Tampa City Council
Thursday, May 8, 2008
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.
17:06:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The City Council meeting will now come
17:06:33 to order.
17:06:33 Can we have roll call?
17:06:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
17:06:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:06:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
17:06:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
17:06:49 We will take up item 1 first.
17:06:51 >> Move to open.
17:06:53 >> Second.
17:06:53 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
17:06:58 Opposed same sign.
17:06:59 So moved.
17:07:00 >>TERRY CULLEN: I'm with the Planning Commission
17:07:03 The request is if we could open items 1, 2 and 3
17:07:08 >>GWEN MILLER: So moved.
17:07:10 >> Second.
17:07:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
17:07:13 (Motion carried).
17:07:14 Moved and ordered.
17:07:15 >>TERRY CULLEN: What's up for consideration tonight is
17:07:18 the adoption of public hearing for the public school
17:07:22 facility element of the Tampa comprehensive plan and
17:07:25 some amendments to the intergovernmental coordination
17:07:29 element and the capital improvements element to
17:07:33 implement the public school facility provision.
17:07:37 This has already been heard by the Planning
17:07:39 You had a hearing on this earlier.
17:07:42 And it was transmitted to the state for review.
17:07:45 It's now come back.
17:07:47 The state has some comments that staff has worked on
17:07:51 responses to.
17:07:51 I'm going to turn the floor over to Mr. Randy Goer,
17:07:56 the City of Tampa, and Lorraine Duffey Suarez from the
17:08:02 school board.
17:08:03 Those two worked closely together and responding to
17:08:05 their comments from the state and they collaborated on
17:08:08 the responses that they are going to bring you today.
17:08:17 >> Lorraine Duffey Suarez, manager of growth
17:08:19 management for the school district of Hillsborough
17:08:21 County, and Randy and I worked so closely that I am
17:08:24 going to have to take his time here and save you from
17:08:27 hearing the same thing twice.
17:08:29 If you recall, you transmitted the three amendments up
17:08:33 to DCA last year and DCA provided their comments to
17:08:39 you, and their comments were expected, there were some
17:08:44 administrative issues about updating their five year
17:08:46 capital plans of the school district that was under
17:08:49 review at the time.
17:08:51 They had asked for some change to some of the policies
17:08:53 so that they would mimic the other three
17:08:58 The City of Tampa, Temple Terrace, Plant City and
17:09:02 Hillsborough County would all have similar policies on
17:09:05 the school district's participation and the selection
17:09:07 of two school sites.
17:09:10 And if we ever get to the point where we need to do a
17:09:13 long-term concurrency program, which we don't think we
17:09:16 will, but in the event that you do, it would require a
17:09:19 comprehensive plan amendment.
17:09:20 We have put language in there to say that will be the
17:09:23 direction we would go if we needed to do it, we would
17:09:25 do a long-term concurrency that would northbound Lou
17:09:28 of lowering the level of service standard.
17:09:30 We would look towards a long-term concurrency program
17:09:34 But they want to make sure of the language.
17:09:36 So really those were expected comments.
17:09:38 There was nothing from a policy direction that they
17:09:40 objected to.
17:09:42 There were some other clarifications as we went
17:09:46 through the process, that came out.
17:09:48 We visited with the other jurisdictions.
17:09:51 And if you recall, the way the statute is written, it
17:09:55 required that when a concurrency review, and I'll say
17:10:04 we looked at gory.
17:10:06 And gory is full. That doesn't mean the development
17:10:12 is denied.
17:10:14 What the statute says is you have to look at the
17:10:16 adjacent concurrency service area.
17:10:19 So Mitchell, that project is going to be able to go
17:10:26 We had proposed language, and I think we are the only
17:10:29 ones from the state who proposed it but if Mitchell is
17:10:33 at 95% of its capacity you can't look at Mitchell.
17:10:36 You have to look at a different one.
17:10:38 We don't want to push development from one area to
17:10:40 another and push it to 100% that way.
17:10:43 We want to have natural growth within each boundary.
17:10:48 That was fine.
17:10:48 There was some concern about development community
17:10:51 that this could stop development.
17:10:53 By not allowing this 100% flexibility.
17:10:56 So we added a policy and all four local governments
17:11:00 agreed -- well, that's a third one I should say.
17:11:04 But the staff all agreed to put a policy that says two
17:11:06 years after this is in effect we'll revisit that
17:11:08 policy and see what effect this has had.
17:11:11 So we proposed a policy that says within two years we
17:11:13 are going to go back to that 95% rule, has it worked,
17:11:17 has it stymied development, has it caused any
17:11:23 And there was some language in the proportionate share
17:11:27 mitigation, if someone has to mitigate their impact,
17:11:30 the developer, it said that they have to pay their
17:11:34 share of the off-site infrastructure.
17:11:36 We qualified that to say the off-site infrastructure
17:11:39 that would typically be borne by the school board.
17:11:42 We were adding a wing and we needed to pull a sewer
17:11:49 They would have to pay for that as well because we
17:11:52 would have to -- they would pay for it so we clarified
17:11:57 And I would say those are the main changes since you
17:11:59 have seen this to the public facilities element,
17:12:03 capital improvement element, and I don't think we had
17:12:05 any changes to the intergovernmental coordination
17:12:08 We have already been to Hillsborough County.
17:12:10 They adopted this on April 17th.
17:12:12 They fully adopted concurrency, up to DCA for final
17:12:18 Tuesday night the city of Temple Terrace adopted
17:12:21 concurrency, they had two public hearings and they
17:12:23 have adopted it.
17:12:25 We have a final meeting I think on June 5th.
17:12:27 And then Plant City has their final adoption on May
17:12:35 So we are right on track for our July first final
17:12:40 If I can answer any questions.
17:12:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda and councilwoman
17:12:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understood understand what you
17:12:49 say, I think, the concurrency issue, and the pupil
17:12:53 issue in schools.
17:12:54 I don't think anyone is against that.
17:12:56 Does this take into effect -- and I hope I am not
17:12:59 getting in the wrong areas here, and please stop me if
17:13:01 I am.
17:13:04 If you have an area, let's say Plant High School or
17:13:06 Jefferson high school or Robinson high school or
17:13:08 Mitchell or Gorrie or Dale Mabry, whatever, that is
17:13:14 near capacity, and some of that capacity is not from
17:13:17 the district, that they have had special permission to
17:13:22 attend the school and they are not from the district,
17:13:24 I certainly don't want to see kids that are
17:13:27 building -- parents are building their homes in that
17:13:31 district no, matter with they are at, orange grove or
17:13:34 whatever, that they be excluded and they have to
17:13:36 travel to another school because someone is there that
17:13:38 doesn't have residency in the district.
17:13:42 Does this vice-president anything to do with that at
17:13:44 >>> No.
17:13:45 The simple answer is school concurrency is not a tool.
17:13:50 Concurrency is purely an accounting.
17:13:52 I will be accounting for those receipts but the
17:13:55 district will determine who goes to which school.
17:13:58 They may need to change boundaries.
17:14:00 They may look at those hardship cases, if that's what
17:14:03 you are talking about, or the choice situation.
17:14:05 And the district will have to make decisions.
17:14:08 They may phase those students out over time.
17:14:12 But the district is going to determine the boundaries,
17:14:14 and who goes to which school.
17:14:18 The concurrency is not going to force students in or
17:14:21 out of school.
17:14:22 It's just going to be an accounting tool so we know
17:14:25 where to make --
17:14:26 >> I understand that but if a school is already 100%
17:14:29 and they are going to have a building there of 150
17:14:32 units, and there are young people moving in, sooner or
17:14:37 later we are going to be over the 100% and there's no
17:14:39 provision that I understand in this here that will
17:14:41 protect the people in the district.
17:14:49 >>> The school district is going to have to examine
17:14:51 the boundaries.
17:14:53 The statute would allow that development even if there
17:14:55 isn't room at the neighborhood school.
17:15:00 The statute requires.
17:15:02 But there are going to be decision that is get made
17:15:03 but I don't think the concurrency isn't going to be
17:15:06 the forcing mechanism.
17:15:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I saw a presentation recently on
17:15:14 the state of California, Massachusetts, and some other
17:15:17 northeastern states, which as a state are committing
17:15:22 themselves to building sustainable schools and
17:15:25 remodeling and N a sustainable way and trying to
17:15:28 either be conscious of the way they use public
17:15:33 Is there anything in the comp plan that addresses
17:15:39 >>> I do not believe -- it may be in the general but
17:15:42 not in the public schools facilities element.
17:15:47 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to say that Mitchell and
17:15:50 Gorrie are examples.
17:15:58 Did you just say to me we have this concurrency, it
17:16:01 must be very frustrating for you, and -- but it
17:16:05 doesn't really mean anything because you can still go
17:16:07 ahead and build.
17:16:08 So it just means that -- it's so that the school, the
17:16:14 schools don't have to bear any of the costs of
17:16:18 building, but it doesn't do anything about the fact
17:16:21 that -- because really the fact is, if you look at a
17:16:25 neighborhood, and the public schools -- there's
17:16:30 probably also another half as many kids in private
17:16:33 schools, and it's a pretty good indication that there
17:16:35 isn't really much room for more development in that
17:16:38 area, especially residential development.
17:16:46 It's kind of a catch-22 to me.
17:16:48 But does it work for you?
17:16:51 Here is my question.
17:16:53 Does concurrency really have the benefit of helping to
17:16:59 have school development happen in places where there's
17:17:03 room to grow at least?
17:17:07 >>> I think the concurrency program on a microcosm is
17:17:10 going to allow just what you said.
17:17:12 But on a macro for the district as a whole it's going
17:17:15 to give us some additional resources to work with.
17:17:18 Because if we do get too crowded in certain places, we
17:17:22 will be able to tap into an additional funding source,
17:17:25 if we do.
17:17:25 But for small areas, it's going to require juggling.
17:17:31 And the exact language in the statute says, the
17:17:34 development gets to go ahead, and the impact of the
17:17:36 development must be shifted.
17:17:38 And I have always said the impact is the student.
17:17:41 You know, it's not like a car.
17:17:43 But a student will have to be shifted.
17:17:46 And I don't think the district position is that we are
17:17:48 going to start moving every child, an approach to
17:17:54 where the boundaries are and an approach to how we
17:17:57 place students in schools and how we allow choice.
17:18:00 So we will be able to manage a lot of that through our
17:18:04 own internal system but it is going to push the
17:18:07 >> Right.
17:18:08 It just helps to you pay for the growth that you are
17:18:10 going to have -- but it's going to have to happen as
17:18:12 opposed to managing the growth.
17:18:14 >>> Correct.
17:18:15 >> So it would be beneficial.
17:18:28 >>RANDY GOERS: Randy Goers, community planning.
17:18:30 Just a couple of follow-up comments.
17:18:32 One of the benefits of the public schools facilities
17:18:34 element is the emphasis placed on the planning for the
17:18:41 concurrency impact.
17:18:42 It isn't about the concurrency part.
17:18:44 It's what you do to plan for the timing of the
17:18:46 facility to come on line at the time when the
17:18:49 development is permitted.
17:18:50 So a lot of the element is involved in making sure we
17:18:55 understand what the school is planning their schools,
17:18:57 what capacities they have, where they see the
17:19:00 long-term needs based on the growth projection that is
17:19:02 developed by the Planning Commission, and then it's
17:19:04 about us, the City of Tampa, providing them with
17:19:07 timely information, and our projections of rezonings,
17:19:10 development that's being permitted, the large project
17:19:13 on the horizon.
17:19:14 So the day you can use that information to correlate
17:19:19 at their school.
17:19:24 I hope to begin planning for those much earlier in the
17:19:27 pro -- process than what's been done in the past.
17:19:30 Ideally what we hope to have schools coming on line so
17:19:33 we never get a situation of concurrency foreseen one
17:19:36 of us to make a decision, if the schools are being
17:19:38 planned at the time that the development that you are
17:19:40 approving and the city is approving is coming online.
17:19:43 So that's really one of the values of the he will E.
17:19:47 And coming back on June 5th we'll also have the
17:19:50 interlocal agreement that the school board has been
17:19:53 working with on the four jurisdictions that puts all
17:19:57 those procedures in place.
17:19:58 The element tells us from the city's standpoint
17:20:00 whether it is our responsibility as for concurrency,
17:20:02 the interlocal agreement specifies what the school
17:20:06 board is going to do and what the city is going to do,
17:20:08 how we are going to coordinate the review of permits
17:20:10 and the timing of the school construction.
17:20:14 If there are any questions we would be happen to
17:20:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Ready move to close?
17:20:24 >> Second.
17:20:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Would anyone from the public like to
17:20:29 address council to speak to these items? I see none.
17:20:32 All right.
17:20:34 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
17:20:36 Opposed same sign.
17:20:37 Do we need to take any action?
17:20:50 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena being
17:20:53 Second reading and adoption will be on June 5th at
17:20:56 9:30 a.m
17:21:01 My mistake.
17:21:05 That was just to close.
17:21:07 My mistake.
17:21:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There's no resolution.
17:21:13 It's just a matter of setting -- three ordinances have
17:21:18 to be read.
17:21:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move an ordinance amending the
17:21:32 Tampa comprehensive plan by creating a public school
17:21:34 facilities element providing for repeal of ordinances
17:21:37 in conflict providing for severability providing an
17:21:39 effective date.
17:21:42 That's PA-07-13.
17:21:49 >> All in favor let it be known by Aye.
17:21:51 So moved.
17:21:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: PA 07-14.
17:21:57 Move an ordinance amending the Tampa Comprehensive
17:21:57 plan, intergovernmental coordination element, to
17:21:59 coordinate public school planning providing for repeal
17:22:01 of ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
17:22:04 providing an effective date.
17:22:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Moved and seconded by Mr. Miranda.
17:22:08 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
17:22:10 (Motion carried).
17:22:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move an ordinance amending the
17:22:16 Tampa comprehensive plan capital improvements element
17:22:18 to coordinate public school planning and incorporate
17:22:21 school boards five-year district facilities plan,
17:22:24 providing for repeal of ordinances in conflict,
17:22:27 providing for severability, providing an effective
17:22:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So moved and seconded by Mr. Miranda.
17:22:32 (Motion carried).
17:22:33 >>THE CLERK: Motions carried with second reading and
17:22:36 adoption will be on June 5th at 9:30 a.m.
17:22:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I did this knowing that Lorraine
17:22:42 put it all together so therefore I was able to support
17:22:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The next item we take up at 5:45.
17:22:51 Not quite that yet.
17:22:52 But we do have a walk-on tonight from the city's
17:22:55 attorney's office so I am going to ask Ms. Hargrett to
17:22:58 come up at it this point.
17:23:02 >>TOYIN AINA HARGRETT: Assistant city attorney Toyin
17:23:10 I provided at the dais for the clerk an copy of
17:23:14 amendment 11-3.
17:23:16 This is being proposed to be walked on for first
17:23:18 reading today based upon your motion last week
17:23:21 regarding your concern for the it the's attempts to
17:23:27 amend their ordinance, thereby removing the right of
17:23:31 first refusal for the Tampa Fire Rescue department to
17:23:34 provide emergency medical stand-by services at Raymond
17:23:38 James stadium.
17:23:39 This week, the county proposed their change to the
17:23:43 We believe that they will be proceeding expeditiously
17:23:45 with it.
17:23:46 Therefore, based upon your commentary in your motion
17:23:49 last week, we have provided you all with a copy of
17:23:52 this ordinance for first reading today, and it would
17:23:55 be the legal department, if you so choose, it would be
17:23:58 our recommendation that we set this for second reading
17:24:01 on Tuesday, May 20th, sometime in the afternoon,
17:24:05 and we have verified that these chambers will be
17:24:08 reserved for you.
17:24:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, all of us have to be
17:24:14 commended, including the leadership, the chair, each
17:24:17 council member, for certainly doing what is right for
17:24:19 the citizens of the City of Tampa.
17:24:22 It is with that, Mr. Chairman, that I would like to
17:24:25 move this ordinance, if I may.
17:24:27 I'll read it into the record for first reading.
17:24:30 An ordinance amending section 11-3 entitled Olympic
17:24:34 applicability of the City of Tampa code of ordinances
17:24:36 for clarifying and jurisdictional of the City of
17:24:38 Tampa's fire rescue division related to provisions of
17:24:42 stand-by medical service, providing for severability,
17:24:45 providing an effective date.
17:24:47 In essence, we have been given this opportunity to
17:24:50 clear the record once and for all.
17:24:56 It talks about the provision of the chapter which will
17:24:58 apply to all buildings, improvements, facilities
17:25:01 within the corporate limits of the City of Tampa and
17:25:05 also requires that the employment of standpoint
17:25:07 emergency services, personnel be held within the city.
17:25:13 I certainly believe -- and I don't want anything to
17:25:21 say about there are no boundaries.
17:25:23 Let me just say cities have boundaries.
17:25:25 Counties have boundaries.
17:25:26 States have boundaries.
17:25:27 The United States of America has boundaries between
17:25:30 Mexico and Canada.
17:25:31 So I don't know what they are drinking over there but
17:25:33 it's not city water.
17:25:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did we get a second on that?
17:25:46 Do we need to include in the motion to convene at 1:30
17:25:51 on the 20th?
17:25:54 Okay, councilman.
17:25:57 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Scott, I'm glad you're not at
17:26:01 the county commission right now.
17:26:03 On number 8 line 1 where it says shall at all times be
17:26:08 in uniform.
17:26:09 At any time, does the fire department have somebody
17:26:11 work undercover in plain clothes?
17:26:18 >>> I can't say for certain but it is my understanding
17:26:21 they are always in uniform when they are providing
17:26:23 these emergency stand-by services.
17:26:28 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can we clarify that with legal?
17:26:31 Because it's very possible that some firemen might be
17:26:34 in plain clothes for undercover reasons.
17:26:41 >>> We can take that out between first and second
17:26:45 We will certainly look into that.
17:26:46 Thank you.
17:26:47 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Thank you.
17:26:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to thank Mr. Miranda, though.
17:26:50 It was your motion and suggestion.
17:26:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It was the whole council's motion.
17:26:59 I so happened to have the opportunity to Britt up at
17:27:01 that time but I don't take decreed for it.
17:27:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a motion.
17:27:05 Let it be known by saying Aye.
17:27:11 (Motion carried).
17:27:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: According to the rules we have to
17:27:13 do that, I ask legal for a methodology of how to
17:27:21 approach this and what legal says.
17:27:26 I would ask Mr. Dingfelder but he can't give me an
17:27:29 opinion as a council member, a conflict of interest.
17:27:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: As long as you would just do it by
17:27:34 motion with the specific date, time, location --
17:27:37 >> The date and time again?
17:27:39 >> The date would be Tuesday, May 20th.
17:27:41 You can have it at any time between 1 and 5 p.m.
17:27:44 We have it reserved.
17:27:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I ask the council before I make
17:27:47 a motion what's the best time?
17:27:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a 1:30 doctor's appointment
17:27:52 so 1:00 would be good.
17:27:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move that we call for a special
17:27:57 meeting of the Tampa City Council on Tuesday, May
17:28:01 20th, at 1:00.
17:28:04 The year 2008.
17:28:06 In the council chambers at 1:00.
17:28:08 And that notice should be posted by the clerk's office
17:28:12 and whatever applicable notifications we must do.
17:28:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The purpose is one reading of this
17:28:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
17:28:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Dingfelder.
17:28:24 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
17:28:27 So moved and ordered.
17:28:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We stand in recess until 5:45.
17:28:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council is now reconvened,
17:49:01 come back to order.
17:49:02 Roll call.
17:49:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
17:49:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:49:08 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
17:49:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
17:49:15 We have item number 4.
17:49:17 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
17:49:28 >> Welcome.
17:49:31 >> Thank you, sir.
17:49:32 I was just about to say, we do need a super majority
17:49:35 vote so we do need five votes.
17:49:37 >>GWEN MILLER: They are coming when they hear you
17:49:42 Just go ahead.
17:49:45 >>TONY GARCIA: Just to give you a quick recap, we are
17:49:50 revisiting a plan amendment that was taken into
17:49:52 consideration by this particular body several weeks
17:49:59 ago for a site that was requesting a change from
17:50:04 public semi-public heavy commercial 24.
17:50:06 I am going to show you a map very quickly as to where
17:50:11 what the recommendation is.
17:50:12 This is a site prevent presently owned by FDOT.
17:50:16 Previous to that it was owned by the school board.
17:50:18 I went through the history of this for you.
17:50:20 Request is to go from public semi-public.
17:50:24 I hope you all can see that from your vantage point to
17:50:27 this red piece over here, approximately a seven-acre
17:50:31 site there. Was some requests that were made by
17:50:34 council, which is why they requested a continuance.
17:50:39 There was a request by the council that the applicant
17:50:42 consider a reduction in the intensity of the site from
17:50:44 heavy commercial 24 to community mixed use 35.
17:50:48 At that point in time that evening, the representative
17:50:50 for the entity was not able to really give you an
17:50:55 They were not empowered to do so at that time.
17:50:58 The representative is here again this evening.
17:51:00 And I think will be prepared to give you an answer,
17:51:05 should you want to hear that answer.
17:51:08 At this point in time unless you have any further
17:51:10 questions or unless you wish me to refresh your
17:51:13 recollection I will be happy to get up and talk with
17:51:15 you all.
17:51:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Tony, now this is on the overhead
17:51:23 in front of us tell me about the blue versus the red.
17:51:29 The blue.
17:51:31 >>TONY GARCIA: This blue was just a piece of
17:51:34 right-of-way that went out, Mr. Dingfelder.
17:51:36 If I can show you an aerial here it shows you the new
17:51:38 road that's been built.
17:51:39 This is upside down, I apologize.
17:51:42 The new road that's been built over here basically
17:51:45 shows off that I just want to show you that is what
17:51:54 the color was for the entire site to begin with.
17:51:59 Any other questions?
17:52:11 >> not a question of you but I wanted to hear from
17:52:15 >> Great.
17:52:16 That's what I was going to do.
17:52:18 >>> Good afternoon.
17:52:19 Department of Transportation last time, as you know, I
17:52:33 was unable to talk specifically about going with CMU
17:52:36 35 but I felt because I really didn't have an
17:52:39 opportunity to speak last time but I wanted to give
17:52:41 you a little bit of background.
17:52:42 What you are looking at here is an actual 2002 design
17:52:49 concept, that we use for interstate widening.
17:52:54 Reason I use this is because I think it shows the
17:52:56 project so well in terms of I-4 and where it was
17:52:59 widened, and how the new Columbus road came off here,
17:53:05 and that's the piece of right-of-way you were just
17:53:07 asking about, Mr. Dingfelder.
17:53:08 And here is the property site.
17:53:11 So that is what happened.
17:53:12 It was back in the 1990s we were working on the
17:53:16 environmental impact statement.
17:53:17 We realized we were going to be impacting that school
17:53:20 We worked with the school at the time back in 1993
17:53:22 when they were working on redeveloping, add something
17:53:26 new buildings to their site to try to minimize the
17:53:29 Unfortunately, by the time we got about a decade later
17:53:33 we realized that with design standard changes we were
17:53:36 impacting more property.
17:53:37 We only ended up along 50th street, took about two
17:53:43 feet off, but unfortunately with the design changes we
17:53:45 were taking a little bit more off 14th Avenue than
17:53:48 what we had originally intended back in the '90s so
17:53:55 we impacted impacting about an acre and a half out of
17:53:57 the 7.3-acre site.
17:54:00 So what happened is we never intended to own this
17:54:03 With the taking, there was actually a final judgment
17:54:08 back in 2003 where the department was to pay the
17:54:12 school board $1.26 million.
17:54:14 So the school board felt it was impacting their
17:54:17 circulation of the property so badly that after a very
17:54:20 long and difficult negotiation, the department finally
17:54:23 agreed to pay the school board $11.6 million.
17:54:28 And in addition to that, before that agreement came
17:54:35 about, it was also, in trying to come up with
17:54:43 agreement for the school board, there was also what we
17:54:45 call the cost to cure.
17:54:47 The department came in and purchased this additional
17:54:49 property right in here.
17:54:51 These three little sites right here, we were trying to
17:54:58 work with additional site plans and try to replace the
17:55:00 property that we were purchasing.
17:55:02 So in looking at that, way wanted to show you is that
17:55:10 even though it's not an actual platted street, this
17:55:13 divides, where you have the actual site itself, there
17:55:15 is a street that comes in here today, and if any of
17:55:17 you were able to go out and actually look at that
17:55:20 site, it's blocked off right here.
17:55:23 So this piece here is the TECO property, referred to
17:55:31 last time, and all this portion here is owned by
17:55:34 D.O.T., and we are not requesting that as being
17:55:36 included as part of the amendment change, because we
17:55:40 think that that is part of the residential area, and
17:55:44 that there is a natural divide between this property
17:55:47 that fronts on 50th street and the interchange
17:55:50 versus the other piece.
17:55:59 I know there were some questions about people coming
17:56:01 out and looking at it.
17:56:02 I know if most of you drive up 50th street, you
17:56:06 have a lot of hotels in that area.
17:56:08 But if you look at the future land use map, which we
17:56:14 did several times, you can see when the department
17:56:16 looked at this, they felt at the time that they wanted
17:56:19 to stay consistent with the plan, so it's showing the
17:56:25 8 feet 24.
17:56:26 However, based on some of the comments we heard last
17:56:28 time, I have discussed it with the department and they
17:56:30 have actually no problem with going with the CMU 35.
17:56:34 The intent right now of the department is to continue
17:56:38 to use this property.
17:56:39 And they are not planning on selling it in the near
17:56:42 However, at some point in time, they would like to get
17:56:45 it back on the city's tax roll and contribute to the
17:56:48 economic development of the East Tampa area.
17:56:50 So they have no problem with going with a lesser.
17:56:57 I'll take questions if you have questions.
17:57:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to thank you for
17:57:08 taking this back to your client and discussing it.
17:57:11 And because of residential to the west of it, even
17:57:13 though it's 50th street which is a significant
17:57:17 corridor, I feel like the CMU 35 is a pretty intense
17:57:21 commercial zoning.
17:57:22 It would allow you all to develop it or sell it but it
17:57:25 would also provide a little bit greater protection to
17:57:28 the neighborhood to the west.
17:57:29 So if we are ready to close the public hearing, that's
17:57:34 what I want to do.
17:57:34 >>RANDY GOERS: Community planning.
17:57:36 Just to summarize, we were contacted by the Planning
17:57:39 Commission staff through the petitioner about the
17:57:43 request to amend the ordinance to change it to
17:57:46 community mixed use 35.
17:57:48 The department worked with the D.O.T. in amending the
17:57:53 You should have in your package a revised ordinance
17:57:58 that says with the change of uses to community mixed
17:58:02 use 35.
17:58:03 I wanted to let now that was added to your package, I
17:58:06 think, yesterday.
17:58:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?
17:58:11 Motion to close?
17:58:15 Oh, sorry.
17:58:15 Anyone from the public wishes to address the board?
17:58:25 >> Good afternoon.
17:58:26 My name is Tracy pierce.
17:58:28 I live at 4706 east 10th Avenue, Tampa, Florida.
17:58:38 The waste management department.
17:58:40 I strongly oppose to this gain.
17:58:42 I tried to get the same zoning two years ago, paid the
17:58:46 Planning Commission, and they came up with an
17:58:50 inconsistent plan.
17:58:51 And I'm 1507 feet away from this property and we went
17:58:55 over this last week.
17:58:57 You can't have two personal planners that come up with
17:58:59 two different scenarios within the same -- within 150
17:59:03 feet of the same property.
17:59:04 My property butts up to the blue part of your little
17:59:07 map that they showed you right there.
17:59:09 I own the three properties that design that, and I'm
17:59:13 on 10th Avenue.
17:59:14 Now, I'm going to have to come right back again and
17:59:18 repeat the Planning Commission to ask for mixed,
17:59:25 because I can't do nothing.
17:59:26 I can't sell my house.
17:59:28 I mean, the place across the street from me is built
17:59:31 like a blowed-up balloon.
17:59:34 It's running businesses there. This whole area, it's
17:59:37 not residential, okay?
17:59:38 But either you need to change the whole brown area to
17:59:43 mixed 35, now what I mean?
17:59:47 Because I keep paying and paying and I got to come
17:59:50 back and pay again because I cannot develop that
17:59:53 commercial property -- I mean residential.
17:59:56 That's all I have got to say.
17:59:57 Thank you.
18:00:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
18:00:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to ask you.
18:00:04 I wasn't here when this was heard the first time.
18:00:10 Could you show us on the map?
18:00:15 >> I gave you guys the handout last time.
18:00:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I have the map.
18:00:24 That's good.
18:00:25 Thank you.
18:00:25 >>> My property is -- right here is the brown area,
18:00:29 right next to TECO.
18:00:30 Right here there's my property.
18:00:33 These three right here.
18:00:35 These four pieces of property that join the city
18:00:38 property, and TECO on the side.
18:00:40 And then all of 10th Avenue.
18:00:46 >>MARY MULHERN: And yours is --
18:00:48 >>> Residential 20.
18:00:53 And I brought this to you all's attention two years
18:00:59 Told the school was there and all that.
18:01:00 So I wait two years, done nothing with this property
18:01:03 but pay taxes.
18:01:04 And it's just not right.
18:01:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, I probably should be asking
18:01:12 our staff maybe these questions.
18:01:15 You may know better since you have the property there.
18:01:21 So, Tony, 10th Avenue, next to the -- west of the
18:01:27 subject property, is that residential 20?
18:01:32 >>> Residential 20 is the land use category.
18:01:34 >> What's --
18:01:40 >>> It's going to be a residential 20 category but RS
18:01:45 1 or RS 20.
18:01:46 We don't delineate that.
18:01:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Are they in conformance with the
18:01:52 Is that -- he said he owns property there.
18:01:55 Is it all residential around it?
18:02:01 >>TONY GARCIA: Let me show you an aerial so you can
18:02:04 get a perspective.
18:02:10 Here is a site.
18:02:18 Here is the church.
18:02:19 Here is the TECO property.
18:02:21 The property is over here.
18:02:24 So there's a commercial use here, and there's a couple
18:02:27 of other commercial uses here.
18:02:28 >> Can you turn that so it's on the right coordinate?
18:02:32 >> Okay.
18:02:32 This is going north.
18:02:34 This is going west.
18:02:38 Do you want me to turn it like this?
18:02:41 50th street.
18:02:42 Here's the exit over here.
18:02:49 Subject site.
18:02:49 This is 10th.
18:02:51 Here is Broadway.
18:02:52 Right here is the street.
18:02:55 There's another small street that dead-ends here.
18:02:59 So this is the TECO piece.
18:03:01 And three parcels down over here.
18:03:03 It has one parcel to the rear over here.
18:03:05 >> So if you moved your pen to the left --
18:03:17 >>> There is some residential housing as you can see
18:03:19 There's no significant -- as you can see, a lot of
18:03:22 this property is vacant land.
18:03:23 And then residential component over here.
18:03:26 It's also borne out by the -- as you can see, you do
18:03:34 have lots that are platted.
18:03:36 I have this upside down, sorry.
18:03:37 You have lots plotted for residential development.
18:03:41 So this is a unique area, Ms. Mulhern, kind of like a
18:03:46 mixed bag.
18:03:48 The primary commercial corridor is 50th street.
18:03:51 You do have some commercial uses on Broadway that are
18:03:55 also industrial, that kind of bleed-off, up this way,
18:03:59 that will probably be considered probably more
18:04:03 conforming, because the commercial goes all the way up
18:04:05 to here because there are some parcels off here but
18:04:09 this is a mobile home park so this could probably be
18:04:11 considered, now, if it's got an RM-16 but it's in the
18:04:16 vicinity of --
18:04:18 >> Okay.
18:04:19 I just had to get a perspective.
18:04:31 >> My name is Harry pierce.
18:04:33 4842 Edmond court, Dover, Florida.
18:04:36 Me and my brother, we own this property with my
18:04:40 And like you said, the things just getting piecemealed
18:04:46 And we own from TECO to the corner.
18:04:49 And like you said, they are ready to bulldoze it over.
18:04:53 10th Avenue.
18:04:54 And then we have the dumpsters right across the street
18:04:56 from our property.
18:04:57 From waste management.
18:04:59 Then they got a jungle gym business straight across.
18:05:04 Our property is useless.
18:05:07 And the way this thing is getting piecemealed, we
18:05:10 think the county planning should go back and relook at
18:05:14 the whole area of 10th Avenue, not keep
18:05:18 piecemealing it.
18:05:21 Because we are sitting on there and we cannot do
18:05:23 nothing with that property, because of what's across
18:05:24 the street is commercial, what's fixing to be
18:05:27 commercial, whatever you all do, down beyond the
18:05:30 church, everything is down there.
18:05:32 And we was turned down for this.
18:05:36 Because they said that this is a residential
18:05:41 Yes, there's people living there.
18:05:43 But not too many.
18:05:46 As anybody knows, I have lived here all my life.
18:05:49 Drew Park used to be the same way.
18:05:50 Go out and find residential neighborhood in Drew Park.
18:05:54 There's not there.
18:05:56 It's not there.
18:05:57 That is all commercial out there.
18:06:02 And that's the way that started, and that's the way
18:06:05 this is.
18:06:06 So I actually believe that the county should go back
18:06:08 and revisit this, because this is costing us thousands
18:06:14 of dollars.
18:06:15 And look at the whole area instead of piecemealing
18:06:20 >> Tony, can you leave that aerial up there?
18:06:25 I wasn't here.
18:06:31 >> All the same family.
18:06:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena had a question.
18:06:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So the question that's before us
18:06:39 tonight is whether to allow this piece of property to
18:06:41 go from what's called public use to community mixed
18:06:46 use 35.
18:06:49 How do you feel about that?
18:06:52 >> I feel whatever they are going to do, the county
18:06:54 should go back and revisit the whole area.
18:06:56 I appreciate you all petitioning them to go back and
18:06:59 revisit that whole corridor of 10th Avenue.
18:07:02 I mean, why should we bear the expense?
18:07:04 We have paid thousands of dollars.
18:07:07 And we was turned down last time by this council and
18:07:10 everything for a report that wasn't right.
18:07:14 We brought big billboards in.
18:07:16 We had our lawyer, ended up down here, showed you the
18:07:19 demolition of the school going on.
18:07:22 And they said, no, the school was there.
18:07:25 And it was not there.
18:07:26 And now it's a plain fact everybody knows it's not
18:07:30 And we were turned down for it and everybody else
18:07:33 across the street was not.
18:07:35 And I think we should all be on the same playing field
18:07:39 and let's play fair, let's don't piecemeal this.
18:07:42 That's all I'm asking for.
18:07:47 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Your property is the same as the
18:07:49 other property?
18:07:50 >> Well, whatever they are going to do on that
18:07:52 corridor, I think the whole corridor should be that
18:07:54 way because there's only one section of 10th
18:07:57 Avenue that is from residential.
18:08:00 And I think that corridor should be, because these all
18:08:04 vacant land.
18:08:04 That big chain link fence property, that's our
18:08:09 Plus we own the properties next to it, which goes with
18:08:13 those houses, and it not even rented because people
18:08:20 don't want to live there really in that area.
18:08:22 It's not a residential area.
18:08:24 If you all went out there and seen it, it's not really
18:08:27 a residential area.
18:08:28 Of course people have to live there, and I understand
18:08:30 they can't live in the houses like some of us do.
18:08:33 But it's just like I said, it's like Drew Park was.
18:08:38 Drew Park was a residential area for years.
18:08:43 And now it behind the airport.
18:08:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
18:08:48 Next speaker.
18:08:54 >>> LENA Patterson.
18:08:57 I too own this property joint with my brother.
18:09:02 We are a little emotional about it.
18:09:03 It's been in our family as I said a long time, over
18:09:07 80 years.
18:09:07 So we are not going down without a fight.
18:09:11 I cut-through traffic approximate map back up.
18:09:15 The property that D.O.T. was talking about is not to
18:09:22 ask for the zoning.
18:09:24 We are fully aware, because we own that property.
18:09:27 We sold it to the school board before it was sold to
18:09:36 I still find it by not including it in your plan, that
18:09:40 puts them into position to not have to notify any
18:09:42 residents within 250 feet of the neighborhood.
18:09:45 Which was convenient.
18:09:49 Fortunately for us, we have been on top of it and
18:09:51 somebody has a voice in this neighborhood concerning
18:09:53 this, that 7.5 acres.
18:09:59 If you put a hotel there, if you put an office center,
18:10:04 which would be liable for -- I know I wouldn't want my
18:10:09 children growing up and living next door to an office
18:10:13 It kills our property value.
18:10:14 And as you said before, it's frustrating, because the
18:10:17 first planned amendment that we paid for was so
18:10:20 erroneous, I would have been embarrassed to have
18:10:25 presented it, it was so wrong and inaccurate.
18:10:28 We felt like we paid $1600 for a plan that wasn't even
18:10:32 So all we are asking for is, you know, just to be fair
18:10:36 about it, to consider, especially that particular
18:10:42 As you can see, everything is right around us.
18:10:45 And nobody wants to live in front of waste management
18:10:48 dumpsters and blow-up balloons and any other kind of
18:10:52 development that they can do there.
18:10:53 I know I wouldn't like it there.
18:10:57 And we are just asking that you consider that.
18:10:58 Thank you.
18:10:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
18:11:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If there's nobody else here to
18:11:05 speak on this item, I had a question for Tony.
18:11:10 Mr. Garcia.
18:11:12 >>TONY GARCIA: Yes, sir.
18:11:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They are pretty consistent on this
18:11:18 through the couple hearings that we have had, and I
18:11:20 think they have a pretty good point.
18:11:23 Frankly, I think this council made a mistake a couple
18:11:26 of years ago when they turned down the request.
18:11:30 Because what we had, if you can put up that thing
18:11:32 again -- you're so anxious to take it home and put it
18:11:41 And shift it over just a little bit.
18:11:46 What we have is that brown area, clearly is an
18:11:49 enclave, and looking at the aerial that you showed us,
18:11:53 it going nowhere but down.
18:11:55 I'm sorry, I apologize to anybody that's living there.
18:11:59 But it feels like it's being pinched in on all sides.
18:12:04 And I think, Glen, you mentioned that last time,
18:12:08 circled by industrial on various sides.
18:12:15 So that brown area has a problem.
18:12:17 My question is, Tony, I know we have City Council
18:12:21 initiated rezonings.
18:12:25 We have done that before several years ago.
18:12:27 I'm just wondering, do we have City Council initiated
18:12:30 plan amendments?
18:12:33 >>TONY GARCIA: Yes.
18:12:34 You are allowed to initiate a plan amendment request.
18:12:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And then that way nobody pays a
18:12:43 Because what I'm thinking is, A, there's no urgency on
18:12:47 the part of the school board.
18:12:50 They are using this -- they are using this in a public
18:12:54 use for that consistent with the planned designation
18:12:57 and the zoning they have now.
18:12:59 I don't know what they are using it for.
18:13:00 Storage, or the D.O.T., I mean, is using it right now.
18:13:03 So there's no urgency on it.
18:13:06 They want to sell it.
18:13:07 But I don't see them selling it in the short term.
18:13:10 She even said that a minute ago.
18:13:11 In the short term they are not selling it.
18:13:13 So what I think is if we just deferred this plan
18:13:17 amendment and did a city initiated plan amendment for
18:13:21 these other two blocks, the entire area did a study
18:13:30 and came back next fall with some other designation, I
18:13:33 have a feeling you are probably going to conclude that
18:13:34 the whole thing needs to be CMU 35, or maybe even HC
18:13:43 At least we would reach a point of fairness and
18:13:47 And I don't think it's just this family.
18:13:48 I think there's many other families over there that
18:13:51 are probably in a similar situation.
18:13:53 They are just not aware of this necessarily going on.
18:13:59 So, council, that would be my leaning, if anybody has
18:14:02 any questions, I would be glad to answer.
18:14:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Dingfelder, I think you are
18:14:10 right in revisiting the lots residentially, but I
18:14:15 don't think it's fair to hold up this petitioner for
18:14:18 So I concur with going ahead tonight, and considering
18:14:24 CMU 35, and then requesting -- initiating a planned
18:14:28 amendment by the city for this neighborhood.
18:14:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask you a question,
18:14:37 Mr. Chairman, of Mrs. Saul-Sena? I appreciate that
18:14:39 and that may be where we end up.
18:14:41 But my only question is, if the Planning Commission
18:14:43 looks at the three blocks comprehensively, the two
18:14:46 brown lots plus the school board lots, what if they
18:14:50 come back and conclude that all of it should be heavy
18:14:52 commercial 24?
18:14:53 You know, that we need heavy commercial in this town,
18:14:56 we have lost a lot of heavy commercial, in other parts
18:14:59 of the city that we are all aware of, and that this is
18:15:02 an ideal location right off the interstate, right off
18:15:05 these exits, to sort of reinvigorate that heavy
18:15:09 commercial that every city needs.
18:15:11 You don't know that that's going to happen.
18:15:13 But if we look at it holistically with all three
18:15:16 parcels, all three blocks, that might be their
18:15:20 But if we make the decision tonight, then we are
18:15:23 precluded from that conclusion.
18:15:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I need a little history here.
18:15:33 When these former petitioners who are here, the
18:15:38 neighbors, when they -- did the Planning Commission
18:15:43 recommend their request, their plan amendment?
18:15:48 >>TONY GARCIA: There was another planter who was
18:15:50 assigned to this particular case the finding of
18:15:55 inconsistency on this particular parcel.
18:15:57 I did not know the intimate details of how that
18:16:00 determination came.
18:16:00 I am here tonight on this plan amendment, on 50th
18:16:04 street, to go from public semi-public to heavy
18:16:09 commercial 24.
18:16:09 The recommendation was made by this body to take into
18:16:12 consideration CMU 35 as expressed by the concern of
18:16:15 Ms. Saul-Sena of the potential of putting crematoriums
18:16:18 on the site which is why the CMU 35 designation was
18:16:24 made to the applicant.
18:16:25 All I have done is served as a messenger to the
18:16:28 applicant if that is the desire of this body which is
18:16:31 why that was taken back to consideration by FDOT.
18:16:33 That is why the applicant is back here willing to go
18:16:37 forward, move forward tonight with that particular
18:16:39 thing, having no bearing.
18:16:40 And I completely understand the concern of the
18:16:43 citizens to the west.
18:16:46 Again, I think the Planning Commission would
18:16:47 understand Mr. Dingfelder's recommendation, to
18:16:52 possibly consider this.
18:16:53 We have done this similarly in the past as you recall,
18:16:55 Mr. Dingfelder, up on north Rome, we did a plan
18:16:57 amendment down-zoning from residential 20 to
18:17:00 residential 10 for some parcels on the east side for
18:17:03 the River Bend from residential 20 to residential 10.
18:17:07 So this body has made this recommendation in the past.
18:17:10 If you would like to do that for the parcels west of
18:17:12 this particular site to be looked at for consideration
18:17:15 for a different plan amendment, which you would
18:17:17 request to us, we would entertain that recommendation.
18:17:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
18:17:23 I'm not done yet.
18:17:24 So the request for the additional, if we were going to
18:17:30 initiate it, a City Council plan amendment, would be
18:17:32 for what?
18:17:35 All of the brown parcels?
18:17:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: For a study.
18:17:38 That's what they do.
18:17:39 They study it.
18:17:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, in that case, I agree with Mr.
18:17:45 Dingfelder that we need to rule on this.
18:17:48 But I also think we need, Planning Commission and this
18:17:52 council, needs to be sensitive to the fact that we
18:17:54 should be treating the little guys the same as we are
18:17:57 treating the big guy.
18:17:59 And, you know, I think the fence, when a big school
18:18:05 board or FDOT or somebody comes in and wants to have
18:18:12 something done, we don't want people to have the
18:18:14 perception that they are not getting the same kind of
18:18:16 >>TONY GARCIA: If I may, the Planning Commission on
18:18:20 whole looks at property based on the relationship of
18:18:24 the property to other properties, not who owns the
18:18:26 property, Ms. Mulhern.
18:18:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that.
18:18:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ms. Mulhern, the reason that we
18:18:35 said that it should be residential is because it's in
18:18:37 an area that is residential, and there is residential
18:18:41 uses on it, and that's what we looked at.
18:18:43 Property that's on 50th street is more commercial,
18:18:45 and my suggestion was to become a more modified
18:18:50 commercial to become compatible to the residential
18:18:53 that I perceived to. Get this off the dime, I think
18:18:55 what we should do is go ahead and address the case
18:18:59 before us, and at this point I'm willing to go CMU 35
18:19:06 or the heavier commercial, but the CMU 35 precludes
18:19:11 crematoria which has been a problem for the people
18:19:14 So that's part of my process.
18:19:15 And I think we should ask the planning staff to do a
18:19:18 study on the uses to the west.
18:19:19 >>> Very well put.
18:19:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think what we have before us
18:19:27 today is one issue, this issue, I am not pertinent to
18:19:30 the facts of what happened, didn't happen on the other
18:19:35 items that were brought up by the good people that
18:19:37 live in that area.
18:19:39 Whether the Planning Commission comes back and says
18:19:42 good or bad, I'm not sure what they are going to say.
18:19:46 But the only issue we have before us now is this area
18:19:49 with neighbors against this area, which would mean to
18:19:53 me that if this area fails, guess what happens to
18:19:56 them, they also fail.
18:20:00 And I may be dead wrong.
18:20:02 But if this goes down, guess what, they go down.
18:20:04 Whether they know it or not.
18:20:06 So in order to work this thing out I think we have to
18:20:10 vote on this one way or the other.
18:20:12 And then like Mr. Dingfelder, Ms. Saul-Sena, Ms.
18:20:15 Mulhern spoke before, we will do the study and council
18:20:20 make the motion, however, and these kind of things can
18:20:23 come out.
18:20:24 It would behoove them to, in my opinion, to see what
18:20:28 happens here today, one way or the other.
18:20:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close the public hearing.
18:20:33 >> Second.
18:20:33 (Motion carried).
18:20:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Before a motion is made let me just
18:20:39 tell you what my concern is, and I would have to agree
18:20:41 with councilman Dingfelder, and that is we had CMU 35,
18:20:50 they go out and do a study and say they need to be
18:20:53 heavy commercial 24.
18:20:55 You got a problem, is that right? I mean, you are
18:20:59 back to square 1 pretty much.
18:21:08 So that's my concern.
18:21:10 If we are going to commission a study, say we want to
18:21:14 do the whole area, I think you need to encompass all
18:21:16 of that at one time.
18:21:17 Otherwise, you could come back -- otherwise, passing
18:21:24 the CMU 35.
18:21:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we have a situation. If we
18:21:30 bass the CMU tonight and then ask the Planning
18:21:32 Commission to come back and study all three blocks
18:21:34 they can come back and say all three blocks should be
18:21:37 HC or all three blocks should be CMU 35 or whatever
18:21:40 they say. That way we can get off the dime, and get a
18:21:49 more holistic look.
18:21:51 So my motion would be -- move the ordinance for CMU
18:22:01 They rewrote it.
18:22:03 Move an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive
18:22:05 plan land use, future land use map for the property
18:22:09 located in the general vicinity of 10th Avenue and
18:22:11 50th street, public semi-public to community mixed
18:22:15 use 35, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
18:22:17 conflict, providing for severability, providing an
18:22:20 effective date.
18:22:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
18:22:27 (Motion carried).
18:22:31 So moved and ordered.
18:22:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
18:22:36 Second reading and adoption will be on June 5th at
18:22:39 9:30 a.m.
18:22:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilman Dingfelder.
18:22:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
18:22:44 Without belaboring this I would like to make a motion
18:22:46 to direct staff and the appropriate staff and the
18:22:50 Planning Commission to do a city initiated study and
18:22:55 plan amendment, depending on how the study comes out,
18:23:00 for those three quadrants, the school board property
18:23:04 as well as the rest of the residential property to the
18:23:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion by councilman Dingfelder,
18:23:12 seconded by councilman Miranda.
18:23:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Question on the motion.
18:23:22 When you, Tony, when you do the study for the land use
18:23:26 change for the brown, do you look at each parcel
18:23:37 Are you asking for them to -- you are looking at --
18:23:41 not necessarily changing it all to the same land use?
18:23:45 Or are you?
18:23:48 >>> Basically the request would be -- okay, if you go
18:23:52 to the map I can show you.
18:23:53 >> I can see it on there.
18:23:58 >>> The study is asking to go from here to all the
18:24:01 brown area.
18:24:02 This is not going to go to the CMU 35 piece, which is
18:24:06 this color right here.
18:24:07 Less intense doesn't allow commercial intensive
18:24:11 By doing that, you are talking about a transitional
18:24:13 away from the interstate of this color.
18:24:16 You do have CMU 35 along 50th street and along
18:24:20 Columbus drive over here, so it does exist in the
18:24:22 It's not a land use --
18:24:25 >> My question was, you are looking at the whole piece
18:24:28 of brown or gold in one piece?
18:24:31 >>> Right.
18:24:32 All this brown, plus this piece would already be that
18:24:34 color and then the request is to take into
18:24:36 consideration changing all of this piece to that same
18:24:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's notice to the neighborhood.
18:24:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
18:24:46 It just seemed -- this is new to me.
18:24:49 But it just seems like it's nice that we are
18:24:51 initiating this.
18:24:52 But do all the property owners there want that?
18:24:58 >>> They will get notice.
18:24:59 >>MARY MULHERN: They will just get notice that you are
18:25:01 doing it?
18:25:02 All right.
18:25:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Need to vote.
18:25:08 All in favor let it known by Aye.
18:25:15 (Motion carried).
18:25:16 >>TONY GARCIA: If I may, I'm sorry, from a time
18:25:18 standpoint, I do not know exactly when we are going to
18:25:22 be able to get a study back to you.
18:25:24 A definitive time was not stated by council when to
18:25:27 get back to you on that.
18:25:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think the next available cycle.
18:25:32 >>TERRY CULLEN: Planning Commission staff.
18:25:35 Next available cycle is August.
18:25:39 The end of the year or early next year.
18:25:41 Plan update -- it will be studied and assessed with
18:25:46 respect to the new plan.
18:25:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
18:25:51 We need to move to other items, general public hearing
18:25:56 and we need to swear in all those that are going to be
18:25:59 addressing council tonight.
18:26:01 Those that want to be speaking tonight, will you
18:26:05 If you are going to speak tonight at all, please stand
18:26:08 and be sworn.
18:26:11 (Oath administered by Clerk).
18:26:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move to open 5 and 6 and I would
18:26:21 like to have the floor if I may, sir.
18:26:23 >> Second.
18:26:23 (Motion carried).
18:26:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:26:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I hope that I don't in any way
18:26:30 pre-judge this case, but in my past years on council,
18:26:35 I'm afraid that when the city makes a petition to
18:26:38 rezone part of a city park that is a dedicated park,
18:26:42 by the looks that I see, I think that's inconsistent.
18:26:46 I would like to ask the legal department for some help
18:26:48 on this.
18:26:51 I would like to clarify what we are doing, why we are
18:26:53 doing it, why is the city the one requesting it?
18:26:57 There are many parks in the City of Tampa that have
18:27:00 buildings on them.
18:27:01 And I'm afraid if one of these -- if we start a Domino
18:27:05 effect, and I am not adjusting that, but I'm saying
18:27:09 that this could certainly enhance the opportunities of
18:27:12 others to do the same thing we are doing here in city
18:27:16 And I'm concerned about that.
18:27:19 I'm also concerned about the original lease agreement
18:27:21 that was signed in the year 2001 that I have a copy
18:27:25 And if you look at the bottom of page 2, I would like
18:27:28 to ask the legal department to answer that.
18:27:30 There's an assignment of that lease that I read here
18:27:34 on -- I don't know if it's the same lease sign-up in
18:27:43 October 18th of 2003.
18:27:46 These are the things that I'm bothered with.
18:27:49 Knowing the history of the city, that they did not
18:27:53 want these things to happen.
18:27:54 So I don't understand why Tampa city is a petitioner
18:27:57 to do this.
18:28:07 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
18:28:09 I think you need to hear from the Parks Department on
18:28:11 your question.
18:28:12 As far as the lease agreement goes there is a
18:28:13 concessionaire agreement between the City of Tampa and
18:28:17 the petitioner for the rezoning and the wet zoning
18:28:21 that's before you.
18:28:21 I believe your question has to do with the part of the
18:28:26 agreement that speaks to alcoholic beverages.
18:28:30 That lease agreement, it does say that there will not
18:28:34 be alcoholic beverages.
18:28:36 That's a separate question that's somewhat before you
18:28:39 If in fact the rezoning passed and if in fact the wet
18:28:42 zoning passed, based on the lease, there would still
18:28:46 not be allowed the sale of alcoholic beverages, unless
18:28:48 and until that lease came back before City Council.
18:28:53 So that's the answer to that question.
18:28:56 That agreement does not have to be changed to come
18:28:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand that, Rebecca, please.
18:29:03 But I'm not a lawyer.
18:29:06 When someone signs, agrees to this, and the assignment
18:29:09 of this, and now what you are telling me is just the
18:29:11 opposite of what they signed?
18:29:13 >>> No.
18:29:14 That is it exists -- and parks will speak to. That it
18:29:20 exists, and I think that language was in most of the
18:29:22 concessionaire agreements.
18:29:24 Because your ordinances prohibit the sale of alcoholic
18:29:27 beverages in part unless they are wet zoned.
18:29:30 So and parks can speak to this but it's my
18:29:35 understanding they did not let it come forward to
18:29:37 change that lease until the property -- until and
18:29:42 unless City Council agreed to wet zone the property.
18:29:44 If you don't agree to wet zone the property then they
18:29:46 can't change the agreement because they are prohibited
18:29:48 to sell it but I think parks needs to come up and
18:29:51 explain their position on that.
18:29:56 >> Cal Johnson, Parks Department.
18:29:58 First of all, on the lease itself, when the lease was
18:30:00 written, alcoholic beverages were not to be sold
18:30:06 The lease was reassigned from sea ray to another
18:30:12 tenant hop assigned to the this petitioner.
18:30:16 It would be inappropriate to change that lease until
18:30:20 all this is resolved.
18:30:22 One of the reasons was the city, the petitioner for
18:30:28 the rezoning, is that we are having a rough time of
18:30:40 keeping petitioners -- petitioners viable.
18:30:44 They are off the street and that sort of thing.
18:30:46 And because of that, we went ahead and agreed to go
18:30:54 forth with the rezoning which would facilitate the wet
18:30:58 zoning request.
18:30:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Johnson, I am not trying to be
18:31:02 argumentative but if that's the indication every park
18:31:05 in the city that has a building will have wet zoning
18:31:07 in it.
18:31:07 >>> No, sir.
18:31:08 >> Well, yes.
18:31:09 Then the second thing is this.
18:31:10 It might be a disadvantage but there's a lease that
18:31:14 was assigned and reassigned and then you come back to
18:31:16 the park.
18:31:17 There is advantages to doing this.
18:31:18 I don't think they can rent a building of this size,
18:31:21 with having an automatic flow of individuals coming by
18:31:25 anywhere else in the City of Tampa for that price.
18:31:28 In other words, they have a built-in base.
18:31:32 I'm not renting somewhere downtown where I am not
18:31:36 known and I am not seen. This building is certainly
18:31:38 very serene, very beautiful, and everybody has done an
18:31:42 outstanding job.
18:31:44 The question is, why put it in the lease?
18:31:46 If the City of Tampa is going to be the one to ask for
18:31:49 the rezoning?
18:31:50 >>> Because when the lease was written which was
18:31:52 several years ago the city didn't contemplate
18:31:57 >> Because they didn't contemplate alcohol.
18:31:58 >>> Ideas have changed and it's something the city
18:32:07 wants to pursue.
18:32:09 >> And the city is who?
18:32:11 >>> Parks and rec department.
18:32:12 >> Not anyone else, just parks and rec?
18:32:16 >>> It's basically a parks and rec issue.
18:32:19 >> No one else in administration okayed this?
18:32:22 >>> As part of the rezoning process, all of the
18:32:29 departments review it and the administration is aware
18:32:30 of it and they have not objected to the.
18:32:32 >> Okay.
18:32:34 >>> To give you some assurance as to rezoning our
18:32:37 other parks, we have currently convention center park
18:32:41 is wet zoned, meaning it doesn't -- the facility at
18:32:46 the convention center is a completely different issue,
18:32:51 I understand that.
18:32:52 >> I understand that.
18:32:53 >> Now, as far as any other park, this is one of the
18:32:59 few that has a restaurant on it.
18:33:01 And it's a restaurant that is limited in size.
18:33:07 And it could not really be expanded.
18:33:09 So it's one that we felt would be a worthwhile
18:33:16 The department is not going to wet zone any ballfield
18:33:22 or any concessions where we have athletic field.
18:33:26 The only other areas that the department is
18:33:29 considering wet zoning for adult rentals are Reagan
18:33:34 community center and the Seminole garden center.
18:33:40 >>REBECCA KERT: Council members, I think we have gone
18:33:42 a little off track, with whether this is legally
18:33:45 appropriate to go before you.
18:33:47 But I think we probably ought to go back to how we
18:33:54 normally treat these with the staff in the initial
18:33:58 report and then petitioner.
18:34:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
18:34:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll wait.
18:34:06 We are going to hear all the staff reports and
18:34:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Staff.
18:34:13 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
18:34:15 I have been sworn.
18:34:18 I don't know -- I was watching from my office at 5:00.
18:34:24 Item number 7 on your agenda, also Z 08-21, we had a
18:34:29 written request from the petitioner this afternoon for
18:34:31 withdrawal of that.
18:34:32 So I don't know if council would like to handle that
18:34:35 item and withdraw that.
18:34:36 >>> Move to allow us to withdraw.
18:34:44 >> So moved.
18:34:45 >> Sec.
18:34:46 (Motion carried).
18:34:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:34:56 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The rezoning and wet zoning both cases
18:34:59 open at this time.
18:35:00 I will go ahead and do the report on the rezoning.
18:35:05 The rezoning request before you this evening is 5314
18:35:11 Interbay Boulevard and it is strictly for the
18:35:16 restaurant concession building that is on the site.
18:35:20 It is not for any of the park area.
18:35:26 This is zoned for a restaurant use to allow petitioner
18:35:31 to apply to sell alcoholic beverages.
18:35:33 It does not include the park.
18:35:34 It does not include the pier.
18:35:35 It is a one-story building containing approximately
18:35:38 1,845 square feet.
18:35:42 No modifications will be made to the structure.
18:35:44 And it is located within the Ballast Point park.
18:35:51 This is the entrance into the park, community center
18:35:59 Another view.
18:36:03 Some of the parking area.
18:36:06 Playground area.
18:36:11 The site itself.
18:36:12 Another view.
18:36:18 View from the south.
18:36:22 A view across of the park.
18:36:27 The park surrounding it.
18:36:47 RS-60 immediately to the west.
18:36:53 In addition to the rezoning, I can let Tony go through
18:37:03 or I can talk to you about the wet zoning request that
18:37:06 is also coupled with this.
18:37:07 However you would like to proceed.
18:37:22 The wet zoning request that is before you tonight is
18:37:24 for 2(COP-R), sell of beverages containing alcohol
18:37:28 more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight
18:37:32 and wines regardless of alcoholic content for
18:37:34 consumption on premises only in conjunction with a
18:37:37 restaurant business having a minimum indoor-outdoor
18:37:41 accommodation thereof, and not less than 11 feet.
18:37:46 The request for the 2(COP-R) is 1,846 square feet, the
18:37:52 same as the PD request, 469 square feet located in the
18:37:57 covered patio.
18:37:59 The establishment will have 49 seats, 25 of them
18:38:03 Sale of alcohol will be incidental to the primary
18:38:05 function of the restaurant.
18:38:08 As you can see in the wet zoning report, there are
18:38:11 currently no wet zoned establishments within 1,000
18:38:15 There is residential within 1,000 feet.
18:38:17 And institutional being the park within 1,000 feet.
18:38:21 Staff is available for any questions.
18:38:24 In addition, I would like to submit to the record
18:38:27 letters that were received by Land Development
18:38:28 Coordination in relation to the wet zoning.
18:38:48 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:38:49 I have been sworn.
18:38:50 Just a couple of additional comments on this
18:38:52 particular one.
18:38:54 We have two land use designations on this
18:39:00 As Ms. Feeley already told you, we are not talking
18:39:02 about the part away from the structure.
18:39:12 Specifically those relating to in the recreational
18:39:15 open space element, city shall continue to pursue
18:39:18 multiple use opportunities on city-owned land and
18:39:22 neighborhood recreation needs, and maintain and
18:39:25 improve existing properties for.
18:39:30 Through appropriate incentives and neighborhood
18:39:32 facilities, policy B-2.17, provide active and passive
18:39:37 facilities and opportunities to meet existing and
18:39:39 projected needs of neighborhoods in accordance
18:39:41 with conditions established in the recreation open
18:39:41 space. Planning Commission staff finds the proposed
18:39:47 request consistent with the comprehensive plan.
18:39:49 Thank you.
18:39:53 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
18:39:55 I have been sworn.
18:39:56 City of Tampa police department has no objection to
18:39:58 this wet zoning.
18:40:01 If you want to come up, raise your hand.
18:40:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a couple of questions.
18:40:40 Could you put up a picture that shows the outside
18:40:42 patio, one of those shots?
18:40:46 They are nice pictures, by the way.
18:40:58 That's good.
18:41:05 The footprint that you are describing, is it just
18:41:12 under the cover there.
18:41:13 >> does it come out toward where the blue tables are?
18:41:17 >>> I believe it comes out just to the line there, the
18:41:21 >> To where those are?
18:41:27 >>> Yes.
18:41:27 >> Usually when we grant these types of things in
18:41:29 sidewalk areas they have to cordon off the -- any
18:41:35 exterior wet zonings.
18:41:37 Is that the case here?
18:41:40 >> Yes.
18:41:41 I believe the petitioner was going to speak to that.
18:41:46 I had that conversation with Mr. Johnson earlier.
18:41:48 >> A requirement of the wet zoning or is it just
18:41:54 >> No, I believe -- the provision of the code that you
18:42:01 are speaking to.
18:42:01 If you will give me just a minute I will look at that.
18:42:04 >> A couple of other questions, and then go look that
18:42:06 up, if you would.
18:42:08 It's curious to me to see the park is zoned RS-60 to
18:42:11 start with.
18:42:12 There must be some ancient vestige of something or
18:42:19 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Parks are actually by definition
18:42:23 public use facility.
18:42:24 Those are a lively use in any zoning district
18:42:27 throughout the city.
18:42:28 Furthermore, and I think going back, in the
18:42:32 comprehensive plan, there are also allowable uses in
18:42:34 the comprehensive plan category.
18:42:36 So they would be permitted in any zoning district.
18:42:43 >> But there's a "P" category, public, right?
18:42:52 Isn't that a zoning category?
18:42:54 >>> It's underlining land use.
18:42:57 >> But not a zoning category.
18:42:58 So we don't have a public category for city buildings
18:43:01 and that sort of thing?
18:43:02 >>> No.
18:43:03 We have that as a use, and that use is allowed in any
18:43:07 of those districts.
18:43:09 >> Okay.
18:43:10 An educational moment there.
18:43:15 The last question, Abbye.
18:43:17 I know it's got to be difficult when the city is the
18:43:25 But in regard to consistency and compatibility,
18:43:28 there's another picture that you flashed up a minute
18:43:32 ago that sure as heck shows that brand new beautiful
18:43:40 $200,000 playground that Ms. Higgins and others pushed
18:43:44 really hard for that's within 50 feet of this
18:43:49 Talk to me about your evaluation and consistency and
18:43:52 compatibility, and especially if this was Joe's beer
18:43:57 joint located adjacent to a city park.
18:44:00 >>> I think this is a PD criteria that includes
18:44:08 compatibility of adjacent uses.
18:44:10 I am presenting someone else's report this evening.
18:44:13 This is not my own.
18:44:14 But I concur that given the use, which is restaurant
18:44:19 use and mixed use, and looking at it just for the use,
18:44:27 not looking at it because this use is allowed for a
18:44:32 wet zoning at the property, that the restaurant use is
18:44:35 compatible, it's been functioning that way with the
18:44:38 concession area for -- concession area for several
18:44:43 years now.
18:44:43 >> I don't have a problem with the PD.
18:44:45 PD just clarifies it as a restaurant there. But I'm
18:44:49 speaking specifically to the AB request.
18:44:51 To the alcohol use.
18:44:52 And that's also your department's evaluation.
18:44:54 >>> Yes, it is.
18:44:56 >> And your recommendation is --
18:44:59 >>> At the present time, this application fell under
18:45:01 the old wet zoning so there are no criteria for the
18:45:04 evaluation of that in relation to compatibility.
18:45:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Oh, I had one more question.
18:45:19 I said that was my last question for Abbye.
18:45:24 Office every?
18:45:24 Thank you.
18:45:24 Your report showed a lot of calls to this site.
18:45:30 >>> Yes, sir.
18:45:31 >> And this site, I would include probably the pier as
18:45:37 well as far as your calls are concerned?
18:45:41 >>> Yes, sir.
18:45:42 >> I can't help but think there have got to be alcohol
18:45:45 related calls up and down that pier.
18:45:48 I have been on that pier late at nature fishing or
18:45:50 just walking, never drinking.
18:45:53 >>> I can say this, officer Dingfelder, I researched,
18:45:56 and the majority of all those calls since '05, and
18:46:02 what I believe are calls to the area for suspicious
18:46:04 activity, things like that.
18:46:06 There are really no reports followed up on.
18:46:08 Whatever it was either misconstrued -- I'm not saying
18:46:12 there wasn't a couple of alcohol columns calls.
18:46:17 But there wasn't a volume of calls to be concerned to
18:46:19 the police department that we felt like, you know, we
18:46:22 should be in opposition.
18:46:23 >> Fair enough.
18:46:24 Thank you.
18:46:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mary, you were first.
18:46:31 >>MARY MULHERN: That's okay.
18:46:34 There's a thing about the chair they are always
18:46:36 looking that way.
18:46:37 You need to look a little to the left.
18:46:38 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: That's why we need to get the
18:46:42 number system up here.
18:46:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry again.
18:46:46 I don't know what my hurry is except I thought we all
18:46:49 thought we were going to get out of here so I'll talk
18:46:53 really fast.
18:46:53 Maybe I could start with you, Tom.
18:46:59 What's the mission of the parks and recreation, the
18:47:02 department in general?
18:47:09 >>> The mission is to provide quality, leisure and
18:47:12 recreational opportunities for the residents of the
18:47:14 City of Tampa.
18:47:16 I don't know if I got it exact.
18:47:17 >> I think it's an interesting question.
18:47:24 Because you have all kinds of different parks.
18:47:27 Do you have a particular sort of plan, or mission for,
18:47:33 say, Ballast Point?
18:47:35 >>> We do have a master plan for Ballast Point.
18:47:38 And the first phase has been enacted that the
18:47:41 playground and the renovation, we are going to be
18:47:46 repairing the pier and extending the program.
18:47:48 The second phase deals with the pad next to the
18:47:52 playground and additional shelter.
18:47:55 Really, you know, the department does have -- it
18:47:59 shares the concern with children and the use of
18:48:03 alcohol in a park.
18:48:08 One of the things that kind of allowed us to pursue
18:48:13 this is there are only 50 feet in this restaurant.
18:48:17 Restaurant -- the PD and the wet zoning because they
18:48:23 followed the footprint of the building and the covered
18:48:25 patio, even if you added more seats, it would not be
18:48:29 allowed to be wet zoned or have alcohol sales there.
18:48:38 The other point is that the -- is not visible it from
18:48:41 the playground because it on the backside, the
18:48:43 waterside of the building.
18:48:44 And the kids in the playground really can't see past
18:48:53 so there is a physical and visible barrier between the
18:49:00 restaurant patrons enjoying a glass of wine, the
18:49:04 aquarium and the zoo.
18:49:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I realize that.
18:49:07 >>> -- are wet zoned.
18:49:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm not done yet.
18:49:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can I just raise an issue?
18:49:14 I'm sorry to do that, council, but a point was raised
18:49:17 and I think it's a valid point.
18:49:18 You are discussing two things that are related, but
18:49:20 the petitioner for the rezoning is the City of Tampa.
18:49:25 The petitioner for the wet zoning -- the petitioner's
18:49:32 representative Haas hasn't had an opportunity make
18:49:34 their statements so maybe before you ask your
18:49:36 questions you may want to hear the petitioner for the
18:49:38 wet zoning make their --
18:49:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Maybe this is the PD.
18:49:42 I mean, it makes sense to me that you ask for the
18:49:44 zoning change.
18:49:45 If you can't ask for a wet zoning without a zoning
18:49:48 change you should do this.
18:49:52 >>REBECCA KERT: The rezoning does have to be decided
18:49:55 It has been opened and I would just echo what Mr.
18:49:57 Shelby said.
18:49:59 Certainly your questions are appropriate, but before
18:50:04 you start questioning, almost they are doing rebuttal
18:50:07 and we haven't allowed them to make their statement
18:50:11 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Sir, can I ask you a question?
18:50:14 Are you familiar with the new park that's opening in
18:50:16 New Tampa Saturday morning?
18:50:18 >>> The community center?
18:50:20 >> Yes.
18:50:22 Would the recreation department approve a wet zoning
18:50:24 for special events at that place?
18:50:30 >>> Well --
18:50:32 >> The reason why I ask --
18:50:34 >>> At any park -- and I don't know if at that
18:50:37 particular park could you get a temporary wet zoning.
18:50:40 For a park like that, and most of our parks, it would
18:50:43 be a temporary wet zoning.
18:50:45 That's what we have downtown.
18:50:46 If you have an event at Cotanchobee, or USF Park, you
18:50:54 would get a temporary wet zoning that's tied to an
18:50:57 I can't say that the department would not approve, or
18:51:02 not allow a temporary wet zoning up there.
18:51:05 I can't say that we would support it necessarily.
18:51:10 It would basically be driven by the event.
18:51:12 I know that that type of park, with a communicator
18:51:15 center and ball field, would not be the type of park
18:51:18 that we would anticipate wet zoning like we are doing
18:51:21 at this particular --
18:51:22 >> The ball field are quite a distance away.
18:51:26 >>> I understand that.
18:51:27 >> Because I have been asked, is it possible to get
18:51:29 that rezoning?
18:51:30 >>> It would not be a rezoning.
18:51:33 It's a temporary wet zoning.
18:51:35 >> Because the taste of Tampa was held there this year
18:51:39 and they had to walk a half a mile to get something to
18:51:44 Because of the location.
18:51:47 >> Let's hear from petitioner.
18:51:55 >>> Good evening, council members.
18:51:58 My name is George Allis.
18:52:03 I own the Taste of Boston.
18:52:06 We lease from the city.
18:52:08 It's a very long lease.
18:52:09 It's been valid for like six years and I have two five
18:52:15 year extensions left and I am planning to stay there
18:52:17 quite awhile.
18:52:18 I really enjoy that location.
18:52:19 It's been good to me and the customers and very
18:52:23 I have been there for four years.
18:52:25 I took the restaurant over.
18:52:26 It's always been my intent to pursue the beer and wine
18:52:30 license only, because I have so many requests for
18:52:36 alcoholic beverages, and really people just would like
18:52:38 to have a cold beer and glass of wine with their
18:52:42 All the restaurants that I know of that I basically
18:52:46 compete against in a way serve beer and wine in the
18:52:49 city, and it is a disadvantage to me if somebody likes
18:52:54 to have a glass of wine with dinner, go to taste of
18:52:58 Boston where you can get it or should I go to rattle
18:53:02 fish which is actually not in business anymore and get
18:53:04 a glass of wine there. That brings me to my next
18:53:08 I feel this would be a great addition to the
18:53:10 I'm talking about Ballast Point really, talking about
18:53:12 the walking community, the neighborhood.
18:53:14 This could be -- in their community, a place where
18:53:19 they spend Sunday afternoon and I think this would
18:53:22 only enhance if they can come down and have a beer or
18:53:26 wine with their meal, because a lot of people enjoy
18:53:29 that, and it wouldn't be unreasonable, your decision.
18:53:35 I know the concern is the playground.
18:53:38 A lot of children out there. A lot of families.
18:53:42 I indicator them.
18:53:45 I established a great clientele.
18:53:47 I have four young children Mace so I'm very concerned
18:53:49 about their safety.
18:53:50 And I by no means want to jeopardize their safety.
18:53:56 That's not my intention.
18:53:57 I'm really emphasizing, I want ton bring something
18:54:00 positive to the community.
18:54:02 And we will have fence and railing around the patio
18:54:07 that you saw in the picture.
18:54:08 So when they get their glass of beer and wine they
18:54:11 can't walk off to the playground.
18:54:14 It would make no sense.
18:54:15 When you go to a restaurant, you don't get up from the
18:54:17 table and walk out into the parking lot with a glass
18:54:21 of beer or wine so I don't think people would do it.
18:54:23 In the first place it's pretty much common sense.
18:54:26 So we will have signs posted that you can't leave the
18:54:29 premises with beer and wine
18:54:34 And me and my staff are fully responsible for the
18:54:37 consumed alcohol on the premises.
18:54:39 It's strictly with the food that will be served.
18:54:44 I am not going to run beer draft specials that for ten
18:54:50 dollars and you can stagger out.
18:54:52 I am going to charge a fair market value, two or three
18:54:55 dollars, and I think the people that are coming
18:54:57 already there would really appreciate that.
18:55:04 But that's what I have been working on for the past
18:55:08 three years.
18:55:08 I paid the surveyor, and finally came to this night,
18:55:12 and I feel that I am making a good cause, if you think
18:55:16 it's a good idea, we will go for it.
18:55:20 If you don't think it's a good idea we will rest in
18:55:22 peace and I'll still thereby for the next 12, 15 years
18:55:25 serving the community.
18:55:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: councilman Saul-Sena, then councilman
18:55:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: How late is your restaurant open?
18:55:41 >>> Currently they are open lunch and dinner, close
18:55:44 8 p.m. during the week, and 9 p.m. Friday and
18:55:46 Saturday, and Sunday 8 p.m. again.
18:55:48 >> Will you keep those same hours?
18:55:51 >>> I would like, if the city agrees to it.
18:55:56 I would like to open one extra hour, which is I don't
18:55:58 think unreasonable.
18:55:59 When I close my restaurant and go home and I drive by
18:56:02 the competition, they are still open at 11:00, 12:00
18:56:06 and serve alcohol.
18:56:07 I would only do an extra hour.
18:56:11 I think it would be more reasonable.
18:56:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, thank you.
18:56:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, thank you.
18:56:18 I certainly appreciate this gentleman's concern about
18:56:20 his business.
18:56:21 I think he took over a business and has done well.
18:56:25 But in doing well, he wants to do better.
18:56:28 And I don't know about competition, but I don't know
18:56:31 of anybody else selling any product in that park that
18:56:34 you are selling.
18:56:35 Am I correct?
18:56:36 >>> Yes, of course.
18:56:37 >> Okay, that's enough, just yes or no.
18:56:39 Tiff floor now.
18:56:40 I didn't answer when you were speaking or talk when
18:56:42 you were speaking.
18:56:43 Did you read this document when you signed this?
18:56:45 >>> Yes.
18:56:46 >> What does it say on the second page?
18:56:48 And I'm not trying to be tough on you but it says the
18:56:51 concessionaire shall be responsible to ensure that
18:56:53 alcoholic beverages, drugs and felony activities are
18:56:57 not permitted on the leased premise.
18:57:00 >>> That's correct.
18:57:00 >> That was there.
18:57:02 That was your oath to yourself and to the city, and to
18:57:04 the -- I guess this is done by the real estate
18:57:08 So what I'm saying is, the only place that I know of
18:57:11 there, the Yacht Club that sales alcohol, Kojak's and
18:57:16 down the street on Gandy, and nowhere else.
18:57:21 You have a great opportunity that others don't have to
18:57:24 your benefit, you have worked hard, you have created a
18:57:27 clientele that supports you, a clientele.
18:57:31 But it comes there.
18:57:32 If you were there by yourself, if that wasn't a part.
18:57:35 Park and it was just woods, I think would you starve
18:57:37 to death.
18:57:38 But you have a park.
18:57:39 You have a rec center.
18:57:40 People go to exercise.
18:57:41 They want something to eat.
18:57:42 The kids come in.
18:57:43 The parents buy Coca-Cola.
18:57:45 They buy coffee.
18:57:46 There's more money in coffee than there is in alcohol.
18:57:50 You can't tell me there isn't because I know there is.
18:57:53 There's more money in coffee and a cold drink than
18:57:56 there is in alcohol.
18:57:57 Because your liability is not there.
18:57:59 Your insurance is not there.
18:58:00 And you can make a cup of coffee for ten cents, you
18:58:04 sell it for a dollar 25.
18:58:06 So what I am saying is, I think your existence here as
18:58:09 ha done well.
18:58:12 And I admire you for that.
18:58:14 But I'm afraid the timing of this thing, at a city
18:58:18 park, by their own admissions, the Parks Department is
18:58:21 very truthful with us and say they have two others
18:58:23 that are considering.
18:58:24 Parks are for people in this community to enjoy, for
18:58:27 kids to go out and have a nice time without any other
18:58:30 pressures of life.
18:58:31 And I'm not a liberal or conservative when it comes to
18:58:35 I vote the way to see it.
18:58:37 But I see great consequences in these issues that are
18:58:41 before us today, not only affect in this location, but
18:58:45 in other locations for years to come throughout the
18:58:47 City of Tampa.
18:58:48 Once you do one, there's no stopping.
18:58:51 I mean, legally, the city does one, and we don't look
18:58:57 too strongly up here.
18:58:59 When these things were signed, either yourself or your
18:59:02 attorney or whoever helped you on this, you had to
18:59:05 understand what you were signing.
18:59:07 Because you're a good businessman.
18:59:08 I can see how you are.
18:59:10 You're very direct, understand it is game, and you're
18:59:15 pricing yourself -- you can make a volume instead two
18:59:18 of or three items, and you have done a very good job.
18:59:20 I was just there last week.
18:59:23 I had din we are my wife somewhere else.
18:59:25 I said let's take a drive down Bayshore and we ended
18:59:27 up at the park.
18:59:28 We sat down on a bench and watched the great skyline
18:59:33 of the City of Tampa and it was very enjoyable.
18:59:35 I even got a little kiss on the check cheek and all
18:59:38 that stuff.
18:59:38 I thought I was 22 again.
18:59:41 I have enjoyed the area.
18:59:42 I mean, it's a beautiful area to go.
18:59:44 Your mind gets different when you get there.
18:59:46 It's one of the most beautiful settings in the city.
18:59:49 It really is.
18:59:50 Among others.
18:59:50 But this has to rate in the top three in the city.
18:59:54 It's got the amenity, it's got the quality across the
18:59:57 You want to see kids with horses, you look out and see
19:00:00 It's mind refreshing.
19:00:01 It really is.
19:00:02 And I'm not going to pass judgment now but I will
19:00:04 later on one way or the other.
19:00:07 And I just totally disagree about competition.
19:00:09 There is no competition in that park.
19:00:11 You're the only one.
19:00:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Mulhern.
19:00:20 >>> May I respond?
19:00:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me ask you a few questions.
19:00:24 What's your name?
19:00:25 Because I have been in your restaurant so many times.
19:00:26 >>> George.
19:00:27 >>: George.
19:00:29 >>> George, yes.
19:00:30 >> First of all I have to say it's a wonderful place
19:00:32 and even when it changed ownership it got better.
19:00:35 And I was thinking when I saw this on the agenda that
19:00:39 something you should is next time the Red Sox are in
19:00:43 town you should advertise because they are like all
19:00:47 Red Sox fans.
19:00:49 At the last ray's game.
19:00:51 He runs a wonderful business and has great clientele.
19:00:56 And I'm not sure whose idea it was for to you get a
19:01:02 wet zoning.
19:01:02 Was it yours or the Parks Department?
19:01:04 >>> It's my customers.
19:01:08 They asked.
19:01:09 And I owned the restaurant for seven years before full
19:01:15 service and we had beer and wine and I never had a
19:01:17 And it was important part of business.
19:01:21 I put a book out three weeks ago, and I asked people
19:01:25 if you are in support or everyone if you are against
19:01:26 it please just sign.
19:01:28 And I have 600 signatures.
19:01:30 Out of the 602 that are opposing, 598 is for it and
19:01:36 they said we think it's a great idea, we can't wait.
19:01:39 And these are not kids that are just out of college
19:01:41 and they want to come down like Ybor City.
19:01:43 These are local neighbors there that would love to
19:01:48 enjoy walking down to the clubhouse and have a drink.
19:01:51 >> I know a lot of people in that neighborhood.
19:01:54 I didn't know they were such partiers.
19:01:58 But I have been at that establishment probably 50
19:02:04 And I have been to that park, you know, so often, so
19:02:08 many times since I have lived here.
19:02:11 And I have never been here with the children and I
19:02:15 don't just go to the playground.
19:02:17 Sometimes we don't go to the playground.
19:02:18 We go to the pier.
19:02:19 We GOP there for the candy and the -- and I am also
19:02:25 going to give you some advice in case you don't get
19:02:28 this wet zoning.
19:02:29 If you open up a little earlier, you get better
19:02:32 breakfast crowd.
19:02:36 >>> Well, for breakfast during the week.
19:02:39 >> Oh, you don't have breakfast?
19:02:41 >>> Not during the week.
19:02:43 >> Oh, just the weekend?
19:02:44 >> So we open seven days a week.
19:02:46 >> But coffee?
19:02:48 Open up early.
19:02:53 I just want to make sure, however you know that I
19:02:57 vote, and I think John and Linda, it's a wonderful
19:03:01 park, it's a great establishment.
19:03:03 I think you all are lucky to have that spot.
19:03:06 And I also think that one of the nice things about
19:03:10 sitting outside is you are right on the water.
19:03:11 I wouldn't want to put up a fence around your deck and
19:03:16 make it into a, you know, more of an adult place.
19:03:21 >>> Okay.
19:03:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.
19:03:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
19:03:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you wish to have a closed, you
19:03:35 should have an opportunity.
19:03:42 It's a public hearing.
19:03:43 Anyone who wants ton address council may come forward,
19:03:46 state your name and address for the record.
19:03:47 You have three minutes.
19:03:48 You have three minutes.
19:03:53 >>> Good evening.
19:03:53 My name is K.L. Smith.
19:03:55 I'm a resident of Ballast Point.
19:04:04 The concern over a lot of families that I spoke to.
19:04:06 More than 100 said they didn't want alcohol in the
19:04:10 Biggest concern is drinking alcohol no more than 14
19:04:14 feet away from the playground.
19:04:17 We measured it.
19:04:18 It's exactly 14 feet away from the state of the art
19:04:21 playground that was recently put in there.
19:04:25 Drew more kids to the park.
19:04:27 Their concern is, we know that everyone that drinks
19:04:29 don't become belligerent or disorderly, but a lot do.
19:04:32 And we are concerned with the same bathroom they are
19:04:36 going to be using which is no more than eleven feet.
19:04:38 The kids are going to have to use the same bathroom as
19:04:41 the people that are drinking.
19:04:42 So the concern that everyone has signed here, that
19:04:45 their biggest concern is being right next to our kids.
19:04:48 And as I understand it, the new plan is going to bring
19:04:52 even more kids because there's going to be a splash
19:04:54 park in there.
19:04:55 So that's our concern.
19:04:57 Ballast Point is not short on alcohol.
19:04:59 If you step outside of the park and you go to your
19:05:02 right, you have chubby's right there on the street
19:05:07 that sells beer and wine.
19:05:08 To your left you have Celine, you have a bar, you have
19:05:11 Circle K.
19:05:13 That's all the alcohol we need in this small area.
19:05:15 We don't want to saturate our community with alcohol.
19:05:17 It will draw people in there.
19:05:19 Now, bringing alcohol and beer to this business won't
19:05:24 guarantee any more income.
19:05:25 Instead of paying $20 for a decent meal, sit out there
19:05:31 and drink.
19:05:32 And as far as the kids and playground and how close
19:05:35 the patio is, the kids can see the patio all day long.
19:05:37 It's right there beside them.
19:05:39 If you saw pictures, like the picture that was put up,
19:05:42 they actually didn't show you how close the park is to
19:05:46 that concession stand.
19:05:50 So what we are asking you today, like if they have 100
19:05:53 signatures here of people that use the park -- I
19:05:56 didn't go on line to get 5 or 600 signatures.
19:06:00 I got signature of people who were in the park using
19:06:02 the park.
19:06:04 The kids were there.
19:06:05 They were exercising.
19:06:06 It's a family park.
19:06:07 And that's what we want it to remain as.
19:06:10 Thank you very much.
19:06:15 >> Next speaker?
19:06:19 >>> Hank Innis.
19:06:23 2808 Marlin Avenue.
19:06:25 And I have been a resident of Ballast Point for the
19:06:27 last 17 years.
19:06:30 The park is a great place.
19:06:33 My wife and I walked down there this weekend, and took
19:06:37 Here is a picture of a family, or birthday party.
19:06:41 Another birthday party.
19:06:45 The old trolley station.
19:06:46 People meeting over there.
19:06:49 It's a great place, a beautiful place.
19:06:51 Here is a picture of the playground which is right
19:06:53 next to the taste of Boston, another pavilion filled
19:06:57 with people.
19:06:58 And here's some shots of the taste of Boston.
19:07:01 As you can see, people are there, kids, families,
19:07:06 And this was on a weekend.
19:07:09 There's nothing wrong with the park the way it is.
19:07:11 And the old saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it,
19:07:14 fits in this situation.
19:07:18 We are against the alcohol sales in the park.
19:07:21 This park is -- the concession stand is -- it's
19:07:29 incidental to this park, it's primarily a playground.
19:07:31 And let's keep that the way.
19:07:34 Thank you.
19:07:36 >> You have been there 17 years?
19:07:39 >>> 17.
19:07:40 >> You're getting old, Hank.
19:07:42 >> Melanie Higgins.
19:07:48 2916 west Curlew Avenue.
19:07:50 I have been only in Ballast Point 14 years.
19:07:53 Sorry about that.
19:07:54 I came down here because I knew there would be
19:07:56 opposition to this wet zoning.
19:07:59 And I was -- I'm the person that's going to speak up
19:08:02 for small business.
19:08:06 We have had probably five or six restaurants in that
19:08:08 spot over the time that I have lived here and it was
19:08:12 really hard to keep people.
19:08:13 We finally had a guy who has really good food, and I
19:08:16 can tell you, on more than one occasion, I have left
19:08:19 there and gone over to the bar that we wet zoned an
19:08:24 few years ago because I couldn't have beer with my
19:08:28 And maybe that makes me a partier, but I would enjoy a
19:08:31 beer with my burger on a Saturday afternoon.
19:08:37 I think that putting a low fence around and keeping
19:08:40 the alcohol within the outside area is a great idea.
19:08:46 I talked to Mr. ISLES yesterday about trash in the
19:08:51 park and I talked to Tom Johnston, too and asked if he
19:08:54 would be willing to put recycling containers, if the
19:08:57 city could, and he said yes.
19:08:58 There's alcohol in the park now, actually.
19:09:01 I saw a couple of guys drinking a couple of Corona's
19:09:05 the other day.
19:09:06 I hardly ever see police there.
19:09:08 And if they do, they don't get out of their cars.
19:09:11 So perhaps if there was an issue, if people have an
19:09:15 issue with you alcohol in the park they should have
19:09:18 some officers on bicycles or on horseback walking
19:09:20 around, and dealing with the other ones who are not
19:09:23 buying at a restaurant, who are bringing it in from
19:09:26 Circle K and on the places. Anyway, I support the
19:09:31 I think it would be great to have a glass of wine in
19:09:33 the evening.
19:09:33 And I don't think it would adversely affect the
19:09:38 neighborhood at all.
19:09:39 Thank you.
19:09:42 >> My name is Fred Reiling.
19:09:50 I live at the Brigantine Condominium Association which
19:09:53 is adjacent to a fitness center.
19:09:58 I have been requested by the president of our
19:10:01 association to come and read a letter into the record.
19:10:09 Ladies and gentlemen, I serve as the president of the
19:10:11 Brigantine Condominium Association of Tampa, Inc., a
19:10:18 9-unit townhouse community based at 5210 Interbay
19:10:18 Boulevard, which is immediately adjacent to Ballast
19:10:23 Point park and the Ballast Point fitness center.
19:10:28 I take note of the April 7th, 2008 position to wet
19:10:32 zone with respect to the attached application that is
19:10:36 scheduled for public hearing on May 8th, 2008.
19:10:41 I am unable to appear at the Thursday, May 8 meeting.
19:10:47 However, I asked one of our fellow board members, Fred
19:10:52 Reiling, to read this letter into the record which
19:10:54 reflects the majority view of our Board of Directors,
19:10:58 which represents all owners of the Brigantine
19:11:06 I need my glasses.
19:11:11 It is our position that consideration of and granting
19:11:14 of the position of wet zone would be squarely in
19:11:18 violation as a matter of law of public policy.
19:11:21 The City of Tampa should not be serving as an
19:11:24 application to a petition to wet zone.
19:11:29 This should be handled and submitted by a private
19:11:33 City of Tampa's interest in this case is solely that
19:11:36 of landlord to taste of Boston.
19:11:39 This is a misuse of City of Tampa resources, and thus
19:11:43 a violation of public policy.
19:11:46 Hence the petition should be denied with prejudice on
19:11:49 these grounds alone.
19:11:51 Even if a private party were to file the petition to
19:11:54 wet zone for this subject property in Ballast Point
19:11:57 park, the petition should be clearly denied.
19:12:01 First and foremost, the subject restaurant operation,
19:12:04 the Taste of Tampa, is within 1,000 feet of the city
19:12:08 park, school, church, or school rehabilitation center.
19:12:13 In particular, the Taste of Boston is located squarely
19:12:16 in the eastern portion of Ballast Point park.
19:12:20 The only means by which such a private application or
19:12:24 petition to wet zone could be granted would be in fact
19:12:27 the City of Tampa granted a waiver to taste of Boston.
19:12:32 But in this case such a waiver would be completely
19:12:34 unjustified because the city must make a special use
19:12:39 determination that the waiver and the resulting wet
19:12:42 zone permit would promote our public health, welfare
19:12:46 and safety.
19:12:48 In this case, we can't imagine anything but contrary,
19:12:54 as explained below.
19:12:57 Since the park has been renovated, it has become the
19:13:00 center weekend and weekday birthday parties, children,
19:13:03 play time, family reunions, as well as other scheduled
19:13:08 events, not to mention the hundreds of people who use
19:13:10 the park each day and evening on a casual basis.
19:13:14 We are talking about literally hundreds of pedestrians
19:13:17 and their children walking through the park in the
19:13:20 parking lot on a daily basis.
19:13:23 Being exposed to alcohol, and its certain, not
19:13:28 unlikely, abuses as well as the danger to those
19:13:31 consuming alcohol and driving away, in an already
19:13:34 crowded parking lot, represents a huge risk to our
19:13:37 public --
19:13:40 >> Sir, how much more do you have to read there?
19:13:42 >>> I have two more paragraphs.
19:13:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ooh.
19:13:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We get the general thought.
19:13:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We allow three minutes, and I gave you
19:13:54 an extra minute so I am going to have to cut you off.
19:13:56 >> All right.
19:13:59 Do you want to scan this into the record?
19:14:01 >> Yes, you can submit it into the record.
19:14:04 Anyone else from the public wish to address the board?
19:14:10 Anyone else want to address the board?
19:14:12 >>> Todd Johnson, parks and rec.
19:14:19 One of the concerns, and one of the things, a number
19:14:22 of things I want to address.
19:14:24 First of all, the department does not see the conflict
19:14:30 between the children and the playground locations that
19:14:34 has been voiced.
19:14:38 The covered patio and the restaurant are much more
19:14:40 than 17 feet away.
19:14:43 On the west side of the building there's a bait shop,
19:14:47 the restrooms and that sort of thing.
19:14:49 And we can look at the pictures, those of you that
19:14:52 have been out there, it's not as if you are sitting on
19:14:56 the patio overlooking the playground and children are
19:15:00 watching you drink.
19:15:02 As far as children being exposed to alcohol, this is a
19:15:07 It is a restaurant with 50 seats.
19:15:11 And I think children go to restaurants very often
19:15:13 these days, and I think that they see people drinking
19:15:16 wine and beer in those restaurants.
19:15:19 The fact that this is in a park is a little different,
19:15:22 but it essentially is -- it is not a use or something
19:15:28 that is entirely for children.
19:15:34 As far as it being a bar or having excessive alcohol
19:15:38 sales, the way that these are structured, it's 51% of
19:15:44 the sales have to be food, the petitioner or owner has
19:15:49 to report back to you on his sales, and from what I
19:15:53 understand the wet zoning process, you as council have
19:15:58 the right to suspend a wet zoning if alcohol sales are
19:16:09 Again we have the aquarium.
19:16:10 Aquarium is a family oriented facility.
19:16:13 It sells beer and wine.
19:16:15 The same thing with the zoo.
19:16:17 They both sell beer and wine.
19:16:20 And we don't think that it has been detrimental.
19:16:24 This city has had a very difficult time keeping
19:16:26 restaurants in this particular location.
19:16:30 It is one of the few locations that we have a
19:16:35 commercial restaurant.
19:16:37 But it would be beneficial to the city and to the
19:16:43 long-term stability of that building's use to allow
19:16:48 for the wet zoning.
19:16:49 Do you all have any questions?
19:16:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I am really shocked and appalled and
19:16:58 dumbfounded, flabbergasted, that the city will stand
19:17:02 before us and say there's no problem with drinking in
19:17:07 correlation with the park.
19:17:08 I'm really shocked by that.
19:17:11 I'm speaking now, okay?
19:17:14 The other thing I will say is, I'm very familiar with
19:17:16 this park.
19:17:18 This is actually my favorite area to go fishing off
19:17:22 the pier.
19:17:22 I love to fish.
19:17:23 And I used to -- both of my boys grew up in the park
19:17:27 down there when I would go fishing off that pier.
19:17:32 Early in the morning, late at night, there.
19:17:37 And I will tell you that almost on the side you have a
19:17:42 playground, you can see it.
19:17:44 If you go down the back you have the two restrooms on
19:17:47 the back of that, unless you have changed that.
19:17:50 I mean, I can't believe -- when you step out the door
19:17:54 you step right into the park almost.
19:17:57 And so you are talking about someone come out that's
19:18:01 been drinking, perhaps a child runs into this parking
19:18:04 lot and gets hit or something.
19:18:06 I mean, I'm just shocked by this.
19:18:11 Councilwoman Mary Mulhern and Charlie Miranda and then
19:18:15 councilman Joe Caetano.
19:18:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know if this -- I have a
19:18:21 question for you but it's mainly legal.
19:18:23 This is actually an odd request that -- I mean, what
19:18:27 is the -- you work for the City of Tampa.
19:18:30 You work for the public of Tampa, the people of Tampa,
19:18:34 >>> Uh-huh.
19:18:35 >> What is the interest of the City of Tampa meaning
19:18:41 all the people who live here in general, the public,
19:18:43 who pay their taxes, and a lost it goes to parks and
19:18:51 Why would the city -- I don't see -- regardless how
19:18:59 appropriate it is.
19:19:00 What's the benefit or the reason for the city to even
19:19:02 get involved in asking for a zoning change, in the
19:19:06 interest of a private business?
19:19:10 >>REBECCA KERT: Councilwoman, I think as stated,
19:19:16 stated why they think it's appropriate and therefore
19:19:18 they brought to the you.
19:19:20 However, at this point it's for you to determine from
19:19:22 a land use perspective whether or not the rezoning
19:19:25 request, and if that's approved, wet zoning is
19:19:31 They felt it was appropriate.
19:19:32 At this point it's in you all's hand to make that
19:19:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand. That that's not what
19:19:37 I'm saying. It seems as if it's totally inappropriate
19:19:41 for this City of Tampa to ask for a zoning change
19:19:46 leading to a wet zoning.
19:19:49 I don't understand.
19:19:50 >>> Well, it could have gone either way.
19:19:56 We could have had the petitioner doing it takes lessee
19:19:59 or city do have could have done it.
19:20:04 >>MARY MULHERN: But you work for the city and you are
19:20:05 standing in front of us and you have gotten all of the
19:20:07 staff and the legal department to advocate for this.
19:20:12 It just doesn't seem right to me.
19:20:14 >>> Well, the city is the owner of the property.
19:20:21 And again the department has Struggled with this
19:20:25 concession, with this in the past.
19:20:26 And we feel that this would help us.
19:20:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
19:20:32 >>> And I guess the department kind of -- we
19:20:35 understand about the drinking in the park.
19:20:39 But the problem drinking in the park is not from
19:20:43 restaurant sales, with a person drinking, you know, $4
19:20:48 glass of wine or $3 beer.
19:20:49 It's people bringing in --
19:20:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Really --
19:20:54 >>> From a box.
19:20:56 That's a mutually exclusive issue for us, for the
19:21:01 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
19:21:03 I think that I share councilman Chairman Scott's
19:21:10 concerns, and that I -- I just don't think that you
19:21:15 should be representing the city, the Parks Department
19:21:19 of the city in that way.
19:21:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Miranda and councilman
19:21:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am not here to try to embarrass
19:21:32 anyone else.
19:21:33 I understand your plight.
19:21:34 I understand there's a lease change if you get
19:21:37 something you get more.
19:21:39 I'm assuming that.
19:21:40 If this were changed I imagine the city would ask for
19:21:43 I don't know.
19:21:43 I can also tell you, I don't know who is paying for
19:21:46 this public hearing.
19:21:47 Is it the petitioner or we?
19:21:49 I don't know.
19:21:51 How did this happen?
19:21:52 Did they pay to do this or do we pay to do this?
19:21:56 >>> The petitioner pays for the wet zoning.
19:21:59 And he paid for all of that, as far as the rezoning as
19:22:03 a city petitioner.
19:22:04 >> But the land zoning he can't have it without the
19:22:07 land being changed so who paid for the land zoning?
19:22:10 >>> The city.
19:22:13 I mean in, that respect -- and again, the city is the
19:22:15 >>I understand that.
19:22:16 >>> The fee was waived for the -- the application fee
19:22:23 was waived.
19:22:23 >> We don't do that for anyone else.
19:22:27 Even on land we are selling to someone else we don't
19:22:30 pay for the rezoning of that property, and we do that
19:22:32 quite often.
19:22:39 You have been here a long time.
19:22:40 And you are the fall guy right now.
19:22:42 >>> We are the petitioner.
19:22:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand that.
19:22:46 I understand that.
19:22:46 And I'm not being apologetic.
19:22:48 But at the same time I know how you are, and you have
19:22:51 always been right down the middle and very straight.
19:22:53 But the petitioner knew at the time that he signed the
19:22:56 contract what he was getting into.
19:22:58 He also knew by the amount of money that we spent in
19:23:02 getting that park renovated and the others that we
19:23:04 have talked about earlier, is an enticement to his
19:23:08 business without that petitioner paying one penny.
19:23:10 We spent the money to bring that park to where it is
19:23:13 Am I right?
19:23:15 We did.
19:23:17 So now we create this beautiful park, and then we want
19:23:20 to destroy the same thing we created.
19:23:23 Kids have legs.
19:23:24 They run all over the place.
19:23:25 You can't tell me that kids 18 feet, 14 feet or 25
19:23:29 feet or 40 feet are not going to run.
19:23:31 They play tag.
19:23:32 They run through tables, under tables, over tables,
19:23:34 through the tables.
19:23:35 I was a kid 152 years ago.
19:23:38 I know what I'm saying.
19:23:39 So what I'm trying to tell you is, I don't understand
19:23:42 this whole deal.
19:23:46 Mr. Chairman, I relinquish the chair.
19:23:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano and we need to hear
19:23:54 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: You, sir, are representing city.
19:23:56 Who drew this lease up?
19:23:58 >>> The lease?
19:23:59 Real estate.
19:24:00 >> Who?
19:24:01 >>> Real estate.
19:24:02 >> Like the real estate department?
19:24:05 Somebody better go back to school and learn how to
19:24:07 write a lease.
19:24:08 Let me tell you something.
19:24:10 The lease is --
19:24:13 >> Well, that's --
19:24:14 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Divide that 48,000 into 12
19:24:17 That's $4,000 a month.
19:24:19 Down on the bottom here, it says, without any
19:24:25 deductions of offset whatsoever in equal monthly
19:24:28 installments of $400.
19:24:30 Somebody screwed up.
19:24:32 I'm going to vote against this tonight.
19:24:34 And it will kill the whole thing.
19:24:37 And we need this lease rewritten properly.
19:24:39 I don't know, how large is your building, sir?
19:24:43 How much?
19:24:43 >>> 1800 square feet.
19:24:46 >> 900 square feet?
19:24:48 >>> 1800.
19:24:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
19:24:52 And then we need --
19:24:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, just for clarity,
19:24:59 although that's what it says on the front page, if you
19:25:02 read the whole lease there's improvement that is are
19:25:03 made --
19:25:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: He's getting reimbursements for
19:25:08 >> In a way yes, in a way no.
19:25:10 There's a whole lease here that I have read a cursory
19:25:12 review of it and although Mr. Caetano is right in the
19:25:16 first part but in the second part there's a whole list
19:25:18 of things.
19:25:19 But he's not on city property.
19:25:22 It would enhance the build field goal he chose to
19:25:25 leave at some time in the future and it talked all
19:25:28 about bankruptcy, leaving the property, and holding,
19:25:37 attorney fees, talks about a whole item of things.
19:25:39 So you are right in the first part.
19:25:41 But in the second part there's a lot more concessions
19:25:43 that are made between the two parties, because the
19:25:46 improvements to the building would be there a much
19:25:50 longer time than the term of the lease.
19:25:52 And I'm not here to make the lease because I
19:25:56 understand your point, Mr. Caetano.
19:25:58 But what I am saying is the improvements to the
19:26:01 property stay with the property and the property is
19:26:03 city property.
19:26:03 >>REBECCA KERT: Clarification, the lease is before you
19:26:07 so it does not have any effect on the lease.
19:26:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
19:26:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to put Tom out of his
19:26:14 misery and move to close the public hearing.
19:26:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have rebuttal.
19:26:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I thought he was doing rebuttal.
19:26:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Is now the time to ask questions of
19:26:26 staff or after his rebuttal?
19:26:33 Not of you.
19:26:35 I have questions for, I guess, zoning.
19:26:52 It's very strange that we don't have zoning for park.
19:26:57 And there are no parks in the city that actually
19:27:00 have --
19:27:06 >>> Parks are an allowable use.
19:27:08 That is one of the things that the comprehensive plan
19:27:09 speaks to especially in relationship to co-location.
19:27:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say that we keep our
19:27:15 questions to the issue before us, or that we have a
19:27:17 workshop on why.
19:27:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, I'll bring that up later.
19:27:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think that's beyond the parameter of
19:27:25 what's before us now.
19:27:30 Do you have any questions on the issue before us?
19:27:35 Then let's hear from the petitioner and then we'll
19:27:37 close the public hearing.
19:27:40 You have five minutes for rebuttal.
19:27:46 >>> I have really pretty much stated my case earlier
19:27:50 why I wanted to do this.
19:27:51 I felt it was going to be a positive thing.
19:27:56 I by no means want to make this -- to the city or the
19:28:00 community and it seems to me that's what the board
19:28:03 feels about it.
19:28:04 And I once again wanted to just emphasize that this is
19:28:10 sit down, dining customers, that we would bring it to
19:28:14 the table and they would be able to get a glass of
19:28:16 beer or glass of wine with their meal just like any
19:28:18 other restaurant.
19:28:19 I understand because it's in a park, it's a touchy
19:28:23 subject, and that's why we are here discussing that.
19:28:27 And I would Maybe to a one-year temporary so that I
19:28:35 can prove that this is a good idea, because if you
19:28:39 approve it tonight for one year we can meet back here
19:28:41 and you can revisit and say, well, this wasn't a good
19:28:44 idea because we have so many complaints, or we could
19:28:47 say, yes, this was a good idea because the community
19:28:51 So maybe if I could ask for at least a one-year trial
19:28:57 period since I had so much requests for it.
19:29:00 And it seems to me the community wants it.
19:29:04 We have heard from the opposition, and there are
19:29:06 people obviously, there's awl always people that are
19:29:10 going to be against something but I have had such an
19:29:12 overwhelming request for it that I feel it's still
19:29:15 more than the opposition.
19:29:17 So I keep asking my customers, do you think it's a
19:29:23 good idea?
19:29:23 I want to hear what they say.
19:29:26 Intelligent grown-up people in the community think
19:29:28 it's a good thing to have.
19:29:29 So they can buy that.
19:29:31 And that's why I pursued it and pursued it.
19:29:34 It wasn't that this is my dream, and this is just what
19:29:37 I want to do.
19:29:39 I'm a business owner just like anybody else that owns
19:29:41 a business trying to succeed, and trying to please
19:29:45 their customers.
19:29:46 And that's really all I am doing.
19:29:47 And it is my responsibility to make sure that that
19:29:52 beer and wine does not leave -- you can have a limit
19:29:58 on two or three drinks per person.
19:30:02 Once again I am not doing 99-cent specials where
19:30:05 people come in and play games, can drink more with the
19:30:12 I'm just trying to do something that I think would be
19:30:15 a good idea.
19:30:16 Just to close it off with, if you would give me the
19:30:19 chance for a year to try this out, so I can prove this
19:30:21 was a benefit to the community, then I would really
19:30:25 appreciate it.
19:30:26 If you think that you don't want me to do this
19:30:29 absolutely, then that would be a decision, and I would
19:30:33 respect that.
19:30:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:30:45 Then motion to close.
19:30:46 (Motion carried)
19:30:48 Board, what's your pleasure?
19:30:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, on item number 5,
19:30:51 which is the Pete for public hearing WZ 06-17, I
19:30:55 believe that I move for denial based on the fact that
19:31:01 we created by the own admission of the city, this is
19:31:04 not -- and this is the only one here and I want to
19:31:11 speak to this first but it's a bad precedent to start
19:31:13 this when families want to come out and just have a
19:31:16 nice time in a city park, enjoy the sites that we put
19:31:20 tens of hundreds of thousands of dollars or maybe a
19:31:23 million, I don't know, to bring this to what it is.
19:31:26 The petitioner is certainly an individual who has
19:31:29 brought his good cuisine and worked hard at the
19:31:35 However, it was not the intent of the city or the
19:31:43 lessor, or the lessee, in this document in 2001, where
19:31:48 it specifically states, the concessionaire shall be
19:31:52 responsible to ensure that alcoholic beverages, drugs,
19:31:58 activity are not permitted on the leased premises.
19:32:00 By his own admission he knew it was there.
19:32:03 The city by their own admission knew it was there.
19:32:06 It's a message that we feel, at least I do, and I'm
19:32:10 sure that others will, too, maybe all of us, that this
19:32:13 is heading in the wrong direction.
19:32:16 By the city's own admission to have others they would
19:32:20 like to do.
19:32:20 I don't think that's the right thing to do in a city
19:32:22 park like this that has a benefit from the general
19:32:28 public, investing money through city recreation
19:32:31 department, which has done an outstanding job.
19:32:35 They had more cutbacks there than any department, and
19:32:39 they still are functioning at a very great product to
19:32:43 the city, more than 100%.
19:32:46 They are giving it all.
19:32:47 But that's not what's here.
19:32:48 What's here today is an alcohol zoning.
19:32:51 Like you said, Mr. Chairman, this is shall not the
19:32:57 right time, right place, and rather embarrassing to
19:32:59 ourselves, an ordinance to allow requests of alcoholic
19:33:03 beverage sales at this location.
19:33:09 For that reason I move for denial.
19:33:22 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) before the wet zoning
19:33:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You cannot wet zone this property
19:33:29 under its present zoning classification.
19:33:31 So if you deny number 5, the rezoning, then 6 can't be
19:33:37 heard as a matter of law.
19:33:38 It cannot be voted on because it is inappropriate.
19:33:40 It is not ripe to be heard.
19:33:42 If you vote on number 6 first, you may have to be able
19:33:45 to have a basis of denial, and then go back to 5 and
19:33:48 do it that way.
19:33:49 But if you do choose to take up number 5 first,
19:33:54 whatever basis under the evidence that you heard, then
19:33:57 as a matter of law number 6 cannot be heard because
19:34:00 under your code you cannot wet zone that present
19:34:04 zoning classification.
19:34:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilman Saul-Sena.
19:34:09 Then --
19:34:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I am going to speak up for the
19:34:15 petitioner, who is asking for a one-year conditional
19:34:18 on this.
19:34:19 And the reason is, I want Tampa to be a city like
19:34:24 other great cities.
19:34:26 And when I think of great cities, I think of the boat
19:34:30 house in Central Park in New York, I think of
19:34:32 millennial park in Chicago, I think of the garden?
19:34:38 Paris, all of those parks with Ferris wheels and merry
19:34:42 go rounds and children playing and adults eating and
19:34:47 drinking wine and beer and I think we are capable of
19:34:50 being civilized people have a drink and don't get
19:34:53 crazy and that we should allow this restaurateur the
19:34:55 opportunity to have a year to prove that he can create
19:35:00 this civilized situation, and I think our Parks
19:35:03 Department is appropriate in saying this is an
19:35:07 opportunity, it's not rezoning the entire park ground,
19:35:13 it's taking the outdoor and interior of this
19:35:15 restaurant, not a bar but a restaurant, and allowing
19:35:18 beer and wine sales of 49% of beer of all sales.
19:35:23 I think it's a reasonable request.
19:35:28 And I will not support the motion for denial.
19:35:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
19:35:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I wish we were more like Europe, but
19:35:38 we are not.
19:35:39 And I think that this in particular is a park that
19:35:45 isn't a big park like millennial park or anything like
19:35:49 that, which I was there and I didn't see a concession,
19:35:52 even an ice cream stand there.
19:35:53 But this is a small neighborhood park that is devoted
19:35:57 to family.
19:35:58 I mean, all of my time I have spent there has been as
19:36:02 a family.
19:36:03 I have gone there every time of the day.
19:36:05 I go there at night.
19:36:06 We walk out on the pier with the kids.
19:36:10 There's family fishing there.
19:36:12 It's all family.
19:36:13 It's not, you know, and there's nothing wrong with
19:36:17 having beer and wine with your meal.
19:36:19 And if this was a cafe, that was next door to the park
19:36:23 on public land, that would be a different story.
19:36:26 But this is our park.
19:36:28 And I totally agree with Mr. Miranda.
19:36:34 We don't need to set this precedent.
19:36:36 I mean, we don't do this in our neighborhood parks
19:36:39 that have playgrounds.
19:36:41 We don't have beer and wine there.
19:36:43 And I also think that the interesting thing for me
19:36:47 about this, and troublesome thing, is that this has
19:36:50 gone through the Planning Commission, you know, got
19:36:53 proposed by the city, got approved -- or was found
19:36:59 consistent by the Planning Commission, and found
19:37:01 consistent by parks and rec and by our growth
19:37:07 management, and really, how do you define
19:37:10 I mean, there's recreational drinking and there's
19:37:13 parks and recreation.
19:37:14 And I don't think that something that should be just
19:37:19 looked at and, oh, this is fine.
19:37:23 I have a problem with that.
19:37:24 And I think there's a problem maybe with the comp
19:37:30 If parks don't have a better kind of definition so you
19:37:32 can distinguish between a place where children are
19:37:35 playing and a place where you are going to have mostly
19:37:38 adult uses, there's a problem with that.
19:37:42 And I also don't understand why we have a land use
19:37:45 category but we don't have a zoning category.
19:37:48 I understand that we don't have one.
19:37:51 I'd like to find out, is that typical of other
19:37:55 municipalities that you just let a park be called
19:37:58 residential, or whatever it's in?
19:38:00 It's in a commercial industrial area, and still called
19:38:04 commercial industrial?
19:38:05 I'm looking at legal here.
19:38:08 Oh, I'm sorry, never mind.
19:38:09 I'm going to bring this up at the end of the meeting
19:38:11 for a workshop.
19:38:12 But I just think -- I wanted to bring this up because
19:38:16 I think it's really problematic that our regulations
19:38:22 and our zoning and land use categories don't really
19:38:26 address something like this.
19:38:28 And I think that's really the mission of the Parks
19:38:32 Department, and the individual missions of different
19:38:35 parks need to be looked at.
19:38:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
19:38:38 Then we need to cast our votes.
19:38:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: To mach our legal department happy,
19:38:47 I seconded the motion and I just wanted to clarify my
19:38:51 The section 3-70 of our code speaks to our ability to
19:38:57 waive the difference separation requirements between
19:39:00 the alcohol use and the institutional use, in this
19:39:03 case, the institutional use, the Ballast Point park.
19:39:09 So I would argue that based upon the criterion that
19:39:16 this is an incompatible use, inconsistent and
19:39:19 incompatible with the adjacent institutional use.
19:39:28 >> Are you addressing on number 5 or number 6?
19:39:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Charlie's motion was for 5.
19:39:41 >>> I'm hearing from my wet zoning attorney that we
19:39:44 really, really, really need to hear the rezoning
19:39:48 petition first.
19:39:49 That is the natural order of things.
19:39:51 And we really need to --
19:39:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If that's the case, why did we
19:39:57 spend all this time without the legal department
19:40:00 saying this is 6 instead of 5?
19:40:03 >>REBECCA KERT: You typically open these with comp
19:40:07 plans, rezoning, et cetera.
19:40:09 However as councilwoman Mulhern said earlier on we
19:40:12 have to vote on the rezoning first.
19:40:13 And the wet zoning cannot be heard if it doesn't have
19:40:16 the appropriate underlining zoning.
19:40:18 And it was if you don't approve number 6.
19:40:21 I'm not sure why it's not on your agenda that way.
19:40:25 I don't have control over that.
19:40:26 To be perfectly clear, number 5 can't even be heard
19:40:29 unless number -- it can be heard but it cannot be
19:40:32 voted on unless number 6 is approved.
19:40:34 It's the same thing with comp plans and zonings.
19:40:37 You open them up together.
19:40:38 If you don't approve the underlying comp plan you
19:40:41 don't vote on the zoning.
19:40:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We opened number 5.
19:40:46 So you are telling me we need to vote on number 6
19:40:49 Is that what you are saying?
19:40:50 >>> Yes.
19:40:51 And if you deny number 6 then number 5 --
19:40:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me do this.
19:40:56 On number 6, I'm thinking as the legal on number 6,
19:41:02 and I'm not as prepared as he is right now for that so
19:41:05 I yield to Mr. Dingfelder.
19:41:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
19:41:08 I move to deny petition Z 08-26, the request to go
19:41:14 from RS-60 to PD.
19:41:16 And basically in a nutshell incorporating all the
19:41:19 comments of council earlier, but basically referring
19:41:22 to section 27-321 which speaks to compatibility.
19:41:27 And I would say that this proposed rezoning is
19:41:31 incompatible with the surrounding neighborhoods.
19:41:35 That's PAREN 6 and the surrounding uses, especially --
19:41:40 I'll just leave it at that.
19:41:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.
19:41:46 Councilman Caetano, speak to the motion.
19:41:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I ask legal a question?
19:41:51 Since the original inception of this lease, this
19:41:55 gentleman did not have the first lease.
19:41:57 Am I correct?
19:42:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.
19:42:04 The public hearing is closed.
19:42:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I ask legal a question?
19:42:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No, not at this point.
19:42:11 Unless you reopen the public hearing.
19:42:15 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I'm looking at the assignment of
19:42:17 the lease.
19:42:18 Evidently this gentleman is not the guy that signed
19:42:19 the original lease.
19:42:21 And it says here, it has to come to the City of Tampa
19:42:24 for a resolution.
19:42:27 And I'm asking legal, has that ever come here for a
19:42:30 resolution, for assignment to this gentleman?
19:42:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Each time it does as a matter of
19:42:35 We voted on the assess assignment and Gwen signed it.
19:42:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Speak to the motion.
19:42:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, speaking to the motion, I'm
19:42:45 wondering, I wish we had heard the PD part first and
19:42:49 then the wet zoning because it's so confusing.
19:42:52 But it's actually asking for a planned development.
19:42:55 And I don't think there were requirements for that
19:43:01 either, John.
19:43:02 If you feel like you need to add anything else, that
19:43:05 you have got it there.
19:43:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm comfortable with the motion.
19:43:08 Do you want to add to it?
19:43:10 >> That's sufficient.
19:43:11 >>MARY MULHERN: It is?
19:43:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The motion to deny.
19:43:15 All in favor let it be known by Aye.
19:43:17 Opposes, same sign.
19:43:18 So moved and ordered.
19:43:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move to strike number 5 from the
19:43:23 agenda as irrelevant.
19:43:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to strike number 5.
19:43:29 Moved by councilman Dingfelder.
19:43:31 Seconded by councilman Miranda.
19:43:33 (Motion carried).
19:43:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think perhaps council should have
19:43:42 a philosophical discussion about whether we think it's
19:43:45 appropriate to have -- whether it's restaurants, or
19:43:51 lease out public calls for weddings and allow alcohol
19:43:54 at weddings.
19:43:55 I think that we should have a policy conversation
19:44:00 perhaps in the form of a workshop about that prayer to
19:44:04 these other potential questions coming before us.
19:44:08 In my years on council it's something we have never
19:44:10 discussed, as a policy, I think we should in a broad
19:44:15 philosophical sense and I think we should ask the
19:44:18 public for their input and perhaps determine if
19:44:20 there's certain conditions under which we think it
19:44:21 would be appropriate or not.
19:44:23 I think it's worthy of in-depth conversation.
19:44:30 >> Can I speak to that?
19:44:31 >> Well, it's not on our agenda but I want to move to
19:44:34 number 8 so we can get out of here.
19:44:36 I would rather put it on our agenda so we can have a
19:44:38 full discussion.
19:44:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, not now.
19:44:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think parks should have had this
19:44:43 discussion with us before we even got to tonight.
19:44:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:44:46 Item number 8.
19:44:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, council.
19:44:51 Item number 8 is a reconsideration of a motion that
19:44:54 was originally made on April 17th 2008.
19:45:04 It was made by Mrs. Saul-Sena, seconded by council
19:45:07 member Mulhern, to schedule a workshop at 9 a.m. at
19:45:12 the Tampa Convention Center to discuss campaign
19:45:15 finance reform.
19:45:16 At the time the motion was made with Miranda voting no
19:45:20 and Scott being absent at vote, so say the minutes of
19:45:25 the clerk.
19:45:27 Council, I believe that is the motion before you.
19:45:30 And, Mr. Chairman, what is your pleasure?
19:45:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We would vote on the particular
19:45:43 So we are back to the original motion.
19:45:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor of the motion on the
19:45:56 workshop on this particular matter at the convention
19:45:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I speak to the motion?
19:46:02 >> What I should is we would not discuss the motion
19:46:05 now until we felt -- we spent quite a bit of time on
19:46:08 that, that we come back and just up or down the
19:46:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's fair enough.
19:46:27 Tell me when to stop.
19:46:28 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19:46:29 I am not going to reiterate everything that the public
19:46:31 came and spoke to us about at that original meeting.
19:46:35 I think there are probably a good favor to ten people
19:46:40 I think everybody received e-mails and phone calls to
19:46:42 the tune of probably another 50 folks who are in favor
19:46:47 of this.
19:46:48 And to my count, I counted maybe three or four folks
19:46:51 in the entire community who opposed to putting this on
19:46:54 the ballot.
19:46:55 But I just wanted to clarify one thing.
19:46:57 And Mr. Caetano, this is real important.
19:47:00 As related to why this came back later in the day that
19:47:06 The reason it came back, in my opinion, was because I
19:47:10 had heard you speak to an experience that you had had
19:47:13 up north.
19:47:13 And I can't remember exactly what the details were.
19:47:17 There was some experience that you had had when -- I
19:47:21 think you said something about when you ran for office
19:47:23 up north or when you ran for office.
19:47:25 Maybe it was here or something like that.
19:47:28 But I remember hearing you say that.
19:47:29 And that's why I thought to myself, well, maybe Joseph
19:47:34 is really interested in this issue.
19:47:35 Because I can count.
19:47:37 I knew where it was earlier in the day.
19:47:39 But then when you made those comments, I thought to
19:47:42 myself that it sounds like you are interested in
19:47:48 letting the people decide on this important issue of
19:47:50 campaign finance reform.
19:47:51 I didn't mean to bring it up to be disrespectful to
19:47:54 council, dysfunctional in any way shape or form.
19:47:57 That's why I brought it up.
19:47:58 Let me say one other thing.
19:48:00 The bottom line of this is to let the people decide.
19:48:03 It's not for council to decide.
19:48:05 We decide lots of things.
19:48:06 We all have good intelligence.
19:48:08 But in this case, let's let the people decide this
19:48:11 critical issue about voting.
19:48:12 >> I'm going to trial to talk really fast.
19:48:21 I actually thought I had talked to Mr. Dingfelder
19:48:23 about voting against it in the first place and I
19:48:25 didn't have another opportunity to do it so I brought
19:48:27 it up at the end of the meeting.
19:48:28 And then Ms. Saul-Sena made the motion to have a
19:48:33 And part of the reason that I wanted to talk about it
19:48:35 again, and I didn't realize Chairman Scott wasn't here
19:48:38 at the time, was he brought up a good point, and kind
19:48:42 of clarified why I had problems with John's ordinance
19:48:46 in the first place.
19:48:47 His motion is -- had not been heard, it didn't come
19:48:51 from the people, it came from people that John knew
19:48:56 and that were contacting him from his district, and
19:49:00 Mr. Scott said he didn't feel like they were -- people
19:49:04 from his district were even interested.
19:49:06 I honestly think that everybody would be happy if we
19:49:09 had cleaner elections.
19:49:11 I don't know whether that motion was worth it or not
19:49:14 but I do not think this is totally -- and I do think
19:49:17 that a lot of people in this country are interested in
19:49:21 getting the money out of politics.
19:49:23 So I think to imply that people don't care about this,
19:49:27 or it's not an important issue, is just flat wrong.
19:49:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:49:36 There's a motion.
19:49:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, real quickly.
19:49:40 You can't cap campaign funding.
19:49:44 So now we are going to cap campaign contributions.
19:49:47 The back door interest.
19:49:48 It's not that I care contributions of 500, I offered
19:49:52 to run for office with no campaign contribution, zero,
19:49:55 none, whether this office or any other office in
19:49:57 Hillsborough County.
19:49:58 I have seen no other takers on council do that.
19:50:01 So what is the most purest democracy we have?
19:50:04 I did that with a bunch of volunteers in 1972 through
19:50:08 the State of Florida, get you on the petition so you
19:50:10 didn't have to pay.
19:50:11 Many of us have gotten elected that way in this
19:50:14 I take no credit for that.
19:50:15 That was a lot of volunteer work that was done.
19:50:17 So, therefore, I have offered again.
19:50:20 There's been no takers.
19:50:21 I'm not asking for takers.
19:50:23 I will sign an affidavit saying if I run for
19:50:25 reelection, I'll do it with no money.
19:50:27 No money to spend on advertising, no money to go and
19:50:30 pay for the qualifying fee.
19:50:33 I have proven that $100 is equal to $400 today's
19:50:38 standards, in '74 is equal to 437 to $469 if I
19:50:45 Price of gas in 1974 was 55 cents, the price of gas
19:50:45 now is 3.60.
19:50:48 Medium income home was 37,900 in '74.
19:50:51 Today it's at 200 even with the deflation that we have
19:50:55 So what I am saying is, this is not the most important
19:50:57 issue that this council is faced with.
19:51:00 We have an enormous responsibility to continue the
19:51:05 reduction of crime, to continue to work toward getting
19:51:08 reclaimed water, to continue to get this city on a
19:51:12 course to make it one of the best, sound cities in the
19:51:16 I understand the issue.
19:51:17 But I don't think it's in the top ten of the city
19:51:19 right now.
19:51:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: He did not have to accept $500.
19:51:33 If you only accept 100, do not give me 500, I'll take
19:51:38 100, I'll take 200.
19:51:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
19:51:42 I think this issue here is not what we individually
19:51:46 would do.
19:51:46 I think what we are doing is asking the community what
19:51:51 level playing field they would like in the future.
19:51:54 I personally would like to see a variety of people
19:51:56 running for office.
19:51:57 I would like to see young people run.
19:51:59 And I think one of the things that prevents from
19:52:05 people running for office is their intimidation about
19:52:08 raising money and my feel isn't public service should
19:52:10 be about your ability to raise money, it should be
19:52:12 about the talent you bring to the service.
19:52:15 I think that the proposal to allow the public to speak
19:52:18 on this, and the public can vote on it, is very
19:52:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor and the
19:52:24 motion is, the motion has been made, that you have a
19:52:27 workshop at the convention center on campaign reform.
19:52:32 All in favor of the motion let it be known by Aye.
19:52:38 >>THE CLERK: Motion did not carry, with Miranda,
19:52:43 Miller, Scott, and Caetano voting no.
19:52:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:52:53 Under new business, councilwoman Miller.
19:52:56 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to make a motion to give a
19:52:59 commendation to Mr. Thomas and Mr. Douglas rain,
19:53:06 recognized for their acts of bravery in saving Tampa
19:53:09 police officer's life Monday morning by pulling her to
19:53:14 safety after her vehicle caught on fire as a result of
19:53:17 a head on collision and I have to ask Chief Hogue and
19:53:21 I will give you a date then.
19:53:22 (Motion carried).
19:53:26 >>GWEN MILLER: And MOSI would like to come before us
19:53:29 and present the Hispanic scientist of the award on May
19:53:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
19:53:38 (Motion carried)
19:53:41 Mr. Miranda, do you have anything?
19:53:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One thing.
19:53:43 I would just like to thank governor Charlie Crist for
19:53:46 making a public service recognition week for May 5
19:53:50 through 11.
19:53:50 He recognizes all the talents of the contribution made
19:53:53 by public employees.
19:53:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Does that include us?
19:54:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I guess so.
19:54:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
19:54:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two items.
19:54:06 One item that I mentioned this afternoon, plant hey
19:54:08 schools girls and boys high school basketball team won
19:54:11 districts, want to honor them at a future date.
19:54:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor let it be known by Aye.
19:54:18 (Motion carried).
19:54:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Secondly, I was invited to make a
19:54:24 presentation to the Hillsborough County Bar
19:54:25 Association leadership institute meeting.
19:54:28 At the last minute I had a conflict.
19:54:30 And I would like to ask Mr. Shelby to sub in for me.
19:54:35 Out of an abundance of caution, he just wanted me to
19:54:39 make council aware of that and make sure there was no
19:54:48 No motion there.
19:54:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to let now the
19:54:52 special discussion meeting today on the comprehensive
19:54:54 plan and livable roadways concept was extremely
19:54:58 It turns out that our comp plan embodies many of the
19:55:01 ideas shared with us last week by the gentleman from
19:55:05 Seminole Heights.
19:55:06 He has a number of neighborhood representatives, and
19:55:09 they are all very pleased that in the future as we
19:55:11 move ahead with the comp plan we will have a greater
19:55:13 ability to promote a walkable, livable community in
19:55:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Dedicate your first recreation
19:55:23 park in the northern part of my district.
19:55:26 Saturday morning at 9:00.
19:55:29 >>GWEN MILLER: You will be representing us?
19:55:31 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, I'll be there.
19:55:34 >>MARY MULHERN: I just have one thing to say.
19:55:36 I just want to double check with Charlie.
19:55:41 If it's you and me, just the two of us, some time in a
19:55:47 race, you against me --
19:55:51 >> Running against somebody.
19:55:54 >> If we are running for the same office and we are
19:55:56 the only two candidates, and there are only two
19:55:57 candidates, and there can't be another candidate
19:55:58 getting in the race, I will shake hands with you on
19:56:01 that deal.
19:56:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You just offered me a challenge,
19:56:05 young lady.
19:56:09 >> Who is running?
19:56:13 >>MARY MULHERN: It sounds great not to have to raise
19:56:16 any money.
19:56:17 I just thought I would take him up on it.
19:56:24 >> Move to receive and file.
19:56:26 >> Second.
19:56:26 (Motion carried).
19:56:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Nothing else coming before council, we
19:56:29 stand adjourned. Thank you.
19:56:32 (City Council meeting adjourned at 7:57 p.m.)
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.