TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, April 3, 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.
09:03:31 [Sounding gavel]
09:03:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:03:33 Chair will yield to Joseph Caetano.
09:03:35 >> Today we have the honor of having Father David
09:03:39 deJulio from St. Marks in the New Tampa area that's
09:03:43 going to give our invocation.
09:03:44 After that please stand for the pledge of allegiance.
09:03:54 >> Heavenly father, you are the source of all grace
09:03:56 and all power.
09:03:57 As we turn to serve each other we ask your continued
09:04:02 grace to be upon this council as they serve the people
09:04:05 of Tampa, that you give them strength, especially as
09:04:08 they elect a new chair.
09:04:11 May their given purpose throughout all form of things
09:04:16 that they desire help them to make the right decisions
09:04:19 in all that they do and say.
09:04:21 We ask you hear us in your holy name. Amen.
09:04:29 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:04:52 Roll call.
09:04:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:04:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:04:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
09:05:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:05:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:05:04 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:05:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:05:06 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
09:05:09 Council, this morning we will conduct the election for
09:05:11 chair, chairman and chairman pro tem of the Tampa City
09:05:16 Here are the election guidelines.
09:05:21 The election of the chairman will be held first.
09:05:23 Nomination does not require a second.
09:05:25 Please wait to be recognized before nominating a
09:05:29 I will open the nominations and close them after all
09:05:33 nominations have been made.
09:05:35 Votes will be counted by raising the hand.
09:05:39 The votes will be taken in order of the nomination
09:05:42 beginning with the first named nominator.
09:05:44 The vote will cease as soon as there is a majority
09:05:48 which requires four votes.
09:05:50 Having said that, nominations are now in order for
09:05:55 Mr. Dingfelder.
09:05:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, madam clerk.
09:06:01 Before I make my nomination, I want to honor and
09:06:04 praise our chairwoman Glen Miller.
09:06:06 I think she's done a great job for the last four
09:06:13 You know, she's a good friend, I respect her in
09:06:15 numerous ways.
09:06:16 So I don't want my nomination to reflect anything but
09:06:20 As a matter of fact, during our Christmas party I told
09:06:23 you that I love you, and I do.
09:06:24 But with that said, I also said about four years ago
09:06:29 that I thought that the chair position should rotate
09:06:32 every year, every other year, that sort of thing.
09:06:35 And I still feel that way very strongly.
09:06:37 I think we have strong leadership across this entire
09:06:39 panel and I think everybody up here could and should
09:06:42 be chair at some point in time.
09:06:44 With that I will nominate reverend Tom Scott to be
09:06:49 Reverend Scott has been chair over at the county
09:06:52 He's done a great job as CRA chair.
09:06:55 And I believe in him strongly and look forward
09:07:00 hopefully to serving under him as chair.
09:07:04 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Reverend Scott is now
09:07:07 Mr. Miranda.
09:07:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, madam clerk.
09:07:11 What am I looking in a chair?
09:07:13 I don't care if a chairperson is here one year or 100
09:07:17 Let me first say that I don't ever want to be chair of
09:07:20 this group.
09:07:22 And I mean that sincerely.
09:07:25 You need a patient person that has to be patient.
09:07:29 You need a person who has compassion.
09:07:32 And I'm not saying that the nominee who has been
09:07:35 nominated doesn't have those qualities.
09:07:38 You need a person to not be insulting.
09:07:43 You need a patient person that can reach out not only
09:07:49 to the community but to other parts of government, not
09:07:53 only in the City of Tampa but throughout the State of
09:08:01 And I firmly believe that the nominee that I will
09:08:03 going to put forth has the qualities that are
09:08:05 necessary to run a government without a lot of jibber
09:08:12 jabber and a lot of interference and get to the point,
09:08:17 gets in a subject matter and tries to get out.
09:08:19 Notice I said tries to get out because getting out is
09:08:22 our responsibility.
09:08:23 Therefore, I nominate the current chair, Gwendolyn
09:08:27 "Gwen" Miller.
09:08:30 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Gwen Miller is now nominated.
09:08:33 There any other nominations?
09:08:37 I'll close the nominations.
09:08:39 Those in favor of reverend Thomas Scott please raise
09:08:45 your hand.
09:08:48 Reverend Scott has been elected chair of Tampa City
09:08:56 Would the new chair lake to say a few words?
09:09:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I thank my colleagues for their
09:09:08 support and for their confidence.
09:09:14 >> Nominations are now in order for chairman pro tem.
09:09:17 Is there a nomination?
09:09:19 Mr. Dingfelder again.
09:09:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I nominate Gwen Miller for chair
09:09:23 pro tem.
09:09:24 I think she's again done a great job, she's a great
09:09:28 When Reverend Scott can't do the job she'll fill in
09:09:33 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Ms. Miller is nominated.
09:09:37 Mr. Miranda.
09:09:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here again, sometimes I feel like
09:09:42 I'm a stone out of water.
09:09:44 Sometimes I feel like I'm a stone bouncing on water.
09:09:47 I don't know how Mrs. Miller feels about this.
09:09:49 But logically and politically I would not accept, if I
09:09:53 was her, a diminished role from chair to vice chair so
09:09:59 therefore I am going to put another person in
09:10:01 I nominate Mr. Joseph Caetano.
09:10:06 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Mr. Caetano is now nominated.
09:10:09 Is there another nomination?
09:10:13 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
09:10:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to nominate John
09:10:21 He served as our vice chair.
09:10:23 He's done an admirable job.
09:10:24 He's provided great leadership on council.
09:10:27 He's raised the professional stature of council and I
09:10:31 think he would be excellent.
09:10:32 He's done an excellent job in this role.
09:10:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Linda, I'm going to respectfully
09:10:38 decline this year.
09:10:42 And I nominate Gwen and I'm going to stand by that but
09:10:46 thank you. I'm honored.
09:10:47 I appreciate that.
09:10:49 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: We have two candidates.
09:10:50 Are there any other nominations?
09:10:53 We will close on Miller and Caetano.
09:10:57 All in favor of Gwen Miller, please raise your hand.
09:11:02 Ms. Miller, you are the new chairman pro tem.
09:11:07 Would you like to say a few words?
09:11:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to thank our colleagues,
09:11:17 I look forward to continuing serving.
09:11:18 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Thank you.
09:11:20 We will move onto the CRA elections.
09:11:22 I know that it's something new this year.
09:11:26 Council, serving as the council, elects the CRA
09:11:31 chairman and vice chair.
09:11:34 Here again are the election guidelines.
09:11:37 The election of a chairman will be held first.
09:11:40 Nominations do not require a second.
09:11:43 Please wait to be recognized before nominating a
09:11:46 I will open the nominations and close them after all
09:11:50 nominations have been made.
09:11:53 Votes will be counted by raising the hand.
09:11:55 The vote will be taken in the order of the nomination
09:11:58 beginning with the first named nominated.
09:12:01 The vote will cease as soon as there is a majority
09:12:04 which requires four votes.
09:12:05 Having said that, nominations are now in order for
09:12:10 Mr. Miranda.
09:12:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mad madam clerk, I nominate
09:12:15 Gwendolyn Gwen Miller for chair of the CRA.
09:12:19 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Ms. Miller is nominated.
09:12:23 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
09:12:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to nominate John
09:12:27 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Mr. Dingfelder is now
09:12:29 Are there any other nominations? We will close on
09:12:31 Miller and Dingfelder.
09:12:34 All in favor of Gwen Miller, please raise your hand.
09:12:40 Ms. Miller is the new CRA chairman.
09:12:49 Congratulations, Mrs. Miller.
09:12:51 Would you like to say a few words?
09:12:53 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to thank my colleagues and
09:12:55 I will work as hard as I have done as chair of the
09:12:58 City Council.
09:12:59 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Thank you.
09:13:01 And now on for nominations for the vice chairman.
09:13:04 Is there a nomination?
09:13:09 Mr. Scott.
09:13:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I nominate councilwoman Mary Mulhern.
09:13:20 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Mrs. Mulhern has been
09:13:23 Is there another nomination?
09:13:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
09:13:27 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Would the new vice chairman
09:13:29 like to say a few words?
09:13:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:13:32 I appreciate it.
09:13:33 I think being city-wide, I think John would do a
09:13:38 fantastic job, too.
09:13:39 I think any of us would.
09:13:41 Being city-wide it might be a little easier for me.
09:13:44 John has a very labor intensive district already.
09:13:50 So I really appreciate your nomination.
09:13:53 And I also wanted to say that I think Gwen Miller has
09:13:56 done a fantastic job as chair.
09:13:59 She's been fair.
09:14:00 She's been patient, all those things.
09:14:03 I think she's done a great job.
09:14:05 And I do just agree it was time for someone else to
09:14:10 get a chance.
09:14:11 But I just want chairwoman Miller to know that.
09:14:16 I have ultimate respect for her and both the honor to
09:14:19 be vice chair or chair pro tem on the CRA with her.
09:14:24 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Okay.
09:14:25 Congratulations again to the new chairman and vice
09:14:34 I would like to turn the meeting over to our new
09:14:36 chairman. Thank you.
09:14:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Board members, what I would suggest at
09:14:40 our next board meeting that we do our outgoing chair
09:14:45 for the board at our next meeting.
09:14:49 It would have been appropriate to have done that had
09:14:51 we known what the results would have been.
09:14:53 But Mrs. Miller has served this city government, this
09:14:57 City Council, outstandingly, and has done a great job
09:15:04 for this City Council.
09:15:06 And I'll tell you, today it's an honor to have worked
09:15:11 with her, serve with her, and to be able to be
09:15:15 selected to walk in her shoes.
09:15:17 And so I think it would be honorable if we would
09:15:19 recognize her more appropriately at our next meeting.
09:15:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, would you like to do that
09:15:29 on the agenda, under ceremonial?
09:15:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
09:15:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
09:15:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:15:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
09:15:43 So moved and ordered.
09:15:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: As the chairman of City Council you
09:15:48 will make the assignments to boards and authorities.
09:15:50 Should we give you if boards and authorities that we
09:15:54 would like to serve on so that you can make a good
09:15:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Whatever has been the process.
09:16:03 >>CHAIRMAN: We don't change those.
09:16:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's not true.
09:16:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, okay.
09:16:11 I would suggest, as long as I'm chair and until the
09:16:14 time you vote me out, that you be recognized by the
09:16:17 chair before speaking.
09:16:18 Chair will be fair.
09:16:19 But I would ask that you make sure that you are
09:16:24 Therefore, as long as I'm chair, we are going to have
09:16:27 a very professional meeting.
09:16:28 We'll move orderly, expeditiously, we are going to
09:16:31 keep our conversations minimal so that we can get to
09:16:35 be very concise and get to the issues so that we can
09:16:38 take care of the business of the citizens.
09:16:39 That's my function.
09:16:40 That's my role.
09:16:41 And that's what I am going to do here today.
09:16:43 Now, I have not been here but one year so I don't know
09:16:45 what the process has been.
09:16:47 Now, Mr. Miranda, since you are the historian, based
09:16:51 on what Joe Caetano said, I defer to you at this
09:16:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, if you believe
09:17:00 everything that Mr. Caetano says, we have already been
09:17:02 to Mars and back.
09:17:04 [ Laughter ]
09:17:04 But you're the one in charge.
09:17:10 You're the one that's carrying the load on your
09:17:12 That's why you -- in fact maybe with this meeting you
09:17:18 don't have any committees to report on.
09:17:20 You're the director.
09:17:21 You're the bandleader.
09:17:22 And we have got to make sure we play the instruments
09:17:24 right and don't go sour on the notes.
09:17:27 So that's the only advice I can give you, sir.
09:17:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In your 20 years of being here,
09:17:39 however many years, you served as chair, what, four
09:17:44 years, five years?
09:17:44 What was the process when you were here?
09:17:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The process was, in fact, you're
09:17:49 entitled to assign parking spaces, you're entitled to
09:17:52 assign your offices, and, you see, I'm a little
09:17:58 I measured every office in here.
09:18:01 I did.
09:18:02 And I knew there would be a B.
09:18:12 And I said, my room is 6 inches shorter than yours.
09:18:16 You can have mine, I'll take yours.
09:18:17 But you have to be vigilant of all those little things
09:18:20 that make up personalities.
09:18:22 All elected officials including myself have some type
09:18:24 of egos.
09:18:26 So what I am trying to tell you is, you assign the
09:18:29 committee, you make the assignments of the committee,
09:18:32 whether we like it or not, those are the committees
09:18:34 you serve on.
09:18:37 That's what I remembered by the rules.
09:18:40 Unless the rules have changed in my time that I was in
09:18:49 >> Councilman Dingfelder.
09:18:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Based on my knowledge in the last
09:18:56 couple of years, I think starting, I guess, when Linda
09:18:59 was chair and then we went over into -- I think a
09:19:03 couple of times we have submitted, you know, just
09:19:08 requests, this is my preference, and I think one, two,
09:19:11 three, these are the types of boards that we did.
09:19:13 I think there's probably even that document.
09:19:15 It's probably floating around somewhere in blank.
09:19:20 The clerk can confirm that.
09:19:23 At the end of the day it's totally up to you,
09:19:25 Mr. Chairman, and you have the discretion to do it any
09:19:27 which you wish, but I can confirm at least over the
09:19:30 last couple of years that we submitted a paperwork to
09:19:33 you saying, you know, this is our top three choices or
09:19:36 top several choices for boards and for "out of the
09:19:43 room" committees and at the end of the day Gwen made
09:19:48 her picks.
09:19:48 So that's the way it was.
09:19:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:19:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I called Jan Platt yesterday
09:19:56 because she had a great memory and many years of
09:19:58 experience and she said in the city charter that the
09:20:01 chairman selects the committees.
09:20:02 There's nothing in the city charter that discusses
09:20:05 boards of authorities, nor is there anything in our
09:20:07 rules of procedure, and it's something that I hope
09:20:09 that we maybe come up with a better system for at our
09:20:13 strategic planning session for the future.
09:20:15 But for now, I think traditionally the chairman has
09:20:19 made all the selections.
09:20:20 But in order to assist you, I thought it would be
09:20:22 helpful if you knew what our priorities were.
09:20:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:20:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say in my last year
09:20:30 experience with this, we did put down -- I think we
09:20:33 got a sheet from the chair with our preferences, and
09:20:36 it included the MPO and all the authority, too.
09:20:41 So I think we had an opportunity to state what we
09:20:43 wanted to do, didn't we?
09:20:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, we did, last year.
09:20:48 But I think that councilwoman Miller was stating once
09:20:53 you have been appointed then you stayed there for the
09:20:56 four years.
09:20:58 >>GWEN MILLER: When I was chair, when Linda was chair
09:21:01 and I took over, we continued to work on the same
09:21:06 committees as appointed and still work on the same
09:21:09 committee for four years.
09:21:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
09:21:13 Councilman Caetano.
09:21:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I don't know whether it's
09:21:19 imperative this decision be made today.
09:21:21 I think you as new chairman should have to next week
09:21:23 to make up your minds on what committees you want
09:21:26 people in and there's no reason to start arrive here
09:21:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We think want to understand the
09:21:34 council that council had in the past.
09:21:36 I'm fairly new.
09:21:36 The board of county commission chairman did not
09:21:39 We voted.
09:21:40 The chairman was nominated and voted upon, then we
09:21:44 voted upon the different positions each of us so
09:21:48 there's a different process everywhere.
09:21:49 So I just want do understand the process.
09:21:51 As now by now I'm a process person.
09:21:53 So okay.
09:21:55 So what I would suggest then that each of you submit
09:21:57 to me in writing and rank them what voice and council
09:22:03 you would like to serve on.
09:22:04 With that being said -- I'm sorry?
09:22:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May I just ask that perhaps it be
09:22:12 done through the clerk's office or somehow in ways
09:22:14 that it complies with the public records law, the open
09:22:18 meetings law, so we don't have certain issues.
09:22:23 So it.
09:22:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:22:27 As notified by our council attorney, would you please
09:22:30 govern yourselves accordingly?
09:22:31 The agenda calls for the approval of the agenda.
09:22:33 Is that right?
09:22:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you like me to review that?
09:22:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
09:22:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With regard to item 78, a request by
09:22:55 Darrell Smith for a continuance of the report on the
09:22:57 TBRTA legislation to April 17th.
09:23:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
09:23:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest that we note all the
09:23:04 changes and make one motion.
09:23:06 Can we do that?
09:23:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What if we don't, Mr. Chairman?
09:23:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question is if you want --
09:23:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What if we don't want one of these
09:23:16 particular items?
09:23:17 Would we just pull it?
09:23:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Just let me know you want to pull that
09:23:24 item, yes.
09:23:26 Go down each one if you don't mind.
09:23:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 83 is a request by chief of
09:23:31 staff for April 17th.
09:23:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chairman, 78 may be related to
09:23:38 things going on in our legislature.
09:23:40 And I spoke with Mr. Smith.
09:23:43 I'm a little disappointed because April 17th is
09:23:45 just two weeks before the legislature is done with its
09:23:50 And I hope that our weighing in won't be too late.
09:23:54 But we could bring these up at our CRA meeting next
09:23:57 week, which would expect the administration two weeks
09:24:03 to get back with us and two weeks to weigh in to the
09:24:06 legislature, in a timely fashion.
09:24:08 So I would really prefer that we hear back after our
09:24:14 CRA meeting next week.
09:24:19 That would be my motion.
09:24:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you want to add these items.
09:24:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: A staff report --
09:24:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did you hear the motion?
09:24:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No, sir, I'm sorry.
09:24:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion is we ask these as a
09:24:33 staff report as part of our CRA meeting next week.
09:24:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question that I would have with
09:24:42 that -- and I'm not familiar with the CRA's
09:24:44 policies -- but would that give sufficient time to the
09:24:47 administration --
09:24:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Smith and I spoke.
09:24:51 He said the problem with coming up with a report this
09:24:53 week was it didn't give him two weeks.
09:24:55 Next week would give him two weeks because I made the
09:24:59 request last week.
09:25:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And then the issue comes out in terms
09:25:04 of procedurally.
09:25:07 What would be the appropriate way to add something to
09:25:08 a CRA agenda?
09:25:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: By motion.
09:25:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, what would have to happen is the
09:25:16 CRA would have to adjourn, the regular City Council
09:25:18 would have to convene.
09:25:19 That's what has to happen.
09:25:21 Anytime the board comes together, it just a matter of
09:25:24 the board determining they want to do that.
09:25:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My understanding, and correct me if I
09:25:28 am wrong, was the intent of the maker of the motion
09:25:30 was to have the CRA board take a position --
09:25:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, the process --
09:25:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: She's saying that we are in session
09:25:36 next Thursday, the CRA is in session, so therefore
09:25:39 could you take it up.
09:25:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: At the end of the meeting, convene
09:25:42 City Council for the purpose of these staff reports.
09:25:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And again it's council's prerogative
09:25:47 to do that.
09:25:48 That is not your current method of conducting your
09:25:52 meeting, and the issue would be if you do open the
09:25:56 door to that, then what it does, it takes the
09:25:58 administration and takes them off notice of when those
09:26:02 items will be appearing, and you might open the door
09:26:05 to having your agenda monthly agenda schedule altered.
09:26:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Listen, I don't want to spend a whole
09:26:12 lot of time on this.
09:26:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's fine, that's fine.
09:26:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say this.
09:26:17 And I remember this very succinctly and well, and that
09:26:21 is the issue came up about this meeting every two
09:26:23 weeks but we did say we still meet every week.
09:26:25 If there is a pressing issue, we can agenda that
09:26:29 We stated that in the workshop and the meeting.
09:26:31 If there is a pressing issue, emergent issue, we can
09:26:36 schedule it and discuss it at that time.
09:26:37 We would not make it a habit of scheduling a thing
09:26:40 that could go on a regular agenda.
09:26:42 But if this issue is an emergency issue, that is time
09:26:48 sensitive, I see no reason why it could not be taken
09:26:51 up next Thursday.
09:26:52 Now, the question is, is it time sensitive?
09:26:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My feeling is TBRTA is very
09:26:59 important to us and that the legislative session is
09:27:01 happening right now.
09:27:02 I believe this is out of committee and I believe we
09:27:04 should move on it.
09:27:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Then you need to make a motion and if
09:27:08 you have the votes we move on.
09:27:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion is that we schedule a
09:27:12 council meeting for Thursday, April 10th, for the
09:27:15 purpose of having a report from the administration on
09:27:18 TBARTA and other legislative issues.
09:27:24 At the end of our meeting.
09:27:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That meeting has been set for next
09:27:30 Thursday at 9:00 and it was set to go about an hour
09:27:33 and a half.
09:27:33 So you are looking at 10:30.
09:27:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 10:30.
09:27:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
09:27:40 >> It's been moved and seconded, moved by councilwoman
09:27:43 Saul-Sena and seconded by councilwoman Mary Mulhern,
09:27:46 that we set these two items, 78 and 83 about CRA
09:27:50 meeting on next Thursday.
09:27:53 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
09:27:56 So moved and ordered.
09:27:57 Next item.
09:28:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, David Smith has requested a
09:28:09 continuance for being able to present an ordinance to
09:28:12 address than the City Council issues.
09:28:13 He is present.
09:28:14 He does have information that he would like to present
09:28:16 to council, I believe not today but through
09:28:22 interoffice mail.
09:28:23 I don't know how he wishes to pro proceed.
09:28:25 But council can listen to what he has to offer today
09:28:28 under 85 or if you wish to have it continued to
09:28:30 another date when he would forward the information to
09:28:32 you and come back with an ordinance.
09:28:33 Mr. Smith, do you know how long you would wish to
09:28:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, he's requesting a continuance?
09:28:42 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes, sir, I am.
09:28:45 What City Council attorney is referring to is I do
09:28:48 have some information pursuant to our discussions.
09:28:52 One of the things we are suggesting, the most
09:28:55 complicated, believe it or not, issue here involved is
09:28:57 the gender issue.
09:28:58 What I am going to propose to this council is that we
09:29:01 address that by putting a section up front in article
09:29:04 1 that makes it clear that whenever a gender term is
09:29:09 used here, it refers to all genders, rather than find
09:29:13 every he and every she that's in the document then you
09:29:17 are going to have a huge document for people to vote
09:29:20 If council is okay with that, I think that would be
09:29:22 the way to approach the gender issue.
09:29:25 And then we can get something back to you in fairly
09:29:28 short order.
09:29:30 I'm not here April 17th. What is your first
09:29:34 meeting in May?
09:29:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: According to the backup we need to
09:29:41 address this before June?
09:29:43 >> June 26th is when we need to have the first
09:29:47 hearing, yes, sir.
09:29:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to make sure we are okay under
09:29:51 that time constraint.
09:29:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to May 1st.
09:29:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:29:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
09:30:03 Moved and ordered.
09:30:04 Yes, ma'am.
09:30:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm wondering if we have enough
09:30:07 closure to move or if we needed any kind of workshop
09:30:10 or discussion session.
09:30:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Which item?
09:30:15 >> On the one we just voted on, the gender for May
09:30:18 1st for the city charter.
09:30:22 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:30:24 Your first workshop session in May is when?
09:30:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm not talking about a workshop
09:30:30 I'm talking about the one at the end of April,
09:30:33 something that -- it's the 24th.
09:30:41 >> I will be here.
09:30:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You won't be here on the 24th?
09:30:48 I will be here the 24th.
09:30:49 I won't be here the 17th.
09:30:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Our workshop, one, two, three, four
09:30:55 workshops that are scheduled.
09:30:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
09:30:57 Then hopefully we'll just have a chance to all be on
09:30:59 the same page by May 1st.
09:31:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, item 86 is a request to
09:31:12 continue the issue of the draft language on local
09:31:14 preference and bids awards to May 15th.
09:31:17 >> So moved.
09:31:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:31:21 >> Moved and ordered.
09:31:29 >> I believe Mr. Smith has a request.
09:31:34 It will have to be taken up again obviously at 10:30
09:31:37 but did you want to apprise council?
09:31:40 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:31:41 I also sent you a communication that may have arrived
09:31:43 late last night.
09:31:45 Essentially, what the mayor has asked me to do is to
09:31:48 withdraw the franchise agreement.
09:31:50 We presented it, and she presented it for
09:31:53 recommendation based upon an understanding that
09:31:56 apparently is a misunderstanding so she would like to
09:32:03 withdraw the franchise agreement, give us an
09:32:05 opportunity to sit down with Tampa Electric Company,
09:32:08 work on those issues which we are currently working
09:32:10 on, and then be able to present a franchise agreement
09:32:12 to you that she will recommend.
09:32:14 Currently she is withdrawing that because she does not
09:32:17 recommend the franchise agreement as it stands today.
09:32:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can do that at 10:30?
09:32:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That will have to be done at 10:30, I
09:32:27 believe, as are items 98 and 99 there is a request for
09:32:32 continuance on 98.
09:32:34 There is a request on 99 to be withdrawn.
09:32:37 Those will have to be taken up at that time.
09:32:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So at 10:30.
09:32:46 When we have time certain, we need to get the time
09:32:49 That's the reason for having time certains.
09:32:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I will bring those to your attention,
09:32:55 all three teams, 97, 98, 99 at 10:30.
09:33:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So 99 at 9:30.
09:33:12 Yikes I'm sorry, thank you, councilman Miranda.
09:33:16 99 is set for 9:30.
09:33:17 Council, you can actually, if you wish, after you
09:33:23 approve the agenda, or do that now, have that item
09:33:27 It is a 9:30 hearing.
09:33:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to strike 99.
09:33:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:33:36 That we strike 99.
09:33:38 Let it be known by Aye.
09:33:41 Opposed same sign.
09:33:42 So moved and ordered.
09:33:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
09:33:46 Council, with regard to item 29, it requires a super
09:33:54 majority vote.
09:33:55 Item number 84 is a memorandum by Ms. Miller.
09:34:05 Cindy Miller, director of growth management services.
09:34:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 84 I think he's talking about.
09:34:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have an item to receive and fail
09:34:24 or you can take that up when it comes to your
09:34:27 Council, item 101 on your consent docket.
09:34:34 There's been a request by Mr. Daignault.
09:34:37 I believe he is present and it involves -- would you
09:34:45 like that after approval of the agenda?
09:34:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
09:34:48 And that is on our agenda, right?
09:34:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It is not now.
09:34:56 So the request would be to move item 101 or make it at
09:35:00 the start of the agenda.
09:35:00 With regard to the items 8, which is on the consent
09:35:05 docket, 70 and 71 which are on the consent docket, it
09:35:10 is a request to have them removed from committee
09:35:12 reports and taken in the following order.
09:35:16 Items 71, item 70, and item 8, the request is to take
09:35:21 that under staff reports and unfinished business.
09:35:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What we need to do then is we are
09:35:26 going to pull those items off the consent, we need to
09:35:28 deal with the consent items now, pull them off and
09:35:31 discuss them at the appropriate time.
09:35:32 Do you understand what I'm saying?
09:35:34 In other words, if you have other consent items, we
09:35:37 need to pull them off now.
09:35:39 So making changes to the agenda is what we are doing.
09:35:42 Any other items need to be pulled from the consent?
09:35:48 I would like to pull item 42, 43, 44, and 45, 46.
09:35:56 Those items are only being pulled, so want to
09:36:01 highlight those items, those dealing with Central Park
09:36:03 and those are good items, so I think the public needs
09:36:09 to be aware.
09:36:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
09:36:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:36:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we have any other items?
09:36:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do we need to officially pull the
09:36:18 ones identified?
09:36:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
09:36:22 8, 71.
09:36:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 71, 8.
09:36:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We include those in the motion.
09:36:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chairman, we have a number of
09:36:38 people from the public here to speak on that, if we
09:36:40 could go through the beginning of our consent agenda,
09:36:43 I think it would move.
09:36:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Are those public hearing items?
09:36:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
09:36:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: They are all consent agenda items.
09:36:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:37:00 Other items that need to be pulled?
09:37:02 The motion is made that we pull those items.
09:37:04 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
09:37:07 Opposed same sign.
09:37:08 So moved and ordered.
09:37:10 Anything else?
09:37:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Approve the agenda as amended.
09:37:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved by councilwoman Miller, seconded
09:37:23 by councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:37:25 So moved and ordered.
09:37:28 At this time we have public comment, I believe.
09:37:36 Council set aside 30 minutes for public comment.
09:37:40 You have three minutes to come and address council.
09:37:44 I would suggest as you come, please state your name
09:37:47 clearly, your address for the record, and also we give
09:37:56 preference to those items that are on the agenda.
09:37:58 So bear in mind we are giving preference to those
09:38:01 items, to those items that are on the agenda first,
09:38:04 those that speak to items on the agenda.
09:38:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As a respectful point of order,
09:38:12 Steve, did you have a plane to catch or something like
09:38:15 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We'll wait.
09:38:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Would you like to take a minute or
09:38:25 two for the introduction and then hear from the public
09:38:27 after that?
09:38:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
09:38:29 Also I failed to mention that item 17, 76 needs to be
09:38:35 moved up as well so if we have a motion move item 76
09:38:40 up as well.
09:38:42 Thank you.
09:38:43 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
09:38:46 Mr. Daignault, do you want to come and introduce your
09:38:49 special guest today?
09:38:51 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you, council members.
09:38:53 I would like to introduce Tonja Brickhouse, the next
09:38:58 solid waste director.
09:38:59 She has a bachelor's degree from the University of
09:39:02 Virginia in economics and psychology.
09:39:04 She has a master's degree in public administration.
09:39:08 In 2002 she was a national defense fellow.
09:39:16 25 years in the Air Force.
09:39:18 Retired at the rank of colonel.
09:39:21 Positions of increasing complexity.
09:39:23 Colonel Brickhouse was asked personally to come to
09:39:26 positions that required great leadership, great
09:39:29 organizational management, and motivation, and did
09:39:33 very well in each one of those jobs.
09:39:35 While she does not have direct solid waste experience,
09:39:39 her experience managing large organizations, managing
09:39:43 organizations with transportation equipment, just far
09:39:47 overshadows many of the other applicants who applied
09:39:50 for this position.
09:39:50 Her business approach and her experience again make
09:39:52 her a great candidate.
09:39:54 She's been very impressive in just the few days that
09:39:57 she's been here, her aggressiveness and her
09:39:59 willingness to get in there and find out about the
09:40:02 So again we are asking for your confirmation, and I
09:40:05 would like to introduce TONGA Brickhouse.
09:40:10 >> I'm TONJA Brickhouse and excited to join the City
09:40:16 of Tampa team and lead the city of solid waste and
09:40:19 environmental program.
09:40:21 [ Applause ]
09:40:21 Mr. Dingfelder.
09:40:29 Then councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:40:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Good morning.
09:40:32 I had the opportunity to meet with Ms. Brick house
09:40:36 previously for a few minutes before the meeting, and
09:40:39 in our brief discussion I'm very impressed with her
09:40:42 approach and with her attitude, and we welcome you to
09:40:44 the city.
09:40:45 >>> Thank you.
09:40:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I echo Mr. Dingfelder's comments.
09:40:51 As I said when we met your predecessor was dearly
09:40:56 beloved and everyplace you have been to I have been,
09:41:00 and we welcome you to this department which has made
09:41:03 great strides and I know we will move on in the
09:41:05 Welcome to Tampa.
09:41:07 >>> Thank you.
09:41:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:41:12 And we'll have an opportunity to -- I had an
09:41:14 opportunity to visit with Ms. Brickhouse and we want
09:41:18 to welcome you aboard.
09:41:21 101, consent item?
09:41:28 Why don't we go ahead and take that item up while
09:41:30 she's here?
09:41:32 >> Move 101.
09:41:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:41:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
09:41:40 Opposed same sign.
09:41:41 So moved and ordered.
09:41:42 Thank you very much.
09:41:43 Have a pleasant flight and welcome aboard.
09:41:47 At this time, public comment, we have 30 minutes set
09:42:06 I can't read that name.
09:42:07 Come in that order.
09:42:09 >> Randy Baron, 217 West Comanche Avenue, here in my
09:42:13 capacity as vice-president of T.H.A.N.
09:42:15 First I would like to congratulate Chairman Scott,
09:42:17 Vice Chair Miller, for your appointments to your
09:42:21 I am here on number 82 which is council's rules on
09:42:28 You already have in your file a letter from T.H.A.N.
09:42:32 stating we recommend that public comment always be
09:42:34 allowed at workshops.
09:42:35 I would like to elaborate a little on that.
09:42:38 Our concern is that public comment be given at the
09:42:41 beginning of a process.
09:42:42 Right now, on a nonquasi-judicial matter, public
09:42:46 comment is at second reading.
09:42:48 At that point, I would state that it's just too late
09:42:52 in the process to hear the input of the public.
09:42:55 A lot of times we can give you some facts and
09:42:58 information that will help you in regard to guiding
09:43:02 the staff and guiding yourselves in determining what
09:43:05 is important on a particular issue.
09:43:08 We would highly encourage any kind of public comment,
09:43:12 either through workshops, if you change the rules as
09:43:15 drafted then, we would recommend that you liberally
09:43:18 apply the ability to speak at workshops.
09:43:22 Please ERR on the side of more public comment rather
09:43:26 than less public comment.
09:43:27 We would also encourage more of the mascot meetings if
09:43:31 I know there are some concerns about sunshine with
09:43:33 those but the city does have a videotape recorder that
09:43:37 can be used in order to videotape those.
09:43:39 I would highly encourage more of those meetings and
09:43:41 the attendance of all council people there.
09:43:44 In short, there are other people to speak on this.
09:43:46 But again I would highly encourage erring on the side
09:43:52 of more public comment rather than less.
09:43:55 Thank you.
09:44:01 >> Ken Gentilly, 777 North Ashley Drive, downtown
09:44:07 You heard in the invocation that we serve best when we
09:44:10 serve one another.
09:44:11 That was very moving to me.
09:44:12 And tried to think in the audience a little bit what
09:44:15 that means.
09:44:15 I think part of that is doing things, that may not be
09:44:18 in your best interest but challenging one another to
09:44:20 do things that are for one another.
09:44:22 I'm here to speak about item 70 and 71 on the Curtis
09:44:25 Hixon park and I was encouraged that you move that on
09:44:29 consent and I think we have several challenges and
09:44:31 some of them on that side of the dais.
09:44:34 One is the challenge that you have to make a lot of
09:44:36 decisions with God's guidance.
09:44:38 I know that can be very difficult.
09:44:40 The second is you have a challenge of providing vision
09:44:43 and faith, given what we have right now is a very
09:44:46 uncertain fiscal environment.
09:44:48 We also challenged I think to lead beyond solutions
09:44:51 that are short sighted and one that is are long-term
09:44:54 and expenses that are investments, and not just
09:44:57 expenses for this year.
09:44:58 And I think finally, the challenge is to look beyond
09:45:01 your personal partisan differences and reach out to
09:45:04 the community, I think were is where some of the
09:45:07 solutions lie.
09:45:08 As relate to the downtown partner, I think the
09:45:10 investment as you probably realize and will come to
09:45:13 realize, will bear fraught for many generations.
09:45:16 And I took a risk of coming downtown to live and
09:45:18 pioneer in the city, and a lot of that was based on a
09:45:23 vision that was given to the city, and I think one in
09:45:25 which the city, in a period of transformation.
09:45:28 But we are seeing parts of this vision realized before
09:45:31 our eyes, and that's encouraging.
09:45:36 We have given you, I guess, the trust to lead us in
09:45:38 that vision and continue to state what that is.
09:45:41 And we have had challenges, too.
09:45:42 This is our first experience in living in a vertical
09:45:46 I live in a close proximity to our neighbors.
09:45:49 We come from the burbs, we moved into the city and
09:45:52 it's been very challenging but in living with our
09:45:55 neighbors is what we did is started to rally together
09:45:57 and put forth a petition we would be happy to give to
09:46:00 you. In three days time we had 41 names yesterday and
09:46:03 51 names as of today.
09:46:04 So it's one that's growing.
09:46:06 But I would like to read some of the comments into the
09:46:08 public record what some of our neighbors are saying.
09:46:10 I want to caution you some of them are very spirited
09:46:12 and very passionate.
09:46:14 One said a large purpose is to encourage residents to
09:46:18 live and stay downtown.
09:46:19 As an owner, I believe the dog park, kayak canoes
09:46:24 bring more value to our urban experience, than
09:46:28 artistic expensive fountain.
09:46:30 Please consider this when you make your decision on
09:46:32 the actual approval based on current funding.
09:46:34 Another neighbor writes: I thought the city supported
09:46:37 the riverwalk.
09:46:38 If you cut the funds, you will achieve nothing, only
09:46:41 But the next comment: I can sponsor contact me, with
09:46:48 a phone number and I'm encouraged by putting money
09:46:51 where their mouth is.
09:46:53 Another neighbor says, to cut these benefits will cut
09:46:55 the whole reason for the riverwalk.
09:46:57 At this rate why don't we pave the river with asphalt
09:47:00 and let's just be over and done with it?
09:47:03 But like anything there's an investment hump.
09:47:05 Once you get over the initial cost or the hump the
09:47:07 benefits will vastly outweigh the costs.
09:47:10 Don't cut the extra features.
09:47:12 And might I suggest funding ideas and allow the
09:47:16 community to embrace it instead of just making another
09:47:20 Finally, as someone has written, by someone of like
09:47:24 mind to myself, even though I'm not a dog owner,
09:47:28 downtown, I recognize the need for a quality venue,
09:47:31 especially with the world watching during the first
09:47:34 week of February 2009 with the Super Bowl.
09:47:37 Companies who choose to sponsor the project take this
09:47:41 free advertising into consideration.
09:47:42 (Bell sounds).
09:47:44 Thank you very much.
09:47:44 I appreciate your time.
09:47:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: David Doolittle, Margaret Vizzi, Susan
09:47:53 Lyons -- David Doolittle?
09:48:00 Then Margaret Vizzi, Susan Lyons, next.
09:48:04 And then Melissa Martinez.
09:48:08 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherill.
09:48:14 I would also like to congratulate our new chair and
09:48:17 vice chair and the other appointments of chair and
09:48:21 vice chair to the CRA.
09:48:23 And I would also like to speak on item 82 regarding
09:48:26 our comments at workshops.
09:48:29 I hope that council will reconsider its decision not
09:48:34 to allow comments at our workshops.
09:48:39 Every workshop come up with comments from the public.
09:48:44 Many, for whatever reason, there is no interest.
09:48:48 But when there is an interest from the public, and
09:48:50 especially those of us who live within the city,
09:48:53 mainly right now it's comprehensive plans, and usually
09:48:58 the zoning code that comes before us.
09:49:02 T.H.A.N. will be celebrating 20 years in existence.
09:49:06 And when we began, it was because there was so little
09:49:11 interest by residents within the city in what was
09:49:16 going on in the city.
09:49:18 They realized that everything that council did
09:49:21 affected them but nobody really got involved.
09:49:24 Since T.H.A.N.'s existence, that's when you began
09:49:27 hearing comments from the public at your meetings.
09:49:32 Before that, there was a lot of input, but it was
09:49:36 mainly in the offices or at a meeting, somewhere else.
09:49:40 But this is the place that we can really address to
09:49:43 you all of our comments on the issue that you will be
09:49:49 addressing at a workshop.
09:49:51 The workshops have made changes at that time.
09:49:55 So before an ordinance is prepared, which takes up the
09:50:00 attorney's time to prepare the ordinance, changes can
09:50:03 be made at that time.
09:50:05 And usually what would happen, those changes helped,
09:50:09 because at first reading, things went much better than
09:50:14 they are doing now.
09:50:15 For example, at our zoning code hearing a few weeks
09:50:18 ago, there were so many changes that had to be
09:50:21 So once again, I would only encourage you to allow, in
09:50:29 all of the workshops, public comment.
09:50:31 If not, I'd like to know if it would come -- for
09:50:36 example, if you set a workshop, because of your
09:50:40 comment at a meeting, and you didn't mention taking
09:50:43 public comment.
09:50:46 Would that be an item that we could come to and
09:50:48 address the next week -- next week as a legislative
09:50:52 action, and ask you to consider putting public comment
09:50:58 at that workshop?
09:50:59 And I guess someone has to answer that question for
09:51:04 Because that would be very important.
09:51:06 At least we could come back the next he week or your
09:51:09 next general meeting and say, please consider public
09:51:12 input at that particular workshop.
09:51:17 But those are my comments.
09:51:19 And when you get to item 82, please consider them.
09:51:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:51:27 We will certainly do that and the attorney will be
09:51:29 prepared to address that issue.
09:51:31 Sue Lyons.
09:51:47 >> This is also Susan.
09:51:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I will always do is call three
09:51:52 speakers in a row.
09:51:54 So Sue Lyons, Melissa Martinez.
09:51:58 Walter Crumbley.
09:52:04 >>> Sue Lyon: I want to congratulate you and I'm
09:52:08 thrilled that you are going to speed things along.
09:52:10 When I went into retirement -- and I'm sorry Charlie
09:52:12 is not here to hear -- he used to run things the way
09:52:15 you always were out of here by noon.
09:52:18 He didn't take any stuff.
09:52:20 And maybe that was not a good thing.
09:52:21 But we could come and talk and be out of here in a
09:52:25 certain period of time and we all knew it.
09:52:28 But it's difficult for the public to come.
09:52:32 And they have to get off from work, they have to have
09:52:39 child care, they have to have all the things that are
09:52:42 And City Council over the years has become our venue
09:52:48 to speak and to let you all know.
09:52:53 We don't have contact with the administration on a
09:52:56 general basis.
09:52:58 Because they run things, and we know you all can get
09:53:01 to them and get things done.
09:53:02 But if we can't comment, it's difficult.
09:53:07 And we want to be able to speak at workshops.
09:53:12 We are here to help you.
09:53:13 We are not here to cause trouble.
09:53:15 I know I have been a troublemaker for years.
09:53:18 And I came out of retirement to cause trouble, because
09:53:21 I don't want this to happen, that public comment is
09:53:25 cut off.
09:53:26 This is a very important thing for you all to hear
09:53:29 from the public.
09:53:35 When we are allowed to talk infinity um, and I'm
09:53:41 sorry, we had a good relationship over the years, but
09:53:45 you are going to be here to vote for us anyway.
09:53:50 It's been a very collegial atmosphere between the
09:53:54 public and the council because we respect you.
09:53:58 We know how hard you work.
09:53:59 And we want to be able to help you.
09:54:02 But if you can you tell us off at the knees, it's
09:54:05 going to be a really bad thing for everybody.
09:54:09 And I appreciate the time to talk to you.
09:54:11 And if it wasn't important I wouldn't be here.
09:54:15 I would much rather be at the beach.
09:54:17 So I thank you very much.
09:54:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you for being here.
09:54:22 Melissa Martinez.
09:54:25 Walter Crumbley.
09:54:27 S.W. Long.
09:54:29 Let me also say before our next speaker, if you are
09:54:35 here to speak on the art museum, that is not a public
09:54:39 hearing item.
09:54:39 So if you want to address the council, the time is
09:54:43 How much time do we have left?
09:54:45 >>THE CLERK: About 20 minutes.
09:54:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: About 20 minutes left.
09:54:53 You don't necessarily have to address the council, if
09:54:56 you are supporting it or whatever.
09:54:57 But just want to let you know, it is not a public
09:54:59 hearing item.
09:55:00 Yes, sir.
09:55:01 >>> Walter Crumbley.
09:55:03 I'm the president of the Courier City Oscawana
09:55:06 resident homeowners association.
09:55:10 I would like to speak first to item 73 and 74.
09:55:15 I was contacted this morning about 8:15 by the city
09:55:20 saying, well, we would like to have a workshop.
09:55:24 You know, I have been coming down here talking to you
09:55:26 folks for two and a half years about this.
09:55:28 I have been to more meetings than I can even remember
09:55:31 at this point with the city, with the people in the
09:55:34 neighborhood and all that.
09:55:36 And I think a workshop is a grand idea, because we'll
09:55:44 stir agent bit.
09:55:45 But what I am concerned about is I want the city and
09:55:48 the departments in the city when they come to that
09:55:51 workshop to come with solutions and not more problems.
09:55:56 We have identified the problems, and we have
09:56:00 identified, in our minds, solutions, and all we get
09:56:05 from the city is, Oh, we can't do this, or we can't do
09:56:11 We want to hear some answers.
09:56:13 And we want to get this situation resolved once and
09:56:16 for all.
09:56:20 They are talking about all those parking tickets they
09:56:22 gave out.
09:56:22 Well, from July of '06 to the present day, 305 of
09:56:27 those tickets came from in front of my house.
09:56:30 I'm the biggest source of revenue you have got.
09:56:34 [ Laughter ]
09:56:35 That's what I have got to say about this workshop.
09:56:44 You want to have a workshop, fine.
09:56:45 We are coming with solutions and problems and we want
09:56:47 the city to be prepared to deal with it head on.
09:56:53 Because we don't need to have another postponement and
09:56:58 make a career out of this.
09:57:00 Item 76 is another item I would like to speak to.
09:57:02 That's a citizen advisory committee.
09:57:07 I think that's a great idea.
09:57:10 I would dearly love to get in and snoop around.
09:57:12 And I bet I can find a lot of things that we can get
09:57:15 rid of besides laying off the sanitation and security
09:57:23 When you take that up, keep that in mind.
09:57:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Crumbley.
09:57:30 S.W. Long.
09:57:33 And then O.T.
09:57:38 Anyone named O.T.?
09:57:40 All right.
09:57:41 Then Pete Johnson.
09:57:46 >>> Susan long.
09:57:47 I would like to speak to item 82.
09:57:53 Mr. Crumbley talked about having a workshop and
09:57:55 wanting to come with solutions, potential solutions.
09:57:58 If you don't allow public input there's no point in
09:58:00 having that workshop.
09:58:02 You guys go sit in a corner, decide what you want to
09:58:05 If there's no public input there's no point in our
09:58:08 showing up except to listen to what your ideas are.
09:58:11 You were elected as representatives of the public.
09:58:13 I feel that your decision would be better and more
09:58:18 encompassing if you allow public input during your
09:58:21 That's when you formulate many of your ideas and the
09:58:24 regulations and stipulations that you want to go
09:58:28 forward with.
09:58:29 If you have no public input you have no idea how we
09:58:33 feel or how we perceive it will impact us.
09:58:36 We think it's important that at our public workshops
09:58:40 you have public input on these workshops you allow
09:58:42 public input so that we can provide you additional
09:58:44 ideas or perceptions as to the problems that you can
09:58:48 incorporate in when you make these decisions.
09:58:50 Thank you.
09:58:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, ma'am.
09:58:56 Mr. Pete Johnson, Scott Springer, it looks like -- I
09:59:00 can hardly read the writing -- Najjar? Keith
09:59:06 >>> Pete Johnson, 301 Druid Hills.
09:59:08 As far as public comment, come on, this is America.
09:59:12 This is free speech.
09:59:13 You guys can't sit in one box and make the decisions
09:59:16 without taking into effect how it's going to affect
09:59:21 all the citizens within the city.
09:59:23 So public comment should be welcome, wanted,
09:59:26 especially during City Council.
09:59:28 I remember years ago I would come up here and scream
09:59:30 and rant and rave about code enforcement.
09:59:33 Well, code enforcement got corrected because people
09:59:36 spoke about it.
09:59:43 Another thing to talk about is Nuisance Abatement
09:59:45 And anybody talking about nuisance abatement board
09:59:51 please turn your TVs off.
09:59:52 Two years ago I sent this report to David Smith's
09:59:54 office with thousands and thousands and thousands of
09:59:57 police reports, for drugs and prostitution.
10:00:03 I have been shifted from Shobe to Rainsberger and now
10:00:14 back to Mr. Shobe to find out if this particular case
10:00:16 will qualify.
10:00:17 Legally it's so hung up on the semantics of filling
10:00:21 out the right form, doing everything precisely this
10:00:27 I want to show you the name.
10:00:29 I won't show you the address because it will affect
10:00:31 the case.
10:00:31 But this house for 20 years has been dealing in drugs
10:00:35 and prostitution without any recourse by the city.
10:00:40 Now we have a nuisance abatement board, finally, back
10:00:44 into place.
10:00:44 But I have also been told that since when didn't have
10:00:46 one in '06 we might not be able to do anything.
10:00:52 So it's ridiculous.
10:00:53 We need to -- I know they are working on it, but
10:00:58 please, I ask the City Council to request the legal
10:01:01 department and TPD work together.
10:01:04 This is ridiculous.
10:01:06 I have been beat back and forth between departments
10:01:08 for over two months.
10:01:10 I will submit this as evidence.
10:01:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there anyone else wants to address
10:01:26 Anyone else? This is our last speaker then for public
10:01:31 >>> Scott Springer. I'm the president of the LSU
10:01:31 alumnae association. Item 31 on your docket.
10:01:37 Seeking approval for wet permit, and have a gathering
10:01:40 of our alumnae at Al Lopez park on the 19th and we
10:01:45 have gone through all the appropriate paperwork and
10:01:48 now here seeking your approval to have that event on a
10:01:50 one-day temporary wet permit.
10:01:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Don't the Tigers know this is
10:01:52 Gator country?
10:01:52 >> Actually, I have two sons that are Gators.
10:01:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is that it?
10:02:18 Do you want to address council?
10:02:20 Come on.
10:02:20 >>> Ray Iford, I reside at 1001 South Franklin road,
10:02:28 here to speak about the Tampa Museum of Art, as the
10:02:32 I just want to let you know that the museum and the
10:02:36 foundation did close on our construction loan as of
10:02:42 Tuesday of this week and we also find the financing
10:02:45 and construction agreement with the City of Tampa so I
10:02:47 am here to let you know that we are ready to move
10:02:50 This is a historic day for TMA.
10:02:55 We appreciate your support and we look forward to
10:02:57 moving forward and bringing a world class museum to
10:03:00 the City of Tampa and the Hillsborough County
10:03:03 Thank you.
10:03:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chair?
10:03:09 Mr. Alfred.
10:03:13 When I met with him the other day to chat about these
10:03:16 issues, I asked how long he's been involved.
10:03:20 And it sounded like a couple of decades.
10:03:24 >>> My second tour of duty.
10:03:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Anyway, I know there's many people
10:03:29 like you in the audience that put in many, many years,
10:03:31 and we appreciate all of your hard volunteer work on
10:03:35 It's been a long journey.
10:03:37 And we just want to say thank you to you as the chair,
10:03:40 and to everybody.
10:03:42 In the audience.
10:03:43 And elsewhere for all of your efforts.
10:03:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
10:03:50 What I would like to do, council, now is to move to
10:03:53 approve item 76.
10:03:55 Actually, I think the major here to speak to the item
10:03:59 and then move to the committee report and then look at
10:04:01 the items that we pulled from consent, if we have time
10:04:04 before our time certain.
10:04:09 So, major, to address item 76 on our agenda.
10:04:11 >> Major John Bennett, Tampa Police Department,
10:04:17 special support division.
10:04:19 Congratulations Chairman Scott.
10:04:22 With me today is guy McDonald, the manager of the TPD
10:04:26 site of the house of the 911 communications center,
10:04:29 who is a supervisor in the electronics differentiation
10:04:32 to answer any technical questions.
10:04:35 Referring back to an incident that occurred on March
10:04:37 3rd, approximately 9:20 a.m. where a cable was cut
10:04:43 that degraded our radio communications at the police
10:04:46 department to where we had to go into what we call a
10:04:49 continuity of operations plan.
10:04:52 We doubled up for the officers safety and the
10:04:57 community's safety and still handle 911 calls.
10:05:00 I'm here to address any questions related to the memo
10:05:04 prepared for council by assistant chief Mike George.
10:05:07 So is there any additional questions based on the memo
10:05:09 that was submitted?
10:05:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions from council?
10:05:14 The question I was raising was that in the future,
10:05:19 should a line be cut, how are you prepared to address
10:05:22 that issue in terms of communication other than the
10:05:28 previous time, I guess last time it happened?
10:05:31 >>> Essentially the same emergency management protocol
10:05:33 will go into place, whether we lost computer
10:05:36 communications or radio communications, the officers
10:05:39 would regroup, pair out for safety, and then we would
10:05:44 implement an alternative radio plan, in this case, as
10:05:50 a matter of fact, since the incident, a 100 radio
10:05:54 cache has been positioned between us and the
10:05:56 Hillsborough County sheriff's office to allow officers
10:05:58 to get a secondary hand-held device, to continue
10:06:02 service outside of the police car without possibly
10:06:05 doubling up or having to double up.
10:06:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you do have something in place to
10:06:10 address that?
10:06:11 >>> Yes, sir.
10:06:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
10:06:13 Council, what I would like to do is take our committee
10:06:16 reports at this time.
10:06:16 We will move to public safety.
10:06:18 Item 5 through 7.
10:06:20 Councilman Gwen Miller.
10:06:22 >>GWEN MILLER: I move item 5 through 7.
10:06:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
10:06:25 (Motion carried).
10:06:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Parks and recreation, item 8 through
10:06:31 10, Linda Saul-Sena.
10:06:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move resolutions 8
10:06:41 through 10.
10:06:41 Or did you want me -- we pulled 8 because -- so 9 and
10:06:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:06:48 (Motion carried).
10:06:51 Public works, Mr. Charlie Miranda.
10:06:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move 11 through 19.
10:06:56 >> Second.
10:06:58 (Motion carried).
10:06:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Finance Committee.
10:07:05 Councilman John Dingfelder.
10:07:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: In regards to items 21 and 22 we
10:07:14 appreciate the service of Kelly and Higgins for
10:07:19 another four-year term.
10:07:20 I move items 20 through 31 and 29 is a separate vote
10:07:34 so we will do that in a second.
10:07:38 Want to do that first?
10:07:39 Item 29, move to waive the rules.
10:07:42 >> Second.
10:07:43 (Motion carried).
10:07:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move 20 through 31 now.
10:07:50 (Motion carried).
10:07:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Building and Zoning committee. Mr.
10:08:01 Joseph Caetano.
10:08:03 >>> I believe 42, 43 and 46 have been pulled.
10:08:07 >> Yes.
10:08:08 >> 42 through 43 and 46.
10:08:13 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: 42 through 43 and 46.
10:08:18 >> The one that was added on at the end?
10:08:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it's the one you spoke to.
10:08:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes. Before we do that, let me hear
10:08:31 from Mrs. Miller.
10:08:32 I just want to highlight these items.
10:08:35 Just let the community know where we are going with
10:08:38 Central Park.
10:08:39 We met yesterday and I think we kind of need to
10:08:42 highlight the activity in Central Park.
10:08:44 >>CINDY MILLER: Director of Growth Management,
10:08:47 Development Services.
10:08:48 And I'm very pleased to have before you on the agenda
10:08:52 a number of items, basically as we mentioned, items 42
10:08:56 through 46.
10:08:57 Basically, this is financial commitment support for
10:09:00 three different projects.
10:09:01 The first, one of the items is a senior housing
10:09:06 program, but I think the ones you want additional
10:09:09 presentation on are two buildings that are part of the
10:09:12 Central Park -- what has been known as the Central
10:09:12 Park Village Development, now known as Encore.
10:09:17 It is a senior housing building in one case,
10:09:20 affordable housing for seniors which is referred to as
10:09:23 the ELLA, and Tempo, which is multi-age housing so it
10:09:28 will be operated by the housing authority in the
10:09:30 This is the city's financial commitment of using state
10:09:33 money for the ELLA for senior housing.
10:09:38 We are making the commitment with your approval of
10:09:42 $1,550,000 in state grant funds and that will be over
10:09:46 a multi-year time period.
10:09:48 There's also a memorandum of understanding that is
10:09:51 partnered along with this in order that we have clear
10:09:54 understanding among the parties.
10:09:55 And we then have for the tempo federal funds, home
10:10:01 funds, and this again will be multi-year, $2 million
10:10:04 per year for a total of $6 million.
10:10:06 This is a commitment that was made in very similar
10:10:08 form a year ago.
10:10:10 The developer is pursuing tax credit financing, and
10:10:14 their application was due next week.
10:10:15 And we are very happy to present this commitment to
10:10:18 you and hope for your approval.
10:10:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
10:10:22 Did you want to address council on this issue, or did
10:10:25 you have another issue?
10:10:26 FROM THE FLOOR: (off microphone).
10:10:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
10:10:32 >> Move approval of the item.
10:10:34 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, we have to add item
10:10:37 102, which was put on after the agenda was made.
10:10:43 That's on page 20 of our report.
10:10:45 And we would like to include that and to move 48, and
10:10:51 are we satisfied with 42?
10:10:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
10:10:54 We are approving now those items, clerk.
10:10:58 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move item 102 also with that.
10:11:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved by councilman Caetano, seconded
10:11:03 by councilman Miller.
10:11:07 So moved and ordered.
10:11:09 Councilwoman Mary Mulhern.
10:11:15 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items 49 through 46.
10:11:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:11:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So moved and ordered.
10:11:24 We will set now items for public hearing.
10:11:29 >>GWEN MILLER: I move items 57 through 69.
10:11:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Setting these items for public
10:11:38 Moved by councilwoman Miller.
10:11:40 Second by councilman Dingfelder.
10:11:45 So moved and ordered.
10:11:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Did I say -- excuse me, clerk.
10:11:49 Did I say 49 through 56?
10:11:51 I think I misspoke.
10:11:53 I'm sorry.
10:11:54 I move items 49 through 56.
10:12:02 I misspoke and said 46.
10:12:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need to take a revote on that?
10:12:11 >>THE CLERK: 57 through 69? Right?
10:12:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No, no. 49 through 56.
10:12:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Caetano thought I said 46. I did?
10:12:22 So I'm correcting it.
10:12:24 49 through 56.
10:12:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the record is clean and clear.
10:12:31 (Motion carried)
10:12:33 All right.
10:12:35 At this time we go to -- we need to take a vote on
10:12:40 items that we pulled.
10:12:41 All right.
10:12:48 We set the public hearings already.
10:12:51 What we pulled was 8, 17, 71, I believe it is.
10:12:56 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:12:57 We have an issue we need to discuss before we get to
10:13:00 I got a phone call last night from Santiago Corrada.
10:13:04 He was concerned that we may have had an issue with
10:13:05 regard to the sunshine due to some communications.
10:13:11 It was late at night, and I have now had an
10:13:15 opportunity to review the memoranda associated with
10:13:20 I called the City Council attorney this morning, and
10:13:22 we spoke as well.
10:13:24 After reading the e-mails, it is my opinion we do have
10:13:29 a violation of the sunshine act, an inadvertent
10:13:33 violation which can happen quite easily with e-mails.
10:13:36 I know I harp on this a lot, just be careful when you
10:13:39 reply to everyone, because the council cannot
10:13:42 communicate back and forth.
10:13:45 We have some case law, an AG opinion we'll give with
10:13:48 you regard to sharing a report, not to comment upon.
10:13:52 So you may provide information.
10:13:55 We prefer you do it through the clerk.
10:13:56 But do not respond to that information.
10:13:59 And sometimes what happens, I try to make sure my
10:14:02 attorneys don't send broadcast e-mails to all of you
10:14:05 so that if you click "reply all" and intend to reply
10:14:08 to me and one of my attorneys you inadvertently reply
10:14:13 to a council member.
10:14:14 Pleas be extremely careful, because these sunshine act
10:14:17 violations are the bane of our existence.
10:14:20 Would you not know how many phone calls I get about
10:14:22 these issues.
10:14:23 So what do we do?
10:14:25 There is case law that's outstanding, clear.
10:14:29 We can cure this issue.
10:14:30 We need to put on the record the communication.
10:14:34 When we see a communication as you will see, it is not
10:14:37 any effort to be covert or anything of that nature,
10:14:40 but it must be put on the record.
10:14:43 After it's put on the record, this body must have a
10:14:46 full and open discussion and vote on that issue before
10:14:50 it then proceeds to the next issue.
10:14:52 So in order to accomplish that, let me read a couple
10:14:55 of points into the record.
10:14:59 It initiated with what was -- appears to be an e-mail
10:15:02 from councilman Dingfelder to the chief of staff with
10:15:05 respect to the need to separate some items.
10:15:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
10:15:09 The e-mail from John Dingfelder was to the chief of
10:15:12 It was copied to the press.
10:15:16 >> Correct.
10:15:17 I was going to say that.
10:15:19 >> Let me say that for you because I think it's
10:15:21 extremely important.
10:15:21 It was copied to the press, to the Tribune and the
10:15:26 It was also copied top council members.
10:15:29 That's why I copied it to the press.
10:15:31 And I also sent it to the clerk.
10:15:33 So my initial e-mail was not a violation of sunshine.
10:15:38 Is that correct?
10:15:39 >> That's correct based on the case law and the
10:15:41 attorney general opinion.
10:15:42 Actually the one I have doesn't show you transmit it
10:15:45 to council.
10:15:45 It shows you transmitted it to the aides which in most
10:15:48 cases stands for council.
10:15:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And we can have Ms. Zink and Mr.
10:15:54 Gadalis get up and say that they received it as well.
10:16:00 >>DAVID SMITH: I'm sure they did because it's the same
10:16:00 email. And the issue, I think I may have said this,
10:16:02 why we need to cure this is any action that you take
10:16:05 that could be alleged to have been tainted by sunshine
10:16:07 act violation would be void ab initio meaning invalid.
10:16:13 We do not want you to take whatever action you choose
10:16:16 to take on these contracts and have it challenged by
10:16:19 someone who doesn't like this transaction and make it
10:16:22 That would be the worst possible scenario.
10:16:24 So putting it into the record, the communication that
10:16:28 unfortunately was the condition precedent, councilman
10:16:32 Dingfelder to Darrell Smith, I did receive a courtesy
10:16:34 copy as well, as did Janet and Alan, it says, quote,
10:16:38 Council has been told in the past by Steve Daignault
10:16:42 that the museum GMP contract and the park GMP contract
10:16:47 would come to us as separate line items, open paren,
10:16:52 see comment from 10-4 meeting below.
10:16:54 Mary Mulhern: That's exactly what I'm asking for.
10:16:58 As you do that and you are looking at these tests, the
10:17:00 goal of the test is to find a way not only to stop the
10:17:02 leaks but to be able to put the landscaping back.
10:17:06 Context, that's reference to the garage. There's a
10:17:08 leaking garage he was referring to.
10:17:10 And I think that's your mission.
10:17:11 Maybe that needs -- I don't know, is Kiley Park
10:17:15 addressed in your contract, too?
10:17:17 Cynthia Sarff, legislative aide councilman John
10:17:20 Dingfelder, district 4.
10:17:21 That's who received it.
10:17:23 And then there's a subsequent e-mail down here that
10:17:26 says, we all have three different contracts or four
10:17:31 contracts, one for Kiley, Curtis Hixon, the TMA and
10:17:35 also the energy plan.
10:17:36 But, yes, this program is an entity we are doing just
10:17:40 to determine what the structure is, and what the best
10:17:42 recommendation to put it back together.
10:17:44 Now I see that they are combined as one resolution,
10:17:47 item 70.
10:17:49 Even though they are different GMPs with Skanska,
10:17:57 that is unusual -- this is, I believe, from Councilman
10:17:58 Dingfelder's email -- what happened.
10:17:58 I would strongly suggest that in order to avoid
10:18:00 holding up either of these votes that they be split
10:18:04 into two separate resolutions for two separate votes.
10:18:08 The response to that e-mail was sent by councilwoman
10:18:11 Mary Mulhern which says: John, thank you for this
10:18:14 There are three different projects.
10:18:16 The Tampa Museum of Art, the Curtis Hixon park, and
10:18:20 Kiley Gardens, and should be presented for council's
10:18:23 vote as promised by the administration in separate
10:18:27 reports, GMPs and resolutions.
10:18:30 The last item that should be in the record, so that we
10:18:33 have everything here so that we can have your
10:18:36 deliberation, it is not challengeable, is an e-mail
10:18:38 from Darrell Smith to, I believe in return to
10:18:41 councilman Dingfelder, it says the TMA museum and the
10:18:45 park need to go forward as one, combined item to the
10:18:49 Skanska contract because: One, this way we ensure the
10:18:52 best price for both, additionally, their price for
10:18:55 demolition, which was a great price and included a pad
10:18:59 for the museum, stimulated the price was based on the
10:19:02 museum and the park going ahead together.
10:19:04 Two, the park infrastructure provides electric, water,
10:19:07 and wastewater utility construction that will support
10:19:10 the children's museum, TMA, and the park.
10:19:14 Additionally, utilities are relocated in order to
10:19:17 accommodate the TMA building foundation.
10:19:20 Three, it makes sense for us to move them forward
10:19:22 together because the work is to be done by the same
10:19:24 contractor under the same contract and agreement
10:19:29 That is a reading in of the record.
10:19:35 What you need to do, as you know, I sent a memorandum,
10:19:37 I believe, indicating why they were to be included
10:19:40 It's my understanding the administration is tendering
10:19:42 only one GMP meaning there's only one contract that
10:19:46 covers Curtis Hixon, and TMA, does not cover Kiley
10:19:50 If that's an error then that's fine.
10:19:52 We can talk about that.
10:19:53 And the item number 8 was a budget resolution linked
10:19:57 to the two of them.
10:19:58 So I think my memorandum suggested that they either
10:20:01 need to all get approved or all be denied, because
10:20:04 it's my understanding the administration is not going
10:20:07 to proceed with one of the contract.
10:20:09 That having been said, the first thing you need to do
10:20:11 is you need to make a motion to determine whether you
10:20:14 are going to deal with these separately or not so that
10:20:16 you have a public deliberation on that issue and a
10:20:18 public decision with all the information in the
10:20:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me make sure, because I want to
10:20:25 make sure we cure the sunshine violation, and be clear
10:20:28 on that.
10:20:32 It is my understanding that council can send e-mails
10:20:37 and letters to one another but they cannot respond.
10:20:40 >>DAVID SMITH: That is the correct statement of the
10:20:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's right.
10:20:47 Did it for ten years.
10:20:48 So the violation comes when there is a response.
10:20:49 I want to make sure in the future that council does
10:20:52 not respond to e-mails and letters sent from another
10:20:55 councilman personally.
10:21:00 >>DAVID SMITH: There is one somewhat anomalous AG
10:21:03 opinion, and that is if the communication is for the
10:21:05 purpose of eliciting support for a matter, be very
10:21:09 So what I generally recommend is be careful with those
10:21:12 issues, preferably send them through the clerk.
10:21:16 But yes, the law currently is you may communicate
10:21:18 without a response as long as you are not appearing to
10:21:20 be courting support on a particular issue.
10:21:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And my suggestion in the future, if
10:21:27 there's any doubt, don't do it anyway.
10:21:31 Just be safe than sorry.
10:21:34 Let me just say that.
10:21:36 Yes, ma'am.
10:21:37 >>MARY MULHERN: With regard to the e-mail that I had
10:21:41 done, I wasn't discussing the merits of anything
10:21:44 coming before us, or how I would vote.
10:21:49 I just want to make that clear.
10:21:50 And neither did councilman Dingfelder in the e-mail
10:21:56 that prompted my e-mail.
10:21:59 I do understand now never to respond directly to
10:22:03 another council member by e-mail.
10:22:06 And that's the safest thing to do.
10:22:08 But in this case I just wanted to be very clear on the
10:22:10 record that I would not communicate anything to do
10:22:15 with the merits of the issues coming in front of us.
10:22:18 And the reason that I did it was I simply wanted the
10:22:22 administration and the chair and council to know that
10:22:27 I would like to move these items off the consent
10:22:34 agenda, and this is purely a procedural issue so it
10:22:38 would have nothing to do with any of the issues of how
10:22:41 we are going to vote.
10:22:42 It was just asking to have these presented to us and
10:22:47 heard separately.
10:22:49 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:22:51 It is my opinion as the city attorney that the
10:22:53 distinction between procedural and substantive issues
10:22:56 is not a distinction I put a lot of weight on so be
10:22:59 very careful with that.
10:23:00 That's why we recommend -- and I believe council
10:23:03 attorney Marty Shelby mentioned earlier -- it's
10:23:06 preferable to send your communications through the
10:23:08 clerk, because the clerk can then make sure they are
10:23:12 circulated in a solitary fashion rather than appearing
10:23:17 in -- and one last point.
10:23:20 I would like to make it clear it's a little
10:23:22 embarrassing when this happens to one of your clients.
10:23:24 It's not because the city attorney's office doesn't
10:23:28 know the sunshine law.
10:23:29 We do.
10:23:30 I think we try to keep you apprised of it.
10:23:33 I know you try to stay apprised of it.
10:23:36 Unfortunately, oftentimes, in trying to get your job
10:23:38 done efficiently, and effectively, you simply proceed
10:23:43 or respond.
10:23:44 And that unfortunately is where we get in trouble.
10:23:46 So I just wanted to make it clear that our office does
10:23:50 the best we can to try to help you navigate these
10:23:55 I've always said, the sunshine act and the public
10:23:59 records law are the most difficult part of this job
10:24:01 because there's so much gotchas in there.
10:24:05 >> I want to make it clear I have had the pleasure to
10:24:08 work with my colleagues for a year now and I have the
10:24:10 utmost respect for them.
10:24:12 I think three of us on here that are relatively new
10:24:15 and still learning the process and, however, with
10:24:20 years of dealing with sunshine law, I'm very clear on
10:24:22 that issue.
10:24:23 And that's why it very important for us to understand
10:24:25 to my colleagues, you can do memorandum, you can do
10:24:27 e-mail, you just can't respond.
10:24:29 It best not to respond.
10:24:31 That's the save side.
10:24:32 And I would stress that again.
10:24:33 Now, with that being cured, Mr. City attorney, how do
10:24:42 you want us to proceed now?
10:24:44 >>DAVID SMITH: I think you need to take up the
10:24:46 specific issue that was the subject of the
10:24:48 communication which was whether to split these out or
10:24:52 So that there's a public airing of that discussion.
10:24:54 I don't know if you want to hear from Mr. Daignault
10:24:56 first or not.
10:24:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are still dealing with the curing
10:25:01 of the sunshine violation.
10:25:02 We need to deal with it.
10:25:03 Mr. Daignault, come on down.
10:25:06 We need to decide whether they can be split out or
10:25:10 Mr. Attorney, is that what you are stating to us?
10:25:12 We need to decide that now.
10:25:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member Dingfelder raised the
10:25:16 issue, brought to the attention of the staff,
10:25:19 obviously was copied to the entire council.
10:25:21 I believe that's an issue that is open for discussion
10:25:23 or should be open for discussion now.
10:25:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
10:25:27 Councilman Dingfelder.
10:25:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: First let me start off by saying
10:25:32 when I saw Mrs. Mulhern's response, I knew it was
10:25:37 There is no doubt in my mind.
10:25:41 When you are just learning sunshine and, you know, you
10:25:44 hit reply, there's no doubt in my mind that it was
10:25:47 inadvertent, and now we have cured it.
10:25:50 So we move on.
10:25:52 But that would get to the sort of procedural issue
10:25:56 that I brought up.
10:25:57 And I had a right to bring it up.
10:26:00 And, Steve, I would like you to come up for a second.
10:26:07 When I quoted Ms. Mulhern's passage from the
10:26:11 transcript and I can't remember if it was December or
10:26:13 January, I think it was December, what I was doing was
10:26:16 a was looking for your comments, because I remember --
10:26:22 and maybe it was private between you and me -- but I
10:26:24 remember us having at least one and perhaps two
10:26:26 conversations saying that we would have a chance to
10:26:28 vote on these items separately.
10:26:31 And that was an assurance, that I believe I got from
10:26:34 you, Steve.
10:26:35 If the administration's position has changed on that,
10:26:39 then that's fine.
10:26:40 That's the mayor's prerogative.
10:26:41 And Darrell Smith's prerogative.
10:26:45 But I just want to make sure that I'm not going crazy,
10:26:48 and that I had previously been assured, you know, by
10:26:53 you that we would be able to vote on it separately.
10:26:55 And on top of that, Mrs. Mulhern on the record in that
10:26:58 transcript that I quoted from specifically said, okay,
10:27:00 we are going to get a chance to vote on these three or
10:27:03 four contracts separately.
10:27:05 And I think you were standing right where you are
10:27:08 standing right now and you never objected to it
10:27:10 So I would say implicitly there was an agreement at
10:27:13 that point, too.
10:27:14 So that's where I was coming from.
10:27:15 I don't like to be told one thing a few months ago and
10:27:18 then have the rules changed today.
10:27:23 Let me just finish up and then I'll get off the floor.
10:27:27 There's no implication in doing that that I am going
10:27:30 to vote against either of these.
10:27:33 I just feel like when you are talking about a $20
10:27:36 million GMP, which by the way, David, you misspoke,
10:27:42 there's separate GMPs.
10:27:44 The administration sent them over as one common
10:27:46 resolution, okay.
10:27:47 And again, that's their prerogative.
10:27:49 But I would ask Mr. Shelby and Mr. Smith, isn't it our
10:27:53 prerogative to break those out as separate
10:27:55 They are separate GMPs.
10:27:58 And unless the administration is going to dig their
10:28:02 heels in and say you have to take both together or we
10:28:05 don't want either one.
10:28:09 And I guess first I would like to hear from you,
10:28:12 David, on the legal side of that.
10:28:13 Can we make those separate resolutions and pass them
10:28:16 And secondly, if we cannot, then I would ask Steve
10:28:22 Daignault specifically that, you know, is it the
10:28:24 administration's position that it's all or nothing,
10:28:26 and that that's it and perhaps throwing the baby out
10:28:31 with the bath water?
10:28:33 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:28:34 Under the charter, each contract that is submitted to
10:28:39 this council, with the recommendation of the mayor, is
10:28:43 to be voted on by this council in order for it to be a
10:28:46 binding contract with third parties.
10:28:48 So each contract is entitled to review by this body
10:28:53 for a vote.
10:28:55 So that's the legal issue.
10:28:56 I think Steve can respond to your other questions.
10:28:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So you are saying that we have the
10:29:00 prerogative to vote on those separately regardless of
10:29:03 how they came over from the administration?
10:29:05 >>DAVID SMITH: If they are two separate contracts.
10:29:07 >>: They are, I believe.
10:29:09 >>> I think what the administration may have been
10:29:10 doing, and I did not see the resolution nor did I
10:29:13 prepare it, telling you the latter part of your
10:29:15 question, but Steve will know that far better than I.
10:29:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
10:29:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I guess I have to start by
10:29:22 addressing, I have received -- I don't send e-mails to
10:29:26 anyone, because I don't have a computer.
10:29:30 I don't get in trouble because I don't have a
10:29:36 I haven't received a conversation with Mr. Dingfelder,
10:29:38 Mr. Smith, with Mr. Dingfelder, with the mayor, with
10:29:43 no one.
10:29:44 I'm a pretty independent body.
10:29:45 That being said, and in this subject matter directly,
10:29:53 I haven't spoke to anyone in the administration, none,
10:29:57 But I do say one thing.
10:30:00 If these things are going to come before City Council,
10:30:02 meaning the park, the museum and others, and they are
10:30:07 going to be split, what we are looking for is throwing
10:30:13 darkness over sunshine.
10:30:14 Let me tell you why.
10:30:15 When you start to look -- I look at things really in
10:30:21 And then a little politically.
10:30:25 And let me tell you what happens here.
10:30:27 Museum has a lot of powers, that mean real well to get
10:30:33 something done and putting their money where their
10:30:36 mouth is at.
10:30:37 The park is a city operational item, and it really has
10:30:44 followers, but they are unknown.
10:30:46 Only the city is pushing forward.
10:30:49 So if we split this, you can't have one pass and the
10:30:54 possibility of the other fail, and ill tell you why.
10:30:58 Without the park, there is no museum.
10:31:01 Without the park, who furnishes all the utilities to
10:31:04 the other buildings that are going to be up, they are
10:31:10 Without the park, and each one going on their own, the
10:31:13 cost will rise.
10:31:15 Without the park, and having separate contractors
10:31:19 possibly, the cost would also rise because you are
10:31:21 going to have duplication of the same equipment doing
10:31:24 two things in one area.
10:31:27 So I can't speak for the administration.
10:31:29 I don't know why -- I don't see anything wrong with
10:31:33 And again, I want to reiterate, I don't speak to the
10:31:36 I think I have spoken to the mayor twice in one year.
10:31:40 So I just sit back and watch and listen.
10:31:46 I try to observe.
10:31:48 And I try to make my judgment based on the facts that
10:31:51 are presented before us on a weekly basis.
10:31:57 It will not behoove us to start splitting these items
10:32:02 The cost will go and increase.
10:32:07 If one fails, the other one doesn't get done.
10:32:10 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:32:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other comments?
10:32:15 Then Mr. Daignault, do you want to address this issue?
10:32:20 >> Steve Daignault, public works utility services.
10:32:25 I'm sorry that we had such a rocky start on this
10:32:28 But I am very pleased, quite frankly, council, to
10:32:31 bring to you today the contract to build the TMA
10:32:36 museum and the new Curtis Hixon park.
10:32:39 It is the culmination of many years of work by many
10:32:44 I just can't even get into the amount of details that
10:32:47 we have had to resolve to get to this point.
10:32:50 You know we have gone through the Vinoly process.
10:32:55 We have had to deal with all the utilities
10:32:57 We had the children's museum as part of this as well.
10:33:00 There has been again no shortage of effort by many,
10:33:04 many people to get here today.
10:33:06 And I'm very, very pleased to bring this to you.
10:33:09 We need to say thank you to the council for your
10:33:12 support along the way as we have gone through design,
10:33:15 and as we have gone through design development.
10:33:17 Thank you to the public.
10:33:19 Thank you to the TMA folks as you mentioned who have
10:33:22 done an outstanding job for staying with us, us
10:33:26 dealing with them, bringing the money to the table,
10:33:28 just an outstanding job both TMA museum staff and TMA,
10:33:34 Inc., folks.
10:33:35 We have Stanley Stalowich and his people, we have
10:33:39 Thomas Barclay and his folks, we have Skanska and his
10:33:41 folks, we have the city staff, and again it's been
10:33:43 everybody from finance to parks and rec and real
10:33:46 estate, utilities, on and on and on.
10:33:49 It has been an enormous effort to get to this point.
10:33:53 And I'm very pleased to be here.
10:33:55 I hope I can dispel some of the confusion perhaps.
10:34:01 There are -- we selected some time ago Skanska.
10:34:04 Skanska was to do the demolition of the old museum,
10:34:10 build the park, build the new museum, and work on
10:34:13 That is still our plan for Skanska.
10:34:17 You have already awarded the demolition.
10:34:19 We have today in front of you a guaranteed maximum
10:34:22 price for the museum.
10:34:25 Now, the city, as you know, had a fixed amount of
10:34:27 money for the museum.
10:34:28 The TMA, Inc., folks brought additional money in the
10:34:32 amount of about $8.3 million to the table to build not
10:34:35 only the small footprint but the larger footprint, and
10:34:39 to pick up three additional items, bid items in that
10:34:44 They have brought that money to the table, and that's
10:34:45 item number 71.
10:34:47 That's the TMA city agreement.
10:34:52 In the park, again we have had a number that we have
10:34:54 been trying to stay understood.
10:34:56 As you know, the Strand impact has had on the city.
10:34:59 So we have had to stay down low.
10:35:03 That number, it's $12.4 million, something in that
10:35:06 order of magnitude.
10:35:07 There are other items on top of that.
10:35:09 There is inspection and permitting, and the costs for
10:35:15 the public art portion of that.
10:35:17 The public art pieces in both of those.
10:35:19 So we have stayed within the dollars that we said we
10:35:22 would stay in.
10:35:24 In the case of the park, we were not able to get all
10:35:26 of the elements.
10:35:28 And I realize that some of you may want different
10:35:32 elements than the ones we are bringing to the table.
10:35:34 We worked with the parks folks.
10:35:37 Parks folks were the bun one that is identified and
10:35:40 said here is the priority.
10:35:41 These are the ones we want for second and third for a
10:35:44 lost reasons because we need to get them in place and
10:35:46 because we think we can have a better job or abettor
10:35:49 opportunity of bringing the additional items on.
10:35:52 The infrastructure that we are going to provide -- and
10:35:56 again we have spoken to each of you about the large
10:35:58 amount of cost for that infrastructure and the park,
10:36:02 that serves both museums, serves TMA, serve it is
10:36:06 children's museum, serves the CSX railroad, serve it
10:36:09 is park.
10:36:11 And in some cases we had to move utilities out of the
10:36:13 way to build the two museums.
10:36:16 So, again, it has been quite an extensive effort, in
10:36:22 the case of the park, however, we think we are going
10:36:26 to be bringing forward a finished park.
10:36:29 And then there are opportunities to put those other
10:36:31 things in, because that infrastructure will already be
10:36:34 in the ground to build these additional items on in
10:36:37 the future.
10:36:38 So again, I'm pleased to bring this here.
10:36:42 I would like to address the concept of the two pieces
10:36:47 or one piece at one time.
10:36:51 We thoroughly believed that we were going to get a
10:36:54 guaranteed maximum price for one of the pieces much
10:36:58 earlier than the other piece.
10:37:00 We thoroughly believed that we would be bringing to
10:37:02 you one guaranteed maximum price and then another
10:37:05 guaranteed maximum price.
10:37:08 Quite frankly, as we have moved forward with our
10:37:11 contractor, we have determined almost every day how
10:37:15 these two become closer and closer linked.
10:37:18 So the reason we have brought this together -- and
10:37:22 certainly I hope that we can answer all of your
10:37:24 questions, whether it collectively or independently,
10:37:27 hopefully we can answer all of your questions and
10:37:29 resolve everything on both of those projects today.
10:37:32 But the reason we brought them together is because the
10:37:39 contractor says I can do best if I have all of this at
10:37:41 once, I can give you the best price.
10:37:43 My price is predicated on these things going together.
10:37:48 So it is that price.
10:37:49 It is the fact that they are linked utilitywise and
10:37:56 In fact, and I mentioned this before, in the
10:37:58 demolition contract, we were able to get the pad, not
10:38:03 the concrete pad, but the earthen pad, to begin the
10:38:06 Tampa Museum of Art.
10:38:07 So we have already paid for that in the demolition
10:38:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So we need to vote for these as one
10:38:17 contract per se.
10:38:19 On both of these items together.
10:38:21 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Mr. Chairman, we would like to see
10:38:23 them go forward together.
10:38:25 If not, we need to do something totally different.
10:38:28 But we would like to see them go forward together.
10:38:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:38:34 Listening to Mr. Daignault, and I'm so happy, we need
10:38:37 to do the best deal that we can do.
10:38:39 And you have done that.
10:38:40 You have done a great job doing that.
10:38:42 And I know we need to move this.
10:38:43 It's been hanging over for a long time ever since I
10:38:46 been here.
10:38:46 You have been working on this park and everything
10:38:48 I would like a motion that we pass the resolution.
10:38:51 >> Second.
10:38:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and second.
10:38:55 We have a question on the floor.
10:38:57 Councilman Dingfelder.
10:38:58 Then councilwoman Saul-Sena.
10:39:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
10:39:05 Not to kick a dead horse or anything Steve, but you
10:39:07 didn't help me with my concern about my memory.
10:39:12 Were we told, was I told that we would vote on these
10:39:14 separately, for the reasons that you stated?
10:39:17 Were we told we were going to vote on them separately?
10:39:20 >>> Council member, I don't have the exact words, but,
10:39:23 yes, I believe early on we anticipated that these
10:39:26 would be coming to you separately.
10:39:28 That is correct.
10:39:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I just want to make sure that
10:39:31 you didn't misstate because I thought I read the GMP,
10:39:35 David is over there and he knows a lot about them and
10:39:37 there's a lot of people in the audience that know
10:39:39 about them.
10:39:40 Two GMPs, not the demolition which we approved
10:39:44 several months ago but the two GMPs on the floor
10:39:47 today, I didn't see any language that tied the two
10:39:49 >>> They are totally independent.
10:39:51 They require different funding sources.
10:39:53 They are separate numbers.
10:39:55 And they cover separate --
10:39:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A minute ago you said they were
10:40:00 tied together or what have you.
10:40:03 I understand functionally they might be tied together
10:40:05 but I did not see any language that said that tied one
10:40:09 to the other in terms of this price is contingent upon
10:40:12 us getting both of these.
10:40:14 >>> Dave Vaughan, director of contract administration.
10:40:19 What you have before you is one amendment to an
10:40:20 existing GMP for the demo that adds separate GMPs
10:40:24 for the construction of the park and construction of
10:40:26 the museum.
10:40:27 They are -- you are only seeing them together, and
10:40:31 they are only agreeing to the numbers and willing to
10:40:33 sign this amendment if both of them are included.
10:40:37 They are separate numbers so that we can track and
10:40:39 make sure that the proper funds, we cannot mix funds
10:40:43 from one to the other.
10:40:44 But what you have before you is a contract action that
10:40:46 is a single item that includes --
10:40:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And is that in writing in any
10:40:52 Because I sure didn't see it last night.
10:40:54 When you are saying tied together and one contingent
10:40:57 on the other, I read through and I didn't see that
10:40:59 language, I didn't see any language saying one goes
10:41:03 with the other or anything else.
10:41:04 >>> From a contractual standpoint that language does
10:41:07 not have to be there precisely.
10:41:08 The fact that they both exist as exhibits to this
10:41:11 amendment make it a single contract option that adopts
10:41:14 both GMPs.
10:41:16 And we would not be here -- we would not be here if
10:41:19 both of those GMPs were not attached.
10:41:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, councilwoman
10:41:26 Mulhern, then councilman Caetano, in that order.
10:41:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm very happy to be at this point
10:41:32 in this process.
10:41:33 As you said, Mr. Daignault, it has been a long road.
10:41:36 I have a few specific questions.
10:41:38 I'm hopeful that the state supreme court will
10:41:42 reinterpret Strand so that we will have additional
10:41:46 I anticipate that that will happen.
10:41:49 There were certain things that were put as phase two
10:41:54 for both the museum and for the park, things that we
10:41:57 all desperately want to see included.
10:42:00 You have stated that the infrastructure is being put
10:42:03 there so that as additional funding is available, for
10:42:06 example, for the fountain or for the additional
10:42:12 building of the museum, that we will be able to do
10:42:15 that, because the infrastructure is being put in as
10:42:18 part of phase one.
10:42:20 Should Strand be clarified in the next six months, and
10:42:26 therefore potentially additional money be available,
10:42:31 have you strategized the construction process so that
10:42:34 we could move ahead with some of the phase two
10:42:37 improvements as part of this overall construction
10:42:43 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Yes, ma'am.
10:42:44 Each of those, we have a bid amount for each of those
10:42:46 so we know what it would cost to add it in, if funds
10:42:49 are available we can add it to this contract, yes.
10:42:51 >> Secondly, I know that Kiley you can't have appraise
10:42:57 for yet because you haven't completed excavation.
10:43:00 Will you be coming back to council with whatever plans
10:43:02 you are using as a basis for cost?
10:43:05 Because my understanding is you won't know what the
10:43:07 conditions are till you excavate it.
10:43:09 Who is going to do the design for what then we get a
10:43:12 bid for?
10:43:13 >>> As you know, the council approved an exploratory
10:43:16 small foray into repairing the cells in Kiley.
10:43:22 We have that information.
10:43:23 Contractor and our staff have been focused on getting
10:43:26 these numbers with the park and the museum and getting
10:43:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sure.
10:43:32 >>> Once this is under underway we will be focusing on
10:43:36 okay Kiley and coming back to council with repairs to
10:43:40 >> Who will be doing the design for that?
10:43:44 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Well, we have, under Skanska, I
10:43:49 don't know, do we have a separate designer?
10:43:52 Okay, we do.
10:43:52 >> Because they are engineers, and they are
10:43:56 >>> Dave Vaughan, director of contract administration.
10:44:00 As we have been before you previously the existing
10:44:01 design contract with that, the lead is Reynolds, Smith
10:44:05 and Hills, and Walter P. Moore on the structural side.
10:44:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Who are the architects?
10:44:12 >>> The project manager is Ron Seale.
10:44:17 He's been before you before.
10:44:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:44:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern and councilman
10:44:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I have several things.
10:44:31 I want to start with the idea --
10:44:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Before you do that, we have a 10:30
10:44:36 time certain.
10:44:36 I went past 15 minutes hoping to get through this item
10:44:39 pretty quickly.
10:44:40 So now we need to go to our time certain and come back
10:44:43 to this.
10:44:44 So you need to tell me how much time you are going to
10:44:46 need, or if we are going to take another 15, 20
10:44:49 minutes we need to go tower to our time certain.
10:44:52 >>MARY MULHERN: There's a lot to discuss here.
10:44:55 You know, it's possible we could move to vote on these
10:44:58 contracts separately.
10:45:00 I do have the transcript from when Mr. Daignault told
10:45:04 us, and I quote, we'll have three different contracts,
10:45:09 or four contracts.
10:45:10 One for Kiley, Curtis Hixon, TMA and also the energy
10:45:17 But yes, this pilot program is an entity we are doing
10:45:19 just to determine what the structure is and what the
10:45:23 best recommendation to put it back together.
10:45:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the date of that?
10:45:28 I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
10:45:30 Just wanted the record to be clear.
10:45:36 >>MARY MULHERN: April -- no, that's today.
10:45:38 October 4, '07.
10:45:40 So this is why I think we need to vote on the GMP
10:45:45 separately because they are separate GMPs, because
10:45:48 we were told that's what we were going to vote on,
10:45:51 because Kiley is included in some of the language in
10:45:53 here, and we need to discuss that.
10:45:57 I'm ready to vote to approve the museum, if you want
10:46:00 to move that.
10:46:04 I think a motion to approve the GMP for the Tampa
10:46:08 Museum of Art.
10:46:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You can't do that.
10:46:13 You have a motion on the floor.
10:46:14 Motion already is to move 71, 708.
10:46:22 That was seconded by Ms. Saul-Sena -- excuse me,
10:46:27 excuse me, we have a motion on the floor.
10:46:28 Your motion is contrary to the motion on the floor.
10:46:36 I'm sorry, Mr. Caetano was next.
10:46:38 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, we could beat this
10:46:40 horse here all day.
10:46:41 If we vote on these separate issues individually, and
10:46:46 they all pass, isn't this our intent, to get this
10:46:49 project going?
10:46:52 >> Yes.
10:46:53 >>> Could we make another motion to make them
10:46:55 inclusive into one package?
10:46:58 What are we bickering for?
10:47:00 Let's get it over with.
10:47:01 [ Applause ]
10:47:07 >>MARY MULHERN: $22 million.
10:47:09 That's what we are bickering over.
10:47:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say that I can vote on
10:47:14 them separate.
10:47:14 I can vote on them altogether.
10:47:16 It don't matter.
10:47:17 I think they are going to pass, personally.
10:47:20 It lets move.
10:47:22 What are we going to do?
10:47:23 Now, councilwoman Saul-Sena.
10:47:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:47:26 Mr. Chairman, I'm going to support all three.
10:47:29 But with respect to my colleagues, I think we should
10:47:32 afford them the opportunity to vote separately.
10:47:34 I think the results will be the same as you
10:47:36 identified, Mr. Caetano.
10:47:37 But I don't want to vote against all three together
10:47:39 because I support them.
10:47:40 But to respect the concerns the two of our colleagues
10:47:44 express, I move that the maker of the motion consider
10:47:47 allowing us to vote separately, and let's get on with
10:47:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I call for the vote.
10:47:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: What was the motion?
10:47:58 >>GWEN MILLER: I made a motion to pass the
10:48:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The motion to vote on all three, that
10:48:04 is the current motion on the floor.
10:48:05 That is the current motion on the floor.
10:48:08 Now I am going to have to hold you to speaking to the
10:48:10 motion now.
10:48:11 Councilwoman Mulhern, this is your second --
10:48:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't actually speak yet.
10:48:18 This isn't my second shot.
10:48:19 Did I?
10:48:27 I'm speaking to the motion, because it was like we are
10:48:31 going to vote on it right away and we can get it over
10:48:34 I don't understand the rush to do this big project
10:48:41 when there's a lot involved here.
10:48:43 And I have been a supporter of the museum and the park
10:48:47 and Kiley Gardens forever.
10:48:51 I worked at the museum.
10:48:53 And this is my field.
10:48:59 I know a lot about this.
10:49:01 And I want more than anything for Tampa to have a
10:49:06 lively downtown and a lively art scene and a great art
10:49:12 So my interest in this is very sincere.
10:49:16 So apparently no one else is particularly interested.
10:49:20 So I want -- well, Linda.
10:49:27 But I have to say that this council was told we would
10:49:30 get these contracts separately for the reason that we
10:49:35 could review them separately and decide if we should
10:49:38 be putting all this public money towards these complex
10:49:44 I think that what we are hearing today is that the
10:49:47 museum is under the gun, that if we don't vote, they
10:49:52 are not going to get their museum going if we don't
10:49:54 also vote for the park, which I think is really too
10:49:57 bad, because I want to have the best park we can
10:49:59 possibly have.
10:50:00 And I want this administration to follow through with
10:50:05 their commitment to restoring Kiley Park.
10:50:11 And none of the information we have -- we have already
10:50:14 signed for, paid for a contract to study Kiley Park,
10:50:20 and we haven't gotten the report on that.
10:50:23 So I also want to appeal to my friends in the arts
10:50:28 community, in the museum community, that I am going to
10:50:31 support your museum, and I always will.
10:50:35 But I would like you to appreciate the world-class
10:50:39 piece of landscape architecture that has slightly been
10:50:47 I mean, it on the brink of just being a crater.
10:50:51 And I hope that we will have your support for that
10:50:55 park, too.
10:50:57 Because it's a beautiful piece of art.
10:51:01 It is the strongest piece of art, world-class art that
10:51:04 we have in this city.
10:51:07 And it's one of the best peaces -- probably the best
10:51:10 piece of landscape architecture in the state.
10:51:13 So I want that to be on the record.
10:51:15 That's why I want it to be separately because I think
10:51:18 that Kiley Park is being ignored and has been for
10:51:23 years, and I want that to be remedied.
10:51:27 So I wish the museum great luck.
10:51:29 I'm very excited about the design.
10:51:30 I'm excited about the building.
10:51:32 I want you to have a great park next door.
10:51:34 I have given up open having any input in that.
10:51:37 But I do want to try to save Kiley Park and I want
10:51:39 your help in doing that.
10:51:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano, councilman
10:51:45 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: To Ms. Mulhern.
10:51:47 We were elected on the same day until '11.
10:51:52 If we don't vote on this today you might not get a
10:51:55 chance to vote on it.
10:51:56 So let's push the motion today, the whole three of
10:51:59 them, and I'm sure they will get done.
10:52:01 The administration and everybody else is going to work
10:52:04 to get it done.
10:52:05 We have got to get it done.
10:52:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
10:52:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I agree, we need to move
10:52:13 I think what we have seen is a little bit of political
10:52:16 shenanigans, a little pretty political -- which is the
10:52:21 kind of thing I expect to see out of Washington but I
10:52:24 don't think is the sort of thing that we should see
10:52:26 here in Tampa.
10:52:27 And that's a T part that bothered me.
10:52:29 That's what inspired me to send that e-mail yesterday
10:52:31 and that's what inspired most of this conversation.
10:52:34 I apologize to everybody out there.
10:52:36 You all aren't used to this and that's fine.
10:52:38 And I appreciate, and in another ten minutes you get
10:52:42 to go home and do your normal life.
10:52:45 But these issues are important because it really
10:52:46 reflects on how we operate.
10:52:48 And we come here every Thursday and we have to
10:52:50 operate, and we have to get along, and we have to be
10:52:52 able to trust each other.
10:52:54 And when Steve Daignault says one thing and then they
10:52:57 come back and in March or April and say something
10:53:00 different, with some reasons, with some reasons, but
10:53:03 we need to know what those reasons are and we all need
10:53:06 to be clear on them.
10:53:07 So I'm sorry, you have to suffer through this but
10:53:10 there's good ropes for it.
10:53:11 It has to do with process, as our new chairman says.
10:53:14 With all of that, it appears we are now consolidating
10:53:18 I think two GMPs.
10:53:21 We are not voting on three.
10:53:23 There are three budget agenda items.
10:53:25 >>> I think the three comes from --
10:53:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Three items, two GMPs.
10:53:31 But we are voting on the museum, bundled together with
10:53:33 the park.
10:53:34 In light of the bundling I am going to support the
10:53:37 I am going to support the motion because I have always
10:53:39 supported the museum.
10:53:40 Frankly I have always been pretty supportive of the
10:53:42 park but I have expressed some budget rip concerns in
10:53:46 recent months in light of our big budget picture.
10:53:49 And I'm confident that maybe we can accomplish the
10:53:51 museum, the park, and still get through these budget
10:53:55 So I'll support it.
10:54:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Vote now?
10:54:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I. Spoken.
10:54:02 Chair always gets to speak last.
10:54:04 One question.
10:54:05 Greg Hart, will you come, please?
10:54:09 Talk to me about the WMBE component in these
10:54:12 I want to know, do you have a listing for the
10:54:16 percentage for both of these items?
10:54:18 >>> Gregory Hart, management, minority development.
10:54:22 Councilman, we have been working with Skanska and we
10:54:26 do have a goal for both the park and the museum.
10:54:30 I believe that information is in your attachments.
10:54:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I read the backup but I want it on the
10:54:38 >>> Yes, sir.
10:54:44 For the museum, we have a goal of 18%.
10:54:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 18.5?
10:54:52 >>> 18.75.
10:54:53 And for the Curtis Hixon park we have a goal of 22%.
10:54:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 22%.
10:55:00 >>> Respectively for those GMPs.
10:55:03 Now to date we have been working with Skanska.
10:55:06 We have identified all of the contractible
10:55:08 opportunities within both of those projects which the
10:55:13 goal was derived from.
10:55:15 We are currently now soliciting the subcontract firms
10:55:22 that would hopefully help us achieve those percentage
10:55:29 When these GMPs are approved, then Skanska can
10:55:34 secure and confirm those subcontractable items and
10:55:38 So we do not have, sir, at this time, the names of
10:55:42 firms, WMBE certified firms that would fulfill some of
10:55:46 these contracts.
10:55:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: But you surely do have the ethnicity
10:55:51 and names of firms who you have contacted.
10:55:53 Is that right?
10:55:54 >>> Yes, sir, we have.
10:55:56 We have the list of firms by ethnicity, gender,
10:56:00 et cetera, that Skanska has been provided, which they
10:56:03 are using in their outreach and solicitation.
10:56:06 But we do not know yet which of those firms will
10:56:09 actually --
10:56:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are aware of. That haven't signed
10:56:12 a contract.
10:56:13 >>> Yes, sir.
10:56:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm pretty as substitute when it comes
10:56:17 down this to this issue.
10:56:19 My thing is I don't like playing games.
10:56:21 I want to be very clear about it.
10:56:23 And I said it last week when you come before this
10:56:25 council, I have a right to question any contract, and
10:56:28 I have a rate to ask for information.
10:56:30 And I expect that information to be provided.
10:56:32 If you want my support.
10:56:34 So I just want it very clear on that issue again.
10:56:36 That's where I am.
10:56:37 I can't control nobody else's vote.
10:56:39 I have one vote.
10:56:40 But every time you come before this council, I am
10:56:43 going to raise that question or raise that issue and
10:56:45 will ask it.
10:56:47 That's the motion on the floor.
10:56:48 If there are no other questions -- yes.
10:56:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do we have a clarification?
10:56:52 You have three items before you.
10:56:54 You have number 71, number 70, and number 8, in that
10:56:59 Was the maker of the motion to approve all three?
10:57:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
10:57:02 >>GWEN MILLER: All three.
10:57:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That was the motion.
10:57:06 You do have the resolution?
10:57:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There are three separate items and
10:57:10 each one has a resolution attached to it.
10:57:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In order to clarify, why don't we
10:57:22 move them one at a time?
10:57:24 It ain't going to take but another 15 seconds.
10:57:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We are not speaking again.
10:57:31 We are moving, not speaking.
10:57:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move the same thing.
10:57:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Don't need to do that.
10:57:36 If you want, you are recommending we vote
10:57:40 Read them?
10:57:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Read them and vote them all in --
10:57:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Don't have to read them.
10:57:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We have been talking on this
10:57:49 subject matter for 45 minutes and the public is saying
10:57:51 what are they doing?
10:57:53 8, 71 and 70 doesn't mean anything to the public.
10:58:07 >>GWEN MILLER: I move --
10:58:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Excuse me, madam -- excuse me, I'm
10:58:11 chairing the meeting.
10:58:13 What I would like for clarity sulk so everyone
10:58:15 understands, item 71 we just read the title of that.
10:58:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You are not required --
10:58:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to do that because Mr. Miranda
10:58:24 saying there's confusion.
10:58:25 I want to make sure it's clear.
10:58:27 Again, I -- listen, I want everybody to be clear.
10:58:32 Next year you can vote for another Chairman but this
10:58:35 year I'm the chairman and I'm asking the title be
10:58:38 Do you want to read 71?
10:58:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move 71, an approval of finance and
10:58:43 construction agreement by and between the City of
10:58:45 Tampa and the Tampa Museum of Art, Inc., and the Tampa
10:58:48 Museum of Art foundation, Inc., relative to the
10:58:51 financing of the construction of the new art museum
10:58:54 and the role of these respective parties in connection
10:58:56 with a construction of a new art museum authorizing
10:59:00 the execution thereof by the mayor of the city of
10:59:03 Tampa, Florida.
10:59:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder on 70 and
10:59:07 councilwoman Miller on number 8.
10:59:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 70, move a resolution
10:59:16 authorizing an amendment to agreement between the City
10:59:18 of Tampa and Skanska USA Building, Inc., in the amount
10:59:22 of $37,197,860 for construction services relating to
10:59:30 contract 7-C-16, PW 7510 Curtis Hixon waterfront park
10:59:35 and Tampa Museum of Art authorizing the mayor to
10:59:38 execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Tampa.
10:59:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 8.
10:59:45 Resolution making certain changes in the budget of the
10:59:47 City of Tampa for the fiscal year ending September 30,
10:59:49 2008, approving the transfer, reallocation and
10:59:53 appropriation of $21,979,957, within the 2001A
11:00:00 Community Investment Tax Bond Fund and the Capital
11:00:02 Improvement Project Fund to other accounts within said
11:00:06 funds for Curtis Hixon park and the Tampa Museum of
11:00:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So we are all clear. All in favor of
11:00:13 the said motion say Aye.
11:00:16 Moved and ordered.
11:00:17 So legally, attorney, everything is in order, right?
11:00:25 >>> Yes.
11:00:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: As a former staff member of the
11:00:27 Tampa Museum of Art, I recognize there are people in
11:00:29 the audience who have worked for over two decades to
11:00:32 achieve this and I want to congratulate them for all
11:00:34 their hard work.
11:00:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:00:38 [ Applause ]
11:00:43 Thank you, Mr. Daignault and all those who worked so
11:00:46 very hard on that.
11:00:47 This is a long-awaited project and we congratulate the
11:00:51 mayor and her entire administration on this project.
11:00:54 10:30, time certain.
11:00:56 It's now 11:00.
11:00:57 So Mr. Smith.
11:01:00 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:01:02 Thank you.
11:01:03 And I was remiss in not congratulating the chair on
11:01:06 his election.
11:01:07 I look forward to very expeditious meetings.
11:01:11 I'm sure we will.
11:01:12 Let me start by saying our goal with regard to the
11:01:15 WMBE ordinances, may we select folks --
11:01:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This is item number 87?
11:01:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are going to deal with the WMBE and
11:01:56 then TECO.
11:02:07 What I will do is give you a brief summary of what it
11:02:09 is we are recommending for your favorable
11:02:11 consideration this morning for a first reading.
11:02:13 I will have COLLETTE assist you with some of the
11:02:22 standard that are applicable to your deliberations.
11:02:24 I know you have people who are here who wish to speak
11:02:27 to this issue.
11:02:28 So I will try to keep my comments brief so you
11:02:31 understand what's before you and at the same time
11:02:33 people who wish to be heard have an opportunity to do
11:02:37 As you realize, what we have done with the most recent
11:02:40 version that was sent to you is we have added back in
11:02:45 the WMBE component that had been removed.
11:02:48 The reason we have added it back in is we think we
11:02:51 have provided a sufficient condition precedent for its
11:02:57 effectiveness so that we will not have a problem with
11:03:00 its legality or its enforceability.
11:03:02 I will also tell you that this requirement was
11:03:06 something that I did.
11:03:07 We exculpate her from any liability on board although
11:03:14 I think she's now on board as well, but this was
11:03:17 something that's my decision, she has no liability if
11:03:19 we have any issues with it, which I don't think we
11:03:21 will because I wouldn't be recommending it if we
11:03:28 What we have done is we have the SBE component that
11:03:31 exists and has been modified, we have added a
11:03:33 subcontract for SPEs.
11:03:35 On the WMBE component we have made it absolutely clear
11:03:38 that the WMBE provisions come in to play when we have
11:03:42 a showing of discrimination based on -- with a strong
11:03:46 basis in evidence that will establish that the city
11:03:50 has a compelling interest to use race and gender
11:03:53 conscious means to accomplish its goals.
11:03:56 Just to refresh your recollection, as you recall, the
11:04:00 disparity study that preceded this did not find the
11:04:05 disparity in subcontracting.
11:04:06 We will be gathering the information with regard to
11:04:08 the subcontracting to continue to evaluate that.
11:04:11 One of the predicate facts I put in the ordinance is
11:04:14 that that result may be a result of our race and
11:04:20 gender conscious program.
11:04:22 We had to sunset it.
11:04:23 We didn't find disparity in subcontracting so we can't
11:04:29 have a mandatory subcontracting goal.
11:04:31 But what that was a result of was a result of our race
11:04:37 and gender conscious basis, and it reemerges, we are
11:04:42 going to implement that program immediately.
11:04:44 So we have established, I believe, a program that is
11:04:47 imminently enforceable that does the most we can to
11:04:49 try to encourage a diverse racially, ethnically and
11:04:54 gender-balanced workforce.
11:04:57 I have talked with many people in the community, as
11:04:59 well as our council members.
11:05:01 I share your frustration with the limitations on what
11:05:04 we can do.
11:05:05 Unfortunately, those limitations are a product of the
11:05:09 current status of the law.
11:05:10 And to help you understand that just a little better
11:05:13 before we hear public comment I would like to have
11:05:15 Colette Holt speak to you.
11:05:19 I think I mentioned last time her father was a civil
11:05:22 rights lawyer back in the 60s when it took a lot of
11:05:24 courage because you may have been risking your life to
11:05:26 do things like that in the 60s.
11:05:28 He was very active, represented many people.
11:05:31 I'm sure irritated a lot of people because of that.
11:05:34 But fortunately because of men like that we have had
11:05:36 at least the modicum of progress we have had.
11:05:41 She brings a passion and commitment to this program
11:05:44 but a very thorough understanding of the law.
11:05:46 She has litigated many of these cases.
11:05:48 She was involved with the Denver case.
11:05:51 I've never found anybody that knows this area of law
11:05:54 And we are very fortunate to have her working with us.
11:05:58 Thank you.
11:06:01 >>> Good morning.
11:06:03 Thank you so much for having me.
11:06:04 I'm sorry my dad has gone on.
11:06:06 He would have enjoyed that.
11:06:08 And David said represented the black panthers in
11:06:11 Chicago back in the 60s and the 70s.
11:06:14 At least I come from a long tradition of folks trying
11:06:16 to make a difference.
11:06:17 As David said, it is difficult, this is a very
11:06:20 contentious and litigious area of the law.
11:06:25 Courts are increasingly hostile to affirmative action
11:06:28 programs on the basis of race and gender, and as you
11:06:30 know, many, many, many local programs have been struck
11:06:33 down in fact until the concrete works case, which the
11:06:37 city attorney just mentioned which was against the
11:06:39 city and county of Denver, on virtually every
11:06:41 affirmative action program in the country that has
11:06:43 been challenged has in fact failed.
11:06:46 I'm happy to say I was part of the trial team there
11:06:48 that began to turn this situation around.
11:06:50 I think we now, in the intervening years have a much
11:06:54 better idea what the courts will require in order to
11:06:56 have an enforceable, effective WMBE program.
11:07:01 And some of those cases are relatively recent.
11:07:04 As recent as January of 2007 when we won the case for
11:07:08 the state of Illinois, where their disadvantaged
11:07:12 business program was challenged and we got additional
11:07:14 guidance about what types of evidence will permit an
11:07:20 agency to apply race and gender based remedies.
11:07:23 That said, as David noted the legal basis is a strong
11:07:27 basis in evidence, established primarily by
11:07:30 statistical evidence of discrimination, as well as
11:07:33 anecdotal evidence to buttress the statistical
11:07:37 That also means, however, that the remedies that an
11:07:39 agency such as the City of Tampa might adopt must be,
11:07:43 quote-unquote, narrowly tailored to the evidence that
11:07:45 you have.
11:07:46 The disparity studies, third generation disparity
11:07:50 study that you did, did not find any disparities in
11:07:53 the city's construction subcontracting.
11:07:56 It didn't really look at disparities in subcontracting
11:07:59 in other areas.
11:08:01 It did find some disparities for prime contractors, in
11:08:06 contracts under $500,000.
11:08:07 Study didn't look at its larger contracts.
11:08:09 So what you really have now is a situation where the
11:08:13 results of your own program are now used as a basis
11:08:16 for now permitting you to go forward.
11:08:18 This is an unfortunate legal result, but I think that
11:08:22 it's pretty clear that that's what the courts would
11:08:24 say, but the evidence the city relayed upon, there is
11:08:30 just not a basis at the moment to continue to use race
11:08:33 and gender subcontracting goals.
11:08:36 So that said, the next step that the city has had to
11:08:41 consider is, what can we do now, what can we do in the
11:08:45 interim, while we examine more evidence and try to
11:08:48 move forward.
11:08:49 Small local business component that I helped to draft,
11:08:52 I think, is the most aggressive stance that you can
11:08:56 take at the moment and it has two important pieces
11:08:58 that I would like to highlight.
11:08:59 There's a lot in there that I think from the
11:09:01 standpoint of a lawyer who defends these cases, and
11:09:04 helps agencies administer programs, there are two
11:09:07 things to focus on.
11:09:08 The first one is that the SLBE program contains
11:09:14 remedies for prim contractors.
11:09:16 It allows for set-asides, contracts under a certain
11:09:19 size, forbidding, or for proposals, solely by
11:09:25 certified firms.
11:09:26 Provides for possible credits, preference points,
11:09:32 And these are remedies that are designed primarily to
11:09:35 assist prime contractors.
11:09:37 And the reason I stress that is because regardless of
11:09:40 the qualities of study that you have, and the quality
11:09:43 of the evidence that you have, it's my judgment at
11:09:45 this point that the federal courts are unlikely to let
11:09:49 any agency have a race and gender base set aside.
11:09:53 I use it in the general sense, not by lay people, and
11:09:58 the set -- aside means a prohibition on the ability to
11:10:01 set a bid proposal for qualifications.
11:10:03 It doesn't mean a subcontracting goal.
11:10:05 It doesn't mean outreach.
11:10:07 It means a set-aside.
11:10:08 And everyone under the best evidence at this point the
11:10:12 courts are going to be very reluctant to let anybody
11:10:15 actually adopt set-asides.
11:10:18 Case in point is the federal DBE program.
11:10:21 We have very successful in removing that.
11:10:25 We want every single challenge to the program and
11:10:30 challenge to the Constitutional of the regulation but
11:10:33 even the DBE regulations say that you cannot use
11:10:37 So I think it's important to recognize that the best
11:10:41 contract for Plame really involves things like
11:10:47 set-asides and bid processes that your contract does
11:10:51 embody on a race and gender basis and that would be
11:10:54 true regardless of whether you had evidence of
11:10:56 discrimination against subcontractors and even
11:10:58 evidence of discrimination against subprime
11:11:02 That's the first thing.
11:11:03 Solid remedies for prime.
11:11:05 The second appointed is data collections.
11:11:07 This is kind of boring to people and not exciting and
11:11:11 doesn't engage people's passions.
11:11:13 But one of the major problems that many agencies have,
11:11:16 the City of Tampa was hardly unique in this regard, is
11:11:20 collecting adequate contracting information,
11:11:23 particularly about noncertified subcontractors and
11:11:30 My understanding is when the disparity study was
11:11:32 underway that that evidence was not available to the
11:11:35 There are ways to go back and reconstruct that.
11:11:38 But that hasn't been done.
11:11:39 And so going forward, this is really important.
11:11:43 The current draft requires that bidders tell the city
11:11:47 who they solicited, and who they are going to use on a
11:11:50 race and gender neutral basis.
11:11:52 So that's all subcontractors, all suppliers, certified
11:11:55 and noncertified.
11:11:56 And this is key to any future evidence gathering that
11:11:59 you want to undertake, and any new disparity studies
11:12:02 that you want to do.
11:12:04 Also note that in the short term, this allows the city
11:12:08 to monitor its own behavior and the behavior of its
11:12:11 prime contractors, in a much more realtime basis.
11:12:16 I was very pleased when I got the very first draft I
11:12:19 saw to see that those data collection provisions are
11:12:22 in there.
11:12:23 They are almost always missing.
11:12:24 People don't pay attention to it.
11:12:26 And routinely then when the consultants show up, or
11:12:30 key word to be sued, the lawyers show up and we say,
11:12:32 where is this evidence?
11:12:33 You don't have it.
11:12:34 So this is a very cutting edge thing that you are
11:12:36 doing, and it doesn't sound as exciting, but from the
11:12:39 standpoint of defending a future program, it really is
11:12:43 Let me just close by saying something what you might
11:12:46 want to think about in the long-term.
11:12:48 Certainly it's evaluating your own contracting
11:12:51 But the other thing I would urge you to consider is
11:12:54 new types of evidence that the courts have allowed us
11:12:56 to put on successfully in the last couple of years
11:13:00 that speak to the question, what would happen in the
11:13:03 absence of an affirmative action remedy?
11:13:05 So we have been very successful in using, for example,
11:13:08 evidence about discrimination against minorities and
11:13:11 women in the market for commercial construction loans.
11:13:15 And we use the federal reserve database, and the
11:13:18 judges have been very impressed with that type of
11:13:21 For example in, Denver we were able to demonstrate
11:13:24 that black-owned firmed confirmed to similarly
11:13:28 situated white owned construction firms were less
11:13:30 likely to be granted a loan, and when they did get a
11:13:33 loan, they paid more for it.
11:13:35 Well, that's the type of evidence that demonstrates
11:13:38 that but for your active affirmative intervention, in
11:13:41 the marketplace, you are going to be a passive
11:13:45 participant in that type of discrimination.
11:13:46 And I think if you talked to minority and women firms,
11:13:49 you will hear that the inability to access credit, as
11:13:52 well as bonding, which is really a form of credit, are
11:13:56 major impediments to their doing business with the
11:13:58 city, doing business about the city's primes and their
11:14:01 ability to grow, create jobs, and support their
11:14:05 You will also need to take a look long-term at the
11:14:07 effects of your small local business enter praise
11:14:09 program, who has been able to participate, have the
11:14:13 firms grow, develop some performance measures.
11:14:16 I think that's very important.
11:14:17 You will also get an opportunity in the future to
11:14:19 review the ordinance itself.
11:14:22 What I have right now in the latest draft is kind of a
11:14:25 trigger mechanism that is A, then B, and probably at
11:14:30 that point up want to review what types of remedies
11:14:32 you want.
11:14:33 There may be some additional things you want to do.
11:14:35 There may be some additional judicial guidance by that
11:14:38 And then fine-tune the current draft as you go
11:14:42 So I think that's it from my standpoint.
11:14:46 I don't know if you have any questions.
11:14:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:14:49 Any questions from council?
11:14:51 That you know again.
11:14:51 Of course, we talked several times by phone.
11:14:54 And Mr. Smith, I guess I have several questions of
11:15:01 concern in regard to this.
11:15:02 And unfortunately, council, I don't know, I don't
11:15:05 think we should take any action today, because I have
11:15:09 not fully digested.
11:15:11 I have read it but haven't fully digested.
11:15:15 Just looking at it, moving to an SLBE, the local, when
11:15:20 we don't have a local precedence.
11:15:21 I'm trying to figure out what was the rationale for
11:15:24 I know Miami has something similar to that but I'm not
11:15:28 understanding why we are including the SLB.
11:15:31 >>DAVID SMITH: let me let COLLETTE respond to that.
11:15:39 >> I guess I'll take credit or responsibility or blame
11:15:43 for that one.
11:15:43 Really my thinking was this.
11:15:44 Location and size are not what the lawyers call
11:15:47 suspect classifications.
11:15:49 Race certainly is.
11:15:50 Gender probably is.
11:15:52 But the location of the firm and the size are simply
11:15:55 not subject to the Constitutional strictures that a
11:15:59 race and gender conscious program would be.
11:16:01 My assumption was that part of what the City of Tampa
11:16:04 wants to do with its program is to promote local
11:16:08 economic development and support local businesses.
11:16:12 So you don't need a study to do that, you don't need
11:16:17 additional evidence to do that because the legal test
11:16:19 is not strict Constitutional scrutiny as it is for
11:16:23 race based program but its rational basis scrutiny
11:16:26 which pretty much means as long as the legislature had
11:16:28 some thought in its head as to why it did it, that
11:16:32 will be defensible.
11:16:33 So given that my assumption was that that was your
11:16:37 overall goal, promote Tampa, promote this area,
11:16:40 promote local businesses, create jobs in your
11:16:42 So what you wanted to do was limit the program to
11:16:45 firms that were in your local market area.
11:16:49 And the definition of local market area pretty much
11:16:51 follows what you use before in your existing program,
11:16:54 and so we stuck with it.
11:16:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Follow-up to Mr. Smith.
11:17:00 >>DAVID SMITH: There is a charter component that you
11:17:03 have heard about, and I want to make sure you
11:17:05 understand how we got to where we are.
11:17:06 The reason I believe the SLBE program is consistent
11:17:10 with our charter, if you look at section 8.04, it
11:17:14 seems to indicate that the only way we can award a
11:17:18 contract is to the lowest bid.
11:17:21 But what it does say, in the very beginning, is the
11:17:25 competitive procurement methods to the maximum extent
11:17:29 practicable shall be as provided by ordinance.
11:17:32 This is an ordinance.
11:17:34 So what I have done, when you have a chance to go
11:17:37 through the ordinance, you will recognize that part of
11:17:39 the predicate facts are, we are attempting to
11:17:41 encourage the development and growth of small
11:17:44 businesses, local in particular, because they will
11:17:47 tend to compete for city contracts.
11:17:50 So our rationale is that this is a competitive
11:17:53 procurement method, and we are allowed to be a little
11:17:57 more aggressive in this arena, because we do have a
11:18:00 disparity in regard to Plame contracts.
11:18:02 So this is to bootstrap those arguments an effort by
11:18:07 us, although SLBs are race and gender neutral
11:18:14 approach, there tends to be generally speaking a
11:18:15 benefit to women and minority owned firms when you
11:18:18 benefit small business enterprises.
11:18:20 It's not a uniform correlation but there tends to be
11:18:23 that benefit.
11:18:24 So that's why we don't have a complete local
11:18:28 preference analysis for you, but we think in this
11:18:30 contract we are provided a little bit more leverage.
11:18:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me follow up with a couple more
11:18:39 There seems to be nor normal requirement for the
11:18:42 opportunity advisory committee.
11:18:43 You know, we have put that language in there.
11:18:45 It's not in there now.
11:18:47 It's removed.
11:18:49 We put the requirement.
11:18:52 >> Do you recall which section we were referring to?
11:18:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Not right offhand.
11:18:56 >>DAVID SMITH: It was the BOAA, I believe was the
11:19:02 We kept in the there.
11:19:08 The SLB committee --
11:19:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The language in the original one we
11:19:20 drafted was section 26.5-93, advisory committee, A, B
11:19:27 and C.
11:19:28 That was included in there.
11:19:29 And I don't see that in the current document.
11:19:40 >>DAVID SMITH: We did read some of these provisions.
11:19:42 I can tell you it was not our intent to take that out.
11:19:44 So I'm a little surprised.
11:19:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We need to go back and take a look at
11:19:49 >>DAVID SMITH: It is in the definition section, page
11:19:52 9, equal opportunity advisory committee, and described
11:19:56 what it is, a task force of 16 members, nine mayoral.
11:20:02 And --
11:20:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, what happened was, I submitted
11:20:09 some recommended changes over to you.
11:20:11 So maybe that's where it got lost at.
11:20:13 So what I suggest is you go back or I'll provide you
11:20:16 my copy and Tau a look at that and so we have that
11:20:20 >>DAVID SMITH: We'll do a global on BOAC because I see
11:20:26 it shows up on page 12 and a couple of other places.
11:20:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Also I see no requirement of a report
11:20:33 to City Council.
11:20:33 Let me just state, there seems to be -- there's no
11:20:40 codified requirement for gathering the data necessary
11:20:42 to meet the test or what's required that there is no
11:20:48 trigger, there is no time line for the data and no
11:20:51 analysis, there's no defined period for which the data
11:20:54 must be analyzed, and, I mean, that's not in this
11:20:59 Do you understand what I'm saying?
11:21:01 >>DAVID SMITH: I do.
11:21:02 And I point out, I realize this has been renumbered.
11:21:04 But 26.5-191-D, it says the manager shall provide
11:21:09 semiannual reports to City Council with respect to the
11:21:12 outreach efforts described above and the annual goals,
11:21:16 project goals, and bid preference contract.
11:21:19 Equal business opportunity advisory committee shall be
11:21:21 delivered copies of any and all reports prepared for
11:21:25 delivery to the City Council as provided here, and the
11:21:27 manager and the SBE committee with a member shall meet
11:21:31 with the EBOAC at least semiannually for remedies --
11:21:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What section is that?
11:21:40 >>> 26.5-191.
11:21:43 It should be on approximately page 32 or 33 of your
11:21:48 33 of mine.
11:21:51 And the issue with respect to the data, while you are
11:21:54 will go for that, is that we use the general
11:21:58 characterization of the requirement of the data.
11:22:01 That is that it provided substantial basis and
11:22:04 evidence to establish discrimination.
11:22:05 And partly we are doing that because if you provide an
11:22:08 elaboration in the ordinance, in case law interprets
11:22:13 differently, we have problems.
11:22:14 So we are leaving that to the manual and to our expert
11:22:16 advice as to the type of data.
11:22:18 But we are requiring that bidders provide us all of
11:22:22 the information.
11:22:24 That's what Ms. Holt was referring to.
11:22:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If it not in the ordinance, you know
11:22:31 there's no trigger mechanism, there's no -- right now,
11:22:35 I have been here a year.
11:22:36 You all everybody trying to collect data for a year,
11:22:38 two years now.
11:22:39 You still don't have it.
11:22:40 So that's my problem.
11:22:41 The ordinance.
11:22:42 Because when you read ahead it says stand by, WMBE.
11:22:49 So my thinking is this is going to mean nothing, if
11:22:53 there's no time line, no trigger for this to go into
11:22:58 You have got to have something in there, where the
11:23:01 data is collected and you are able to analyze the data
11:23:03 that forces this into action and you don't have that
11:23:08 in here.
11:23:08 >>> That's what the annual reports are intended to do,
11:23:11 come to this body with that data and with the analysis
11:23:14 and with recommendations that that data and analysis
11:23:17 So that when we have that data and analysis that shows
11:23:21 discrimination, we trigger the application, and you
11:23:24 have an opportunity to discuss any additional,
11:23:28 narrowly tailoring you want to engage in.
11:23:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The problem is, though, is the
11:23:35 commitment to gather the data and to analyze the data
11:23:37 and to make a report to this council.
11:23:39 Now I still say, I have been here a year.
11:23:42 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes, sir, there is.
11:23:45 There is a -- you are correct, it is difficult that
11:23:50 part of what we are doing here is we are making it an
11:23:54 obligation of doing business with the city to provide
11:23:57 us data.
11:23:59 And as COLLETTE indicated data that is literally
11:24:04 cutting edge in terms of the amount of information you
11:24:06 must provide us so that we will have everything we
11:24:09 need in terms of the database to analyze it and
11:24:13 determine where and what kind of discrimination we
11:24:16 have, and therefore what types of remedies we need to
11:24:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Who is going to analyze it?
11:24:22 >>> It's going to be Gregory Hart's development area.
11:24:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chairman, you have been
11:24:31 outstanding in your promotion of this.
11:24:34 And to support it, what I would like to do is request
11:24:37 a report, a time line, at our next council meeting on
11:24:40 the 17th, a time line of when this data will be
11:24:46 collected, when we will have the results, when we'll
11:24:48 be able to do something with it.
11:24:50 And I want to make sure that our budget challenges in
11:24:53 this coming year don't mean that we backed down on the
11:24:58 I feel that -- we have moved like a snail and it's
11:25:02 been very frustrating.
11:25:05 And welcome to Tampa.
11:25:06 You're smart.
11:25:06 You're energetic and we need your help.
11:25:08 We need you to come to City Council very forthrightly
11:25:13 and tell us what we need to make this happen, because
11:25:15 some of us are growing old trying to get this going.
11:25:19 So I really expect you to be very forthcoming with us.
11:25:22 >>> I certainly always try to be.
11:25:25 I want to make an observation about data collection.
11:25:28 Because I think it's important to distinguish between
11:25:30 different types of data.
11:25:32 And there's at least three kinds that you are looking
11:25:35 to correct.
11:25:35 The first one is, what has the utilization been on
11:25:40 City of Tampa prime contracts, by minority and women
11:25:44 firms, and on City of Tampa contracts with prime
11:25:48 contractors with minority and women subcontractors.
11:25:50 So that's the first type of data.
11:25:52 Let's call that city utilization data.
11:25:54 And that's normally what the consultants would call
11:25:58 The second type of data you want to collect, and this
11:26:00 is what the ordinance is doing something that is
11:26:02 highly unusual, is you want to find out who the prime
11:26:05 contractors solicit.
11:26:07 That's not utilization data.
11:26:09 Because it's going to include firms that weren't
11:26:11 actually used by primes.
11:26:13 But you are looking for solicitation data.
11:26:16 I don't need two hands to count the number of agencies
11:26:19 across the country that are looking at that kind of
11:26:22 data so I really think you ought to at least recognize
11:26:24 that what you are doing there really is very cutting
11:26:27 But it's very important in trying to figure out
11:26:29 whether or not prime contractors are discriminating on
11:26:32 the basis of who then solicit.
11:26:34 Because rate now all anybody is asking who S who they
11:26:37 use so that's the second kind of solicitation data.
11:26:40 The third kind is a broader database.
11:26:42 It's going to look at the economy, of the Tampa
11:26:46 market, and ask what are the experiences of minority
11:26:49 and women firms economywise?
11:26:52 That data, frankly, is not your data.
11:26:55 That's data that you get from the census, that you get
11:26:58 from the federal reserve, and that's not data that Mr.
11:27:01 Hart's office is going to be able to analyze anyway.
11:27:03 But it's that last data component that's allowed us to
11:27:07 extend the program.
11:27:08 So one of the things I want to be sure I'm clear about
11:27:10 is that the legal standard is not as preferential as I
11:27:15 think people are discussing it.
11:27:16 We talk about the city analyzing its data and it needs
11:27:19 to do that.
11:27:20 But the way we have won cases is by looking beyond
11:27:23 what you do.
11:27:25 Your current disparity study didn't look beyond what
11:27:27 you do.
11:27:28 But in fact that's what seems to work.
11:27:30 Because one of the questions that's going to be
11:27:31 answered, what happens in the absence of an
11:27:34 affirmative action remedy?
11:27:36 The city has been running a program, and I'm sure
11:27:39 various people have different ideas about how
11:27:40 effective it was.
11:27:41 But you have been running one for quite some time.
11:27:44 So it's not a surprise to me that you didn't find
11:27:47 disparities in your own activities.
11:27:49 Because you have been running an affirmative action
11:27:52 It's like saying that you have hypertension and you
11:27:55 take your medicine and you exercise and your blood
11:27:59 pressure looks normal, but you still have
11:28:02 So the remedy will mask the problem.
11:28:05 Now, when you go to an SLB program you are not going
11:28:08 to have a race and gender based activity anymore
11:28:11 especially for subs so you are going to see what
11:28:14 But that's only part of the story.
11:28:16 And you are not going to be able to do the overall
11:28:18 economy-wide analysis every year because frankly there
11:28:21 isn't going to be any Newt data.
11:28:23 The census data only comes out every five years.
11:28:25 Federal reserve only does it every five years.
11:28:28 So it's not the case that every year you are going to
11:28:30 have a whole bunch of new information.
11:28:32 You will have your own utilization data over the
11:28:34 course of the next few years, you will have
11:28:36 solicitation data.
11:28:36 And you can use economy wide data.
11:28:39 But it's important to keep those things separate
11:28:41 because they create a mosaic and a picture which is
11:28:43 what the federal courts are going to want to use.
11:28:45 So the frustration about data collection I'm assuming
11:28:48 is related to your own utilization data, not
11:28:50 solicitation data which you haven't asked for, and not
11:28:53 economy-wide data which nobody tried to go get for you
11:28:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:29:00 Councilwoman Mulhern.
11:29:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, I was out of the room and
11:29:05 didn't hear your last name.
11:29:06 >>> I'm sorry.
11:29:08 Colette Holt.
11:29:09 >>> I was teasing David because you were coming from
11:29:12 the University of Chicago.
11:29:14 >>> And the law of economics school?
11:29:16 Yes, indeed.
11:29:18 That's the program that taught me tort.
11:29:20 But I think what you were just speaking about, you are
11:29:23 going way beyond.
11:29:25 We have been talking about this, this council for
11:29:28 I don't know.
11:29:32 Chairman Scott and I have been here a year.
11:29:33 Linda has been here.
11:29:34 These two have been here.
11:29:39 >>> Long time.
11:29:40 >>MARY MULHERN: But I think we are not worried about
11:29:43 census, economic data.
11:29:45 We are not worried about if we are comparing it to the
11:29:47 actual, you know, population out there.
11:29:50 We are worried about getting a basic report, not
11:29:54 necessarily who these contractors are soliciting.
11:29:58 How about if they just tell us, in the past year, how
11:30:02 many small business, women and minority businesses
11:30:08 that they have used? We are not asking for really
11:30:11 serious data systems.
11:30:13 And I worked with data for years.
11:30:16 I know about this.
11:30:17 It's basic software.
11:30:20 We all use software systems.
11:30:21 We use Excel, the basic one, right?
11:30:24 If you don't have a good database system you just use
11:30:35 This isn't my frustration with you.
11:30:37 I appreciate your expertise in this.
11:30:39 But we really needed you a year ago before this
11:30:42 process because we have been through a lot of this
11:30:44 And we are bringing -- you know, you are being brought
11:30:47 in at the end of the process with your great advice
11:30:52 and expertise, when we have already stumbled our way
11:30:57 through a lot of this work.
11:30:58 And Chairman Scott has already written.
11:31:08 Did you work on the county?
11:31:09 So you are not starting from scratch, and we are not
11:31:13 starting from scratch.
11:31:14 And I think -- and your goals are maybe even bigger
11:31:16 than what we need.
11:31:18 And I have to tell you, David Smith worries about what
11:31:22 happens in court.
11:31:23 We worry about who gets hired.
11:31:27 We are not worried so much about the -- that's not our
11:31:35 So they are trying to predict -- I mean, I have a
11:31:38 question for David.
11:31:39 How many times have we again sued for discrimination?
11:31:44 >>DAVID SMITH: Our program expired self years ago and
11:31:49 let me explain.
11:31:50 >> We heard expired.
11:31:52 Were we ever sued?
11:31:54 >>> Not since I have been here but we have not had a
11:31:56 program since I have been here.
11:31:57 But when what lawyers do is we try to make sure you
11:32:01 act consistent with the law, because if you do not,
11:32:03 not only does the city have potential liability, you
11:32:05 may personally.
11:32:06 But let me also make sure you are clear on one thing.
11:32:09 What you are hearing from Mrs. HOLT is the same thing
11:32:14 I have been telling you for the last two years
11:32:16 probably before you were here.
11:32:17 Her comment is, use an active aggressive SBE program,
11:32:21 get the data.
11:32:22 When you have the data that supports an aggressive
11:32:24 race and gender conscious program, implement it.
11:32:28 So what you are hearing, perhaps in a more
11:32:30 sophisticated way, with someone who dealt with these
11:32:33 issues in litigation is what I have been telling you
11:32:35 is what you should be doing.
11:32:36 Now, we can debate this another year if you want to.
11:32:39 The recommendation is clear.
11:32:41 Get an ordinance.
11:32:42 Get it in effect.
11:32:43 Get the data.
11:32:43 And get moving.
11:32:44 >>MARY MULHERN: We have been trying to get an
11:32:49 And the reality is now that we have more legal advice,
11:32:52 and I can't even -- I cannot keep these ordinances
11:33:00 And Chairman Scott has so much advice and so many
11:33:04 changes he's asked for, we don't know if they are in
11:33:07 there or not.
11:33:08 We have been debating this stuff for a year.
11:33:11 So I started reading what I thought was the latest
11:33:16 draft of the ordinance, and I have my yellow marker
11:33:20 out already.
11:33:21 Because I have questions about it.
11:33:22 I asked you to get this to us at least two weeks ahead
11:33:25 of time and we got it maybe a week ahead of time with
11:33:29 everything else on this agenda today.
11:33:31 So I don't think we are ready to move on this.
11:33:34 Are we?
11:33:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No, no.
11:33:35 >>MARY MULHERN: And I did want to say -- my problem
11:33:39 with this data thing is what I said before to Greg.
11:33:43 You know, this is not rocket science.
11:33:46 I could come to your office and I could go through
11:33:49 your files and I could figure it out.
11:33:51 I mean, it's a matter of doing that work and getting
11:33:57 it on data entry.
11:33:59 So we should be able to get that data in there.
11:34:07 >>> Colette Holt: I my understanding the city is in
11:34:10 the process of implementing a data collection system.
11:34:14 I have seen some proposals and some documents that
11:34:16 talk about what data you are going to need.
11:34:17 (Bell sounds).
11:34:19 We talked about what data I suggest that you collect,
11:34:24 going forward, and looking back.
11:34:25 So that's my understanding, is that you are in fact
11:34:29 collecting now the Plame contract data.
11:34:32 You are collecting the subcontract data on WMBEs and
11:34:35 you will be collecting the subcontract data on
11:34:37 non-WMBEs which is the hard part which quite
11:34:43 candidly is not so easy to go back into somebody's
11:34:46 office and reconstruct because if you didn't ask for
11:34:48 it when the Democrat was completed you can't go back
11:34:51 now and --
11:34:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me -- if you figure out who the
11:34:56 MBEs are, all the other ones that --
11:35:00 >>> Yes, from the standpoint of trying to defend you
11:35:03 and have a program I need to know how that balance was
11:35:06 So yes, if you had 20% MBE subcontract participation I
11:35:11 will know that 20 but I don't know anything about the
11:35:13 other 80.
11:35:13 And remember, in the MBE program it's ratio.
11:35:17 So its enumerator over a denominator.
11:35:22 I know that 20% of the WMBEs, but I don't know
11:35:25 anything about the denominator.
11:35:27 I don't snow if it's split between the primes and the
11:35:29 subs and I don't know the split between the various
11:35:34 >> You don't know that but we do in our data.
11:35:36 >>> Not if you didn't ask for it.
11:35:38 And it's my understanding from reading the disparity
11:35:40 study that in fact the city had not asked for specific
11:35:44 non-WMBE --
11:35:47 >>MARY MULHERN: We are not at the point where we need
11:35:49 to do another study.
11:35:50 We are at the point where we need to get this thing
11:35:52 And I just want to say one more thing.
11:35:54 I think it's great.
11:35:56 One good thing as I saw the small and local
11:36:00 Because that is the economic development tool.
11:36:03 But we don't know for sure that that's going to solve
11:36:07 our discrimination problem.
11:36:10 So my feeling right now is that I'm not ready to
11:36:20 support this until I have had a chance to go through
11:36:24 it, and until Chairman Scott is happy with it.
11:36:28 >> With what?
11:36:30 >>MARY MULHERN: The ordinance.
11:36:34 >> She said she's not ready --
11:36:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Oh, no.
11:36:39 We need to move because it's 20 till.
11:36:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think what Ms. Mulhern said she's
11:36:47 not ready to move until you're happy with it.
11:36:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah.
11:36:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me go on.
11:36:56 We are definitely not going to move forward today so
11:36:58 I'm not going to say too much.
11:36:59 But I will say, and Ms. Ward and Mr. Smith's definite,
11:37:06 I have read these cases, okay?
11:37:08 Holt, excuse me.
11:37:10 Four letters.
11:37:11 Mrs. Holt.
11:37:14 I have read these cases.
11:37:15 David gave them to me a few months ago.
11:37:18 I don't know if I have read every case but I have read
11:37:21 a bunch of them.
11:37:22 I know where they are coming from.
11:37:23 I didn't go to as prestigious law school and she did
11:37:27 and I'm very impressed with her presentation.
11:37:29 In a perfect world we would have had a different study
11:37:31 and we would have had hopefully different results.
11:37:33 But unfortunately, as she stated very eloquently,
11:37:36 today, we are stuck with the study we have, which is
11:37:40 we spent a lot of time and money on, and we are stuck
11:37:43 with the results we have.
11:37:44 With that, we are limited in how we can move forward.
11:37:49 Previously, as David said, he was advocating an SBE
11:37:53 program on a short-term basis until we can accumulate
11:37:56 more data to just SBE program that I think everybody
11:37:59 would like us to see.
11:38:00 But we cannot.
11:38:01 We cannot.
11:38:03 We cannot knowingly adopt an ordinance of this type of
11:38:08 magnitude that would violate the law.
11:38:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's right?
11:38:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And David is abundantly right, we
11:38:16 set ourselves up for a 1983 action that could
11:38:18 personally subject us to personal liability
11:38:21 None of us are going to do. That he's not going to
11:38:24 let us do that and we are not going to let ourselves
11:38:26 do that.
11:38:26 This is not just your run-of-the-mill stuff.
11:38:30 These are the types of things that do get challenged
11:38:32 across the country.
11:38:33 There are people that run around the country looking
11:38:36 for these kind of things because you know what?
11:38:39 They also get attorney fees when they win.
11:38:40 With all of that said, slow down a little bit, take a
11:38:43 few weeks that they can explain to the us a little
11:38:45 more privately so we all have a better understanding.
11:38:48 If we need better reporting right now, there is a
11:38:50 reporting provision on page 33 that speaks about
11:38:55 semiannual reports to City Council, the EBOA
11:39:00 committee, but if we need to beef that up let's beef
11:39:03 it up so everybody is comfortable with it.
11:39:05 I theory direction you are going in.
11:39:07 And let me say one more thing.
11:39:08 Loy love the fact, and Mary, you will, too, if you
11:39:11 think about it a little bit, I love the fact they are
11:39:13 talking about locally owned businesses, to encourage
11:39:15 locally owned businesses.
11:39:17 Because that's something that we have been talking
11:39:21 about to try and accomplish in a different manner.
11:39:24 So now we get it rolled into here.
11:39:26 So, anyway, okay.
11:39:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to bring up the fact
11:39:33 that I made a motion.
11:39:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say as we try to bring
11:39:38 this to closure, I think, Mr. Smith, you have worked
11:39:44 hard trying to help to us move forward.
11:39:46 You are right.
11:39:46 You brought the SBE.
11:39:48 However, I have been the stickler because I know from
11:39:51 experience when you adopt just an SBE, without
11:39:55 anything there, and without a commitment from any
11:40:00 administration, and the administration which I already
11:40:03 have a commitment, that we are going to make sure that
11:40:06 whatever contracts are going to be let, that it going
11:40:10 to be looked at, and made sure they are all segments
11:40:13 of our community have opportunity to do business with
11:40:15 the city.
11:40:16 Now, most citizens have adopted an SBE, primarily,
11:40:23 most of the contract has been primarily white females,
11:40:28 So that's the issue.
11:40:29 Got to make sure that everybody benefits.
11:40:31 Not only white women, but African-Americans, Hispanic,
11:40:34 et cetera.
11:40:35 Everybody has to benefit from this whole SBE or from
11:40:40 WMBE component as far as I'm concerned from the city.
11:40:43 So that's what I have been pushing for is to make sure
11:40:45 that every citizen have the opportunity to do
11:40:47 business, and that there's a commitment from the
11:40:51 And you hit the point.
11:40:52 And that is that there needs to be a trigger and the
11:40:56 resources that's committed to this.
11:40:58 And I have not heard that yet.
11:40:59 I have not seen that yet.
11:41:02 And so I will tell you, and I said from day one,
11:41:06 Portland, Oregon, does not have a WMBE but yet at the
11:41:11 same time they have a commitment from their mayor to
11:41:13 say that this will be a key issue for my
11:41:15 administration, and they make it happen.
11:41:17 You don't need an ordinance to do what's right.
11:41:19 But it's unfortunate you have to have an ordinance,
11:41:23 and that's my position.
11:41:25 Now with that being said do we need to continue this
11:41:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If it's on for first reading today,
11:41:31 if council wishes, it's not set for public hearing, if
11:41:34 council wishes to continue it, council can do so.
11:41:39 Did you have a second to your motion?
11:41:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I made a motion that we get a time
11:41:43 frame from the administration on doing our database.
11:41:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And these items here, can you include
11:41:54 this in there?
11:41:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Certainly.
11:41:57 The question is should this be April 17th or April
11:42:01 Then May 1st.
11:42:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let set it for public hearing May
11:42:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to set this for public hearing
11:42:06 on May 1st, including the items by Chairman Scott
11:42:09 and include a time frame for data collection, and a
11:42:12 funding commitment by the administration to fund
11:42:14 whatever we need to in the next '08-09 budget to
11:42:19 follow through on that.
11:42:22 >>DAVID SMITH: Need a public hearing.
11:42:25 I think you are continuing the first reading followed
11:42:29 with a public hearing.
11:42:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It doesn't require two public
11:42:33 Normally what happens this appears on the consent
11:42:37 agenda, would be the public adoption public hearing.
11:42:40 Right now it's just set for first reading.
11:42:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So continue.
11:42:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Linda, did you get a second?
11:42:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, I think we are clarifying the
11:42:51 >>MARY MULHERN: But I'm concerned that when you ask
11:42:53 the administration for a time line, that's nothing.
11:42:58 That's some numbers they give you.
11:43:00 We need them to show us their process, how they are
11:43:07 going to gather this data.
11:43:09 If that's what you are trying to get at, how they are
11:43:12 going to give us the report of what they are doing.
11:43:14 That's what we are talking about, right?
11:43:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's really two fold, how and then
11:43:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't even know if "how" is good
11:43:26 How about if they show us some data, and in a format
11:43:33 so we know that they have begun doing this?
11:43:38 Now, I know Mrs. Holt said they are in the process of
11:43:43 data collection.
11:43:44 I don't know what that means.
11:43:45 Because if they are, then there is some data, show us
11:43:48 what you have, or how you are doing that.
11:43:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it's more show us what the
11:43:52 process is.
11:43:53 One, did you begin, or when will you begin, and when
11:43:57 will you complete this collection?
11:43:58 But, Mr. Chairman, given what Mr. Smith said about
11:44:02 this being first reading and second reading, in order
11:44:05 to move things along, I would be willing to go ahead
11:44:07 and put this on first reading knowing that second
11:44:10 reading, which I would make for May 1st, would be
11:44:13 an opportunity for us to have a public hearing, give
11:44:15 us all the opportunity to read through this, and make
11:44:18 any changes.
11:44:19 If we have to put it back on first reading we will.
11:44:21 But at least we get it going.
11:44:22 So my motion would be to put this on first reading at
11:44:25 the second hearing on May 1st.
11:44:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Clarification.
11:44:32 You had a motion on the floor, or attempted to made
11:44:37 make the motion with regard to data collection.
11:44:39 Do you wish that to address this first?
11:44:43 On first reading, settle second reading for May
11:44:47 1st, I believe it was, and then come back to that
11:44:50 issue? Or to address it --
11:44:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was going to do it all at once.
11:44:56 If it's easier for the city clerk I will do it twice.
11:44:58 My first motion would be --
11:45:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What's before you now is on for first
11:45:05 If you wish to have it come back for a public hearing,
11:45:08 on second reading, you would have the opportunity
11:45:10 again if there are things that happen between the
11:45:13 first and second reading that require changes that --
11:45:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think we can continue.
11:45:20 I don't think we need to do first reading.
11:45:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then my motion would be to continue
11:45:24 this entire discussion to May 1st, to come back
11:45:27 and have the information that I stated previously from
11:45:29 the administration.
11:45:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
11:45:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions on that?
11:45:34 Moved and seconded.
11:45:36 So moved.
11:45:37 Thank you again, Mr. Smith.
11:45:38 Thank you, Mr. Hart and Ms. Holt.
11:45:42 Thank you and have a pleasant flight back.
11:45:52 Because this was not a public hearing, do we still
11:45:55 allow the public to speak?
11:45:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No, sir.
11:45:57 That would be at the agendaed public comments earlier
11:46:00 in the meeting.
11:46:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So it wasn't a public hearing.
11:46:10 Mr. Smith, we need to deal with the TECO issue.
11:46:17 That we have the other time certain.
11:46:18 Was it 10:30 was TECO?
11:46:21 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes.
11:46:23 Essentially, what has happened at this juncture is the
11:46:25 administration has asked me to send a memorandum to
11:46:29 you withdrawing the franchise application.
11:46:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did we already take action on that?
11:46:36 >>DAVID SMITH: I think it's withdrawn.
11:46:38 But if you have it stricken, and we will try to get
11:46:41 back to you as soon as we can with it, with a revised
11:46:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to withdraw item number 97.
11:46:50 >> Second.
11:46:51 Mr. Smith, there are a number of people in the
11:46:52 community who expressed interest in this.
11:46:54 What kind of advance notice would we receive before
11:46:59 this being placed back on the agenda by the
11:47:05 We discussed perhaps May.
11:47:07 It wouldn't be prior to May, would it?
11:47:10 >>DAVID SMITH: Certainly not but we will provide you
11:47:13 advance notice of progress with regard to this, the
11:47:15 MacKay Bay and the lighting agreement so you will have
11:47:19 ample warning as will the community.
11:47:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you very much.
11:47:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, the question is now, it was a
11:47:26 continued public hearing.
11:47:27 So we have to take public comment on the withdrawing.
11:47:30 Is that act accurate?
11:47:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It would be if there were those
11:47:34 people who want to speak to the subject matter.
11:47:37 This would have been the time in that it was set for a
11:47:40 public hearing, if there was anybody who was here, if
11:47:42 they wanted to address council on this beings
11:47:46 particularly in light of now Mr. Smith's discussion,
11:47:49 if that were necessary, that they do that, they have
11:47:51 that opportunity.
11:47:52 My recommendation is if it were necessary.
11:47:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here want to address council on
11:48:00 the TECO franchise agreement, the public hearing?
11:48:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I see none.
11:48:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:48:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And there was a motion made to
11:48:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
11:48:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
11:48:16 So moved and ordered.
11:48:19 It is ten minutes of 12, council.
11:48:20 What do you all want to do?
11:48:22 Do you want to proceed with the rest of these items?
11:48:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, if I can bring to your
11:48:26 attention item number 98 a request by the petitioner's
11:48:30 representative David M. Smith for continuance to a
11:48:33 particular date.
11:48:34 On a closure public hearing.
11:48:39 And brought to council's attention earlier.
11:48:44 It's a continued public hearing.
11:48:46 If you would like to hear from petitioner or if you
11:48:48 entertain a request and then ask for public comments
11:48:50 regarding that request for a continuance.
11:48:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: This has been a request by the
11:48:55 petitioner, right?
11:48:58 Is there anything additional you want to add?
11:49:01 >> Just providing additional time to get with staff.
11:49:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here to address the council on
11:49:11 I assume not.
11:49:14 >>GWEN MILLER: I move that.
11:49:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 10 a.m.
11:49:16 (Motion carried).
11:49:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, I wish to bring to your
11:49:23 attention and council's attention that item number 91
11:49:26 is a second reading.
11:49:30 Public hearing.
11:49:30 It requires -- it appears, it may very well require a
11:49:34 full council for that.
11:49:35 I don't see a full council now but I just want to
11:49:38 bring to your attention there were three in
11:49:44 That may be something that council should remain
11:49:47 mindful of.
11:49:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Number 91.
11:49:50 Then we will continue with the other public hearings.
11:49:52 Council, it is now 8 minutes till.
11:49:54 What do you all want to do?
11:49:56 Do you want to try to get through with these?
11:49:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we should try to get
11:50:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's fine.
11:50:04 We'll move then to item 88, I believe, isn't it?
11:50:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you wish to swear in the
11:50:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
11:50:13 Everyone here who wants to address council on the sub
11:50:16 hearings, will you please stand?
11:50:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, it would be those 9:30
11:50:22 hearings, number 88 through 96?
11:50:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
11:50:35 (Oath administered by Clerk).
11:50:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I ask that all written communications
11:50:42 relative to today's hearings which have been available
11:50:43 for public inspection in City Council's office be
11:50:45 received and filed by motion at this time, please.
11:50:56 >> Moved.
11:50:57 >> Second.
11:50:57 (Motion carried).
11:50:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, have you had any ex parte
11:51:00 communications? Please disclose them prayer to the
11:51:02 Finally, ladies and gentlemen, there is a sign-up
11:51:04 Please be sure that you have signed it and you are
11:51:06 familiar with the council's policies.
11:51:08 And as a reminder, if you would, when you state your
11:51:11 name please reaffirm that you have been sworn.
11:51:13 Thank you.
11:51:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, just as a point of
11:51:17 order related to the business so folks that don't know
11:51:20 where we are headed are we going to do second readings
11:51:23 and then do a lunch break?
11:51:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are going to finish up.
11:51:28 It's hopeful we will be finished in the next hour.
11:51:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't know this appeal hearing if
11:51:35 it's going to go forward because that I understand
11:51:37 might take some time.
11:51:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is that right?
11:51:40 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
11:51:41 Yes, item number 100 is an appeal hearing.
11:51:44 I do suspect it's going to take some time.
11:51:47 So maybe a minimum of 30 minutes.
11:51:50 I would say more likely to be maybe in the
11:51:52 neighborhood of an hour.
11:51:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It might be my recommendation to take
11:51:58 the second readings, if you can, and then contemplate
11:52:01 whether you want to take lunch at that time or work
11:52:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena will not be
11:52:08 here at 2:00.
11:52:10 What about the rest of the council?
11:52:11 I was hoping to get through it all this morning and be
11:52:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: To be honest, I had an appointment
11:52:34 from 12:00 to 1:00.
11:52:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I may refresh council's
11:52:38 recollection it does say a recess for lunch shall be
11:52:41 taken at noon or close to noon as possible unless
11:52:43 waived by majority vote of council.
11:52:45 The vote will require a motion.
11:52:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Trying to get awe feel from council
11:52:51 how far they want to go here.
11:52:56 Councilman Dingfelder?
11:52:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I can do second readings.
11:52:59 And then head out.
11:53:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Second readings and then come back for
11:53:04 the appeal hearing.
11:53:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest we try to do second
11:53:08 hearing and then take up only the appeal afterwards,
11:53:11 after the break.
11:53:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You still have staff reports.
11:53:17 On your agenda as well.
11:53:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:53:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You see, we put ourselves in a box
11:53:24 by putting that 12:00 limit.
11:53:25 And telling you one thing you can't go past 12 unless
11:53:29 you have the majority of council members so I am not
11:53:31 trying to tell you what to do as chairman but come
11:53:33 noon you better take a vote.
11:53:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:53:37 Let's move.
11:53:38 We have a few minutes.
11:53:39 Let's move with the second reading.
11:53:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open.
11:53:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded to open.
11:53:50 So moved.
11:53:51 All right.
11:53:53 Anybody here from the public want to address item 88
11:53:56 on the agenda?
11:54:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
11:54:01 >> Second.
11:54:02 (Motion carried).
11:54:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move an ordinance
11:54:06 for second reading and adoption.
11:54:08 An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending
11:54:10 section 23.5-5 schedule of violations and penalties by
11:54:15 striking the word minimum from each subsection
11:54:18 creating violation class W violation and corresponding
11:54:25 fines for outdoor watering violations providing for
11:54:27 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
11:54:30 severability, providing an effective date.
11:54:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
11:54:34 89 you have got to vote and record.
11:54:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Oh, got to vote and record.
11:54:40 Thank you.
11:54:46 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously with Mulhern
11:54:49 being absent at vote.
11:54:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 89.
11:55:01 >> And Caetano.
11:55:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We are doing second reading.
11:55:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like council to know Jan Smith
11:55:13 on the streetcar board is here if anybody has any
11:55:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Ms. Smith.
11:55:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to open.
11:55:27 >> Second.
11:55:28 (Motion carried).
11:55:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here on 89?
11:55:35 Anyone from the public?
11:55:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
11:55:37 >> Second.
11:55:38 (Motion carried).
11:55:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move an ordinance for second
11:55:46 reading and adoption, an ordinance approving an
11:55:48 historic preservation property tax exemption
11:55:51 application relative to the restoration, renovation or
11:55:55 rehabilitation of certain property owned by Tomybor,
11:55:59 LLC, located at 1506 north 23rd street, Tampa,
11:56:03 Florida in the Ybor City historic district, based upon
11:56:06 certain findings, providing for notice to the property
11:56:08 appraiser of Hillsborough County, providing for
11:56:10 severability, providing for repeal of all ordinances
11:56:12 in conflict, providing an effective date.
11:56:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded by councilman
11:56:19 Record your vote.
11:56:26 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
11:56:36 >> Move to open 90.
11:56:38 >> Didn't we move to open all of them?
11:56:40 When they were sworn?
11:56:42 >> Move to open 90 through 96.
11:56:45 >> Second.
11:56:46 (Motion carried).
11:56:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and ordered. Anyone here on
11:56:49 item 90?
11:56:50 Anyone here --
11:56:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
11:56:56 >> Second.
11:56:56 (Motion carried).
11:56:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 90.
11:57:00 Move an ordinance amending ordinance 2008-14 passed
11:57:04 and ordained by the City Council City Council of the
11:57:09 City of Tampa on February 8, 2008 which approved a wet
11:57:12 zoning 4(COP-X) for 512 east Hillsborough Avenue
11:57:15 correcting a scrivener's error by correcting sections
11:57:18 3 and 6 regarding conditions, providing for
11:57:21 severability, providing an effective date.
11:57:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Vote and record.
11:57:28 Record your vote.
11:57:31 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
11:57:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here on item 91?
11:57:43 Anyone here on item 91 to address council?
11:57:45 >> Move to close.
11:57:49 >> Second.
11:57:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
11:57:52 (Motion carried).
11:57:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Are you speaking on 91?
11:57:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to reopen.
11:57:59 >>: Second.
11:58:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest if you are here to
11:58:04 speak on the item -- I want to say it twice.
11:58:07 If you don't move we are going to close and we are
11:58:08 going to keep moving, okay?
11:58:10 I need a motion to reopen.
11:58:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
11:58:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
11:58:14 (Motion carried).
11:58:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yesterday.
11:58:20 >>> David Doolittle, 2712 north Monroe street,
11:58:24 directly behind Ken's grocery.
11:58:26 I have lived here for over 22 years and I support this
11:58:29 wet zoning, conditional wet zoning.
11:58:31 I'm extremely familiar with the property in the form
11:58:33 of former business, prince grocery.
11:58:36 I and my neighbors watched along with the city the
11:58:39 deterioration of the entire property, the business and
11:58:40 the clientele.
11:58:41 We suffered the consequences of the constant presence
11:58:45 of the homeless, vagrant men and women who became the
11:58:48 main stray of prince groceries clientele.
11:58:50 The fact that prince groceries sold beer and wine has
11:58:53 very little to do with the presence of these problem
11:58:55 people or the condition of the entire property.
11:58:58 They had everything to do with the manner which the
11:59:00 owner and management of the property catered to some
11:59:02 of the individuals and did not discourage the rest
11:59:05 from maintain ago presence on the property and in the
11:59:08 immediate neighborhood.
11:59:10 For whatever reason totally failed to maintain the
11:59:13 When prince grocery closed its doors in 2004 all of
11:59:17 the problem people associated with that disappeared.
11:59:20 And they are still gone.
11:59:22 This issue is no longer about prince grocery.
11:59:26 We now have new property owners.
11:59:27 We have new convenience store.
11:59:29 King's grocery.
11:59:30 The owners spent a great Dale of time and effort to
11:59:33 clean up the property, improve the appearance of the
11:59:36 As you all know, they do not own or control the front
11:59:39 parking lot, the east side parking lot, and any
11:59:42 concerns you have about this parcel should be directed
11:59:43 to the current property owners and should not play a
11:59:46 part in this decision today.
11:59:47 The new owners of King's grocery spent a great deal of
11:59:50 time and money to open a small, clean and well-run
11:59:53 convenience store.
11:59:54 They have personally contacted and visited with many
11:59:56 of the most immediate neighbors on north Monroe street
12:00:00 and Euclid Avenue.
12:00:02 They met with our Riverside Heights association, they
12:00:07 pledged their commitment to improve the entire
12:00:08 property and to make King's grocery into an asset for
12:00:11 our community.
12:00:12 They had from the very beginning only asked for a
12:00:14 one-year conditional approval.
12:00:16 They are well aware that there are serious problems in
12:00:18 this next year associated with the sale of beer and
12:00:21 wine, or if they do not fulfill their commitment to
12:00:24 continue improving the property that they will not
12:00:25 have our support for permanent wet zoning.
12:00:28 I support this request.
12:00:30 Many of the homeowners on north Monroe street and west
12:00:33 Euclid Avenue, the two closest neighbors to the
12:00:38 property I spoke with are in support of this request.
12:00:40 The Riverside neighborhood association supports this
12:00:42 Q.and we ask that you please give them this chance.
12:00:46 Thank you.
12:00:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else to speak on item number
12:01:00 >>> My name is Mary Watson.
12:01:03 I reside at 1202 Columbus drive.
12:01:06 And I'm here for the community, from North Boulevard,
12:01:11 Amelia, on back.
12:01:13 I have been here from the beginning and I am going to
12:01:15 be here till the end.
12:01:17 If I have to come every Thursday to fight this, I
12:01:21 We are moving forward.
12:01:22 We are not going backward.
12:01:27 We have gotten rid of all boarded up buildings, all
12:01:31 old houses.
12:01:32 Our community is much better than what it was.
12:01:37 This store boarded up the windows.
12:01:39 If you care about our community, you won't allow a
12:01:45 Fix up your store.
12:01:46 Make it look presentable.
12:01:48 We have children walking.
12:01:53 We have kids going to school.
12:01:58 We have people in our neighborhood that we don't know
12:02:01 who they are.
12:02:02 We don't want this in our neighborhood.
12:02:04 Alcohol brings on problems.
12:02:08 Our neighborhood, we have a lot of elderly in that
12:02:13 We have a church right across the street where they
12:02:17 are trying to get beer and wine license. Where is
12:02:19 your respect for God?
12:02:21 Are we losing all respect?
12:02:23 That every store comes to Tampa has to have beer and
12:02:29 Isn't there other things that they can sell outside of
12:02:34 That messed up our neighborhood.
12:02:37 Take where you live at.
12:02:39 Mess up your neighborhood.
12:02:42 When you go home, you go to a quiet neighborhood.
12:02:44 Let us remain like we are.
12:02:46 We are nice and quiet.
12:02:47 If you don't think about me and the young people,
12:02:50 think about our elders.
12:02:52 Think about the people that built up the neighborhood
12:02:56 to where it is now.
12:02:57 We don't have -- I spoke with him.
12:03:02 We don't have nothing against him.
12:03:04 But we do have something against alcohol.
12:03:08 We have a store right on the corner, true.
12:03:10 We have a gas station on Boulevard, and Martin Luther
12:03:16 King. We have a store on Columbus drive and Albany.
12:03:20 We have a liquor store on Columbus drive and Howard
12:03:27 We have plenty of alcohol.
12:03:29 We don't need no more.
12:03:30 What we need is a good grocery store, meat store.
12:03:37 You want to bring it to the neighborhood?
12:03:43 We need someplace where these older women that don't
12:03:45 have transportation, that can't walk far, to catch
12:03:49 Hartline buses, to go and do their grocery shopping.
12:03:53 You will make just as much money selling meat that you
12:03:56 will alcohol.
12:04:01 Please, I'm begging you.
12:04:02 And as I said, I did it from the beginning, from my
12:04:07 community, and I will be here until the end.
12:04:12 I'm going to fight this thing.
12:04:16 I have many people coming with me but when it's time
12:04:19 to show, you don't show up.
12:04:21 But I'm standing.
12:04:22 And I'm standing for my community.
12:04:24 I'm standing for my senior citizens.
12:04:26 I'm standing for our young people to ho have to walk
12:04:31 those streets every day, and cannot confront their
12:04:35 children on their way home at that time.
12:04:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
12:04:39 Yes, ma'am, thank you.
12:04:40 Next speaker.
12:04:43 >>> Chester Roberts, 2402 Ridgewood Avenue, Ridgewood
12:04:48 And we do support this ordinance.
12:04:52 With all due respect to the lady who just spoke here,
12:04:55 what is our alternative?
12:04:57 If you guys don't approve the grocery, what is our
12:05:02 A pawn shop?
12:05:03 A gun shop?
12:05:04 Just think about that for a minute.
12:05:06 This gentleman has been at this now for over a year.
12:05:09 He's asking for a one-year conditional.
12:05:13 You all say you support small businesses.
12:05:15 I think now is the time to stand up to the plate and
12:05:17 let's help this guy out because it's about competition
12:05:20 in business.
12:05:21 And if we don't let him sell alcohol, there's a store
12:05:25 right across the street that's selling alcohol right
12:05:28 And we are not going to bring in 5 that you more
12:05:31 people into that corner to just buy alcohol at that
12:05:33 corner from his store.
12:05:34 What we are doing is providing him an opportunity to
12:05:37 provide competition, to survive as a small business.
12:05:41 And right now we know things are hard out there
12:05:44 And he needs all the tools at his availability to
12:05:48 survive as a small business.
12:05:49 And I hope you guys do approve this.
12:05:51 Thank you.
12:05:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.
12:05:59 >>> My name is Arty Roseberry, I lived at 2805 north
12:06:07 Monroe Street since 2003.
12:06:10 Like the first gentleman that spoke, it's no longer
12:06:13 about King's grocery.
12:06:16 It is about the community.
12:06:18 I feel what the lady said about, you know, the crime
12:06:22 and everything.
12:06:22 But since they have been there, the crime in that
12:06:25 particular area has shut down and it stopped like the
12:06:29 gentleman said.
12:06:30 It's no longer there.
12:06:31 And we appreciate that.
12:06:33 We appreciate how they came in and they cleaned up
12:06:36 around there.
12:06:37 It used to be people throwing stuff back there. It
12:06:39 used to be mattresses, sofas, all kind of trash.
12:06:43 You know, they have done a lot to help clean up that
12:06:46 Now, we can't combat crime in every single area.
12:06:52 But we can make a difference, we can make a
12:06:55 And these guys are doing a good job.
12:06:56 I don't mind helping.
12:06:58 Ill come on their behalf because they are helping that
12:07:00 area right where we live.
12:07:02 We have predators in the neighborhood, that's true.
12:07:06 But, however, when you clean up the vagrancy that used
12:07:13 to be there and all those that used to hang out back
12:07:15 in the back and smoke and drink and all that stuff,
12:07:18 when you clear that stuff away, amen, now you have a
12:07:23 cleaner environment.
12:07:24 So what we are trying to do, keep those people who
12:07:26 live back there, who stay back there.
12:07:29 We are trying to keep them from behind the store.
12:07:31 Now, if you close the store, what you are going to do
12:07:34 if you fail?
12:07:37 What's going to happen is you are going to create a
12:07:39 vacuum that's going to suck every vagrant back to that
12:07:42 store for a place to stay.
12:07:44 And that's what we are trying to come against.
12:07:49 I don't really care for alcohol.
12:07:51 I don't drink, you know.
12:07:52 But we are not fighting alcohol.
12:07:56 A because of alcohol is the thing.
12:07:58 That's the sin that we have got to deal with.
12:08:00 We can't control how people drink.
12:08:02 But we can keep our store open.
12:08:06 That's why I'm here.
12:08:08 I want to keep the store open.
12:08:09 I want to keep it vibrant, clean.
12:08:12 And I just want to support them, just to survive in
12:08:16 that corner.
12:08:17 And that's all I want.
12:08:18 I want to see.
12:08:19 You know, I will help fight the crime and everything.
12:08:24 I'll fight with her.
12:08:26 But I want to see that store open to keep that area
12:08:29 from becoming a vacuum to suck all the crime back to
12:08:33 that area.
12:08:34 So that's my fight.
12:08:36 That's why I'm here.
12:08:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
12:08:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I ask you a question?
12:08:41 You might have said this and I didn't hear.
12:08:44 You are a neighbor?
12:08:44 >>> Yes, ma'am.
12:08:45 >> Where do you live?
12:08:46 >>> 2805 north Monroe street.
12:08:49 I have lived there since 2003.
12:08:52 >> And where is that in relation to the store?
12:08:54 >>> About three houses from the store.
12:08:56 >> Right behind it?
12:08:57 >>> Behind.
12:08:58 Yes, ma'am.
12:08:59 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.
12:09:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
12:09:04 Anyone else?
12:09:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
12:09:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
12:09:08 (Motion carried).
12:09:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move it and let me discuss
12:09:16 something about drugs and alcohol and everything else.
12:09:18 The problem with this country might be drugs and might
12:09:22 be alcohol but more importantly a problem with the
12:09:24 country are these little kids, girls and boys, no
12:09:27 matter where they come from, what part of the city
12:09:29 they are from, see and emulate what they see in their
12:09:32 We have a lack of parenting in this country that's
12:09:36 causing the same social ills year in and year out.
12:09:41 It not the kids.
12:09:42 It's the lack of parenting.
12:09:43 Like I always say.
12:09:44 We don't have A and B schools.
12:09:46 We have A and B parents that makes the school and A
12:09:48 and B school.
12:09:49 So I understand what they are saying.
12:09:52 I have compassion from both sides.
12:09:54 But I tell you what.
12:09:57 In this issue here with alcohol, I raised three kids
12:09:59 and I got eight grandkids.
12:10:02 If my three kids did something wrong, they wouldn't
12:10:05 have to answer to the police.
12:10:06 They would have to answer to me.
12:10:09 I'm five times on my three kids than any police
12:10:13 officer would have ever been.
12:10:15 So that's what we need.
12:10:16 We need parenting.
12:10:17 The kids don't know any better.
12:10:19 And I will read this ordinance, Mr. Chairman.
12:10:22 An ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages
12:10:25 containing alcohol by.
12:10:27 More than 1% by weight not more than 14% by weight and
12:10:31 wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer and Wayne,
12:10:33 2(APS) in sealed containers for consumption off
12:10:35 premises only at or from that certain lot, plot or
12:10:38 tract of land located at 723 west Columbus drive,
12:10:42 Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described in
12:10:44 section 2 hereof, wavering certain restrictions as to
12:10:48 distance based upon certain findings, imposing certain
12:10:50 conditions, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
12:10:52 conflict, providing an effective date.
12:10:56 >> Second.
12:10:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded by councilwoman
12:11:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I am not going to support this
12:11:04 motion because I think it not fair for business owners
12:11:06 to come to us and say their only possible means of
12:11:08 survival is to sell alcohol.
12:11:10 I simply think that that is slapping the community by
12:11:16 inferring if they get alcohol that they will close.
12:11:19 I think people should figure out a business plan if
12:11:21 they don't have a current alcoholic zoning that
12:11:23 includes not having an alcoholic zoning.
12:11:25 I think that it's disingenuous to say we can make this
12:11:31 improvement but only if we are given this privilege.
12:11:36 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Saul-Sena, in contradiction
12:11:38 to your statement, a person may go in there and buy
12:11:44 alcohol and bay something else.
12:11:45 When a person goes to Publix, they may go there to buy
12:11:49 a newspaper, but they are also going to buy other
12:11:54 And the reason if he fails is because that person is
12:11:57 not going to buy two or three items, because he can't
12:12:01 buy that one item, so he won't go there.
12:12:03 And I think it's unfair for us to deny a small
12:12:07 businessman, because we have vagrants around there.
12:12:11 That's the police department's job.
12:12:12 It's not his job.
12:12:14 And our police department is focusing on crime, and
12:12:18 those people cause a lot of crime, believe me.
12:12:21 And I know what it is.
12:12:22 It's like these street vendors out there, collecting
12:12:26 money, selling newspapers, and we have to do something
12:12:28 about that, too.
12:12:32 But this is a staple that he needs to stay alive.
12:12:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Record and vote.
12:12:51 >>THE CLERK: We have a split vote, 3 to 3.
12:12:54 Caetano, Miller, and Miranda voting yes.
12:12:58 Mulhern, Saul-Sena, and Scott voting no.
12:13:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So we need to continue this to a full
12:13:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Under the council's rules continues
12:13:09 to the next regular meeting, which would be April
12:13:11 17th under unfinished business.
12:13:14 Public hearing being closed, I would ask -- request
12:13:20 council member Dingfelder's office that he review you
12:13:31 didn't have an opportunity for rebuttal.
12:13:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:13:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question comes up whether Mr.
12:13:48 Michelini wanted to take the opportunity for rebuttal.
12:13:50 Mr. Michelini, was that your desire?
12:13:53 Did you not have that opportunity?
12:13:55 >>STEVE MICHELINI: If I could just take two minutes
12:13:57 just to summarize where we were on this issue.
12:14:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Unfortunately, a vote was taken.
12:14:03 A vote was recorded.
12:14:05 But --
12:14:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Could you tell us what is the issue
12:14:09 that he's raising?
12:14:10 >>> Talking about the fact this is one year
12:14:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't want to speak for the
12:14:21 I feel uncomfortable doing that.
12:14:22 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to say something.
12:14:25 After the audience spoke you did not ask if there is
12:14:28 And we always ask the petitioner if he wants rebuttal.
12:14:33 >>MARY MULHERN: My question might help with this, too.
12:14:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May I ask?
12:14:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Will you please let me ask my
12:14:43 I know our rule is to go to the next public meeting.
12:14:46 But if Mr. Dingfelder looks lake he's coming back this
12:14:49 afternoon, can't we vote this afternoon?
12:14:54 It will be opening the public meeting again.
12:14:55 That way, everyone doesn't have to come back and then
12:14:59 we could give him his opportunity for his rebuttal at
12:15:03 that time.
12:15:08 >> The motion would be then to waive the rules and not
12:15:12 do that.
12:15:12 That would be the appropriate motion right now.
12:15:13 >>MARY MULHERN: I make a motion we waive the rules to
12:15:16 allow us to revote when we reconvene this afternoon,
12:15:21 if we have a full council.
12:15:24 And to allow the petitioner to have an opportunity for
12:15:27 rebuttal at that point.
12:15:29 But we have already had the public hearing.
12:15:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
12:15:37 So moved and ordered.
12:15:38 So we'll take this up when we come back.
12:15:40 Now, council, it's 12:15.
12:15:42 Do you all want to take a break now?
12:15:44 Because looks like we are going to be here.
12:15:46 So what I would like to do is come back at 1:30.
12:15:52 We will reconvene at 1:30.
12:15:55 We stand in recess until 1:30.
12:15:58 (City Council meeting in recess)
12:21:27 The foregoing represents an unedited version of
12:21:27 realtime captioning which should neither be relied
12:21:27 upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
12:21:27 The original of this file was produced in all capital
12:21:27 letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
12:21:27 third party edits and software compatibility issues.
12:21:27 Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
12:21:27 proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
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.
13:42:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Are we ready?
13:42:48 Okay, everybody.
13:42:52 Tampa City Council will now reconvene.
13:42:54 Come to order.
13:42:56 We need roll call.
13:42:57 Roll call.
13:42:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
13:43:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
13:43:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
13:43:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
13:43:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
13:43:09 We need to go back at the advice of our council to
13:43:12 address the last issue we took on item 91.
13:43:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, if we could hold number
13:43:18 91 until the remaining counseling members come back
13:43:20 and that -- I believe it should be very shortly,
13:43:24 perhaps get 92.
13:43:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
13:43:30 We'll go to item 92.
13:43:32 Do we need to reopen again for public hearing?
13:43:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: They have already been open.
13:43:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Make sure the record is clear.
13:43:40 Item 92 is -- anyone here want to address City Council
13:43:45 on item 92?
13:43:47 >> Michael Horner, 14502 North Dale Mabry highway,
13:43:58 representing owner and the applicant, has been sworn.
13:44:04 I wish my client was here today because he's in Miami
13:44:09 picking up fresh meat, produce, seasoning, spices.
13:44:12 That's his business.
13:44:13 That's what he intended to do here is a special food
13:44:16 and meat market.
13:44:19 I heard the last case discussion the nice lady was
13:44:23 concerned about what neighborhoods need are fresh meat
13:44:26 grocery stores and unique produce venues.
13:44:29 That's what my client's dream is.
13:44:33 He's a very passionate man, a very proud man.
13:44:36 When Pete Johnson and I spoke two weeks ago he said,
13:44:39 Mr. Horner, if you could address my clients neighbors
13:44:44 concerns about the bar, concerned about the late
13:44:47 I said, Pete, my client has no interest in a bar, he
13:44:50 has no interest in late hours.
13:44:52 His passion is a specialized food and meat service
13:44:55 venue, a grocery store for the neighborhood.
13:44:58 We will agree to operating hours of 8:00.
13:45:00 They suggested 10:00 p.m.
13:45:02 My client said 8:00 is fine.
13:45:04 We also agree that this is not going to be a bar.
13:45:07 It's certainly going to be the grocery store, has no
13:45:10 interest in a bar.
13:45:14 APS only package sales.
13:45:16 This is a PD plan that you all approved last year in
13:45:22 It's on your screen enough. 5850 square feet.
13:45:26 My client is occupying 3,000 square feet of that.
13:45:30 He's financing it himself.
13:45:31 This past Monday he just closed on a $350,000 loan
13:45:35 himself, pledging all his family assets.
13:45:38 Additionally, he has a $450,000 construction budget to
13:45:42 build this loan.
13:45:43 He just signed his first tenant, a barbershop, going
13:45:47 to be between the neighborhood and his store on
13:45:49 Nebraska Avenue, all in the same building.
13:45:52 Two grand oak trees, a sidewalk, a retention pond, PVC
13:45:56 fencing, vegetation, you name it, he's agreeing to
13:46:00 He just wants to have his business.
13:46:04 I think the alcohol APS is a staple.
13:46:08 He has to be competitive.
13:46:10 There are people who come in for their dinners and
13:46:13 need certain spices and seasoning and some of that
13:46:17 happens to be alcohol.
13:46:17 And they don't want to buy a six-pack.
13:46:20 They just need one or two.
13:46:22 And he doesn't want to force them to buy the six-pack.
13:46:24 It might help them on the business perspective.
13:46:27 We ask your consideration.
13:46:29 Thank you.
13:46:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
13:46:33 I'll come to that in a minute.
13:46:36 I'll come back to you.
13:46:38 >> Pete Johnson, 301 Druid hills, Temple Terrace,
13:46:43 I have to admit two weeks ago I was sitting outside
13:46:45 and this gentleman comes up to me, first time he's
13:46:48 ever been before City Council, tried to speak about,
13:46:50 this took his whole day off of work and got frustrated
13:46:54 because he had to go back home.
13:46:55 He couldn't be here today, nor some of the other
13:46:58 neighbors do not be here today because they are
13:47:00 working people.
13:47:01 So I talked to him and said, well, I am going to be
13:47:03 down there anyway, I'll represent you.
13:47:05 It's what I enjoy doing.
13:47:06 I have got three letters here from neighbors about not
13:47:11 wanting the liquor.
13:47:16 One is actually handwritten in pencil.
13:47:22 I have gone back and I have talked to petitioner's
13:47:28 I talked to the neighbors.
13:47:29 They understand that this is going to be a grocery
13:47:32 store, not a 7-Eleven, it has package food, it's going
13:47:37 to be a specialty store.
13:47:39 We have all agreed that it's fine.
13:47:41 We don't like the zoning of it because it comes in off
13:47:44 of Holland, which is a residential street, but that's
13:47:47 something we can't deal with.
13:47:49 Traffic is already in that.
13:47:53 There are two liquor stores already within a thousand
13:47:55 feet and a bar, and a -- or two bars.
13:47:59 Both of those bars are giving us problems in the
13:48:02 neighborhood, I understand.
13:48:04 Late night, screaming, hollering, everything else.
13:48:06 This guy considered to close at 8:00.
13:48:10 I think it's a great deal.
13:48:12 I support it 110% P.I don't support the wet zone
13:48:15 because I don't think this neighborhood, that
13:48:18 notorious for prostitutes, sex crimes and everything
13:48:22 The neighbors have asked if they could not do a single
13:48:27 sale, a single sale, anybody can come in, walking home
13:48:32 from work, pick up a beer, and drink it on the way
13:48:35 home, and then trash the bottle.
13:48:37 They are not likely to do that with a six-pack.
13:48:40 That would be the only thing that we would really like
13:48:42 to see.
13:48:43 If not that, then maybe a one-year contingency to see
13:48:47 if we do have a problem.
13:48:49 I have met the gentleman.
13:48:50 I have looked at what he wants to do.
13:48:51 I think it will be a great improvement for the
13:48:54 The only concern like the lady before had said, I'm
13:48:59 sorry, beer and wine and liquor creates havoc in a
13:49:04 poor neighborhood that is known for drugs and
13:49:08 Now I'm a drinker.
13:49:09 I love my cocktails every afternoon.
13:49:11 But in these neighborhoods, we have problems with it.
13:49:15 So, please, consider either limiting to not the single
13:49:21 use, or a one-year contingency.
13:49:24 This is all they are asking for.
13:49:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the public?
13:49:32 Councilman Dingfelder, then councilman Caetano.
13:49:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
13:49:38 Michael, if I could.
13:49:42 I do well recall this petition.
13:49:44 And my question to you and your client was why not
13:49:49 preclude single sales?
13:49:51 And you said a little while ago, in the foreign food
13:49:58 aisle or whatever they are going to come in and want a
13:50:01 single bottle of, you know, some type of flavoring or
13:50:05 whatever that has alcohol in it.
13:50:06 I'm not suggesting they need to buy a six-pack of that
13:50:09 type of product.
13:50:11 But maybe what we could do as a compromise is say no
13:50:15 single sales of beer.
13:50:16 That's what we are talking about.
13:50:17 I'm not talking about, you know, they have to buy a
13:50:20 six-pack of wine or something like that.
13:50:22 That's silly.
13:50:23 We all know what we are talking about.
13:50:25 There's nothing that can come gadabout selling
13:50:28 singles, especially in that neighborhood.
13:50:30 And I am going to review just a quick excerpt from Mr.
13:50:35 Stephen Doddy, the handwritten penciled letter here.
13:50:41 He says he lives next door to this.
13:50:44 He's all for something to be built there.
13:50:45 He says in the past they encountered prostitutes and
13:50:49 drug dealings.
13:50:49 He said everybody knows there's alcohol problems, it
13:50:52 has vagrant problems, and then he goes on to say,
13:50:56 talks about drunks in the neighborhood, and then he
13:50:58 goes on to say -- to ask us, he says council members,
13:51:02 I would like you to put ourselves -- yourselves in our
13:51:06 shoes, where we were yesterday and where we are today,
13:51:08 he said we made our neighborhood better, and he said
13:51:14 he had to explain to his children and now his
13:51:16 grandchildren why these ladies come in and out these
13:51:19 cars and stuff.
13:51:19 He said, council members, I would like an honest
13:51:22 opinion from all of you.
13:51:23 Would you be willing to pass a wet zone in your own
13:51:26 Would you be willing to put your kids and grandkids
13:51:29 odds at risk playing outside?
13:51:31 I know what everyone's answer would be.
13:51:33 I mean, he couldn't be here today, but he sent Pete
13:51:36 with this letter.
13:51:37 I think we need to respect that.
13:51:39 And again all we can do is ask.
13:51:41 We can ask the petitioner to limit the sale to not
13:51:44 allow single beer.
13:51:46 Single sales of beer.
13:51:48 And Michael Horner, I would ask you one more time if
13:51:51 you would check with your client and see if he would
13:51:53 limit himself on that issue.
13:51:55 Because if he could, I'm feign for this.
13:51:56 This is revitalization. This area needs
13:51:59 Pete and his neighbors are in favor of revitalization
13:52:02 but they are not in favor of single sales of beer.
13:52:07 >>> That's a fair question.
13:52:09 My client is not here but he's trying to get his fresh
13:52:13 produce and meats and bring them back.
13:52:16 I ran that question by hmmm yesterday.
13:52:18 He called me four times yesterday and three times this
13:52:20 morning before 9:00.
13:52:22 I asked that specifically.
13:52:23 His response was, some of the Caribbean dishes and the
13:52:26 island dishes require stouts which you believe would
13:52:29 be precluded under your single sale.
13:52:32 They don't need a six pack of stout to make their
13:52:35 particular dishes.
13:52:36 He said I just would prefer not to have that and be at
13:52:38 a disadvantage from the competitive side.
13:52:40 Let me say this, also.
13:52:41 He has a Caribbean market on north 15th street.
13:52:47 City of Tampa ran he have test on my client, was
13:52:53 Under city of chapter ordinance 95-22 no alcohol open,
13:52:56 loitering within 500 feet of his establishment.
13:52:59 I mean, he is not one to allow any of that activity.
13:53:02 So he takes the obligation very seriously.
13:53:05 I just don't have his permission to authorize that at
13:53:07 this time, Mr. Dingfelder.
13:53:09 We would agree to the one year probation. If there's
13:53:12 any issue, any loitering, bringing us back, any
13:53:15 problems, bring us back but that's something, he's on
13:53:21 the line about $800,000.
13:53:22 He can't afford to lose $10 a month on this.
13:53:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it written up right now as a
13:53:28 one-year conditional?
13:53:35 >>> Planning did not.
13:53:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: We hear evidence all the time
13:53:45 from like Pete said, there's prostitutions there,
13:53:48 there's drugs and everything else.
13:53:50 That's not the businessman's responsibility.
13:53:52 It's the city's responsibility.
13:53:54 It's the police department's responsibility.
13:53:57 Now, when that hotel wanted to come over by Columbus
13:53:59 and your area, and I told Mr. Scott that I was going
13:54:07 in his area, I didn't want to infringe on his area.
13:54:10 I called code enforcement and went over there.
13:54:12 I took a whole bunch of pictures and gave them to code
13:54:15 enforcement and I told the chief, if there's
13:54:17 prostitution going on in those hotels, let's do
13:54:20 something about it.
13:54:21 I mean, this man has a piece of land there.
13:54:23 He wanted to put a hotel there.
13:54:25 And maybe it would be like the others.
13:54:28 But I doubt it very much.
13:54:29 And we cannot keep listening.
13:54:33 It's the prostitutes, it's the drugs, it's this and
13:54:36 If it's there we have got to clean it up.
13:54:38 It's our responsibility.
13:54:39 That's what these people -- and the man shouldn't pay
13:54:42 taxes on his land if he can't use it to its highest
13:54:45 and best use.
13:54:46 And this is probably the highest and best use for that
13:54:48 But I'm sick and tired of hearing about the
13:54:51 prostitutes, the drugs.
13:54:52 I went by one of those motels.
13:54:54 And where people are living in there, the board of
13:54:57 health has got to go in there.
13:54:59 There's probably 15 people living in a little room.
13:55:01 It's disgusting.
13:55:03 And I'm going to keep on that.
13:55:05 And Mr. Scott, I'm not infringing on your territory.
13:55:10 But I've got to clean it up.
13:55:12 Thank you.
13:55:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
13:55:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The sense of what I am getting
13:55:19 here, from what I heard, the conversation, I don't
13:55:21 think it would take too long to add that one year
13:55:25 restriction on this ordinance.
13:55:26 Am I correct, legal?
13:55:32 >>> Currently there are no conditions on it.
13:55:34 If you let me know what exactly you would like I would
13:55:37 try to be happy to do that.
13:55:38 I believe you have an appeal hearing.
13:55:40 I could probably do it during that time.
13:55:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can't do it by myself.
13:55:54 It will be the charge am -- the chairman's request for
13:55:57 the council members to see if they vote to put in the
13:56:00 and the petitioner's suggestion for a one-year use,
13:56:04 and then at the end of that one year if there's any
13:56:06 loitering or anything coming out of that, prostitution
13:56:09 or whatever out of that location, it's gone.
13:56:12 That's the sense that I get.
13:56:13 I may be wrong.
13:56:14 But that's what I got out of the conversation.
13:56:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me ask petitioner.
13:56:20 Are you open for a one-year conditional based on the
13:56:22 surrounding --
13:56:26 >>> we would be.
13:56:26 If that's what it takes to pleas council, I think the
13:56:29 assurance is there from my client there's not going to
13:56:31 be any problem.
13:56:32 We are going to accept that.
13:56:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We can close the hearing.
13:56:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, we have H we have to leave it
13:56:41 open for the ordinance to come back with that
13:56:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
13:56:45 And you have to go draft it first.
13:56:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What we have done in the past,
13:56:51 Mr. Chairman, you closed the public hearing and direct
13:56:53 legal to return perhaps during today's agenda with the
13:56:58 amended ordinance to be able to read it.
13:57:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to ask the legal
13:57:06 department to put that into the ordinance for that
13:57:09 one-year conditional based on the evidence we heard
13:57:11 today regarding any loitering or prostitution or
13:57:15 anything of that sort, at that location.
13:57:21 I guess it's a location at east Highland street and
13:57:26 14009 and 1411 north Nebraska Avenue.
13:57:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second that for discussion
13:57:32 >>REBECCA KERT: I just want some clarification.
13:57:36 What you have in your ordinance, the one that this is
13:57:39 processed under, is the ability to have a one-year
13:57:42 It means it only lasts for one year.
13:57:44 After that they have to come back, no automatic
13:57:47 triggers, if there's problems.
13:57:49 I just want to make sure we all have the same
13:57:51 This is only good for one year.
13:57:54 >> Right.
13:57:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So let me ask you a question, in one
13:57:58 year they have to come back and reapply, do the whole
13:58:00 process again?
13:58:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right.
13:58:03 We do that.
13:58:04 We do that.
13:58:07 >>> I think I may have to withdraw that consent.
13:58:11 I was hoping if there were any issues, we would be
13:58:13 forced to come back in one year and have a
13:58:17 My client can't afford to pay any more money in
13:58:19 application fees and stuff.
13:58:24 I'm telling you what I can tell you.
13:58:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I withdraw my motion.
13:58:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I withdraw my second.
13:58:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Are we done with the hearing?
13:58:40 >> No.
13:58:40 We are still open.
13:58:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Want to move to close?
13:58:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to close.
13:58:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
13:58:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before you do that, Mr. Johnson, just
13:58:51 for the sake of clarity of the record were you sworn
13:58:53 >>> No, I'm sorry, I was not sworn.
13:58:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can Mr. Johnson be sworn and have him
13:58:59 reaffirm the fact?
13:59:02 (Oath administered by Clerk).
13:59:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Johnson, what you have previously
13:59:09 stated, is that the truth?
13:59:11 >>> Yes, sir.
13:59:12 Can I make one other comment or am I off?
13:59:16 >> No.
13:59:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion and second to close the public
13:59:19 hearing. So moved and ordered.
13:59:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm going to move for denial based
13:59:26 on the concerns of the neighbors that what is before
13:59:28 us doesn't give them enough protection.
13:59:29 I think if petitioner did come in and ask for a
13:59:32 one-year conditional that might be acceptable.
13:59:34 They aren't willing to do that.
13:59:35 So I am going to move for denial.
13:59:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Dies for lack of a second.
13:59:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second it but I think we need
13:59:44 to elaborate on the motion for purposes of the record.
13:59:48 >>REBECCA KERT: I believe you have to site the
13:59:50 sections 93-70-A, 370-A, 2, 3, 4 and 6.
13:59:56 And those would be the waiver criteria.
13:59:58 I would recommend that you site specifically the facts
14:00:01 in the record that show that this is adverse to the
14:00:03 public interest.
14:00:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We received as part of our
14:00:06 testimony letters from three neighbors, one absolutely
14:00:09 adjacent, is very concerned with the privilege being
14:00:13 requested by the petitioner would adversely impact the
14:00:16 residential uses that are absolutely adjacent, and
14:00:22 based on that, and the sections, that legal
14:00:26 identified, I move for denial.
14:00:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I am not going to support the
14:00:29 I am going to tell you why.
14:00:31 I went and looked at the site, the property and all
14:00:34 I will tell you, you are making a huge mistakes, and
14:00:37 the citizens if you don't put something there.
14:00:39 I'm just telling you.
14:00:40 It's a major mistake.
14:00:41 And he's shaking his head because it's true.
14:00:43 That's a major mistake.
14:00:45 If you vote this down.
14:00:46 I mean, if you pass this motion.
14:00:49 Mr. Miranda.
14:00:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: With all due respect to all council
14:00:51 members, I wish to offer a substitute motion.
14:00:55 And when I look at these things I don't look at how
14:00:57 much money somebody invests.
14:00:59 I could care less.
14:01:01 That's their own due diligence.
14:01:03 It's your money, your baby.
14:01:05 You stand on your own two feet.
14:01:07 That's what happens with Bear Stearns and everything
14:01:09 I'm not here to tell what you to do with your money,
14:01:12 not here to tell you how to invest your money.
14:01:14 The petition is the petition.
14:01:15 It stands on its own, not how much money I got
14:01:18 invested or somebody else has invested.
14:01:20 That being said, I am going to -- the reason this came
14:01:27 up, and I brought up the one year, and the reason I
14:01:29 pushed that, because some members of council, and
14:01:32 rightfully so, don't like to have single sales.
14:01:36 I am going to hold that responsible to every zoning
14:01:39 that comes here including Wal-Mart, K-Mart, 7-Eleven,
14:01:43 all of those that sell one beer item.
14:01:49 So what I am saying is, I have a great memory.
14:01:53 I can tell you the date, I can tell you the hour and I
14:01:56 can tell you the time two years from now what
14:02:00 If I'm still alive.
14:02:01 My memory might be gone by then.
14:02:03 But what I'm saying is, this individual, there's no
14:02:07 preponderance of evidence for denial.
14:02:10 The police department was not against it.
14:02:14 There was three letters from neighbors.
14:02:15 I grant that.
14:02:18 There was also evidence brought in that he's got
14:02:20 another operation similar to this on 15th street
14:02:23 with zero that I know of violations.
14:02:31 So what I am saying is, there is no preponderance of
14:02:38 evidence that he should be denied based on any law.
14:02:43 I have a motion on the floor.
14:02:44 I don't know if I got a second.
14:02:46 The motion was to pass item number 92.
14:02:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's out of order, though.
14:02:51 >> I have a substitute motion.
14:02:53 That takes precedence over the motion.
14:02:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Actually the motion would be to amend
14:03:00 the pending motion and that is contrary to the motion
14:03:03 that's on the floor, in direct opposition.
14:03:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So you are telling us that a
14:03:07 substitute motion does not take precedence over a
14:03:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Over an amended.
14:03:12 >> I'm amending it for approval.
14:03:14 >>> That's counter to the intention of the motion.
14:03:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In opposition.
14:03:23 What I would suggest is that we move this motion
14:03:25 that's on the floor and come back and then put your
14:03:27 motion on the floor.
14:03:29 Here again, council, I went out and looked at the
14:03:34 I'm just telling you.
14:03:35 And you're right, Mr. Miranda, some things take
14:03:37 precedence over.
14:03:38 And a single sell on this issue takes precedence
14:03:40 because it is a good economic development for that
14:03:43 area, for this community, and it will, in my opinion,
14:03:47 protect the community better than just leaving it
14:03:50 vacant there.
14:03:51 That's my opinion.
14:03:52 And I understand what the neighborhood is saying.
14:03:54 At least some of them.
14:03:55 But I will tell you, you know, why I am looking at it.
14:04:04 Councilman Mulhern.
14:04:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll second Linda's motion.
14:04:09 It's already seconded?
14:04:11 I have a question for legal.
14:04:15 I don't know, Ms. Kert or Marty.
14:04:20 Councilman Miranda was talking about a preponderance
14:04:24 of evidence.
14:04:25 Now the question for us in a wet zoning is whether to
14:04:27 grant waivers.
14:04:29 It's coming to us because -- it's --
14:04:34 >> Maybe I should just explain. I hate to interrupt.
14:04:36 Maybe that would help.
14:04:37 >> Okay.
14:04:37 >>REBECCA KERT: All of these come to you.
14:04:40 So they are coming to you no matter what.
14:04:41 The applicant has the initial burden to show after
14:04:46 substantial competent evidence that they meet the
14:04:49 criteria for the waiver.
14:04:50 The applicant's burden therefore is to show that the
14:04:52 sale of alcoholic beverages will be incidental to the
14:04:55 primary use.
14:04:57 They are saying a grocery store. If they submit
14:05:04 evidence to show the sale will be incidental then the
14:05:07 burden shifts to anyone in opposition to show by
14:05:10 substantial competent evidence that this is adverse to
14:05:13 the public interest.
14:05:15 >>MARY MULHERN: And that's it, adverse to the public
14:05:18 >>> Right.
14:05:20 Competent evidence that it is in fact adverse.
14:05:24 >>MARY MULHERN: So our burden is to show that.
14:05:29 I just want to say this, since I am going to vote
14:05:33 against this wet zoning, and my feeling is, you think
14:05:37 about the -- if you lived in that neighborhood, and if
14:05:43 that was your house, one of these neighbors, and you
14:05:45 lived that close to it, and you dealt with that
14:05:49 neighborhood every day, I just feel like those
14:05:52 neighbors have a better idea than me, even though you
14:05:57 go to the site and look at it, they live there every
14:06:00 So I'm more inclined to accept their evidence that it
14:06:06 is not advantageous to their neighborhood.
14:06:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I call the question?
14:06:11 I have got to catch a cab.
14:06:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
14:06:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Real quick.
14:06:18 I'm sorry.
14:06:19 Joseph, I just want to respond to one thing you said.
14:06:21 We don't control a lot of things in this city
14:06:25 We can't call the police any more than any citizen can
14:06:28 call the police.
14:06:29 We can't control them.
14:06:30 We can't control the health department.
14:06:31 Can't control fire department.
14:06:33 These are frustrating things to you because you see
14:06:35 them happening and you want to do something.
14:06:37 But the reality is as the mayor controls those day to
14:06:40 day functions.
14:06:41 But what we do control is zonings and wet zonings.
14:06:45 In that neighborhood which is your district, I
14:06:47 believe, has traditionally, for many, many years, had
14:06:51 alcoholics walking up and down Nebraska with singles
14:06:56 in their hand.
14:06:58 I drive up there and I see it.
14:06:59 And they have singles in their hands, and I assume
14:07:02 they are singles, because they are in paper bags,
14:07:05 So that's kind of a suspicion I have.
14:07:07 But we are adding fuel to the fire.
14:07:08 There's a fire burning along that street.
14:07:11 And by approving another place that sells singles, we
14:07:16 are just adding fuel to that fire and making a certain
14:07:20 situation worse.
14:07:21 I agree wholeheartedly with you guys.
14:07:23 It's a small businessman we should support the small
14:07:26 business, but at the same time -- I will try to offer
14:07:30 compromises and you guys know it.
14:07:31 I offered a very reasonable compromise.
14:07:33 His business is not going to rise or fall.
14:07:35 He didn't put $350,000 of his own money on there.
14:07:38 Business is not going to rise and fall on his ability
14:07:41 to sell or not sell singles.
14:07:44 He dug his heels in the sand at that podium because he
14:07:51 thinks he has four votes so he says I am going to roll
14:07:54 the dice and go for it but it's not a good message to
14:07:56 your constituents, okay, to say, well, we have read
14:07:59 your letters but we really don't care because we are
14:08:01 going to help the small businessman even if he's being
14:08:05 That's just my humble opinion.
14:08:06 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: In response, should we punish the
14:08:13 neighborhood because our city is not doing their job
14:08:15 to pick these -- it's illegal to walk on the street
14:08:18 with a beer in your hand whether it's in a brown paper
14:08:20 bag or a plastic bag.
14:08:22 And I'm not one -- I'm chasing these solicitors that
14:08:26 are out there.
14:08:27 I called the police the other day.
14:08:29 It took two and a half hours and nobody came.
14:08:31 When I finally came back, I have got another guy on
14:08:34 the other side of the street.
14:08:36 I says, let me see your permit.
14:08:39 Who are you?
14:08:39 I showed him my city badge that I have like you have
14:08:42 in the back of your truck.
14:08:43 All right.
14:08:44 Not that that carries much weight.
14:08:46 So he says, you have got to see that guy over there.
14:08:49 And that was the boss.
14:08:51 And guess what.
14:08:52 I called the police again.
14:08:54 They finally came out.
14:08:55 And I had the order right here from '04, the police
14:09:01 officer said, we are told to leave them alone.
14:09:05 I'm not going to -- I'm going to push this issue.
14:09:09 All right?
14:09:09 This is from Kirby Rainsberger.
14:09:12 He is the police enforcement officer there.
14:09:14 It's not right that we are punishing a citizen because
14:09:17 some people don't like it because they are running up
14:09:20 and down with a beer, and the prostitutes and what the
14:09:22 hell ever you got out there.
14:09:24 It's not right.
14:09:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
14:09:27 There's a motion.
14:09:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I get to speak one more time.
14:09:33 We have a problem.
14:09:36 I talked about it in the past many times.
14:09:37 We say no drinking in city parks.
14:09:40 What do you think is happening with a certain event or
14:09:43 certain stadium?
14:09:44 Al Lopez park becomes a beer haven.
14:09:47 Nobody does a damn thing.
14:09:49 You are not supposed to drink when you go in there.
14:09:52 And there's bottles, I walk around there, there's
14:09:55 bottles everywhere.
14:09:56 But we don't do anything.
14:09:58 Nothing is done.
14:09:59 That's the problem we have.
14:10:00 I do not like to pick and choose on anyone.
14:10:05 If they catch me drinking a beer in West Tampa I get
14:10:09 If it's somebody else in Hyde Park drink ago beer they
14:10:13 don't get arrested.
14:10:14 And that's a knot fact.
14:10:15 And I have nothing against the citizens living in Hyde
14:10:18 That's the way society is, I hate to say.
14:10:20 But, Mr. Chairman, lets let's go back to the original
14:10:22 There's a motion for denial by Mrs. Saul-Sena, second
14:10:26 by Mr. Dingfelder on a close vote with Mrs. Mulhern.
14:10:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor.
14:10:32 Do we need to record that?
14:10:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Second reading?
14:10:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
14:10:41 All in favor of the motion?
14:10:44 So it's 2.
14:10:46 Those who oppose?
14:10:49 >>THE CLERK: The motion failed with Miranda, Miller,
14:10:53 Scott, and Caetano voting no.
14:10:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, on item 92 I make a
14:10:59 motion for approval.
14:11:03 Ordinance for second reading, ordinance making lawful
14:11:05 the sale of beverages containing alcohol by more than
14:11:08 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight and wines
14:11:11 regardless of alcoholic content beer and wine 2(APS)
14:11:14 in sealed containers for consumption off premises only
14:11:17 at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land
14:11:20 located at 905 east Holland street, 10409, 10411 north
14:11:25 Nebraska Avenue, Tampa, Florida as more particularly
14:11:28 described in section 2 hereof waiving certain
14:11:30 restrictions as to distance paved upon certain
14:11:33 findings providing for repeal of all ordinances in
14:11:35 conflict, providing an effective date.
14:11:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Mrs. Miller.
14:11:39 All in favor of the ordinance -- or roll call, please.
14:11:43 Record your vote.
14:11:52 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
14:11:55 Mulhern voting no.
14:12:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We go back to item 91 now.
14:12:06 We need to get some counsel on this item.
14:12:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To waive your rules, 4-C which would
14:12:19 be April 17th.
14:12:20 Council member Saul-Sena has left, unfortunately.
14:12:23 It would be my recommendation, council, if you wish to
14:12:25 have the vote taken, there was additional testimony
14:12:32 that was received at this second reading that Mr.
14:12:36 Dingfelder unfortunately was not present for.
14:12:39 There was an opportunity that Mr. Michelini wants to
14:12:42 have, for rebuttal purposes.
14:12:44 It would be my recommendation that if council does
14:12:46 wish to have this vote go forward, it would be my
14:12:58 recommendation to have it continued for two weeks,
14:13:02 have Mr. Dingfelder have the opportunity -- or have it
14:13:05 reopened, excuse me, then Vermont continued for two
14:13:08 weeks, have Mr. Dingfelder to have the opportunity to
14:13:10 review that record and then have Mr. Michelini have
14:13:13 the opportunity for rebuttal before a vote.
14:13:15 Again, that's assuming that council wishes to maintain
14:13:18 their present position based on the fact that they
14:13:22 have before them.
14:13:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I move to continue
14:13:25 for two weeks to have the item reviewed by council
14:13:30 member who was absent at that point to some business,
14:13:34 and then open the hearing so that public comments can
14:13:39 be made, since we didn't give the petitioner time to
14:13:41 rebuttal what the public said.
14:13:43 >> Second.
14:13:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need to give petitioner the
14:13:47 opportunity since we are continuing or what?
14:13:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would the chair allow the petitioner
14:13:54 to speak to the continuance?
14:13:56 >> Yes.
14:13:56 >>STEVE MICHELINI: My only concern is, I guess now --
14:14:01 the hearing is closed now.
14:14:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Please don't address that.
14:14:07 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I am not going to address. That we
14:14:08 heard somebody come down in support and we also heard
14:14:11 somebody opposed to it.
14:14:12 I don't think it was clear exactly what our petition
14:14:15 And I would like to get at least that portion on the
14:14:17 record so that it is clear about what we are
14:14:20 requesting and where we are in the process.
14:14:24 And at that point, perhaps council can decide to take
14:14:28 it up today, or continue it based upon that.
14:14:33 Let me explain what the request was for.
14:14:38 >>CHAIRMAN: The public hearing was closed.
14:14:40 How can we continue if it's closed?
14:14:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We have to reopen it.
14:14:44 >>GWEN MILLER: I know.
14:14:45 We have to reopen it to continue.
14:14:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I believe I had a motion on the
14:14:49 floor to reopen and continue for two weeks.
14:14:51 Maybe it has to be amended.
14:14:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Do one at a time.
14:14:53 I move we reopen the public hearing.
14:14:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's get it behind us.
14:15:02 >>CHAIRMAN: Now you do yours.
14:15:06 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I guess at this point, I am
14:15:08 requesting an opportunity for rebuttal.
14:15:10 Do we need a motion to undertake that?
14:15:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't you do it with a full
14:15:16 council so Linda can hear your rebuttal when we come
14:15:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe Mr. Michelini's concern is
14:15:22 if given the opportunity to make a comment today, it
14:15:24 may cause council to perhaps reconsider its previous
14:15:29 vote so he can have a determination today.
14:15:31 That's my understanding.
14:15:32 If you wish to make inquiry, you can make inquiry of
14:15:34 Mr. Michelini.
14:15:35 >>> Precisely.
14:15:38 What I don't want to have happen is for two weeks to
14:15:41 go by with the impression that council is not aware of
14:15:44 what our full request is, and I think that certainly
14:15:46 from the petitioner's side we deserve the right to at
14:15:49 least put that on the record about what is our
14:15:51 request, and what's before you as opposed to thinking
14:15:54 that perhaps there's some other issue that's out
14:15:57 And we never had a chance to address issues that were
14:16:00 raised by the public.
14:16:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The unfortunate thing, I had the
14:16:10 opportunity to speak with Mrs. Kert F.council is being
14:16:13 asked to make a determination today it's quite clear
14:16:15 from the record that council member Dingfelder was not
14:16:17 present for the testimony, and it would raise serious
14:16:22 legal issues to be able to go forward.
14:16:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I want to substantiate what the
14:16:37 legal counsel has told us.
14:16:40 I firmly believe we have to wait two weeks to get the
14:16:43 familiarity of this case completed with the council
14:16:46 member who was absent at that time and move from
14:16:48 If not, another council member is absent right now and
14:16:52 we are going to be back in the same thing.
14:16:53 It's going to be a month later instead two of weeks.
14:16:56 And I understand the parameters and people have things
14:16:58 to do.
14:16:59 But two weeks is 14 days.
14:17:03 Better than 30 days.
14:17:04 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Yes, sir.
14:17:06 Is the hearing going to be opened for additional
14:17:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We already opened the hearing.
14:17:11 >>> I understand.
14:17:12 Is it going to be open for additional testimony from
14:17:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, we have to have legal advise us
14:17:21 on that.
14:17:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe we are both in agreement.
14:17:26 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
14:17:28 You had the opportunity for a public hearing.
14:17:29 The only issue that came up is Mr. Michelini asserted
14:17:32 after the hearing has been closed that he felt he did
14:17:34 not have the opportunity for rebuttal.
14:17:36 It would be appropriate if it's the City Council's
14:17:39 desire to open it up, if there's any doubt about him
14:17:44 having the opportunity for rebuttal.
14:17:45 But everyone else had a full and fair opportunity to
14:17:48 be heard.
14:17:48 So there is no reason to reopen it for any reason
14:17:51 except for rebuttal.
14:17:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So in two weeks we will only open
14:17:58 rebuttal and then close and then take action at that
14:18:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion to continue for two weeks.
14:18:08 Only to take testimony on rebuttal.
14:18:13 >>STEVE MICHELINI: 9:30 time certain, please?
14:18:17 >> That's his motion.
14:18:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 9:30, for rebuttal purposes.
14:18:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The motion.
14:18:24 Moved and seconded.
14:18:25 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
14:18:27 Opposed same sign.
14:18:28 So moved and ordered.
14:18:30 Item 93.
14:18:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's already open.
14:18:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here from the public?
14:18:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
14:18:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Has everybody been sworn?
14:18:46 Everybody been sworn?
14:18:48 Stand up and raise your right hand.
14:18:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you are going to be here for 93
14:18:53 through 9.
14:18:54 Is there anybody else who has not been sworn?
14:18:57 Thank you.
14:18:58 (Oath administered by Clerk).
14:19:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone want to address item 93?
14:19:10 Seeing none, okay.
14:19:12 Close the public hearing.
14:19:12 >> Moved.
14:19:15 >> Second.
14:19:15 (Motion carried).
14:19:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, move the following
14:19:21 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance repealing
14:19:24 ordinance number 8031-A making lawful the sale of
14:19:27 beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight
14:19:29 and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless
14:19:32 of alcoholic content beer and wine 2(APS) in sealed
14:19:34 containers for consumption off premises only at or
14:19:36 from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located
14:19:39 at 3255 West Cypress street, Tampa, Florida, as more
14:19:43 particularly described in section 3 hereof, waiving
14:19:45 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
14:19:47 findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
14:19:50 conflict, providing an effective date.
14:19:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:19:54 Record your vote.
14:20:01 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I was going to ask a question
14:20:02 whether he wants singles there or not.
14:20:04 Better not.
14:20:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Only in the building that was zoned
14:20:12 properly and vacant, walking out, that's what it is.
14:20:23 The corner of Glen and cypress.
14:20:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And they have good Chichiritas.
14:20:31 >> Motion carried with Mulhern abstaining --
14:20:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Can't do it.
14:20:38 You have to vote one way or the other.
14:20:39 >>THE CLERK: And Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
14:20:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You have to vote one way or the other.
14:20:47 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to vote.
14:20:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You have to have reset.
14:20:51 Record your vote.
14:20:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no,
14:21:04 and Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
14:21:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
14:21:11 Item 94.
14:21:12 Anyone here to speak to council item 94?
14:21:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
14:21:18 >> Second.
14:21:18 (Motion carried).
14:21:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So moved and ordered.
14:21:23 Mrs. Miller.
14:21:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 94.
14:21:28 Move an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages
14:21:31 containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not
14:21:33 more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of
14:21:36 alcoholic content beer and wine 2(COP-X) for
14:21:38 consumption on the premises only at or from that
14:21:41 certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 4811
14:21:44 west Main Street, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly
14:21:46 described in section 2 hereof waiving certain
14:21:48 restrictions as to distance based upon certain
14:21:51 findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
14:21:54 conflict, providing an effective date.
14:21:58 >> Second.
14:21:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:22:00 Record your vote, please.
14:22:08 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and Mulhern
14:22:11 being absent at vote.
14:22:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 95.
14:22:16 Anyone from the council want to address council on
14:22:18 item 95?
14:22:19 Yes, ma'am.
14:22:20 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
14:22:22 I have been sworn.
14:22:24 Item number 95 and 96 on your agenda today are second
14:22:28 readings on rezonings that require changes in between
14:22:30 first and second reading.
14:22:32 The changes were made per the motion of council.
14:22:36 Plans have been submitted by the zoning administrator
14:22:38 and submitted to the clerk.
14:22:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Both item 95 and 96, right?
14:22:45 Anyone who wants ton address council?
14:22:47 I see none.
14:22:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close item 95.
14:22:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
14:22:54 Same sign opposed?
14:22:55 So moved and ordered.
14:22:58 Mr. Caetano.
14:22:59 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: An ordinance being presented for
14:23:01 second reading, rezoning property in the general
14:23:04 vicinity of 8710, 8712, 8716 north orange place, in
14:23:09 the city of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly
14:23:11 described in section 1 from zoning district
14:23:13 classifications RS-50, residential single-family, to
14:23:18 PD, planned development, daycare, providing an
14:23:21 effective date.
14:23:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
14:23:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
14:23:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It is moved and seconded.
14:23:27 Record your vote.
14:23:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena being
14:23:38 absent at veto.
14:23:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 96.
14:23:41 Anyone here from the public that wishes to address
14:23:44 Anyone here from the public wishes to address council?
14:23:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
14:23:50 >> Second.
14:23:51 (Motion carried).
14:23:51 >> So moved and ordered.
14:23:54 Councilwoman Mulhern.
14:23:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance for adoption upon
14:24:00 second reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the
14:24:02 general vicinity of 102 north Jefferson street in the
14:24:05 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described
14:24:07 in section 1 from zoning district classifications
14:24:10 CBD-2 central business district to CBD-2 central
14:24:14 business districts, residential multifamily, providing
14:24:17 an effective date.
14:24:22 >> Second.
14:24:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:24:27 Record your vote.
14:24:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena being
14:24:32 absent at vote.
14:24:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 97 we have already dealt with
14:24:39 that, right?
14:24:40 That's the TECO franchise.
14:24:49 Now we have the appeal hearing.
14:24:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Staff reports.
14:24:52 Page 13.
14:25:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, staff reports.
14:25:10 Anyone here for 72?
14:25:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe you received a memorandum
14:25:14 from the police chief regarding this issue.
14:25:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need a motion on this?
14:25:20 >> Move to receive and file.
14:25:21 (Motion carried)
14:25:24 Item 73.
14:25:25 >> Move to continue to May 22nd.
14:25:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to receive and file the
14:25:30 subject matter relating to parking, and address -- we
14:25:34 do have a parking problem, especially in those good
14:25:38 citizens that live on South Howard Avenue.
14:25:44 They are caught in their own web that they did not
14:25:47 There's ample parking for them to live in their own
14:25:49 But what happens is, after 6:30, 7:30, 8:00 especially
14:25:54 on Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday they can't
14:25:57 drive the streets because there's parking on both
14:25:58 sides of the streets and only one car goes through the
14:26:02 And this is a situation that became ton this degree
14:26:06 because of success of other businesses.
14:26:09 Not because of failure.
14:26:10 Because of success.
14:26:11 But in being successful, we have created a problem in
14:26:14 the neighborhood.
14:26:17 And somewhere along the line we have to issue parking
14:26:20 permits of the residents only so that they can park
14:26:22 there, and in one else can.
14:26:24 Something has got to be done, because those businesses
14:26:27 have grown, they don't have ample parking and they go
14:26:30 right into the neighborhood.
14:26:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion that we receive and
14:26:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Continue to May 22nd.
14:26:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Workshop scheduled for May 22nd.
14:26:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, you presently have one
14:26:46 item on the May 22nd workshop which is a 9 a.m.
14:26:48 workshop to discuss the Tampa comprehensive plan.
14:26:50 Did you wish to set a time for this?
14:26:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do this at ten?
14:26:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 10:00.
14:26:57 We can always be a half hour late.
14:26:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: One other issue, if council wishes to
14:27:01 take up the concept of public comment.
14:27:03 It would be appropriate at this time if council wishes
14:27:06 to do that.
14:27:07 There's no real to that effect but the question arose
14:27:11 this morning by a constituent so if council wished to
14:27:14 do that, it can.
14:27:15 If council wishes to take it up at a later date with
14:27:17 regard to public comment, there's plenty of time to do
14:27:23 Presently your rules state there is no public comment.
14:27:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Unless we make the motion.
14:27:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We didn't do 74.
14:27:31 74 really rides with 73.
14:27:33 Let's do these two together, if I may, Mr. Chair.
14:27:36 I'm sorry.
14:27:41 It gives a precise description of the area and I think
14:27:43 that goes with 73 which would be May 22nd to receive
14:27:46 and file.
14:27:49 I think I said 10:00.
14:27:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The question Mr. Shelby raises
14:27:55 which needs to be resolved within the motion is, are
14:27:57 we going to open on May 22nd at 10:00, we are going to
14:28:01 open that for public comment?
14:28:02 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) we had a lot of
14:28:12 discussion here and in other public meetings about
14:28:14 So if we have a workshop where we can talk about what
14:28:18 the solution is, it's going to result in some kind of
14:28:22 action where we'll end up having a public hearing
14:28:25 So I feel okay with not opening it for public hearings
14:28:28 because I know that we are going to -- the result of
14:28:32 this discussion, and really what we do need is advice
14:28:37 from our staff about how we can solve this permitting
14:28:42 We know it's a problem, but the public --
14:28:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't have a problem with that
14:28:51 but if there's something in front of the agenda that
14:28:54 has a 30-minute section for public comment.
14:28:58 Am I correct, Mr. Shelby?
14:28:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, sir, for regular meetings on the
14:29:02 third of the month.
14:29:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know FHP 30 minutes is
14:29:06 going to make me later for any other meeting.
14:29:08 I always get there later than what I expect.
14:29:12 I understand your motion.
14:29:13 I agree with it.
14:29:14 But on the other side I have compassion that somebody
14:29:16 may want to come in and sit down, and they don't have
14:29:20 the right to say a word or two.
14:29:22 And I'm not opposed to having a 30-minute thing, of
14:29:26 workshops all across.
14:29:27 But if the chairman holds it to 30 minutes, I have no
14:29:31 problem with that.
14:29:32 What I do not want to get is any one of us can have
14:29:36 200 people here on a subject matter that we are either
14:29:40 for or against.
14:29:41 That's what I don't want to do.
14:29:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's what you are going to have.
14:29:45 Let me just comment.
14:29:48 Again, workshops are designed for council and staff to
14:29:53 We cannot talk because of the sunshine law.
14:29:56 It is for us to come out and talk among ourselves and
14:29:58 to talk to staff, staff educate us, whatever.
14:30:02 It is for us.
14:30:03 We will not take any official action until we have
14:30:05 heard from the public.
14:30:06 They will get an opportunity to talk to us.
14:30:08 It is not that they will not talk to us.
14:30:11 They will get an opportunity.
14:30:13 The workshops are designed for us.
14:30:16 We have special discussions.
14:30:18 You have public hearings.
14:30:20 So they will have an opportunity to address council.
14:30:24 I'm telling you, I have been work shopping for ten
14:30:27 years, and workshops are a way for council to talk to
14:30:31 each other and to talk to staff.
14:30:33 And at the appropriate time we will open it up to the
14:30:37 public, public hearing or whatever for them to address
14:30:40 us on these issues.
14:30:41 That's where I am.
14:30:47 >>MARY MULHERN: And if any -- I'm sorry.
14:30:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think this is the classic example
14:30:52 of one that needs public input.
14:30:54 They have come to us and said there's a problem and
14:30:56 staff has now responding and hopefully coming up with
14:30:59 a solution by May 22nd.
14:31:01 Problem is we'll hear from staff and they'll say,
14:31:03 here's the solution.
14:31:04 We will not, if we go along with what Mr. Chairman has
14:31:07 said, in all due respect, or Ms. Mulhern said in all
14:31:11 due respect, we will not be able to receive input back
14:31:13 from that neighborhood responding and saying, you know
14:31:16 We like or we don't like, or we want to tweak the
14:31:19 staff recommendation about parking permits in our
14:31:24 If we don't hear from them, then let's say we agree
14:31:27 with staff, we say, okay, staff, go ahead and draft an
14:31:30 ordinance and spend a lot of time working on putting
14:31:33 it all together so we can come to a public hearing on
14:31:35 the issue.
14:31:36 We come to a public hearing, then we'll hear from the
14:31:38 public, and then we have to start all over again,
14:31:41 because we have gotten so far in the process.
14:31:43 Why don't we hear from the public as early as possible
14:31:45 so we can all tweak it together and then by the time
14:31:48 we get to the public hearing on an ordinance, or
14:31:50 whatever it takes, resolution, what have you, then we
14:31:52 have a final product.
14:31:54 Instead what we do is we spend a lot of time spinning
14:31:57 our wheels, spinning our wheels, spinning our wheels
14:31:59 with these ordinance that is just seem to take an
14:32:02 inordinate amount of time.
14:32:04 >>MARY MULHERN: You are asking for more spin of the
14:32:07 wheel by having another bite.
14:32:09 I have to tell you, John, I have been at two public
14:32:11 meetings outside of council chambers, with this
14:32:15 neighborhood, where you were there, where we talked
14:32:17 about this issue.
14:32:19 I have only been on council for a year.
14:32:20 This issue has to have come up six, seven times
14:32:25 We have heard from Walter crumbly, from Walter
14:32:28 crumbly, from Walter crumbly, who has excellent ideas
14:32:31 for solutions.
14:32:32 We can talk about them, and we can bring them back as
14:32:36 a proposal at a public hearing.
14:32:41 We shouldn't pass the rule if we are going to make an
14:32:45 exception every time.
14:32:47 How many times do you have to talk about something so
14:32:52 Charlie has a solution in his head.
14:32:55 He'll tell us and we'll write it up and have a public
14:33:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The only thing about it again is the
14:33:04 workshop of council, if you don't want that then you
14:33:08 need to have regular meetings every four weeks,
14:33:11 because that's what you are doing if you going to open
14:33:13 up every time.
14:33:14 I'm just telling you.
14:33:15 So, anyway, that's a motion.
14:33:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here again, she's right.
14:33:23 You have a first reading of any ordinance and then you
14:33:25 have two weeks and then a second reading of the
14:33:28 So what I'm saying is, I have never, that I know of,
14:33:32 and no council member that I ever served with, has
14:33:35 ever deprived a person, a neighborhood, or somebody
14:33:40 representing somebody else, to pass something without
14:33:44 asking for public input.
14:33:46 And that has never happened in all the years I have
14:33:48 been in and out.
14:33:49 So it's incumbent.
14:33:51 I think they are still going to get the opportunity.
14:33:54 Yes, the ordinance may be in draft form.
14:33:56 Yes, it may not pass.
14:33:58 Yes, we get input at that time.
14:34:00 Those ordinances are tweaked.
14:34:02 There's no emergency ordinance that has to be brought
14:34:05 up and passed other than those that are fully debated.
14:34:08 So what I'm saying is, let's get it moving, and if
14:34:15 first and second reading there's ample time of first
14:34:17 reading and in second reading for reviews.
14:34:19 If it has to be tweaked in first reading they still
14:34:22 have another shot at the apple on second reading.
14:34:24 And I have compassion for them.
14:34:26 I hope I understand what they are saying.
14:34:28 But in this case I have to agree with some of my
14:34:32 colleagues that a discussion or a workshop is really
14:34:37 so that when don't get in trouble behind these walls
14:34:40 discussing something that should be discussed.
14:34:43 And that's why the workshops are done.
14:34:45 Remember, I gave up workshop for lent.
14:34:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, you are saying that we
14:34:53 should not have the public speak at workshops, right?
14:34:57 >> That's why you are vice chairman.
14:34:59 You caught it.
14:35:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we need to put that in a motion?
14:35:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The motion is just to set this for a
14:35:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Without public speaking.
14:35:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's right.
14:35:10 >>MARY MULHERN: John, we have all heard from these
14:35:12 really concerned neighborhood associations.
14:35:14 And you are the king of constituent service.
14:35:18 And they are all going to know, you don't ever want us
14:35:23 not to have public input.
14:35:25 But I think that the rest of us, or the majority of us
14:35:28 feel that we are always, as Charlie said, going to
14:35:35 afford the public input at our meeting.
14:35:38 Regular meeting.
14:35:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have been select elected official
14:35:41 for eleven years.
14:35:42 I have never been around where the public did not have
14:35:44 input onto discussion of the issue that we want to
14:35:48 vote on.
14:35:49 The public will be afforded the opportunity, I will a
14:35:51 sure you that.
14:35:53 They will have opportunity to address this council.
14:35:55 There's a motion on the floor.
14:35:56 All in favor of the motion let it be known by Aye.
14:36:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.
14:36:02 On principle.
14:36:03 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder voting no.
14:36:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 73 and 74.
14:36:08 Item 75 on the budget analyst.
14:36:17 All right, 75.
14:36:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There are two items here that were
14:36:26 put together.
14:36:27 One is the council's desire to discuss the process to
14:36:30 hire a budget analyst.
14:36:31 Second is the discussion regarding the formation of a
14:36:34 citizens budget advisory committee.
14:36:36 These are continuances for time constraints.
14:36:42 I don't know what council's pleasure is.
14:36:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we are going to have to
14:36:46 continue this, because two council members aren't
14:36:50 And if our discussion is going to end --
14:36:56 Caetano is here.
14:36:57 He just needs to come back to the meeting.
14:36:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would rather have a full council.
14:37:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, and yipe guessing, I might be
14:37:06 learning to count finally, but I think we are going to
14:37:08 end up with some kind of stalemate if we have a
14:37:10 discussion and then anybody makes any kind of motion,
14:37:13 we are not going to have enough people to vote.
14:37:15 >> You want to continue both those items?
14:37:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Two weeks.
14:37:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved by councilman Miranda, seconded
14:37:24 by councilman Dingfelder.
14:37:26 Let it be known by Aye.
14:37:28 Okay, two weeks.
14:37:32 Item 77.
14:37:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move the resolution.
14:37:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
14:37:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
14:37:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Item continued to April 17th, item
14:37:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
14:37:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: This is the legislation.
14:37:58 Is this the item we already moved to next week with
14:38:02 our CRA meeting, as I recall.
14:38:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We already dealt with it.
14:38:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We already did that one earlier.
14:38:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, on 79, if I could.
14:38:14 Tom, you are going to be happy with what I am going to
14:38:17 Because Mr. Daignault and I talked, and basically what
14:38:23 he has explained is that it's premature to discuss
14:38:27 once a week garbage collection, because the first
14:38:29 thing we have to do is automate our system.
14:38:32 And we are about halfway through automating our system
14:38:34 with those little side things that throw the cans up.
14:38:38 After we automate our system then we are going to
14:38:41 start collecting yard weight city-widely will be step
14:38:45 Step three, which is obviously step three is the
14:38:49 consideration of once a week.
14:38:52 It's really the consideration is premature until about
14:38:55 two weeks years from now.
14:38:56 I'm comfortable with all of that.
14:38:58 I think that we need to have that discussion after we
14:39:00 finish step one and step two, because there's at least
14:39:02 a million dollars of savings to be done by going to
14:39:06 once a week, and he admits it and I'm good with his
14:39:09 numbers, $1.3 million.
14:39:12 So with that, I am going to suggest a continuance of
14:39:15 two years on that subject, because --
14:39:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Put it on pending calendar.
14:39:24 >> I don't even know if we have a pending calendar.
14:39:28 But Mr. Daignault said when could have those
14:39:30 discussions after we finish the other phases.
14:39:35 I'm a realist.
14:39:36 Obviously I don't speak for council but that's what
14:39:38 Steve and I talked about.
14:39:39 >>GWEN MILLER: I got the same message.
14:39:41 I think let it go to the calendar.
14:39:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand there's a plan to
14:39:48 And I think that's a good thing, a great thing.
14:39:50 We are going to save money on that.
14:39:53 I'm not convinced in any way that that should impede
14:40:00 something that we could do that would not only save
14:40:07 energy and save money but would perhaps allow us not
14:40:09 to pass on higher rates to our constituents.
14:40:14 So I don't feel like -- I mean, you have a plan.
14:40:19 And you want to stick to it.
14:40:21 And you don't want to change it.
14:40:22 Well, you know, we have a globe that's melting, and
14:40:26 every bit of energy we put out from our garbage
14:40:29 trucks, and every piece of garbage that we don't
14:40:33 recycle, two years makes a big difference.
14:40:35 So I know that I'm alone on this but I just had to
14:40:41 make my point that we're talking about raising
14:40:44 people's rates when we could be saving money.
14:40:46 We're talking about doing something to reduce our
14:40:50 carbon footprint.
14:40:51 And we are talking about reducing -- because part of
14:40:55 the -- it needs to be in conjunction with conservation
14:41:00 and with recycling.
14:41:02 So it's all about the big picture.
14:41:06 And two years is a big deal to the climate.
14:41:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just one response, if I could,
14:41:24 Mr. Chairman.
14:41:28 We have got a big garbage collection system.
14:41:30 We have hundreds of employees over there.
14:41:32 We have dozens of trucks.
14:41:34 It's not a simple thing to just change course.
14:41:38 And I want to be respectful of that.
14:41:40 The other concern I have, which is very big, is I
14:41:43 think if we passed an ordinance right now that said we
14:41:45 are going to go to once a week, which is our
14:41:49 That's what we do, we pass ordinances. If we passed
14:41:51 an ordinance today that said we two to once a week,
14:41:54 the way they would accomplish that is to lay off
14:41:58 And it was never -- and I want to make this abundantly
14:42:01 clear to all of those employees, it was never my
14:42:04 intent to go to once a week, so we could be cutting
14:42:07 employees as a way of saving money.
14:42:10 I think the way we can get there is methodically is
14:42:12 that we go to the automated system, we pick up the
14:42:15 yard waste which will reduce our wastestream to the
14:42:17 plant, and then the third possible step, which we
14:42:22 can't take before we are done two years from now, is
14:42:25 to go to once a week and then we won't lose any
14:42:27 employees, either.
14:42:28 Because there's been some concern, even my garbage
14:42:31 collection guy, I saw him in the street the other day
14:42:34 and we were chatting.
14:42:35 He said, Mr. Dingfelder, there's concern among our
14:42:38 guys that you want to lay off people and that's how
14:42:40 you are going to accomplish this cost saving.
14:42:42 And I want to a sure all of them it's never been my
14:42:45 intent, that's not my intent today and that's why I am
14:42:48 comfortable doing it methodically over the next two
14:42:51 But I don't think the administration is going to be
14:42:54 bringing it up.
14:42:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have to move.
14:42:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I just have to say one thing.
14:43:01 Whole plan of automating the trucks, and not laying
14:43:04 people off, that's how we save money, unfortunately.
14:43:08 My feeling is if we start thinking a little
14:43:11 differently, and I'm afraid to revamp what we are
14:43:14 doing with it, possible other solutions to save money.
14:43:19 We are creating other jobs.
14:43:22 We are going to need more people for recycling.
14:43:26 There's plenty of ways to employ people in forward
14:43:33 kind of jobs if we displace them by trying to be
14:43:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: On the other side of that, though,
14:43:44 councilman Dingfelder, it's not any of our intent to
14:43:48 lay people off and lose jobs but I am going to tell
14:43:51 you there's going to be a referendum on the ballot in
14:43:54 November that's going to further reduce, you know,
14:43:58 property tax by an additional 25%.
14:44:01 So we are going to be in a scenario where we have to
14:44:04 look at everything across the board.
14:44:05 So again, I want to stress, I don't think it's our
14:44:09 Now, I will tell you right now, and I stand to be
14:44:11 corrected, I think that your recycling now is not
14:44:15 making money.
14:44:16 Is that right, Mr. Daignault?
14:44:18 You are losing money right now.
14:44:19 So that's going to the first thing you want to look at
14:44:22 because you are spending about 6, $700,000 on your
14:44:27 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: You are correct.
14:44:29 And the recycling program does cost us money.
14:44:33 Of course, this is an enterprise fund and it is
14:44:36 captured in the rates that we charge at the moment.
14:44:39 So it would not be affected by the property taxes.
14:44:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
14:44:45 But it's costing us money.
14:44:46 I want to point that out.
14:44:49 Let's go to the next item.
14:44:55 Item 80.
14:44:57 This was on councilman Dingfelder.
14:45:00 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
14:45:03 Mr. Huey couldn't make it.
14:45:05 I'm not exactly sure what the motion is about.
14:45:07 But it looks like you are trying to find out what will
14:45:09 be coming back before you dealing with the streetcar.
14:45:12 Right now, the only items to come back before council,
14:45:14 the streetcar budget has to come back before City
14:45:16 Council for approval.
14:45:18 And since there was tax increment financing involved
14:45:21 in this process, the budget for the CRAs would also
14:45:25 be something that would come back before you during
14:45:27 the normal course of business when you are having the
14:45:30 CRA budgets coming before you, whether you want to use
14:45:32 any of the TIF money to assist with the streetcar.
14:45:35 That's all I'm aware of at this particular point
14:45:38 unless you have something else in mind.
14:45:40 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that-oh I'm on the streetcar
14:45:45 board and John is on the Hartline board.
14:45:48 And this motion was made quite awhile ago and a lot
14:45:53 has transpired since then.
14:45:55 So I think for the purposes of the public and the
14:45:59 council, I can give you, the thinking of what we
14:46:08 arrived A at, and if John needs to add anything for
14:46:12 Hartline he could, or I see Ed Crawford here from
14:46:15 Hartline, too.
14:46:16 Basically, we have the streetcar and Hartline had a
14:46:23 little bit of a hassle over some money that had been
14:46:27 allocated for the phase two of the street car which we
14:46:32 all have seen and approved spending up to the -- what
14:46:40 is that agency?
14:46:41 For the state environmental -- DCA?
14:46:46 I don't remember what it is.
14:46:49 It's the environmental impact.
14:46:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That goes to the feds.
14:46:53 >>MARY MULHERN: So if that came back approved, we are
14:46:58 at the point where we need the funding to do the
14:47:01 extension, and we need to make the decision of when to
14:47:07 start building, which I think has become the question
14:47:10 for us on the streetcar board and with Hartline and
14:47:14 with the city now.
14:47:15 We have interlocal agreement.
14:47:17 But the street cars put together a business plan, and
14:47:26 Hart found some other money for us, so we have money
14:47:29 that was earmarked for something else, and we managed
14:47:32 to find enough money to pay for the extension.
14:47:36 So that's going to go forward.
14:47:38 But really the question now that the city needs to
14:47:41 think about is who is going to say, okay, let's go, we
14:47:47 are going to build this.
14:47:49 Because is it City Council that says, you know, let's
14:47:53 go ahead and do it?
14:47:54 Is it Hartline?
14:47:55 Is it the streetcar board?
14:47:57 >>SAL TERRITO: I don't think it's the City Council
14:48:01 that's going to be doing it.
14:48:03 City Council's involvement would be if there's going
14:48:04 to be an extension for the streetcar, then if it's
14:48:06 going to require vacation of rights-of-way, it's going
14:48:08 to require those kinds of things, that will come back
14:48:12 before council in the normal course of business, but I
14:48:14 would think the expansion is really going to be based
14:48:16 on their plan, not ours.
14:48:17 >> What I am talking about is, you know, Hartline
14:48:21 will -- the way that things are structured now will do
14:48:27 the work and everything.
14:48:29 But who says, okay, let's do it, let's get started, is
14:48:36 not -- you know, there's interlocal agreement between
14:48:39 the city and Hartline and it's not in there.
14:48:42 And I think that that's something we need to start to
14:48:46 talk about.
14:48:53 David Smith or whoever our transportation attorney is.
14:48:59 >>SAL TERRITO: Okay.
14:49:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that's it for me.
14:49:04 I am not getting into the details of the funding.
14:49:09 Ed can give us that if we think we need it.
14:49:11 But basically we reached an agreement, David as the
14:49:17 new head of Hart found some money, it was earmarked
14:49:20 for streetcar, now we have that for the extension.
14:49:23 And they got the money that they wanted for some rapid
14:49:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Can we hear from Mr. Ed Crawford?
14:49:35 >>> Ed Crawford with Hart.
14:49:42 Hart, not Hartline.
14:49:45 We are trying to twist that "line" off the end of that
14:49:48 tag line but it is Hart.
14:49:50 Essentially everything you said is correct.
14:49:51 I think the issue that's hanging at the moments is
14:49:54 finalizing the documents that we have agreed to in
14:49:57 That will come back in if B two weeks, come before
14:50:00 this board, and whatever capacity we are directed by
14:50:04 legal staff that it needs to come, but it will come
14:50:06 back in some form to you and to our Hart board for
14:50:11 We are ready to move forward.
14:50:13 The grants are all current-year money.
14:50:16 So it just a question of letting contract and getting
14:50:21 out there and doing the work because the money is in
14:50:23 What this really hinged on, that councilwoman Mulhern
14:50:28 referred to, was having a viable 20-year business
14:50:31 And that was really part of it because we were not
14:50:35 allowed by the federal government to spend the grant
14:50:37 money unless and until the city in the form of the
14:50:40 mayor was willing to guarantee that for 20 years the
14:50:44 city would continue, or we would continue jointly to
14:50:46 operate the streetcar system.
14:50:48 We are there.
14:50:49 We have reached agreement on that plan.
14:50:50 We think it's a good plan and city staff has done a
14:50:53 tremendous job in putting that together.
14:50:56 And so we are not ready to light the candles and sing
14:51:01 Kum ba yah just yet, but we will be ready to couple in
14:51:06 a couple weeks and light the candles and join the hand
14:51:10 but there's no reason at this pointed that anything
14:51:12 should come out anyway other than what the agreement
14:51:14 that's been reached between the THS board, Hart, and
14:51:20 the THS board consist tick two of thirds members,
14:51:24 appointed by the City of Tampa, so we are there.
14:51:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, ed.
14:51:32 Reason I put this item on here was sort of as a place
14:51:35 holder, because it was my understanding the 20-year
14:51:42 THS budget needed to come before this council as soon
14:51:45 as possible so we could give it a blessing so the city
14:51:48 could give it our blessing and that's why I put it
14:51:51 there. It doesn't look like that has happened in
14:51:53 regard to today.
14:51:54 So we are going to see that in N two weeks.
14:51:59 Did you all schedule that nurse two weeks?
14:52:01 You don't need to us do that?
14:52:02 >>> That will be something your staff schedules.
14:52:09 So we have been working very closely with them.
14:52:11 So as soon as the document is ready, and my
14:52:14 presumption is they would schedule that to come back
14:52:17 before you.
14:52:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I think it would be the THS board that
14:52:24 would be submitting the documents.
14:52:27 Board of directors of the streetcar will submit it.
14:52:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What I would suggest, to carry over
14:52:34 item 80 for two weeks so you can just plug that into
14:52:37 that and we'll just continue it as a place holder.
14:52:39 That way it has a place to go.
14:52:40 >>> That's really up to your staff.
14:52:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, it's up to us to decide.
14:52:45 >>> Well, whatever but --
14:52:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't understand what you are
14:52:49 continuing it for.
14:52:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, let's say the administration
14:52:54 says they don't want to put this item on the agenda.
14:52:56 We are not meeting over the next two weeks to put it
14:52:58 on the agenda.
14:52:59 So let's say that Hart and THS want us to review that
14:53:04 document in two weeks, but if the administration has a
14:53:10 different plan, then it will get on the agenda.
14:53:12 So my point is if you leave it on the agenda, carry it
14:53:14 over for two weeks, and that way we have control over
14:53:17 our own destiny.
14:53:18 >>MARY MULHERN: I think the funding has to come in
14:53:21 front of us and the MPO, doesn't it?
14:53:23 It's going to come up in front of us.
14:53:26 What are we going to do in the meantime?
14:53:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's the budget.
14:53:33 >>MARY MULHERN: You have seen the budget.
14:53:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Tell me if I am wrong.
14:53:36 I have been told that the budget has to be approved by
14:53:39 this council and has to be approved --
14:53:43 >>> approved by the city, has to be approved within a
14:53:45 reasonable amount of time, going before the MPO on May
14:53:49 whenever the first meeting in May is.
14:53:51 I believe it's the first or second, for their
14:53:54 approval, because there were several contingencies
14:53:58 involved including reprogramming the 2 million that
14:54:01 was set aside for the new museum, reprogramming the
14:54:04 CMAQ money that Mary Mulhern referred to that will go
14:54:09 to the bus system, so there's a couple of things that
14:54:12 will need to go to various bodies.
14:54:14 You will need to offer approval at some point.
14:54:20 The documents, what we did, the budget that you saw is
14:54:25 kind of a sketch if you will of what everyone expects
14:54:28 the revenues to be, but there has to be supporting
14:54:31 documents with that.
14:54:32 It's like you are not just handed a budget with no
14:54:34 explanation as to what it is, and that's what --
14:54:38 >> Well, listen, listen, this item -- this item has to
14:54:41 go before Hartline and will come back before the board
14:54:45 at some point.
14:54:46 So we need to move.
14:54:47 It's going to come back to us, people.
14:54:50 Let it come before us, okay?
14:54:52 We are going to need to move.
14:54:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me clear something up very
14:54:56 That's why I am saying we don't need to continue it.
14:54:58 It's getting to come back to us.
14:54:59 Streetcar budget comes to us every year for approval.
14:55:02 And actually the CMAQ money was the money that needed
14:55:08 to have a 20-year business plan according to Hart, and
14:55:16 none of that CMAQ money is going to buses, it not
14:55:20 going to the street cars.
14:55:21 So there's no reason for the business plan or the
14:55:24 budget to come to City Council other than when it
14:55:28 regularly does come to us, as far as I know.
14:55:30 The other money is already programmed.
14:55:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, we need to move.
14:55:34 We need to move.
14:55:35 >>MARY MULHERN: So we don't need to continue it.
14:55:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We need to move.
14:55:41 Receive and file.
14:55:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to receive and file.
14:55:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't have a problem with
14:55:53 receiving and filing but I have a problem, it says
14:55:56 Mr. Baird and Mr. Metcalf to present reports, and they
14:56:00 are not there, and want to receive and file and
14:56:05 there's no discussions. Is that the way we want to do
14:56:08 I think we have a choice.
14:56:10 We can say provide a report or we can say appear.
14:56:12 All right.
14:56:12 Now with all due respect, Ralph, Brad, you guys are
14:56:16 great guys, love them both.
14:56:18 But the bottom line is I think we need a discussion on
14:56:20 these issues.
14:56:21 I have read the report.
14:56:22 I haven't had a chance to discuss it with them.
14:56:24 I'll give them another month to meet with me and chat
14:56:27 with me.
14:56:28 But I think when it says up here we have to decide, is
14:56:31 that our druthers?
14:56:33 And if it's not, then we need to use different
14:56:36 language or come up with a different system.
14:56:38 So, anyway, I'm glad to read and file the report.
14:56:43 But in the meantime I would like to continue this for
14:56:45 four weeks.
14:56:46 And I would request that both of them chat with me in
14:56:48 the meantime.
14:56:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So in essence you still want them to
14:56:53 appear, right?
14:56:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
14:56:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion made by councilman Dingfelder.
14:56:58 Seconded by councilwoman Mary Mulhern.
14:57:00 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
14:57:02 Opposed same sign.
14:57:03 So moved and ordered.
14:57:05 Okay, item 82.
14:57:06 I think we already resolved that issue, did we not?
14:57:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, the rules as presently,
14:57:12 Mr. Chairman, state the public may be heard on the
14:57:14 matter which is the subject of the workshop if upon
14:57:16 motion and vote of council the chair opens the floor
14:57:18 for public comment during the workshop.
14:57:20 We have seen that that has become problematic,
14:57:23 particularly in notice issue that people don't know
14:57:25 anything whether they will be coming and have the
14:57:28 Therefore, after discussion and direction from
14:57:32 council, I have prepared a resolution that changes
14:57:34 that first citizens to public comment on the matter
14:57:37 which is the subject of the workshop shall not be
14:57:39 taken unless City Council by separate motion and vote
14:57:44 at the time of setting the workshop establishes a
14:57:46 specific duration of time allowing for public comment
14:57:49 on that matter.
14:57:50 That was the direction of council.
14:57:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And we agreed to that, right?
14:57:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move the resolution.
14:57:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: According to council's rules in order
14:57:59 for it to become effective, it has to be read by the
14:58:02 resolution title, which is before you on the agenda,
14:58:04 has to be read twice at two consecutive regular
14:58:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Rule 3-B oh, 3-D-4 governing the
14:58:23 order of business of the meetings of the City Council
14:58:25 of the City of Tampa.
14:58:26 >> Second.
14:58:28 (Motion carried).
14:58:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think 83 we already dealt W.that's
14:58:33 come back to us next week.
14:58:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's Mrs. Saul-Sena.
14:58:41 Want to defer that?
14:58:42 For two weeks.
14:58:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and second.
14:58:49 >>JULIA COLE: I do understand that Mrs. Miller has
14:58:51 provided a written support on that matter as well.
14:58:53 So I don't know if that answered all of the questions
14:58:56 that Mrs. Saul-Sena had or not.
14:58:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If we don't know let's go two
14:59:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to continue.
14:59:08 Do I hear --
14:59:10 >> So moved.
14:59:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved by Mr. Miranda, seconded by
14:59:16 councilman Dingfelder for two weeks.
14:59:18 Let it be known by Aye.
14:59:20 So moved and ordered.
14:59:28 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone)
14:59:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what the original motion
14:59:34 >>GWEN MILLER: It said appear and report.
14:59:36 We want one or the other.
14:59:37 >>MARY MULHERN: It didn't say appear on that.
14:59:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, it does.
14:59:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Appear and provide a report.
14:59:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They already did a report.
14:59:46 Now all they need to do is appear.
14:59:48 >>GWEN MILLER: They are going to give the report.
14:59:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Your dis.
14:59:53 In the past you have had provide a written report
14:59:56 versus appear and provide a report.
14:59:59 That's the way it has been in the past.
15:00:01 Normally the discussion that I had with council in the
15:00:03 past is that you do make that distinction so it is
15:00:05 clear of what council's intention is at the time of
15:00:08 the maker of the motion so that is clearly
15:00:11 communicated to -- to the administration.
15:00:14 >>MARY MULHERN: And I have to point out in that in
15:00:17 this case, staff didn't appear or give me -- I haven't
15:00:22 seen a report.
15:00:28 After we sat down here.
15:00:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
15:00:45 And 86.
15:00:47 Both of those and 87.
15:00:52 All of those have been dealt with.
15:00:54 If I am not mistaken, we are down to the public
15:01:03 The appeal hearing.
15:01:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Did we do 98?
15:01:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We did 98.
15:01:19 >>GWEN MILLER: A feel hearing.
15:01:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded to open
15:01:23 the appeal hearing.
15:01:25 So moved and ordered.
15:01:29 >>> This is not a de novo hearing.
15:01:31 It's a record review.
15:01:33 I just want to point that out.
15:01:34 Julia Cole, legal department.
15:01:36 What you have in front of you is an appeal from the
15:01:39 Variance Review Board.
15:01:41 The variance review board actually asking acting in
15:01:45 their appellate capacity from a zoning administrator
15:01:48 interpretation which was appealed to them.
15:01:50 So really you are the second body, appealing, the
15:01:56 zoning administrator rendered a zoning administrator
15:01:58 interpretation relating to the unimproved plan
15:02:02 development by this council and answered a question
15:02:08 relating total allowable uses on that particular site
15:02:10 plan, and whether or not those allowable uses were
15:02:14 properly permitted and whether or not those allowable
15:02:17 uses would have required a substantial change.
15:02:19 I am not going to get into the details because that
15:02:22 really is appropriate for the petitioner to get into,
15:02:25 but to give you some context.
15:02:26 In reviewing this action, as I said, you are actually
15:02:29 in a second tier review.
15:02:31 That's where you are.
15:02:32 And what the code provides is at this type of appeal
15:02:35 hearing no new evidence may be presented to you.
15:02:38 It's just hearing the record as it was in front of the
15:02:41 Variance Review Board, and you should have that record
15:02:43 in front of you.
15:02:48 And your actions shall be solely based upon the record
15:02:51 Just so you know what that means, you can't take any
15:02:53 additional testimony.
15:02:54 You can ask questions.
15:02:55 However, those questions can only be answered in a
15:02:58 manner which is consistent with the information, and
15:03:02 the factual information already in the record, and in
15:03:05 reviewing the provision and making a decision on, from
15:03:09 your perspective you are looking at three things.
15:03:11 You are looking at whether or not the Variance Review
15:03:12 Board decision was supported by competent, substantial
15:03:16 evidence, whether due process was accorded, and
15:03:19 whether the essential requirements of law has been
15:03:22 So it is like I said a pure appellate review.
15:03:26 You may not take any additional evidence.
15:03:28 I have provided you, in addition to the record that
15:03:31 you have already received, with a memorandum of law
15:03:33 which I received from the appellate attorney, Mr. John
15:03:39 I have reviewed that memorandum of law.
15:03:42 It is containing only that information which is part
15:03:45 of the record and really is argument from the record.
15:03:48 Be the last page of that memorandum preserves
15:03:51 particular Constitutional rights that is for the
15:03:56 purposes of preserving those is not part of your
15:03:58 discussion, is not part of the record in front of you
15:04:00 and is not appropriate for you to be discussing any of
15:04:05 these Constitutional issues.
15:04:06 I did want to raise one additional issue with you that
15:04:08 came to my attention; through the date today, that one
15:04:14 of the persons who appeared at the Variance Review
15:04:16 Board, her name is Donna Watson, did not properly
15:04:21 receive notice in the way this was done, and the name
15:04:26 did not come out correctly, so therefore the appellant
15:04:30 in this mat der not send her separate notification as
15:04:33 is required under the code.
15:04:35 However, she is here.
15:04:39 She has indicated to me that she is prepared to waive
15:04:41 that notification requirement.
15:04:43 And since this is not a first tier review but it is
15:04:46 really an appellate review, I will feel comfortable
15:04:49 moving forward if in fact she does waive that
15:04:54 So before we get into the merits of the hearing would
15:04:58 request for her to come up here and indicate on the
15:05:00 record that she's waiving that notice.
15:05:04 There is one additional issue that I wanted to bring
15:05:06 up, and this is a procedural issue.
15:05:10 As you all recall, because you heard these appeals
15:05:13 before, you have been previously placed in the
15:05:15 position when an appeal comes to you from Variance
15:05:17 Review Board as they are here, or the BLC, that you
15:05:21 are in the position of either upholding the position,
15:05:25 or in the position of remanding that decision back to
15:05:28 the appropriate board.
15:05:30 As of April 1st, you have changed that procedure
15:05:33 to where you can actually take action.
15:05:37 It has been my opinion in the past and continues to be
15:05:39 my opinion today on those types of procedural matters,
15:05:42 not withstanding the fact this was an appeal already
15:05:44 in the hopper, you would have the opportunity to have
15:05:46 the benefit of that provision.
15:05:49 Not withstanding that, I have discussed this matter
15:05:51 with the attorney representing the appellate Mr.
15:05:54 Grandoff and Mr. John Thomas who is representing the
15:05:58 party which brought the original appeal, and they have
15:06:01 both indicated to me that they do not object of using
15:06:04 the benefit of the new procedure.
15:06:06 And I just wanted to make that clear as part of the
15:06:08 So in reviewing this decision today, and in rendering
15:06:11 your decision, you have an opportunity you haven't
15:06:14 had, which is you can either up hold the decision of
15:06:18 the VRB, who overturned the zoning administrator
15:06:23 interpretation -- and again I am going to let the
15:06:26 petitioners argue the merits and the points of what
15:06:30 And the second is you can remand that back to the VRB,
15:06:34 if you need additional evidence, because you can't ask
15:06:36 for additional evidence today.
15:06:37 Or third, you can actually take action.
15:06:39 So upholding or reversing that decision.
15:06:43 So that is just a general understanding of where we
15:06:47 are and what we are doing.
15:06:48 At this point I would first ask Ms. Watson to come to
15:06:52 the podium and only address the issue of whether you
15:06:54 waive the notice provision, the notice defect.
15:06:58 And that would be the only -- if you put your name on
15:07:02 the record and indicate whether or not you are
15:07:05 >> Donna Watson.
15:07:06 I'm waiving the notice.
15:07:08 >>JULIA COLE: Thank you.
15:07:10 I just wanted that for part of the record.
15:07:12 I think it would be appropriate to ask Mr. Grandoff
15:07:14 representing the appellate in this matter to go first
15:07:18 and make his argument.
15:07:20 Any persons who were in attendance and participated at
15:07:24 the hearing may have an argument on the record.
15:07:30 However, I want to caution everybody again, you cannot
15:07:34 tap additional evidence.
15:07:35 It has to be based only on the evidence and part of
15:07:37 the record so they can only be making arguments in the
15:07:40 Thank you.
15:07:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Cole, you will monitor that?
15:07:48 >> Mr. Grandoff.
15:07:48 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: My address is suite 3700 Bank of
15:07:55 America Plaza.
15:07:56 And I represent Mr. and Mrs. David Schoewe and their
15:08:02 company South Tampa Auto Bath. I'm also joined this
15:08:05 afternoon by Mr. Lee Kynes, an associate in our firm
15:08:08 and Lee offers the memorandum of law that was filed
15:08:10 with you earlier this week.
15:08:17 Would you raise your hands?
15:08:21 We are here appealing the decision of the Variance
15:08:23 Review Board.
15:08:24 We are asking you to reverse that decision.
15:08:30 That's going to be our final request after I make my
15:08:33 I would like to first ask if you had the opportunity
15:08:35 to review the transcript and the record on file.
15:08:39 As to the notice issues with Mrs. Watson, I want to
15:08:42 briefly explain, at the VRB level there is no role
15:08:46 taken, or a sign-up sheet of people that participate
15:08:49 in the hearing.
15:08:49 But under the code I am required to notify those that
15:08:52 Only way to do that is to go through the transcript.
15:08:55 We went through the transcripts.
15:08:57 Her name was not properly spelled so the notice did
15:08:59 not get to her correctly.
15:09:00 And we apologize for that occurring.
15:09:03 But apparently the zoning staff is going to now have a
15:09:06 sign-up sheet at the Variance Review Board level so we
15:09:09 will have a name and address list to work from.
15:09:11 Getting to the merits of the case, I would like to be
15:09:15 very succinct.
15:09:17 David hired us to represent him after the Watson, who
15:09:23 you will hear from later, filed a request of Cathy
15:09:26 Coyle to make a zoning interpretation.
15:09:28 And we appeared at the Variance Review Board hearing
15:09:31 to defend Ms. Coyle's interpretation with which we
15:09:35 totally agree.
15:09:39 David rezoned his property to a PD.
15:09:41 The PD did not include a restriction on air dryers.
15:09:45 He went into construction.
15:09:48 During construction he decided to add air dryers.
15:09:51 They were outside of the footprint.
15:09:53 That was in conflict with the PD site plan.
15:09:56 He amended his building permit to put the air drier
15:10:00 inside the building.
15:10:01 He came into compliance with the PD, site plan, and he
15:10:04 proceeded to his building permit.
15:10:06 He built the car wash, in operation.
15:10:10 The Watsons challenged that, asked Ms. Coyle to
15:10:14 determine that was a substantial deviation under the
15:10:17 She ruled that it was not, since it was not violating
15:10:21 the footprint.
15:10:25 Her letter is in the file.
15:10:26 That letter was appealed by the Watsons to the VRB.
15:10:29 The VRB reversed Ms. Coyle's decision.
15:10:33 I'm here asking you to now reverse the VRB and find
15:10:36 Mr. Watson's operation totally in compliance with the
15:10:41 Let's talk about the ordinance.
15:10:44 The property was rezoned, and the ordinance, which is
15:10:48 in your backup, under tab 1, ordinance 2004-284, which
15:10:59 was approved by the mayor on November 18th, 2004,
15:11:03 section 2, said that the zoning district
15:11:06 classification is hereby amended and controlled by a
15:11:10 site development plan dated September 9, 2004, a copy
15:11:14 of which is attached hereto, and by reference made a
15:11:17 part hereof as exhibit D.
15:11:21 In the jacket, in tab 1, is a copy of the site plan.
15:11:27 There's no mention of any restriction on air dryers.
15:11:31 See Tampa zoning code, section 27-321, specifically
15:11:38 regulates site plan rezoning in the PD zoning
15:11:41 It says at page 2025, construction on property zoned
15:11:46 under a site plan district may only take place
15:11:49 consistent with the site development plan approved by
15:11:52 City Council at the time of the rezoning.
15:11:55 That is what Mr. Schoewe did.
15:11:57 That is what Ms. Coyle found.
15:12:00 In your standard of review this afternoon, there are
15:12:04 three issues involved.
15:12:06 Number one, did Mr. Schoewe get due process?
15:12:10 We have no issue with that.
15:12:12 He had plenty of due process at the Variance Review
15:12:14 Board level.
15:12:16 That is not an issue.
15:12:17 Number two, did the Variance Review Board depart from
15:12:21 the essential requirements of the law in their
15:12:26 My opinion is that they did.
15:12:29 They made an illegal decision, albeit wrong decision.
15:12:35 Number three, did the VRB decision supported by
15:12:39 competent substantial evidence?
15:12:41 They decided to reverse Ms. Coyle.
15:12:43 They were wrong.
15:12:45 Their decision is not supported by competent,
15:12:47 substantial evidence.
15:12:48 To prove this to you this afternoon in argument -- and
15:12:52 I am not offering any further evidence -- I will ask
15:12:56 that you review the transcript, and let's talk about
15:13:00 the essential requirements of the law.
15:13:03 When Ms. Coyle is interpreting a site plan under
15:13:06 chapter 27, she is the expert under the city charter.
15:13:13 She works under the administrative body of the city.
15:13:18 She is the final arbiter on interpretation of the
15:13:21 zoning code.
15:13:23 Her decisions are clothed with a presumption of
15:13:27 correctness, and her decision cannot be disturbed or
15:13:32 reversed unless she exercises an abuse of discretion.
15:13:40 An a because of discretion.
15:13:41 She has to be beyond reasonable.
15:13:45 She has to be abusing her discretion.
15:13:49 She did not abuse her discretion or her decision.
15:13:52 It was a well reasoned decision that she made and that
15:13:56 she filed.
15:13:59 In the transcript on page 14, Ms. Coyle is speaking to
15:14:04 the variance reviewed board and said at the bottom:
15:14:07 There are two key issues here for me, reviewing this
15:14:10 type of plan.
15:14:11 One being in a PD, and any kind of rezoning, that is
15:14:17 site plan controlled, I am bound by the four corners
15:14:19 of that plan.
15:14:22 What is on the plan is on the plan. I can only go by
15:14:24 what is on the plan. I cannot make up other
15:14:26 conditions. I am also not able to take, read the
15:14:30 testimony, and then further apply other conditions.
15:14:35 That were not stated.
15:14:37 Whether or not something was stated falsely or
15:14:39 otherwise, I have to go by what is on the site plan.
15:14:48 On page 20 of the transcript, Ms. Julia Cole was
15:14:52 peering at the VRB to give an opinion as to the zoning
15:14:56 At the bottom, she stated -- and I am here for the
15:15:00 purposes because I am the attorney that represents the
15:15:02 city as it relates to zoning matters.
15:15:05 In the zoning process you go through a public hearing
15:15:07 process, and there may be conversations, testimony
15:15:10 placed in the record.
15:15:11 But ultimately, what the city regulates is the plan
15:15:17 adopted by the city, and in this instance as relates
15:15:19 to the issue, the blowers remain silent, so in the
15:15:24 zoning administrator's role in determine what
15:15:27 regulations are as it relates to that parcel and what
15:15:29 can and can't be done, she, as she mentioned, can only
15:15:32 look to those four corners of what is on the site
15:15:39 Skipping down.
15:15:39 If it's not on the plan, if there's not a specific
15:15:43 note on the plan, it's something that has no validity
15:15:46 in terms of regulatory authority at some point in the
15:15:50 And this is Ms. Cole commenting on Ms. Coyle's
15:15:55 And we submit that that was the essential law at the
15:16:00 VRB level.
15:16:02 And the VRB departed from that in their decision.
15:16:06 Skipping to page 54, in the transcript, the board is
15:16:11 now talking about the issue before them, and the
15:16:16 Mr. Chairman Mr. O'Kelley brings the board together
15:16:20 and tries to summarize the issue for them.
15:16:22 And at the end of the page, he comments.
15:16:26 So the question that I have in my mind, the question
15:16:28 before us tonight is, did Cathy, did Ms. Coyle, in the
15:16:32 performance of her standard duty, did she do her job
15:16:36 And in this one board member's opinion, she did.
15:16:41 On page 55, Mr. Catalano, also on the board, the
15:16:47 bottom of the page: The zoning administrator has come
15:16:50 before us saying, and I think rightly so, I have this
15:16:54 plan before me.
15:16:55 They have got permits.
15:16:56 I can't go into the testimony in the public record to
15:16:59 say this was spoken, that was spoken.
15:17:02 It not on the plan.
15:17:04 And in a sense my hands are tied.
15:17:08 Continuing on page 56, Mr. Catalano remarked: I think
15:17:12 Cathy Coyle has done what's appropriate.
15:17:14 She looked at the plans and said, you know, there's
15:17:16 nothing I can do here with the decision that says air
15:17:19 dryers are considered typical with other standard
15:17:22 accessory equipment at car washes.
15:17:25 This is Cathy's quote.
15:17:28 Catalano replying: So with that statement being said,
15:17:31 her hands are tied.
15:17:33 At the bottom of page 56, Mr. AMADEO, the third member
15:17:38 on the VRB to speak that evening, I am in wholehearted
15:17:42 agreement with you.
15:17:43 And with you as well.
15:17:44 Now he's agreeing with the chair, who said: Very well
15:17:48 And Mr.Amadeo agreed with the chair and Mr. Catalano.
15:17:53 I believe that Cathy Coyle followed the letter of the
15:17:57 law, did her job, did it well, and she did it
15:18:01 Ironically, the board voted unanimously to reverse Ms.
15:18:07 Now let that sink in for a second.
15:18:10 You have got the city attorney opining that Cathy
15:18:13 Coyle was correct.
15:18:14 You have Ms. Coyle opining that "I am in charge of the
15:18:18 zoning code and this is my opinion, the site plan
15:18:20 controls the four corners," period.
15:18:24 You have three members comment on the record, Julia is
15:18:28 right, Cathy is right.
15:18:30 Nonetheless, they reversed.
15:18:35 That action is not supported by competent, substantial
15:18:38 It completely 180 degrees off the evidence.
15:18:45 I can offer further explanation to you, further
15:18:48 argument to you.
15:18:49 I have record I have provided to you.
15:18:52 I commend it to your reading.
15:18:54 I'm available to answer any further questions.
15:18:56 This is a very simple case.
15:18:59 Did Ms. Coyle correctly interpret the code and the PD
15:19:03 in front of her?
15:19:04 She D.did is T Variance Review Board incorrectly rule
15:19:08 on her decision?
15:19:09 They did.
15:19:10 You are compelled to reverse their decision.
15:19:12 I ask that you do.
15:19:13 I have nothing further to add.
15:19:15 I'm available for any questions you may have.
15:19:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The issue is we lost our quorum and
15:19:47 you all need to hear what the attorney says when they
15:19:50 present a case to us so we can understand, and then we
15:19:53 lost the quorum, then the meeting is not legal.
15:20:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's the two of us and we are still
15:20:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Terrible.
15:20:08 I don't like meetings like this.
15:20:11 It's terrible.
15:20:13 I apologize to you that are here.
15:20:15 This is not professional.
15:20:17 This is not the way it should be handled.
15:20:19 And we have to address this at some point.
15:20:26 Let me take a recess for five minutes so we can get a
15:20:29 quorum back in.
15:20:30 Let's take a five-minute recess to get a quorum in.
15:20:33 Thank you.
15:20:34 (City Council recess).
15:26:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, we will reconvene.
15:26:59 Roll call, please.
15:27:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
15:27:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
15:27:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
15:27:07 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
15:27:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
15:27:13 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Mr. Chair, you finished my argument
15:27:15 and I asked if there were any questions from the
15:27:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
15:27:22 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Grandoff, you made a
15:27:24 statement before that three other people on the review
15:27:28 board agreed with Cathy Coyle.
15:27:31 And that agreement was they were legal, excavations.
15:27:39 >>> Yes.
15:27:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: And half of these people agreed
15:27:43 and then went an opposite direction.
15:27:44 >>> That's what's so perplexing about the decision.
15:27:47 Mr. Oh Kelly, Mr. Amadeo and Mr. Catalano all she had
15:27:53 clearly she was right.
15:27:54 And my opinion is they decided that they didn't want
15:27:57 to make a tough call, and forced us to appeal to you
15:28:00 this afternoon.
15:28:01 I think that's what happened.
15:28:05 Because it's totally 180 degrees from their finding.
15:28:10 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Maybe this board ought to be
15:28:12 reviewed, if they render an opinion that they agree
15:28:14 with the attorney and then vote against the staff,
15:28:22 maybe there's some collusion there, there's something
15:28:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern, then councilman
15:28:31 >>MARY MULHERN: We have only begun to hear any
15:28:37 So I'm going to listen to everything.
15:28:39 And I had a couple of questions for you, Mr. Grandoff.
15:28:43 I did review the file.
15:28:44 And I did watch the entire Variance Review Board cape.
15:28:55 One question is, you are quoting Cathy Coyle saying
15:29:02 your dryers are typical accessories.
15:29:05 Is that what you said?
15:29:09 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Yes.
15:29:10 >>MARY MULHERN: And that was Cathy's interpretation
15:29:17 they are typical?
15:29:18 Or was she siting?
15:29:20 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Pardon me for a moment.
15:29:32 On page 16, she said: What else I noted in my letter
15:29:53 was that air blowers are that accessory equipment that
15:29:56 has been a historical interpretation of my office for
15:30:00 more than 20 years.
15:30:02 An air conditioner and accessory mechanical equipment,
15:30:06 an air blower is an accessory, standard accessory
15:30:09 equipment to an auto car wash just as it has been --
15:30:13 just as it is throughout the city.
15:30:14 And that has been replicated over and over again
15:30:17 throughout the city.
15:30:18 That's on page --
15:30:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, but my question was that was her
15:30:25 It wasn't from any code or anything.
15:30:27 It was just her decision and interpretation.
15:30:31 She wasn't quoting from some --
15:30:36 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Yes, ma'am.
15:30:37 >>MARY MULHERN: My next question.
15:30:40 This is a very interesting appeal to me.
15:30:42 Because we are talking about a planned development,
15:30:48 which everyone is saying is dependent on the site
15:30:52 plan, right?
15:30:54 Everything within four corners of the site plan.
15:30:57 Well, I went to art school, and I took some drafting
15:31:02 classes, and we have to think visually, too, in legal
15:31:05 terms, because this document is basically a drawing.
15:31:10 So not only are they bound by the words in it.
15:31:13 The words are really additions to this site plan.
15:31:17 They came with the site plan, and then they add these
15:31:22 But the meat of it is the drawing.
15:31:25 Here's what I'm going to build.
15:31:27 And I think I heard in all this testimony that there
15:31:34 were no blowers on here.
15:31:37 Am I right?
15:31:40 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: That's correct.
15:31:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Because there's something over here I
15:31:43 couldn't figure out what it is.
15:31:44 So there's no blowers on here.
15:31:45 >>> That's correct.
15:31:47 >> And this was the site plan that City Council --
15:31:51 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: That's correct.
15:31:53 And there's an important distinction.
15:31:59 We went to permitting, and the blowers were included
15:32:02 in the site plan.
15:32:03 But outside of this footprint.
15:32:07 That was illegal.
15:32:10 He revised the building plan and put the blowers up
15:32:15 above, inside the structure.
15:32:18 Air blowers are not a separate regulated use under the
15:32:22 zoning code.
15:32:24 He had been in compliance.
15:32:26 >>MARY MULHERN: But none of that was discussed, or
15:32:28 there was no -- actually, at the City Council hearing,
15:32:34 when he got his zoning approval, that was not on the
15:32:40 site plan.
15:32:40 >>> That's correct.
15:32:41 >> So how is it that -- I guess this is a question for
15:32:49 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Let me give you an analogy.
15:32:52 >>MARY MULHERN: No, I understand.
15:32:55 I don't think you need to give me an analogy.
15:32:57 But my question to Julia is, this is kind of
15:33:12 complicated because there were so many hearings.
15:33:15 When the petitioner went to zoning to add the blowers,
15:33:23 at that point, because this was a PD, she looked at
15:33:29 the site plan.
15:33:32 And noticed that there was -- this was approved by
15:33:35 City Council, right?
15:33:40 >>JULIA COLE: As part of the record, what was in the
15:33:43 record is as follows.
15:33:44 This is a record review.
15:33:46 We have to be very cognizant and careful when we look
15:33:50 at it from this perspective.
15:33:52 What was in the record was originally, I believe Ms.
15:33:55 Coyle was requested to opine the ratings to blowers
15:33:59 which were placed outside, within the setbacks, within
15:34:03 the site plan --
15:34:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Right, right, right.
15:34:06 >>> That was determined because it was a setback
15:34:10 violation and this was discussed as part of the record
15:34:13 that that was not legal.
15:34:14 That was corrected.
15:34:15 That aspect of it was dealt with.
15:34:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
15:34:19 >>JULIA COLE: At that point in the future there was a
15:34:23 request made of Cathy to opine relating to whether or
15:34:27 not the blowers can be within the setback.
15:34:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand that.
15:34:33 >>JULIA COLE: So I want to make sure that --
15:34:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, I understand that.
15:34:38 My question is, as the zoning administrator who is
15:34:43 making that decision -- and I think she said this in
15:34:48 the variance review thing, that her decision is
15:34:54 based -- is based on her interpretation, and the site
15:35:00 plan, right?
15:35:01 Even though they have done something illegal and fixed
15:35:03 it, she still is making her decision, according to
15:35:06 that site plan that City Council approved.
15:35:08 >>JULIA COLE: Well, her decision was based upon a
15:35:12 request for a zoning administrator interpretation.
15:35:14 I mean this wasn't a situation --
15:35:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Right, but --
15:35:18 >>JULIA COLE: She was requested, what is in front of
15:35:21 you, she was answering a specific question to her
15:35:23 which is whether or not the blowers could be or were
15:35:27 allowable uses on this property.
15:35:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Right, and this was a PD.
15:35:33 So its site plan.
15:35:36 I don't know what that wording is.
15:35:38 This is what she had to work with.
15:35:40 This was her knowledge within the code.
15:35:48 >>JULIA COLE: Let me say, that is correct, that is
15:35:50 what her decision was based upon as part of her
15:35:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Dingfelder, then Mr. Charlie
15:36:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And we do need to hear from Mr.
15:36:03 Thomas on the other side in a minute.
15:36:05 But my question is this to Mr. Grandoff, because I
15:36:07 want this record to be as clear as possible in case it
15:36:10 has to go further.
15:36:12 For one thing, on page 9, of the VRB transcript that
15:36:18 we are reviewing, at the bottom of the page, bottom
15:36:20 paragraph on line 21, and I'm sort of surprised nobody
15:36:24 picked up on this at the VRB.
15:36:26 It says, during the council's scent discussion of that
15:36:30 development approval Martin Shelby made the final
15:36:33 He said -- and then I'll skip a little bit, quote:
15:36:38 And the noise because like you said no noise, because
15:36:40 it doesn't have air dryers, no problem.
15:36:43 So I will support this.
15:36:45 Now I will a sure you if Martin Shelby, our City
15:36:49 Council attorney, never said -- whoever was making the
15:36:53 transcript that night, mistook Mr. Shelby's voice
15:36:57 perhaps for one of the other male voices in the room,
15:37:00 because the people who have do the transcripts are not
15:37:03 in the same room.
15:37:04 They are in another room.
15:37:05 They can hear our voices.
15:37:08 Obviously he or she, whoever is doing it takes the
15:37:11 transcript got it wrong.
15:37:12 But I just want to clear that up.
15:37:14 Because it's a little bit important.
15:37:16 Somebody else said those words.
15:37:18 I'm not sure.
15:37:19 And we'll never know unless we went back and looked at
15:37:22 the audio tape which male person it might have been
15:37:25 that night.
15:37:25 But I just want to clarify that.
15:37:27 Mr. Grandoff, are you in agreement with that
15:37:31 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I just noticed it myself.
15:37:33 That's John Thomas speaking at the VRB level.
15:37:36 That wasn't Marty.
15:37:41 >> It wasn't John Thomas.
15:37:42 >>> It's John Thomas' argument.
15:37:44 >> John Thomas' argument and he's quoting verbatim
15:37:48 from the, quote, verbatim transcript at the original
15:37:52 City Council hearing was a mistake.
15:37:54 >>> And let me mention there were --
15:38:00 >>JULIA COLE: The line of questioning that you are
15:38:02 asking, Mr. Dingfelder, needs by necessity to add
15:38:09 additional facts into the record but there is concern
15:38:11 that this record is based upon facts that are
15:38:14 incorrect, then I would recommend you remand that back
15:38:18 to get that particular issue corrected so that we
15:38:22 could deal with that factually.
15:38:25 >> That's a possibility but I want to make sure we are
15:38:27 all on the same page.
15:38:30 Somebody obviously said it.
15:38:31 The guy didn't make it up as he was typing but it
15:38:33 wasn't Mr. Shelby because he's our City Council
15:38:35 attorney and he's not going to say, quote, so I will
15:38:38 support it."
15:38:39 >> And there was a certified reporter at that hearing.
15:38:45 What that is is the shorthand transcript taken by --
15:38:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me ask you, Mr. Grandoff, this
15:38:57 goes to the same page, page nine, where Mr. Thomas is
15:39:00 describing what happened at City Council.
15:39:02 And Mr. Caetano, this is extremely important.
15:39:05 As related to your questions.
15:39:07 What's the VRB doing, all right?
15:39:09 Well, the VRB -- and I'm looking attachment 2 at tab
15:39:14 7, which is the -- which I believe is that verbatim
15:39:19 transcript that came from -- I don't know where it
15:39:22 comes from.
15:39:23 I assume it comes out of the city clerk's office.
15:39:29 It's attachment 2 to tab 7 of the record that I have.
15:39:37 It's not another page.
15:39:40 But it's tab 7.
15:39:42 And it feels like it's one, two, three, four pages
15:39:46 back in tab 7.
15:39:51 But in this transcript from the original City Council
15:39:54 hearing, that was referenced by Mr. Thomas on page 9
15:40:00 of the VRB hearing, says, it quotes Mr. Shelby as your
15:40:07 client, in front of this City Council in 2004, okay,
15:40:14 and I was on this board as was Gwen Miller, who is
15:40:18 sitting here today, and it says, quote, and it's
15:40:21 circled in this document in attachment 2, it quotes
15:40:25 Mr. Shelby as saying, quote, I'm not sitting an air
15:40:29 drier like Mr. Betancourt has on his, I assume his car
15:40:34 Mr. Shelby continues: That's why he's aware -- Mr.
15:40:39 Betancourt or somebody else -- he's aware of the loud
15:40:42 noise and probably complains, it's because the big air
15:40:45 dryers kick on and they are noisy.
15:40:48 I don't do them.
15:40:49 I use reverse osmosis, something or other, where we
15:40:54 take the water and take the solids out and spray the
15:40:58 That really is what -- and my question to you is, do
15:41:04 you doubt or question that your client, Mr. Schoewe,
15:41:09 said that in front of this City Council when we
15:41:11 originally made our decision, he said, I'm not going
15:41:14 to use air dryers, I'm going to use reverse osmosis
15:41:20 Do you stipulate that's what he said to this council
15:41:22 when we made our decision in 2004?
15:41:24 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I did not represent Mr. Schoewe at
15:41:31 that hearing.
15:41:31 Transcript that you quoted speaks for itself.
15:41:34 I will further add that it is absolutely not relevant
15:41:37 to this proceeding this afternoon.
15:41:39 >> Well, I guess we decide relevance.
15:41:41 But the bottom line is, it appears from these records
15:41:45 that we have, from the records that the VRB reviewed,
15:41:50 that this was an assertion to this City Council that
15:41:52 he was not going to use -- let me finish, John -- that
15:41:57 he was not going to use air dryers, he was going to
15:41:59 use a reverse osmosis treatment system instead.
15:42:08 You, at page 24 of the VRB transcript, attempted to
15:42:14 put evidence on the record, okay.
15:42:18 You said sort of rhetorically on page 24, line 13 of
15:42:22 the VRB the blowers in?
15:42:27 Market reasons.
15:42:28 Market demands that you have the blowers in your
15:42:30 Otherwise, you can't compete against your competition,
15:42:33 pure and simple.
15:42:34 He, Mr. Schoewe, decided after the fact to do that.
15:42:39 In other words, he decided -- so basically you are
15:42:42 stipulating that earlier in front of this council,
15:42:45 when we approved the PD, he said he wasn't going to do
15:42:47 the blow drier, the dryers, and he decided later after
15:42:52 he got the PD and after he was up and running that the
15:42:54 market demanded that he do it.
15:42:57 I think the record is abundantly clear on all of that.
15:43:01 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: That's what I said.
15:43:04 >> That's what you said and that's what I'm reading.
15:43:06 But I want to point out those are extremely important
15:43:08 provisions to council.
15:43:09 Because to me it explains where the VRB was coming
15:43:13 from when they made this decision.
15:43:14 They weren't coming out of left field, okay.
15:43:16 They were relying upon these assertions at the
15:43:21 original VRB hearing.
15:43:23 The only reason I mention that is, okay, there is a
15:43:26 statute that says when you stand at that podium, okay,
15:43:29 and to me it doesn't matter whether or not you raise
15:43:33 your hand and sworn under oath, when you stand at that
15:43:36 podium and you talk to this body especially in a
15:43:39 quasi-judicial format, okay, that if you mislead the
15:43:45 body or misrepresent the body it's a potential
15:43:49 misdemeanor, a violation of law.
15:43:51 There is no fact in evidence, because your
15:43:53 representation about why he did it, market reasons,
15:43:56 those aren't facts in evidence because you can't
15:43:59 Is that correct?
15:44:00 You can't testify to fact.
15:44:02 At that VRB hearing.
15:44:04 Is that correct?
15:44:06 I mean, you can't.
15:44:07 That's not your role.
15:44:08 >>> What is the line of your questions?
15:44:12 >> My point is, as a lawyer, would you agree that you,
15:44:15 at the VRB hearing when you said this at page 24, line
15:44:19 13 through 18, okay, you offered argument about why
15:44:22 you thought your client did something.
15:44:24 But those can't be facts in evidence, can they?
15:44:27 >>> I'm an advocate.
15:44:28 I was not testifying.
15:44:29 I was answering the potential question from the VRB,
15:44:33 why did this gentleman change his mind?
15:44:36 And your arguing with me has absolutely nothing to do
15:44:40 with this afternoon's hearing.
15:44:41 >> My whole point is exactly it does have to do with
15:44:43 this hearing.
15:44:43 >>> It doesn't.
15:44:44 >> My whole point is I sat in that hearing on 2004.
15:44:49 And I heard him say that he wasn't going to put blow
15:44:52 dryers in.
15:44:54 And --
15:44:55 >>> this is not a rezoning hearing.
15:44:58 It's an issue of law.
15:44:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, obviously some other courts
15:45:02 can decide that later.
15:45:03 But right now, I will tell you that I heard him say
15:45:06 that he wasn't going to put blow dryers in.
15:45:08 The fact that that little incremental statement did
15:45:11 not make it into that PD, into that PD site plan is
15:45:16 what you are hanging your entire case on.
15:45:17 >>> No, it's know it.
15:45:18 >> Yes, it is.
15:45:20 In my opinion that's what it is.
15:45:21 >>> You're wrong.
15:45:22 >> Well, that's what I heard you say.
15:45:23 It didn't make it into the site plan as a condition,
15:45:26 therefore we can't rely on it.
15:45:27 Well, you know what?
15:45:29 This board has to be able to rely on the assertion
15:45:33 that is are made at that podium by petitioners, okay,
15:45:36 who now are under oath.
15:45:38 At that time I can't swear they were under oath but I
15:45:40 assume he's an honorable man.
15:45:42 And made that assertion to council.
15:45:45 Council took him on his word.
15:45:46 We approved the rezoning for that drier.
15:45:50 And then he changed his mind down the road.
15:45:53 And that's what the case is about.
15:45:55 Anyway, let's move on here.
15:45:56 >>> May I respond for a moment?
15:45:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Miranda.
15:46:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, no one knows what I
15:46:07 said 15 years ago, but I still remember what I said.
15:46:11 These things are going to court, not to City Council.
15:46:33 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: May I respond briefly?
15:46:35 Mr. Dingfelder, the transcript speaks for itself.
15:46:37 Mr. Schoewe is a man of honor.
15:46:41 He was sworn at that hearing.
15:46:42 That's what he said.
15:46:44 He amended his permit, not the rezoning, permit, to
15:46:49 include dryers within the footprint.
15:46:52 That is completely legal.
15:46:57 We operate, with this system of government, under
15:47:02 systems of law.
15:47:03 And it has to be a system of written law, either by
15:47:06 ordinance, or by site plan.
15:47:10 Now, the variance review board may not like the
15:47:13 results, but they are compelled to follow the law.
15:47:15 And they had no choice but to affirm the decision.
15:47:24 They departed from the essential requirements of the
15:47:29 And I ask that you reverse their decision.
15:47:31 I will reserve the remainder of my time for rebuttal,
15:47:48 >>> John Thomas, I'm an attorney for Julie and Don
15:47:52 Watson who are here.
15:47:54 And my address is 233 Third Street north,
15:47:56 St. Petersburg.
15:47:58 I appreciate your patience hearing this today.
15:48:02 As in many cases, it seems like the appellant and the
15:48:06 appellee are talking two different languages, talking
15:48:09 about two different sets of facts.
15:48:10 But I must commend councilman Dingfelder for
15:48:15 presenting really what is the crux underlying this
15:48:20 case, that this case is explainable, and it can be
15:48:23 explained within the confines of the law.
15:48:27 What we had in this case was a misrepresentation to
15:48:32 this council.
15:48:33 Although there's big a big turnover, I wish the
15:48:35 other -- no offense to you newly-elected, but the
15:48:39 prior council would be clearly offended by these set
15:48:42 of facts.
15:48:43 The Variance Review Board was offended by this set of
15:48:48 But to explain better how this should be interpreted,
15:48:56 the original ordinance, rezoning, was based on the
15:49:03 September 2004 site plan.
15:49:06 That site plan was silent regarding the drying method.
15:49:12 But it did not provide the infrastructure for drying.
15:49:14 It did not provide the electrical service for drying.
15:49:19 We included in the record a letter from Mike Romaldi
15:49:26 explaining this.
15:49:27 And in his letter he says: I find no indication that
15:49:31 high volume air blowers to dry vehicles after washing
15:49:35 at this location were ever specified in the
15:49:37 construction plans.
15:49:39 No means of blowers are shown on the elevations, nor
15:49:41 are they or their respective electrical service
15:49:46 supplies indicated on the electrical plan sheet of the
15:49:51 So these plans, which the appellant would like you to
15:49:56 focus narrowly upon, didn't provide for blowers.
15:50:00 So we agreed.
15:50:02 They didn't provide for blowers.
15:50:04 So the colloquy that has been accentuated by Mr.
15:50:10 Dingfelder was a discussion of whether this project
15:50:15 was compatible with this neighborhood, and
15:50:19 compatibility was one of the key permitting criteria
15:50:23 for a site plan rezoning such as this.
15:50:27 In fact, the code provisions include section 27-323-6
15:50:35 which provides the construction on properties zoned
15:50:37 site plan, zoning district, may only take place
15:50:39 consistent with the site development plan approved at
15:50:43 the time of the rezoning.
15:50:44 So that's critical.
15:50:45 This plan didn't include air blowers at all.
15:50:54 Then we look at, okay, how would you bring about air
15:50:57 blowers to this site plan?
15:50:58 The answer is you would have to go back and request
15:51:00 them from the city, and then the zoning administrator
15:51:03 should have made a determination whether that would be
15:51:06 a substantial change or not.
15:51:08 If it was a substantial change, and it would have to
15:51:11 come back before the council.
15:51:14 The council which was considering whether this
15:51:17 facility would be compatible with the neighborhood.
15:51:21 So when that did not occur, that's the err.
15:51:25 This was a substantial modification.
15:51:27 There are examples of substantial modification that
15:51:29 are included in the code, and substantial change --
15:51:34 this is from the code, section 27-323 -- substantial
15:51:39 change to the approved site plan development are
15:51:43 deemed to exist where there is failure to comply with
15:51:46 conditions or stipulations authorizing the original
15:51:50 Number one, when Mr. Schoewe got up here he stipulated
15:51:53 that the design concept that he was -- the employ of
15:51:58 this car wash, the design concept was a reverse
15:52:02 osmosis of eliminating spotting, not an air blowers
15:52:06 So his design concept was important.
15:52:13 Another criterion that creates a substantial change is
15:52:16 when there is a modification in the original design
15:52:19 concepts such as a substantial change in relationships
15:52:22 among land uses.
15:52:24 That's what we have here.
15:52:26 We have car wash.
15:52:28 We have residential.
15:52:29 This car wash is right up against residential.
15:52:32 So that's really the problem that we have in this
15:52:36 There was a substantial modification in the design
15:52:40 concept, a substantial change, and that change needed
15:52:42 to go back through the rezoning process, come back
15:52:46 before this council, for this council to consider
15:52:49 whether this car wash with these blowers would be
15:52:52 compatible. so it's our position that there was a
15:52:57 substantial change, and that that substantial change
15:53:00 should have triggered a re-review by this council.
15:53:04 The original site plan, the appellant is relying upon,
15:53:08 did not address the blowers.
15:53:13 We provided an opinion letter.
15:53:15 I assume this is in the appeal packet.
15:53:20 It should be Mr. Romaldi's letter.
15:53:24 That explains why these blowers were not included, and
15:53:27 what that means.
15:53:29 So the unfortunate thing here is, we have the
15:53:33 appellee, the Watsons, who have two properties in the
15:53:38 neighborhood adjacent to this car wash, they could not
15:53:42 rent them, they could not sell them.
15:53:44 And then Mr. Schoewe comes in and his council at the
15:53:47 Variance Review Board hearing represents that he
15:53:52 changed the design because of market conditions,
15:53:56 Economic impact of not having blowers to him.
15:53:59 But the impact of having blowers to the community that
15:54:03 they cannot rent, they cannot sell.
15:54:05 They are just losing money on those properties.
15:54:08 So I want you to consider the three prongs test that
15:54:15 is presented to you.
15:54:16 Due process is out according to the appellant.
15:54:20 They are not pursuing a process claim.
15:54:23 Essential requirements of law.
15:54:24 Essential requirements of law is not fine detail,
15:54:29 compliance with each and every aspect of the law.
15:54:31 It's gross compliance, essentially.
15:54:34 It's the essential compliance.
15:54:36 And also the substantial competent evidence standard,
15:54:42 case line interpreting that indicates that it's
15:54:44 basically any substantial, competent evidence.
15:54:47 Doesn't have to be a.
15:54:48 Of the evidence.
15:54:49 Just any substantial competent evidence.
15:54:52 So it's clear, there is substantial, competent
15:54:56 There was testimony from a number of residents in that
15:55:00 community, that when these blowers come on, they
15:55:04 cannot enjoy their homes.
15:55:09 There's testimony that they could not sell, they could
15:55:11 not rent, they cannot enjoy.
15:55:14 And this is all because of a change, after the fact
15:55:17 change, after the certificate of occupancy was issued,
15:55:24 that's when Mr. Schoewe went back and installed these
15:55:28 And I believe he installed them without pulling
15:55:30 permits first.
15:55:31 I think he got an after-the-fact permit, is my
15:55:36 So we don't really have -- Mr. Grandoff says appellant
15:55:43 in good faith relied on the City Council's approval.
15:55:46 I think that's pretty tough position for him to take.
15:55:51 Good faith is on the part of the community.
15:55:54 The applicant went to the community.
15:55:57 This is in the record.
15:55:58 Went to the community.
15:55:58 Met with them individually.
15:56:00 Went door to door.
15:56:01 And spoke with them about how he was going to use
15:56:05 reverse osmosis system, they didn't need to worry
15:56:09 about noise, and so they came to this hearing, they
15:56:12 just wanted to make sure that it was going to be
15:56:14 reverse osmosis and not blowers.
15:56:16 That's what everybody heard.
15:56:20 Maybe a misdemeanor was spoken and occurred before
15:56:23 this council, to bring about approval.
15:56:28 I don't know if any of you remember as a child, there
15:56:31 was a commercial, promise them anything but give them
15:56:37 That's what comes to their mind.
15:56:38 Quirky perhaps.
15:56:40 But programs them anything but do what you want to do,
15:56:43 do exactly what you want to do regardless of what you
15:56:46 promised them.
15:56:47 If this council now reverse it is variance review
15:56:50 board it rewards that misdemeanor, it rewards that
15:56:53 approach of promise them anything but do whatever it
15:56:55 is you want.
15:56:58 That's what this is about.
15:57:01 Can an applicant come before you, promise you whatever
15:57:04 he wants, and as long as you don't do something formal
15:57:10 which the public doesn't control to memorialize that,
15:57:14 the applicant can say it's not there, I am not
15:57:17 required, I'm not bound.
15:57:19 I can tell you anything, if you don't put it down in
15:57:22 your stipulation, in your conditions, then I can do
15:57:24 whatever I want.
15:57:26 That's what we have here.
15:57:28 Now, I do have one further point to make here.
15:57:33 A little bit difficult.
15:57:34 I apologize for this.
15:57:35 But for the record I must object to the quorum issue
15:57:38 that we went through between the appellant and the
15:57:42 appellee's presentation.
15:57:44 For the record I need to place that.
15:57:46 I don't know who heard what.
15:57:47 I hope you all have a good indoctrination.
15:57:53 I'm available and here to answer any questions you may
15:57:56 I hope you understand, there has been -- the appellant
15:58:01 has the burden of proof.
15:58:03 The appellant has not shown a departure from the
15:58:06 essential elements of law. The appellant has not
15:58:06 shown a lack of substantial competent evidence.
15:58:09 And we ask you to uphold the VRB decision.
15:58:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
15:58:16 We will have rebuttal.
15:58:18 And Mr. Grandoff, you have three minutes.
15:58:32 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
15:58:33 Speaking on rebuttal, there is no misrepresentation by
15:58:38 Mr. Schoewe at the PV hearing.
15:58:43 Site plan is silent as to air dryers.
15:58:46 Ms. Coyle typically found that air dryers and other
15:58:50 mechanical systems have been historic a determined to
15:58:53 be accessory to and standard for the principal uses
15:58:55 they served.
15:58:57 That's in her letter October 24.
15:58:59 Mr. Thomas raised a big I shall but compatibility.
15:59:02 That is a complete red herring in this case.
15:59:05 The PD by you approving it has to find compatibility
15:59:11 to be approved.
15:59:14 The PD by its very terms is a zoning district, it
15:59:21 speaks to itself, the four corners of the document.
15:59:23 The variance review board did not like Ms. Coyle's
15:59:26 decision but they were bound by law to affirm it.
15:59:29 And what they have done is they placed it directly in
15:59:31 your lap this afternoon, because they feel that the
15:59:35 City Council created the problem because a condition
15:59:38 was not imposed upon Mr. Schoewe at the time the PD
15:59:42 was adopted.
15:59:43 That is pure and simply what's going on.
15:59:45 You cannot conduct business constantly looking at
15:59:51 transcripts ad nauseam to see what was said and what
15:59:55 was not said.
15:59:56 Mr. Schoewe is on completely firm legal ground to do
16:00:00 what he did.
16:00:01 The air drier is common to a car wash.
16:00:05 He changed his plan in conformance with the city code
16:00:08 and chapter 5.
16:00:09 The city issued a permit.
16:00:11 He relied on that permit.
16:00:13 That is a property right.
16:00:15 And he is entitled to continue to operate with the air
16:00:21 The appellant that Mr. Thomas' client raised an issue
16:00:25 about can't rent my property, property rights
16:00:28 everybody lost, diminution of value.
16:00:33 That is a civil remedy they have and they will have
16:00:35 tomorrow if they wish to pursue that in circuit court
16:00:38 we would certainly welcome that challenge if they want
16:00:41 to do that.
16:00:42 That is not your problem. That is not your remedy to
16:00:45 You can only look at the Variance Review Board's
16:00:48 You can come to no other conclusion but that they
16:00:53 departed from essential requirements of the law.
16:00:57 Four of them admitted on the record that Ms. Coyle and
16:01:02 Ms. Cole, the zoning administrator and her attorney,
16:01:04 were correct.
16:01:08 The zoning administrator and her attorney both agreed
16:01:10 that she was correct.
16:01:13 You are compelled to reverse the decision.
16:01:18 It may not conform to exactly what you feel should
16:01:21 have been done.
16:01:21 You have no power to now rezone the property according
16:01:24 to whim.
16:01:25 And I ask that you reverse the VRB's decision.
16:01:29 I have nothing further.
16:01:31 Thank you for your time.
16:01:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Policies for a meal have not
16:01:44 contemplated surrebuttal.
16:01:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
16:01:47 Councilwoman Mary Mulhern and councilman Dingfelder.
16:01:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
16:01:55 I don't think -- this is all very emotional and a lot
16:01:59 of opportunity for histrionics but I don't think we
16:02:04 need it.
16:02:05 I have just a few questions and then I am going to
16:02:07 make a motion to uphold the VRB's decision, I believe.
16:02:14 If Julia Cole can help me with this, as an attorney.
16:02:21 I tried to ask you this before, and I don't know if I
16:02:24 said the question right or if I got the answer.
16:02:26 But this is the site plan that is basically what I
16:02:37 think Mr. Grandoff just said, that this is basically
16:02:40 the law of what can happen there, right?
16:02:45 And the argument of the petitioner is that basically
16:02:53 that it wasn't written down on here, that there would
16:02:56 be no growth.
16:02:59 >>> That's what I understand.
16:03:03 >>MARY MULHERN: But this is the evidence, right?
16:03:07 Of what -- I mean, I'm not interpreting this site
16:03:10 I'm looking at it, right?
16:03:13 >>JULIA COLE: The procedure -- and I know this is
16:03:15 frustrating because I am not giving you a direct
16:03:17 answer but that's the nature of this type of
16:03:19 I think you need to procedurally step back, and when
16:03:22 we are talking CPA about exactly what the VRB said I
16:03:25 am going to ask that Mr. Mueller for the VRB opine it
16:03:30 because I technically was not setting with the VRB at
16:03:34 the time but I think I can tell you procedurally where
16:03:36 this is.
16:03:37 There was a request made of the zoning administrator
16:03:38 who has the authority under the code to interpret the
16:03:42 zoning code, included in the zoning code is the zoning
16:03:46 atlas which includes the site plan zoning district.
16:03:49 She interpreted that zoning code, that zoning
16:03:58 classification, with that site plan, to be that on the
16:04:02 face of that site plan, blowers were not prohibited,
16:04:10 therefore there was nothing that she could say
16:04:12 required a substantial change if blowers were
16:04:15 requested to now be included on that site.
16:04:19 It would not be a substantial change.
16:04:22 That opinion, that interpretation, was appealed to the
16:04:25 Variance Review Board.
16:04:27 The Variance Review Board when they reviewed the
16:04:31 zoning administrator's interpretation under the way
16:04:32 your code reads is not limited to only the evidence
16:04:36 reviewed and determined by the zoning administration.
16:04:38 They can take testimony, what they call a de novo
16:04:42 It is something where additional evidence and
16:04:45 testimony is taken for them to review and make a
16:04:48 determination as to whether or not the zoning
16:04:51 administrator's interpretation is correct.
16:04:55 And that is procedurally where this was.
16:04:57 It went to the Variance Review Board.
16:05:01 They listened to additional evidence and testimony and
16:05:04 overturned her interpretation.
16:05:07 And I just think the problem is procedurally where
16:05:12 this is.
16:05:13 You are now looking at the variance review board
16:05:15 decision. And what you are --
16:05:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, we are looking at their
16:05:19 decision, and whether -- we are looking at the
16:05:21 Variance Review Board's decision under the three
16:05:25 categories, whether there was competent, substantial
16:05:28 evidence to overturn it.
16:05:35 Whether the due process was afforded, and the
16:05:38 essential requirements of law.
16:05:41 >>> That's correct.
16:05:42 So you are not looking at Cathy's decision, you are
16:05:44 looking at the variance review board decision.
16:05:46 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a great deal of respect ---I
16:05:51 have one more -- of Cathy and we all do and she's
16:05:56 brilliant, but that's not the question.
16:05:59 I think Mr. Grandoff said that this is the law.
16:06:02 This site plan, because it's a planned development,
16:06:07 this determines what can happen there.
16:06:09 And that was presented by -- I think I'm okay now.
16:06:22 Mr. Thomas, this is his main argument, that this is
16:06:25 the site plan.
16:06:28 There weren't blowers on the site plan.
16:06:30 I don't think it matters.
16:06:31 And this is my argument.
16:06:33 I don't think it matters, but this is the substantial
16:06:39 evidence, all they needed, because this is the site
16:06:41 There's a few little notes here.
16:06:46 There are little notes on the site plan.
16:06:48 But this is the site plan.
16:06:49 And this site plan is really small.
16:06:55 But they listed everything that was going in here,
16:06:59 except blowers.
16:07:00 They listed, oh, here's a fire hydrant, here's a
16:07:03 masonry wall, here is where the wheelchairs can park,
16:07:09 here's the automated wash bay, here is the equipment
16:07:13 storage, here is the self-serve car wash, here is the
16:07:18 self-serve wash base, here is the existing asphalt,
16:07:21 here is the existing asphalt to be removed, here is
16:07:25 the proposed six-foot masonry wall, here's the
16:07:29 landscape buffer.
16:07:30 There's a lot of really small print I can't read.
16:07:33 But I know it doesn't say blowers.
16:07:36 So I don't think it matters that council didn't make
16:07:44 them write on the site plan.
16:07:45 A site plan is the drawing, and the notes are part of
16:07:49 But that isn't the entire part of it.
16:07:54 So if we are going to interpret this -- if site plans
16:07:58 can be interpreted that way, I will never vote for
16:08:00 another PD, because that means unless you write on
16:08:05 this PD, you can never put up blah-blah-blah.
16:08:10 Then the person can go right back to the zoning
16:08:13 administrator, and if they can sell the idea to her --
16:08:18 and it is a big burden on her look what she had to do.
16:08:21 She probably wasn't here when council voted on this.
16:08:26 This is what she had to go on.
16:08:28 And there is no blowers in here.
16:08:33 There's no reverse osmosis.
16:08:35 There's nothing on here.
16:08:37 But I think that all the stuff, getting rezoned, it
16:08:44 doesn't matter because this is the site plan, this is
16:08:46 the law of that site.
16:08:52 And the Variance Review Board accepted the appeal.
16:08:58 What did they do?
16:08:59 They granted the appeal, because what happened was not
16:09:05 included on the site plan.
16:09:11 So I move to deny the appeal of the petitioner.
16:09:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And uphold the decision of the VRB.
16:09:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, and up hold the decision of
16:09:23 the VRB.
16:09:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I'll second that.
16:09:26 And I think that's an excellent explanation of the
16:09:30 site plan.
16:09:30 But I also want to talk about one other thing, and I
16:09:33 alluded to it before and I apologize for the late hour
16:09:35 and I'll try to go as fast as I can.
16:09:38 Snoop pleas do.
16:09:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I will.
16:09:41 Mr. Grandoff spoke about a system of laws.
16:09:43 And within the system of laws as Mr. Grandoff and
16:09:44 everybody else in this court -- in this court? -- in
16:09:48 this room knows is a concept of equity, a concept of
16:09:52 equity which means fairness.
16:09:55 And within the system of laws is the concept of
16:09:57 equitable estoppel.
16:09:59 And within the concept of equitable estoppel, it
16:10:02 basically means that the person, okay in, this case I
16:10:06 believe Mr. Schoewe, cannot come to this City Council
16:10:09 and say I will not put in fans, and then turn around
16:10:14 after he gets his PD rezoning and just so happens it
16:10:17 didn't get codified, expressly codified on the PD site
16:10:21 plan and then turn around and pull a quick one and put
16:10:24 in fans.
16:10:25 Now if he was out in the middle of the cow pasture,
16:10:28 and maybe none of us would be here.
16:10:30 But the reality is, as a matter of fact, that his
16:10:33 establishment, his car wash facility, immediately
16:10:37 abuts residential property.
16:10:41 Let's talk about equitable estoppel.
16:10:44 I have litigated this issue and I am going to site the
16:10:47 case because it's recorded, Jerome waders versus city
16:10:51 of Palmetto and the major issue was fraud on the
16:10:55 Like it or not, Charlie, and you are probably right in
16:10:57 some ways, we shouldn't be doing these cases, but like
16:10:59 it or not, we sit as a court sometimes.
16:11:02 We sit as a court today in appellate capacity, when we
16:11:06 sit in a rezoning capacity we sit as a quasi-judicial
16:11:11 body as a court.
16:11:11 The concept of fraud on the court says, and the Waders
16:11:15 case that I just sited and I apologize for not having
16:11:18 the site, Judge Lazzara in federal district court here
16:11:20 in Tampa, okay, it was affirmed bit eleventh circuit,
16:11:25 basically said, you cannot do that.
16:11:29 Any part of your process as long as you are standing
16:11:31 in front of a judicial body you better shoot straight.
16:11:34 If you don't shoot straight, then a later body, in
16:11:37 this case it was judge Lavoro of the eleventh circuit,
16:11:42 will shoot down your case because that's not what our
16:11:45 system of justice is about.
16:11:46 Our sis Tim of justice is equity and fairness.
16:11:49 And we have another group of people out here who are
16:11:51 looking for equity and fairness and that's the next
16:11:53 door neighbors.
16:11:54 Mr. Schoewe -- I can't pronounce his name -- Mr.
16:11:58 Schoewe told had this council, he said no blowers.
16:12:01 Tampa City Council relayed on that and found it
16:12:02 compatible with the immediately adjacent neighborhood.
16:12:05 The variance review board recognized implicitly the
16:12:08 inequity of the zoning administrator's decision to the
16:12:11 neighborhood, and the variance review board properly
16:12:16 reversed the zoning administrator, and that's why I'll
16:12:18 second Ms. Mulhern's motion to affirm the zoning, the
16:12:23 variance review board's decision to reverse the zoning
16:12:27 I hope I got all that right.
16:12:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
16:12:33 The reason I said in the past I felt that way and
16:12:36 still do, we sit here as quasi-judicial on things we
16:12:42 know a lot about, zoning matters, issues of that
16:12:45 nature, so forth, setbacks, all that contained of
16:12:48 When you come into appeals you talk about estoppel,
16:12:52 de novo.
16:12:53 Guess what.
16:12:54 Not only do some of us may or may not know what all
16:12:57 that means, I do, but on the other side they don't
16:13:01 When you are in a court of law, guess what, that
16:13:04 judge, he or she, really knows the law -- really knows
16:13:09 what these two gentlemen in their presentation made.
16:13:13 Guess what, I wasn't here in 2004.
16:13:16 So I'm not blaming the council members, but they
16:13:18 should have put in there, put it in the site plan that
16:13:21 you have no blowers.
16:13:22 That wasn't there.
16:13:23 So either the council made a mistake, the city made a
16:13:26 mistake, or both of them made a mistake by not putting
16:13:30 it in.
16:13:30 So now we are faced where something that sooner or
16:13:34 later, the way I read this thing now, in 2004, it's
16:13:38 now 2008, that's four years.
16:13:43 That's a complete term of office for the mayor or any
16:13:46 council member.
16:13:47 Four years.
16:13:49 It still hasn't been resolved in four years.
16:13:52 I assume that no matter which way this thing goes,
16:13:56 that's not the end.
16:13:58 I'm making that assumption.
16:13:59 This is not the end.
16:14:01 It will be in court and at the end, the city is going
16:14:05 to be on the hook one way or the other.
16:14:08 For either what they did, or what they didn't do.
16:14:14 That's just my feeling on it from reading and
16:14:16 understanding what I think I assume, and the
16:14:19 assumptions of the facts that were presented today.
16:14:25 It's a case that I affirmative believe will end up in
16:14:30 some judicial court sooner or later.
16:14:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a motion on the floor.
16:14:40 Do you want to speak to the motion?
16:14:46 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to hear from them first.
16:14:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want you all to speak to the motion
16:14:50 so we can move.
16:14:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a concern, council, the maker of
16:14:53 the motion set forth the basis.
16:14:56 Mr. Dingfelder seconded it, set forth other bases,
16:15:00 additional reasons.
16:15:01 Just a reminder that with regard to the requirements
16:15:04 before you as a body, equitable estoppel is not what
16:15:09 is before you.
16:15:10 The issue of equitable estoppel.
16:15:12 It's within your determination as laid forth of what
16:15:16 your standard of review is.
16:15:17 I just wanted to make sure that you understand that
16:15:19 and that your basis of the decision is on the basis of
16:15:23 the as the maker of the motion had reiterated.
16:15:32 That being the essential requirements of law, due
16:15:34 process is not an issue, and competent substantial
16:15:40 Thank you.
16:15:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would confirm my second would
16:15:43 incorporate the words of our City Council attorney.
16:15:48 I seconded the motion and I would concur with you, Mr.
16:15:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Maker of the motion?
16:15:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't think I need to say anything
16:16:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Then we have a motion made by
16:16:02 councilwoman Mary Mulhern seconded by councilman
16:16:07 All in favor of the motion let it be known by Aye.
16:16:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano and Miranda
16:16:19 voting no.
16:16:25 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I need to make a couple of
16:16:27 clarifications on the record for appeal reasons.
16:16:29 Number one, I would like to state an objection to Mr.
16:16:33 Dingfelder's entire argument on equitable estoppel.
16:16:37 We do not accept that as a grounds for appellate
16:16:41 Further, I want to make sure that Mr. Dingfelder was
16:16:46 not impugning my reputation or character in his
16:16:50 statements, because I did not represent this party at
16:16:53 the PD hearing.
16:16:55 Is that correct, Mr. Dingfelder?
16:16:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, John.
16:16:58 You know, I have known you for 20 years and I never
16:17:01 impugn your reputation.
16:17:02 >> I want to make sure because sometimes things are
16:17:05 viewed in a vacuum and I wanted to make sure that was
16:17:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
16:17:09 Thank you.
16:17:10 >> Can I please say something?
16:17:14 >> No.
16:17:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That concludes all of our business for
16:17:27 the day except for new business.
16:17:28 We will now take up our new business at this time.
16:17:35 Councilwoman Mary Mulhern, do you have anything to
16:17:37 bring to council?
16:17:39 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
16:17:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilwoman Miller?
16:17:42 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
16:17:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder?
16:17:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two quick items.
16:17:47 I have a commendation to Robinson high school band
16:17:49 director I made a month or two ago, Jeremy Klein will
16:17:55 come in on April 17 at 9 a.m. to accept a
16:17:59 That's a motion.
16:18:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second?
16:18:05 Okay, moved and seconded.
16:18:06 (Motion carried)
16:18:12 So moved.
16:18:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Secondly, I would make a request to
16:18:17 Verizon representatives, and I spoke to one of the
16:18:23 government liaison yesterday about this, to ask them
16:18:27 to come to council in four weeks to discuss the
16:18:29 complaints regarding the franchise and what they are
16:18:34 going to do to respond to the complaint.
16:18:36 And I have got pages upon pages here of these
16:18:42 complaints that are coming in, either directly to us,
16:18:44 or through the Tribune web site.
16:18:51 So I think there's a problem there.
16:18:53 But I actually look forward to hearing Verizon explain
16:19:01 how they are going to address these customer service
16:19:05 All we can do is request that they come in.
16:19:07 That's my cordial request that they do come in and
16:19:11 address these.
16:19:11 I think it's our obligation as the granter of the
16:19:15 franchise to make sure that we monitor these things,
16:19:19 especially when there are as many complaints floating
16:19:22 around as it appears that there are.
16:19:25 And they'll tell us how they are going to fix them.
16:19:28 That's a motion.
16:19:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
16:19:32 >> Second.
16:19:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
16:19:36 So moved.
16:19:37 And other council members not hear.
16:19:40 Let me just say, there are a number of items I want to
16:19:43 bring forth.
16:19:44 Again, at our next meeting I mentioned that we want to
16:19:50 honor Ms. Miller, who has served four terms as our
16:19:54 But as we move forward for this particular year, I
16:19:58 would like council to give me an opportunity to
16:20:06 framework something to move forward on certain issues
16:20:10 as we move forward in the coming year.
16:20:12 One of those issues is mass transit, transportation,
16:20:18 Particularly what I have in mind there, and I know
16:20:22 Mary Mulhern as well, with the MPO, but I think it's
16:20:30 important that we bring all the decision makers of the
16:20:32 department together to look at a comprehensive plan.
16:20:34 It would never happen until I think all of us come
16:20:39 So what I am talking about doing is writing a letter
16:20:41 to the Hillsborough County commission, this board
16:20:47 sitting together, and also representing Temple Terrace
16:20:52 and Plant City to discuss mass transit, and
16:20:55 formulating a plan so that when the TBRTA moves
16:20:58 forward then we are already in position.
16:21:01 Would say to you that you do have the '99 and 2003
16:21:06 plan from the MPO, and that we may need to access that
16:21:11 information, bring them to the table, FDOT, and look
16:21:14 at them and improving that and moving forward with our
16:21:17 particular plan, and as well requesting those persons
16:21:20 who already are involved or have been funded to come
16:21:23 and address.
16:21:24 I know we have one already set before workshop in
16:21:33 But I had the privilege of going out to San Diego and
16:21:35 a couple of other place that is had mass transit,
16:21:38 St. Louis and those areas that had it already.
16:21:41 So it would be good if formulate something with our
16:21:46 other partners and stake hold towers help us move
16:21:48 forward in this particular issue.
16:21:49 So that is one issue.
16:21:53 Affordable housing continues to be a big issue.
16:21:55 I know now we have a lot of houses in foreclosure.
16:21:58 Central Park continues to be a big issue for us.
16:22:00 And affordable housing throughout our community.
16:22:02 I think we need to continue to focus in on that.
16:22:06 The other issue is our budget, Mr. Dingfelder, I would
16:22:12 hope that we can maybe move our budget process up
16:22:15 some, because this year is going to be, here again,
16:22:23 very strenuous and time consuming, and I think the
16:22:26 earlier we can get started with that, it will be
16:22:28 better for us.
16:22:29 And I would hope that we will have public hearings
16:22:33 here early on, our public discussions that we talk
16:22:37 among ourselves so that the public can see and hear
16:22:40 our discussion, and then at the same time I move that
16:22:46 forward as well, because I think the mayor brings the
16:22:49 budget in August, and has to be approved by September,
16:22:52 because we I'm not sure whether we have enough time to
16:22:57 really exhaustively go through that budget.
16:22:59 I know at the county commission that we started in
16:23:01 March looking at the budget, meeting with the staff,
16:23:04 meeting with the department heads, going through that
16:23:06 whole process.
16:23:07 So that when we got down to September, and we pretty
16:23:11 much had everything addressed and answered here.
16:23:15 I know under a strong mayor charter requirement, but I
16:23:20 do think working with the mayor and the administration
16:23:23 that we can perhaps move those up some so we can have
16:23:27 some discussion and try to help us through that whole
16:23:31 Then the other issue is the economic development
16:23:34 piece, that I think we continue to look at.
16:23:37 What I see is we are talking about providing jobs, and
16:23:40 the usual you thing to me is we keep saying the next
16:23:43 great city, world class community.
16:23:45 I will tell you at some point -- and I love Tampa, I
16:23:49 think we made great strides, but there's a lot that
16:23:52 needs to be done by all of us and by the stakeholders
16:23:55 to really move this issue forward.
16:23:57 I will tell you, I struggle with this issue of the
16:24:01 I just have a problem with that, when I know other
16:24:04 communities have done that especially, and move
16:24:08 And here again, all of that has to do with jobs and
16:24:11 economic development, all of that.
16:24:13 And so I think that's the issue that we have just got
16:24:16 to frame it and deal with it.
16:24:18 The other issue for me is the Sports Authority.
16:24:22 I think we need to raise the question about their WMBE
16:24:25 component because they don't have one.
16:24:27 They spend millions of dollars, and I think Mrs.
16:24:30 Miller can attest to that, they spend millions of
16:24:32 dollars and I have yet to see any documentation where
16:24:35 minorities are benefiting from Tampa money that they
16:24:37 are spending, the city and the county, to support
16:24:41 their budget.
16:24:41 So I would think that in this also that we look at the
16:24:45 Sports Authority, and raise the issue about WMBE
16:24:52 The last issue that I think is very important is the
16:24:54 issue of our strategic plan, planning process.
16:24:58 We said that we will back six months, as I recall,
16:25:02 review what we will be doing, look at how we want to
16:25:04 move forward, critique everything, and tweak if
16:25:07 necessary, so our hope that we can look at our
16:25:10 calendars, let us have ab strategic planning session,
16:25:15 workshop if we get everybody here, but my intent is to
16:25:19 kind of frame how we move forward in this coming year,
16:25:22 frame it so that we are dealing with issues that are
16:25:25 substantive, issues that are relevant, and issues that
16:25:28 can help our community.
16:25:30 And so with that being said, so with that, I guess I
16:25:41 need to see how you all feel to move forward.
16:25:44 >>GWEN MILLER: I appreciate you, Mr. Chairman, to want
16:25:47 to honor me for being chair. I serve the community
16:25:51 and our colleagues.
16:25:53 We had a good working relationship, and want to make
16:25:57 sure that everything runs smoothly, that we work well
16:25:59 together, that we have the community, and we do
16:26:01 everything to make things well in Tampa.
16:26:04 And that's the only reason I was chair.
16:26:06 Not to be recognized.
16:26:07 And I don't want to be recognized.
16:26:10 You all told me today I did a good job at chairwoman.
16:26:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, that's fine.
16:26:17 But I know serving the board of county commission I
16:26:19 served three terms as chair and always we recognize
16:26:23 outgoing chairman.
16:26:25 That was something we did and I thought it was
16:26:27 appropriate thatch we do that here.
16:26:32 That's fine, I understand.
16:26:34 >>MARY MULHERN: I was going to say, you might not want
16:26:36 to be recognized but what if we recognize you anyway?
16:26:39 You can't stop us from recognizing.
16:26:50 I'm going to follow up on a couple of things that you
16:26:52 brought up.
16:26:53 And I'm on board with all of that.
16:26:56 The budget, I'm thinking about the budget.
16:27:02 And we did continue our discussion about the budget.
16:27:09 Budget committee, and I think maybe what we should be
16:27:12 thinking about is really having serious discussion
16:27:14 about that at that meeting.
16:27:17 And, you know, we may not be able to get -- add a new
16:27:22 staff person before the next fiscal year.
16:27:25 We may not be automobile to figure that out.
16:27:27 But what I would like us to get, at least an advisory
16:27:30 committee of each of us selecting somebody with some
16:27:36 expertise from the community to help us with it.
16:27:42 If that's not going anywhere, fine.
16:27:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My only problem, again, is that you're
16:27:48 right in terms of budget.
16:27:49 I don't think we can do it because it is not included
16:27:52 in the initial budget but I do think we can do one is
16:27:55 include it in next year's budget.
16:27:56 That's number one.
16:27:58 And secondly, we can, since the mayor has offered one
16:28:01 of her top staff persons to assist I think we can
16:28:04 avail ourselves and take advantage of that.
16:28:06 I'm supportive of that.
16:28:08 And by having public discussions, personally, I don't
16:28:11 think you need anybody if you have public discussions
16:28:14 and everything is on the table that that gives you
16:28:17 more opportunity to address any issues and concerns.
16:28:20 However, I am not going to scream and holler and kick
16:28:23 about it.
16:28:24 >>MARY MULHERN: We'll talk about it at that meeting.
16:28:27 It may not go anywhere.
16:28:29 The other thing I want to say is with regard to women
16:28:31 and minority business ordinance, I'm going to read the
16:28:42 thing in the next week.
16:28:43 If I can figure out which is the most current draft,
16:28:46 and if you could send me or remind me -- because I
16:28:55 probably already have it -- your most latest comments
16:28:59 on it, I'm going to go over it, because I think that
16:29:04 it's too much of a burden for you to be the only one
16:29:09 that's trying to keep up with the huge problem that we
16:29:16 are trying to solve.
16:29:17 And I would like to ask Mr. Shelby, after I have gone
16:29:22 through it and anybody else on council that is going
16:29:26 to concentrate on it, and you feel like you have had
16:29:29 enough to say about it, I would like you to give us a
16:29:34 final draft, help us have a finally draft that
16:29:38 reflects what we want in that ordinance.
16:29:42 Because otherwise we are going to be -- we are never
16:29:45 going to come to an agreement.
16:29:47 And we are writing it.
16:29:48 And council is creating the ordinance, right?
16:29:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ultimately, council does.
16:29:57 It does require the mayor's signature.
16:30:00 If not, then clearly it would require the
16:30:04 administration to administer the ordinance.
16:30:10 I understand what --
16:30:11 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we need to move forward with
16:30:13 it, you know.
16:30:14 I'm not saying you need to create a new ordinance.
16:30:16 You need to reconcile what --
16:30:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If what you are asking is for me to
16:30:24 work with the chair to be able to work with the
16:30:25 administration to be able to resolve the differences,
16:30:27 then I certainly offer my services and assistance.
16:30:30 >>MARY MULHERN: That's not what I'm asking.
16:30:33 >>: Okay.
16:30:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Because the administration is working
16:30:38 on it.
16:30:38 And they are not -- I don't think we are getting the
16:30:42 response than we need.
16:30:44 So I would like you to advocate for council what we
16:30:51 want that ordinance to say, and then we can vote on
16:30:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Can I make a suggestion?
16:30:59 >> What?
16:31:00 >> I would suggest, one, that Mr. Shelby get with you,
16:31:03 give you the latest draft, as well as the
16:31:06 recommendations I have and then walk you through that
16:31:07 whole process.
16:31:08 I don't feel comfortable -- our attorney can get with
16:31:15 He has all the documentation.
16:31:17 And you authorize him to meet with me and he has been
16:31:20 in the whole process meeting with the city attorney
16:31:22 and all that so he's well up to speed on this.
16:31:25 I would suggest that any council person that wants any
16:31:28 information, and drafts, and like that, that you can
16:31:32 get with Mr. Shelby and go through that process.
16:31:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we are saying the same thing.
16:31:39 You are just giving it more credit because I don't
16:31:40 know how you can possibly search through all of that.
16:31:44 But if you feel like you are there.
16:31:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We spent a lot of time. In fact
16:31:49 yesterday we was on the phone talking.
16:31:51 >>MARY MULHERN: But here's why I am saying this
16:31:55 because it sounds to me like you weren't comfortable
16:31:57 yet with it.
16:32:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There have been some changes.
16:32:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Whatever those last recommendations
16:32:05 you have --
16:32:06 >> He has them.
16:32:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The issue ultimately is not my level
16:32:09 of comfort.
16:32:10 It's the issue of this level -- the issue of this
16:32:13 council's satisfaction with Mr. Smith's
16:32:15 recommendation, because Mr. Smith is your city
16:32:17 attorney, and Mr. Smith is the one that's also
16:32:22 protecting you against potential section 1983 action.
16:32:28 So everybody is working together.
16:32:30 The question is, the way to phrase it is -- I will be
16:32:35 happy to --
16:32:36 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand what you are saying.
16:32:38 And you are just saying we are going to be -- maybe by
16:32:42 after four years we'll have one.
16:32:47 Maybe I'll be going into another career and I can have
16:32:50 a small women's business and maybe I can get it,
16:32:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I understand and I will be happy to
16:32:57 work with you doing that.
16:33:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, at what point -- I guess, you
16:33:06 know, this is what you are saying.
16:33:08 We are in a stalemate.
16:33:10 What can we do to make this --
16:33:12 >> Why don't you all get together?
16:33:14 Get with him.
16:33:15 >> Okay.
16:33:19 >> New business.
16:33:21 >> I would like our legal department to focus on code
16:33:23 section 25-173 which pertains to solicitation in the
16:33:28 Back in 2003, a bulletin was put out by the police
16:33:33 department, Kirby Rainsberger, telling law enforcement
16:33:38 not to enforce this law, okay, this code.
16:33:41 And then again in October 22nd, 2004, he sends another
16:33:46 bulletin out, 0417, please be advised that the problem
16:33:50 with solicitation in the right-of-way ordinance code
16:33:52 section 25-173, has been rectified.
16:33:57 Violations of this section are now punishable under
16:33:59 code 16 as criminal offenses with appropriate -- when
16:34:04 appropriate under circumstances, defendants may be
16:34:08 physically arrested and booked.
16:34:09 Now, this is not happening.
16:34:10 I talked to the chief.
16:34:11 I have talked to our legal department.
16:34:13 And we can't have these ordinances on the books and
16:34:16 not enforce them.
16:34:20 It's just not right. This goes back to 2004.
16:34:24 I had an incident the other day where I ended up
16:34:27 calling the police department, waited two and a half
16:34:29 No one came.
16:34:29 Then I called again.
16:34:30 And the culprits took off.
16:34:33 They know who they are.
16:34:34 But they were told to leave them alone.
16:34:39 And it's not right.
16:34:40 And we are getting many, many calls from the people
16:34:42 who are out there selling newspapers on Sundays.
16:34:46 They are all violating our sales taxes, okay?
16:34:49 Because you can go into Publix and buy a newspaper for
16:34:52 25 or 50 cents or whatever it is and you pay a sales
16:34:56 Now, these people are selling newspapers out there,
16:34:58 and they are not collecting sales tax.
16:35:01 And there's 15 or 20 of them right in the New Tampa
16:35:05 area every weekend.
16:35:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a motion again?
16:35:09 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I want legal to come back with an
16:35:11 opinion on this.
16:35:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to give a date?
16:35:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Sixty days. This thing has been
16:35:20 on the books since 04 and they are not enforcing it,
16:35:23 they were told not to enforce it.
16:35:25 >> Did you want that in an appearance or written
16:35:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Have them make an appearance with
16:35:31 a written report.
16:35:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, the motion.
16:35:35 Got a second are? Is there a second?
16:35:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
16:35:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
16:35:40 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
16:35:42 I am going to relinquish the chair and turn it over to
16:35:46 Mrs. Miller.
16:35:47 One motion is we ask the Sports Authority to address
16:35:50 the issue of the WMBE at our next regular meeting.
16:35:54 >> Second.
16:35:55 (Motion carried).
16:35:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The second issue is, again, you want
16:35:59 to be able to frame I guess an agenda in terms of
16:36:03 transportation of affordable economic development comp
16:36:07 That's my motion.
16:36:08 Bring it back to council.
16:36:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: When you say --
16:36:13 >> Give me 30 days.
16:36:19 I would rather have a motion.
16:36:21 >> Second.
16:36:21 (Motion carried).
16:36:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And we need to look at our discussion
16:36:26 about the strategic plan.
16:36:27 We need to look at -- we will come back in six months.
16:36:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It took effect I believe in October.
16:36:36 So you are that close to that.
16:36:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me take a look at that then and
16:36:41 see what we can --
16:36:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'll work with you on that.
16:36:45 I guess your request is to have council be aware of
16:36:47 the calendar and what would work.
16:36:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
16:36:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question with regard to the
16:36:52 Sports Authority, Mr. Chairman, you say that's in two
16:36:56 weeks to appear?
16:36:59 I'm just curious.
16:37:01 Who intends to make the communication, just so that's
16:37:04 clear by your motion?
16:37:05 >> The issue is that they are intend -- spending
16:37:09 taxpayer dollars and don't have anything on the issue
16:37:12 of WMBE.
16:37:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Who is the contact, the clerk or the
16:37:16 chair's office?
16:37:17 I just want so the motion is clear that the invitation
16:37:21 is extended, right?
16:37:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Someone to contact.
16:37:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I don't know what we have in place
16:37:32 now. Some kind of policy in place.
16:37:35 >>GWEN MILLER: (off microphone).
16:37:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We need them to come and state on the
16:37:45 Because I don't know what they are doing.
16:37:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Your office would write them and
16:37:53 invite them.
16:37:54 Do that?
16:37:55 >> Yes. Okay.
16:38:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Is that a motion, John?
16:38:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It definitely would be that I am
16:38:08 getting complaints that that is not accurate.
16:38:10 So if they can come tell us, I don't know.
16:38:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, the chair received a
16:38:18 letter from the president of Ashton woods asking for
16:38:21 council to hear them for three minutes under
16:38:26 ceremonial on the next agenda to give them an update
16:38:31 on the development agreement and I had a chance to
16:38:35 discuss that with chair Miller.
16:38:36 Obviously he could do that under public comment but
16:38:40 he's asking for a time certain at 9:00 for three
16:38:42 minutes only, on the April 17th, the next regular
16:38:46 meeting, for the purposes of discussion of the Ashton
16:38:51 woods homes, and I am putting a letter that was
16:38:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Three minutes?
16:38:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about 9:30?
16:39:01 I make the motion.
16:39:01 >> Council's motion.
16:39:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It takes us that long to get
16:39:06 through our business.
16:39:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
16:39:08 (Motion carried)
16:39:11 We also have a request from the fire department that
16:39:13 we move the fireman of the month from April 17th
16:39:18 to another date.
16:39:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: May 2nd?
16:39:24 Fireman of the quarter.
16:39:27 I'll move that to may 1st.
16:39:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: First meeting in May.
16:39:30 >> Second.
16:39:31 (Motion carried).
16:39:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
16:39:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to file all the documents.
16:39:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
16:39:42 (Motion carried).
16:39:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other business that needs to come
16:39:45 before us? If not then we stand adjourned.
16:39:48 Thank you.
16:39:50 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, you really moved us
16:40:11 (Meeting adjourned)
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.