you are looking to see.
15:03:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If you feel comfortable that.
15:03:14 I'm trying to help.
15:03:15 If you feel comfortable with that I'll withdraw the
15:03:17 motion.
15:03:17 Whoever seconded it can withdraw the second.
15:03:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm just saying that Mr. Smith had
15:03:25 stated earlier we had a lot of people come down and I
15:03:29 think we should maybe give them their opportunity with

15:03:33 the understanding I do have a meeting in about 15
15:03:35 minutes.
15:03:36 >> Can we just make a motion?
15:03:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Waive the rules.
15:03:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to make a motion to put
15:03:42 this topic on the agenda.
15:03:44 I think the next regular council meeting is probably
15:03:46 too full.
15:03:49 I think we need to go to the next one.
15:03:51 >>GWEN MILLER: When do you want to have the public
15:03:53 hearing?
15:03:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 21st will be the next regular
15:03:57 meeting.
15:03:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, maybe hear it on the --
15:04:01 >> The 7th.
15:04:03 >> Put it on the agenda.
15:04:06 >> For discussion for staff report for Mr. Smith to
15:04:09 come back with his response, and new language.
15:04:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
15:04:17 >>DAVID SMITH: Toyin a was advising me it was 60 dice.
15:04:25 >> I was saying put it on the agenda for discussion.
15:04:28 >> That's good.

15:04:29 That's fine.
15:04:29 >>MARY MULHERN: For the 7th.
15:04:32 >> I think a lot of the issues aren't going to require
15:04:35 more than a week or two.
15:04:37 And I would like to say, also, there's a variety of
15:04:39 people in the community who have good suggestions and
15:04:42 good ideas.
15:04:43 I was talking to Mr. Robinson just beforehand, and he
15:04:46 e-mailed me some things, not all of it did I get, but
15:04:49 I would encourage those people who have comments to
15:04:53 send them, and we'll take them into account.
15:04:56 >>GWEN MILLER: You are saying send you the comments
15:05:00 instead of the public hearing?
15:05:02 >>> No, I think you need to hear their concerns.
15:05:04 Some of it we might be able to address beforehand.
15:05:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do we have a motion to hear from
15:05:11 the public?
15:05:14 (Several talking at once)
15:05:17 >> On the agenda for --
15:05:19 >> February 7th.
15:05:20 Staff reports.
15:05:21 February 7th.

15:05:27 >> You don't have to make a motion.
15:05:30 It's already -- you don't have to make a motion.
15:05:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council is not going to make the
15:05:33 motion because the clerk has informed it is already
15:05:35 agendaed as a WMBE update so that might be the
15:05:38 appropriate time.
15:05:40 February 7th.
15:05:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need a motion for a public
15:05:47 hearing.
15:05:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's not have a public hearing yet
15:05:50 because we have to see where we are on the 7th.
15:05:52 On the 7th we'll hear from Dave, hear from Greg.
15:06:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to waive the rules to hear
15:06:05 public discussion, right now.
15:06:07 >>GWEN MILLER: And then don't have to have the public
15:06:09 hearing?
15:06:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, do you, council.
15:06:11 By state law adoption of an ordinance requires you --
15:06:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The motion is to open the public
15:06:17 hearing.
15:06:18 Three minutes a shot.
15:06:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For how long?

15:06:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Up to 3:30.
15:06:27 Up to 3:30.
15:06:29 >> That's fine.
15:06:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have understand I have to leave in
15:06:34 about 10, 15 minutes.
15:06:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's go.
15:06:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Dingfelder seconded it.
15:06:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
15:06:42 (Motion carried)
15:06:43 It's now open to the public.
15:06:44 Anyone in the public that wants to speak may come up
15:06:46 and speak now.
15:06:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: After all that, please, somebody.
15:07:15 All right, Joe, your three minutes are up.
15:07:22 >>> I put it up because I didn't know you all was
15:07:29 going to let us speak, but I will find it.
15:07:31 And I want to pass it out.
15:07:36 I am going to have this received and filed for public
15:07:44 record.
15:07:44 I want to thank you for letting me speak.
15:07:46 Joe Robinson, president and CEO, consulting engineers
15:07:51 and certified minority business, WMBE with the City of

15:07:54 Tampa since 1991.
15:07:57 Okay.
15:07:58 Continuing.
15:07:59 Now, this is the issue.
15:08:00 I appreciate you letting us speak because we have
15:08:03 canal people, you all let them speak.
15:08:06 At our workshop for minority business I couldn't speak
15:08:08 so I appreciate you giving us some fairness, Linda.
15:08:11 I really do.
15:08:11 Let me just say this.
15:08:13 First of all, Reverend Scott, you're right, we need to
15:08:16 do what you're saying.
15:08:17 However, will you put the overhead up, whoever has got
15:08:21 the overhead?
15:08:21 You can see all this ready got on here?
15:08:24 I have gone through this thing and it doesn't speak to
15:08:26 WMBE.
15:08:27 It speaks to small business.
15:08:29 There are a lot of things where you are talking
15:08:31 construction services that need to be coordinated.
15:08:34 Also, once again, talking about discrimination.
15:08:38 Yes, there's discrimination right now

15:08:48 All this stuff they are talking about is garbage.
15:08:52 Here right here, just as of April, you can see there
15:08:56 were no blacks.
15:08:58 Women 10%.
15:09:00 Hispanics.
15:09:00 Nobody black got nothing.
15:09:02 And this is 2007 work order going out every day.
15:09:05 I can show you 2006.
15:09:07 The same thing occurred.
15:09:09 Here it is for blacks.
15:09:10 Point 82%.
15:09:12 Here it is, 2005, black.
15:09:16 Discrimination is still going on every day.
15:09:18 If you go ahead and do what you are doing, you are
15:09:20 going to have a lawsuit from me to shut you down based
15:09:24 on the lawsuit that was filed in federal court in
15:09:28 Miami.
15:09:28 This particular lawsuit, you can look at the overhead.
15:09:33 Nobody wants to listen.
15:09:35 Finally thing I want to say in throw minutes, okay,
15:09:37 since nobody else is talking, the major deal breaker
15:09:39 here in this whole deal, the definition of certified

15:09:44 minority business or not.
15:09:45 The definition in the state statutes specifically
15:09:50 state that resident.
15:09:57 You have certified people on your list right now, out
15:10:01 of Atlanta, that are not lawful, permanent residents
15:10:03 of Florida.
15:10:04 You keep doing that, you are going to get sued.
15:10:06 Because you are violating a substitute state law.
15:10:11 One final thing.
15:10:15 Here is the mayor's 2003-07 executive order and she
15:10:20 says that the people sitting on this committee is the
15:10:28 minority enterprise.
15:10:29 So the mayor has to coordinate -- and for that time,
15:10:37 the direction, not -- he needs to be at the table.
15:10:44 To get him to work for Mr. Smith, the chief of staff.
15:10:50 He's supposed to be a director.
15:10:52 It's always been a racial issue.
15:10:54 They never want to get a black man a director title
15:11:00 for this office.
15:11:01 That's a problem.
15:11:02 And she did the right thing.
15:11:04 We need to coordinate these ordinances, executive

15:11:08 order, with this new ordinance.
15:11:13 I am going to go to federal court.
15:11:22 You don't want to listen now, you are going to have to
15:11:24 listen later.
15:11:25 And I have a lot more here.
15:11:26 But that's the problem.
15:11:27 I am sitting here listening to you and I feel like I
15:11:30 am handcuffed because I can't say nothing.
15:11:33 Staff don't know.
15:11:34 I been listening to this for the last 20 years.
15:11:37 So
15:11:42 I am going to take it to federal court if you don't
15:11:45 listen.
15:11:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
15:11:49 >> John, I am a business owner in Hillsborough County.
15:11:52 I don't live in the city.
15:11:54 Live in the county, Hillsborough County.
15:11:56 My issue, I'm not in total agreement with the
15:12:00 gentleman who just spoke, in the sense that I am a
15:12:03 minority.
15:12:04 My grandparents were born in Mexico.
15:12:06 I'm la tin O.I speak fluent Spanish.

15:12:09 I know it doesn't appear that way.
15:12:10 But I did want to express one thing that's important
15:12:13 to me, and that is, I as a minority business
15:12:16 enterprise just want a fair shot.
15:12:19 I believe that the services that I provide and my
15:12:22 company provides can stand against and with any of the
15:12:27 companies that do similar things.
15:12:29 In fact I think we do some things that other companies
15:12:33 that are in quote-unquote business don't do, and we
15:12:36 specialize in that.
15:12:37 We also have an array of service that is he would
15:12:39 offer that other competitors don't.
15:12:41 So my issue is I'm just looking for a fair shot.
15:12:45 At this business.
15:12:46 It's very complicated to progress and try to get the
15:12:50 certification.
15:12:51 We have got to get a certification for city, and for
15:12:54 Hillsborough County, then I go to pursue employment,
15:12:59 or rather win contracts for other big companies.
15:13:03 I have got to speak to each one of the individuals.
15:13:06 There's usually an individual dedicated to this and
15:13:08 it's one company.

15:13:09 So I spend so much time trying to get certifications
15:13:13 long after I have proven and defined that I am a
15:13:16 minority, and a minority business.
15:13:18 I just would like to express to you that the
15:13:20 complexity there, and being a small business, I have
15:13:25 capital issues that I am constantly dealing with back
15:13:27 and forth.
15:13:28 I'm sure you guys understand that.
15:13:32 One last point is simply that when I was in college, I
15:13:35 got approached to be part of the minority engineering
15:13:37 program.
15:13:38 I am an engineer.
15:13:39 And I denied that because I felt there was reverse
15:13:43 discrimination so I have always turned it down and
15:13:45 turned it down and turned it down.
15:13:47 And today, I feel that my heritage, folks in my
15:13:54 heritage are underrepresented in what I am doing but
15:13:56 that's not the big issue.
15:13:58 I think the person who has the most qualifications for
15:14:01 the company should get the job whether they are
15:14:02 minority or not.
15:14:04 And I have now I am trying to take advantage of this,

15:14:07 because I feel like it's really one of the avenues I
15:14:11 have got to try to gain business from the city and
15:14:15 prove ourselves.
15:14:16 And I would like it to be simpler and maybe get
15:14:18 somebody ---by the way, Mr. Scott, thank you for your
15:14:21 very comprehensive and very detailed and more
15:14:23 importantly very clear.
15:14:24 I spend a lot of my time, Mr. Scott, trying to be
15:14:27 clear because I'm in a very technical business and I
15:14:30 really appreciate that, because I am not a political
15:14:33 or in any way shape or form person, and it was very
15:14:35 clear to me.
15:14:36 I thank you for that.
15:14:37 And I would like ideally, maybe the manager is one of
15:14:42 the people that I can call and say I qualify for this
15:14:45 minority business, and position, if you will, please
15:14:49 help me get set up so I can forgo that and go pursue
15:14:54 the contracts and prove that we can do the work.
15:14:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
15:15:04 >>> President of A&L electrical contractors.
15:15:16 I have been in the contracting business way back and
15:15:19 listened to the disparate studies and other things

15:15:22 that these ordinances.
15:15:24 My question is, what are the consequences when these
15:15:26 people don't comply?
15:15:30 You say you are going to monitor them.
15:15:32 They put me down as a subcontractor.
15:15:35 When we get to the business end of doing the job I'm
15:15:37 not there.
15:15:38 What are the consequences?
15:15:42 They are still playing the same games.
15:15:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
15:15:48 >> Calvin Morrison.
15:15:59 I want to thank councilman Scott for his work that
15:16:03 he's done with the task force or the group so far.
15:16:07 A couple of things that I want to recommend, where the
15:16:10 city says that they encourage primes to work with the
15:16:13 WMBE.
15:16:14 I think if they have a little bit more forceful
15:16:16 language, and said that you must -- and give a
15:16:20 percentage, 10%, 15%, I think that will make this go
15:16:24 through a lot easier.
15:16:25 And I think going hand in hand with that, where
15:16:28 there's a $200,000 threshold, I think the whole

15:16:31 purpose of the WMBE program is to possibly one day
15:16:35 grow a small business or minority business to the
15:16:38 point being a prime, and I don't think you can do that
15:16:43 by limiting the dollar amount.
15:16:44 Every minority business out there is not a mom and pop
15:16:46 business, there are some professional businesses that
15:16:48 are railroad to grow and step to the next level and I
15:16:51 think the City of Tampa has an opportunity to do that.
15:16:54 And lastly the gentleman that spoke with the
15:16:57 engineering firm, I believe that the Aviation
15:17:00 Authority, the school district, Polk County, and
15:17:03 Hillsborough County, have a reciprocal certification
15:17:06 process.
15:17:07 So he shouldn't have to go through all of those.
15:17:09 I'm not sure he's aware of it.
15:17:11 We can make him aware of it.
15:17:13 Those are my comments.
15:17:17 >>CHAIRMAN: What do you think it should be?
15:17:20 >>> I don't know if there should be a dollar amount.
15:17:21 I think every job should be looked at if it's a
15:17:24 construction job compared to a roofing job or compared
15:17:26 to an IT job.

15:17:28 There are different types of work out there, different
15:17:29 types of professions, and to put a $200,000 cap on a
15:17:34 $6 million construction job, I don't know if that's
15:17:37 necessarily good.
15:17:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Take that out of there?
15:17:40 >>> Right.
15:17:40 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
15:17:41 Would anyone else like to speak?
15:17:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
15:17:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Close the workshop?
15:17:49 I have one question about press porosity.
15:17:54 Greg, I guess.
15:17:57 I guess I'm confused.
15:18:00 About our reciprocity with the county and with these
15:18:03 other agencies.
15:18:04 Do we currently have it, certificationwise?
15:18:07 >>> We do have reciprocity for the minority women
15:18:11 business enterprise certification.
15:18:13 Hillsborough County, there is one of the state
15:18:15 agencies, and the entity is certified by either of
15:18:18 those, if they notify us and send basically their
15:18:23 certification letter, we will certify them under the

15:18:27 City of Tampa.
15:18:29 >> Is it clear on our certification form?
15:18:31 Maybe it needs to be the first line, like: Warning,
15:18:35 if you are already certified by one of these entities
15:18:37 you may not have to fill out the rest of this form?
15:18:42 >>> I will revisit that and make sure it is --
15:18:44 >> Because I can see if somebody called up and said I
15:18:46 want your form and then they fill it out, it may not
15:18:49 be there.
15:18:50 >>> It's specifically noted in our instruction and
15:18:53 guidelines but we'll make sure it's very clear and
15:18:55 very pronounced.
15:18:56 >>GWEN MILLER: And while you do look about taking that
15:18:59 200,000 cap off, too.
15:19:00 >>> That's related to our SBE program, when the
15:19:03 determination of sheltering or not.
15:19:08 >> As the gentleman was saying there might be a larger
15:19:15 project.
15:19:16 >>> Without going into too much detail, at present we
15:19:20 have a $200,000 threshold whereby projects that fall
15:19:24 at that amount or under are considered for sheltering.
15:19:27 Solely for certified funds.

15:19:30 A determination based on analysis was that most of our
15:19:34 small minority-owned businesses had the capacity and
15:19:39 the wherewithal to respond as primes, when the dollar
15:19:43 value is at 200,000 or below.
15:19:45 Quite certainly as the gentleman mentioned there are
15:19:47 firms that are well on their way to be a mid-sized and
15:19:51 larger firms, and the gentleman is apparently just
15:19:56 seeking some conditions where they, too, might be
15:19:58 considered, because of their certification status.
15:20:05 I think that's what the issue was about.
15:20:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
15:20:08 Any other questions?
15:20:09 We need to close the workshop.
15:20:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
15:20:12 >> Second.
15:20:12 (Motion carried)
15:20:15 Any information from council members?
15:20:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Miranda had to leave and he asked
15:20:26 me to give his report on water.
15:20:33 Tampa water, voluntary consumption, watering under the
15:20:38 current water use ordinance residents would be allowed
15:20:41 to water on Sunday, January 20 or Tuesday, January

15:20:44 22nd, depending on address.
15:20:45 The voluntary suspension of all outdoor watering over
15:20:50 this period could result in aggregate savings of
15:20:53 $30 -- of 30 million gallons of water.
15:20:57 He just wanted to suggest that we should be doing
15:21:01 that, and people should be doing that voluntarily.
15:21:07 And for the clerk, he gave me these numbers.
15:21:11 On the days when watering is allowed, we are using 11
15:21:17 million more gallons of water.
15:21:18 So we could save a lot if people would voluntarily not
15:21:22 water during the drought.
15:21:24 >>CHAIRMAN: Anything else?
15:21:25 >>MARY MULHERN: At a previous meeting, I think Linda
15:21:34 asked for a report on the status of the streetcar
15:21:36 extension.
15:21:38 So I just wanted to say that where we are right now is
15:21:43 the state did come back and say that there were no
15:21:46 environmental problems with it.
15:21:48 So the extension has been approved to go forward, and
15:21:52 the streetcar board is working on a business plan to
15:21:55 guarantee the federal dollars that are committed to
15:21:57 it, and also working on an active new plan to increase

15:22:02 endowment income revenue through sponsorship and
15:22:04 development.
15:22:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else?
15:22:10 Mr. Dingfelder?
15:22:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to have my office
15:22:13 prepare two commendations.
15:22:14 One, Robinson high band director Jeremy Klein won the
15:22:20 state award for Florida band masters association.
15:22:24 Tom Bishop award.
15:22:26 Just a great educator.
15:22:28 I would like to bring him in on a date to be advised.
15:22:32 >> Second.
15:22:35 >> KLEIN.
15:22:38 And the second one is Mike Flynn down at Ballast
15:22:43 Point.
15:22:44 And he has been doing these artificial reefs.
15:22:47 What are they called?
15:22:49 He's been doing these refall projects for so many
15:22:52 years and I saw it the other day as we were driving by
15:22:55 that we never really recognized him and he created
15:22:58 these artificial reefs out in Tampa Bay that are doing
15:23:01 wonders.

15:23:02 I would like to either bring Mike in or give -- he's
15:23:06 been a little under the weather and see if he wants to
15:23:09 come in, or I will just give it to him at a Ballast
15:23:12 Point meeting.
15:23:13 >> Second.
15:23:14 (Motion carried).
15:23:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else?
15:23:16 Mr. Shelby?
15:23:18 Clerk?
15:23:19 >> So moved.
15:23:22 >> Second.
15:23:23 (Motion carried).
15:23:23 >>THE CLERK: (off microphone)
15:23:28 11:00 be changed to 9:00 because he does have to catch
15:23:43 a flight that afternoon and would like to be first at
15:23:47 nine.
15:23:51 He's already set for eleven.
15:23:53 Wants to change to 9:00.
15:23:54 >> First thing on the agenda.
15:23:56 >> Will there be an opportunity to chat with him
15:23:58 provider to that?
15:24:00 >>CHAIRMAN: You will have to.

15:24:01 I have a motion and second.
15:24:02 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
15:24:04 Opposed, Nay.
15:24:06 Anything else?
15:24:07 We stand adjourned until 6:00 p.m
15:24:09 (Meeting recessed.)

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