Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Thursday, September 25, 2008
9:00 a.m. Session

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

>>CHAIRMAN SCOTT: The meeting will now come to order.
The chair will yield to the Honorable Gwendolyn Miller.
>> GWEN MILLER: Good morning. It is my pleasure to
introduce our special guest this morning. We have with
us this morning a very humble person who has been with
the City for 34 years. He spent four and a half years
as an employee with the old Model Cities program which
afforded him his first opportunity to become a City of
Tampa employee. So in actuality he has been with the

City for a total of 39 and a half years.
09:04:58 He presently serves as supervisor of the department of
09:05:01 code enforcement and shows tenacity when it comes to
09:05:01 making the city look its best, and he makes himself
09:05:08 readily available to council members all the time, and
09:05:15 whenever there's a question or whenever citizens refer
09:05:16 to him.
09:05:17 He not only takes on his job responsibilities as if
09:05:19 they were his own personal responsibilities, but he
09:05:21 does it with the most gracefulness and graciousness.
09:05:25 He is married to Diane and they have two sons Which he
09:05:34 is very proud of. He is a member of Greater Bethel
09:05:35 Missionary Baptist Church where the Reverend Oscar
09:05:38 Johnson serves as pastor.
09:05:40 He really needs no introduction but he has agreed to
09:05:44 bring us this invocation many times before and has
09:05:47 always done a wonderful job.
09:05:49 Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Mr. Harris Scott.
09:05:55 >> Let us pray. {^}
09:06:02 Mighty sager of the cross, a follower of the land, or
09:06:05 blessed to speak his name.
09:06:08 Most holy almighty and righteous God, once more and

09:06:12 once again we are able to come before you, your mercy
09:06:16 and grace one more time.
09:06:17 Father, we thank you for allowing us this opportunity
09:06:20 for walking with us as we travel this journey.
09:06:24 Father, we need you in our lives.
09:06:25 We ask that you would bless this great city, the land,
09:06:29 this great city, the council staff, join this workshop
09:06:31 and all meetings that are conducted here in your name,
09:06:34 Lord Jesus.
09:06:35 Father, you said it's my people who are called by my
09:06:38 name, who will humble themselves and speak your faith
09:06:42 and turn from our wicked ways, father, we need you
09:06:47 this morning, for being in you, Lord Jesus.
09:06:53 Help us be with people you would have us to be, not
09:06:56 what we want to be. Father, we need you in every walk
09:06:57 of life.
09:06:58 We ask that you go with us as we walk this journey.
09:07:01 Go with the people, my father, as they endeavor to do
09:07:05 your will, your way, and we pray this morning for the
09:07:11 children of the world.
09:07:13 Father, there's so much going on out there in the
09:07:15 world today, they need you.

09:07:17 We place all matters and all cares in your hand,
09:07:21 father, from the local to the homes to the church
09:07:28 house to the boys and girls on the corner, father, we
09:07:30 need you.
09:07:30 We need to have a word from you, father, only you can
09:07:33 provide and lead us to do what we need to do in a
09:07:36 right way.
09:07:38 Father, and may we in our journey forever, forever
09:07:43 give you all the praise and glory.
09:07:45 Amen.
09:07:46 Amen.
09:07:47 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
09:07:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:08:08 Roll call.
09:08:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:08:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:08:13 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:08:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:08:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:08:17 Let me read into the record, we have a memorandum from
09:08:19 the honorable Charlie Miranda.
09:08:25 I have recently been selected by the Florida League of

09:08:27 Cities to represent the league in Orlando, Florida, on
09:08:33 September 25-26, 2008.
09:08:36 While you can be assured that I will be protecting our
09:08:39 water supply, I must inform you that I will be unable
09:08:42 to attend the City Council's workshop the morning
09:08:47 meeting and evening session on Thursday, September 25,
09:08:50 2008.
09:08:51 Thank you for reading the notation of my absence into
09:08:54 the record.
09:08:55 September 22nd is a memorable day, and I would like to
09:09:01 take this opportunity to wish you a very happy
09:09:03 birthday.
09:09:04 Thank you.
09:09:09 >> Happy birthday.
09:09:11 >> The honorable Gwendolyn Miller for a special
09:09:18 presentation.
09:09:27 >>GWEN MILLER: It's my honor to be here this morning
09:09:29 to honor a great man who has been great for our city
09:09:33 and it always a pleasure to do that.
09:09:35 He is master patrol officer Mark McGowan.
09:09:39 The chief will tell you why he deserves this great
09:09:41 honor.

09:09:44 >>> Good morning, council.
09:09:45 Once again thank you for allowing us this opportunity,
09:09:49 council, to recognize our Officer of the Month.
09:09:51 The Officer of the Month for September is officer Mark
09:09:56 McGowan.
09:09:56 And he's a special individual because he epitomizes
09:10:02 kind of what we respect of the police department.
09:10:05 Here's a man who has been a police officer for over 20
09:10:08 years, he's a master patrol officer, he has spent his
09:10:14 career working the streets of Tampa, which is a tough
09:10:19 job, which is the difficult job, you know.
09:10:21 It's not like me who gets to sit behind a desk all
09:10:24 day.
09:10:25 It's the real job being a police out there facing the
09:10:29 dangers that are out there every day.
09:10:31 And Mark has done that.
09:10:35 And we jokingly refer to him as the veteran police
09:10:40 officer with the rookie attitude, because he's as hard
09:10:46 a worker today as he was over 20 years ago when he
09:10:49 came on the police department.
09:10:51 And one of the things that we respect about him is
09:10:56 that he's not only just going out there and working,

09:11:00 he's one of our trainers, and what we do with our
09:11:03 trainers is we take a brand new civilian that was
09:11:07 working as a clerk in a store somewhere, or some other
09:11:11 job, knowing nothing about law enforcement, they come
09:11:14 into law enforcement after having gone through a law
09:11:18 enforcement academy and assign them to a field
09:11:20 training officer, and this person really knows nothing
09:11:23 about police work, and it's Mark's job to mold them
09:11:27 into being a police officer.
09:11:29 Well, it not just that, because Mark still has to work
09:11:31 a zone.
09:11:32 And answer calls and take care of his zone just like
09:11:36 anybody else.
09:11:37 So it's just double duty, then having to train
09:11:40 somebody.
09:11:40 And then just about the time, generally four or five
09:11:43 months later, that that rookie is starting to be some
09:11:46 value to Mark, we take him or her away, send them to
09:11:53 another squad and start all over again.
09:11:54 So it is a laborious process.
09:11:57 But the reason we made Mark is a couple of reasons.
09:12:01 Once, like I said, he kind of epitomizes what we look

09:12:05 for in police officers, this past month, to his area,
09:12:09 and the nice thing about Mark is he knows everybody in
09:12:12 his area, he knows the criminals in his area.
09:12:14 It isn't just driving around all day answering calls
09:12:17 for service and then going home at night.
09:12:19 He knows everybody.
09:12:20 And he sees a guy he knows is a burglar going down the
09:12:25 street and he's got some stuff with him.
09:12:26 So Mark says, I know he's a burglar, he's got stuff,
09:12:29 so let's stop and talk to him.
09:12:32 We haven't had any burglaries reported or anything
09:12:34 like that, so he stops.
09:12:35 Sure enough, this guy has a bunch of copper.
09:12:41 Councilwoman Saul-Sena and I talked about that
09:12:42 yesterday, about what a problem that is.
09:12:45 Here in the city.
09:12:46 And Mark, because he's an outstanding investigator,
09:12:51 worked the case backwards and discovered that a
09:12:53 burglary had occurred and made an arrest on that
09:12:55 copper.
09:12:56 And that's kind of the way he is.
09:12:59 Another one of the incidents we noted about him was

09:13:03 the fact that Mark is known among the detectives who
09:13:07 do generally the latent work, as so competent they
09:13:13 just don't tend to come out lots of times when he's
09:13:16 assigned a call, and we had an armed robbery, and
09:13:19 usually we send a detective out to do the latent
09:13:21 investigation.
09:13:21 But Mark was on the job.
09:13:23 So they didn't bother.
09:13:24 He did the photo pack.
09:13:27 He located all the witnesses.
09:13:28 He got the suspect identified out of the photo pack,
09:13:31 and then he wrote the warrant himself to make the
09:13:34 arrest.
09:13:35 So Mark can do it all because of his experience.
09:13:38 He's the kind of police officer that really makes
09:13:41 Tampa a better place.
09:13:42 And for that we'd like to recognize him as our office
09:13:46 of the month for September.
09:13:47 [ Applause ]
09:13:49 >>GWEN MILLER: From the City Council we would like to
09:13:57 give you a commendation.
09:13:58 I'm not going to read it because I would be saying the

09:14:00 same thing the chief said.
09:14:02 Also I have a gift for you from Charlie's.
09:14:05 Plus we have some others who give you some more gifts.
09:14:10 They can come up now to give to the you.
09:14:15 >> With the Tampa police benevolent, $100 gift
09:14:22 certificate.
09:14:24 >> Danny Lewis from Bill Currie Ford Lincoln-Mercury.
09:14:28 Somebody once said nothing great happens without
09:14:31 enthusiasm and I think what's greats this morning is
09:14:34 someone after all these years to have the enthusiasm
09:14:37 of what they took an oath to, and we appreciate it
09:14:40 very much.
09:14:47 >> Florida Aquarium.
09:14:49 Congratulations.
09:14:50 On behalf of the Florida Aquarium, here's a family of
09:14:53 four annual membership to the aquarium.
09:14:58 Take time off from work sometime.
09:15:00 >>> Good morning, council.
09:15:09 Attorney referral service.
09:15:10 We would like to say thank you.
09:15:12 This is a gift certificate from Macy's.
09:15:14 We would like to you take a moment and go out to the

09:15:20 studio for a job well done.
09:15:24 Thank you so much.
09:15:26 >>> Steve Stickley representing Stepp's towing
09:15:29 service.
09:15:30 We appreciate what you do out there for us, I'm sure
09:15:34 Jim and Judy Stepp are real proud for things you do.
09:15:37 We would like to present this trophy, statute to you,
09:15:40 and gift certificate to Lee Roy Selmon's.
09:15:45 Thank you so much.
09:15:45 We appreciate it.
09:15:49 >> We just want to present with you a certificate for
09:15:52 a free pair of sunglasses to wear, and congratulations
09:15:56 on your work.
09:16:05 >> On behalf of Tampa Lowry Park Zoo, we want you to
09:16:08 come out and enjoy it.
09:16:09 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Good to see you, officer.
09:16:13 The chief said it already, but it's not the exciting
09:16:16 day, it's the everyday days that make the great
09:16:19 officers, and those are the things that put the time
09:16:22 in, that make all the rest of the troops better.
09:16:25 Certainly we appreciate your having done that.
09:16:29 From Bryn Allen studios I would like to present you a

09:16:33 gift certificate to have your pictures taken for you
09:16:35 and your family and from David Laxer at Bern's
09:16:40 steakhouse, enjoy yourself at Bern's.
09:16:43 From rigatoni's we are providing with you a gift
09:16:46 certificate to enjoy lunch or dinner at rigatoni.
09:16:49 From the Hillsborough County towing association we are
09:16:52 providing with you a gift certificate for $50 and you
09:16:55 can go to Outback or Lee Roy Selmons or anywhere you
09:16:59 haven't been yet.
09:17:00 Congratulations.
09:17:01 And again thank you for your time and your commitment.
09:17:05 [ Applause ]
09:17:12 >> I really appreciate it.
09:17:14 Irv working hereto years and I have seen a lot of
09:17:17 improvements in the City of Tampa, especially in the
09:17:19 police department and in the community, and I'm proud
09:17:23 to be a part of that.
09:17:24 Thank you very much.
09:17:26 [ Applause ]
09:17:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Congratulations again.
09:17:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We will now go to our first workshop,
09:17:55 which is the responsible employers ordinance.

09:17:58 All right.
09:18:04 Does someone want to present that?
09:18:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Motion to open the workshop, please.
09:18:09 >> So moved.
09:18:10 >> Second.
09:18:11 (Motion carried).
09:18:11 >> Good morning, chairman, council.
09:18:15 Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you today.
09:18:20 David pine, director of contract administration, with
09:18:23 Chip Fletcher, city attorney, and the manager of the
09:18:27 MBO.
09:18:27 I have some general comments to make and Gregory as
09:18:30 well is available certainly for questions and
09:18:32 discussion.
09:18:36 My office and Gregory's office do have concerns and
09:18:40 are generally not in support of this ordinance.
09:18:44 And the responsible employer ordinance, as it has been
09:18:48 presented to us, is a collection or a bundle of
09:18:53 additional requirements placed upon bidders and those
09:18:57 forms to work with the city.
09:18:59 I appeared before you previously and talked in some
09:19:02 detail about a number of those items and how many of

09:19:06 those things are already covered by other statutes
09:19:09 and/or other provisions in our contract, and have been
09:19:12 effective in that manner.
09:19:15 But it also imposes additional burdens on all firms
09:19:18 doing work with the city, specifically in regard to
09:19:22 requirements for health insurance and retirement.
09:19:27 And the information that's been presented to us today,
09:19:30 those are really undefined and unspecified, and that's
09:19:32 part of the problem.
09:19:35 Also, previously discussed with you that we did some
09:19:39 canvassing of firms that do business with the city,
09:19:42 came up with a collection of general contractors, and
09:19:46 an assortment of subcontractors in various trades, and
09:19:49 what we found was that the vast majority of those
09:19:54 firms are already providing some level of retirement
09:19:58 and health benefits, and that exceptions to those were
09:20:04 heavily weighted towards the small, local and minority
09:20:07 businesses.
09:20:09 And Gregory will speak some more to that in just a
09:20:12 minute.
09:20:14 Our concerns about this ordinance boil down to two
09:20:17 areas.

09:20:17 The first area is that of additional cost to projects
09:20:21 and to the city in executing projects.
09:20:26 That additional cost has manifest itself in several
09:20:29 ways.
09:20:30 One, just in the direct cost of implementing a program
09:20:34 that might be defined by the ordinance, certainly
09:20:38 bidders are going to pass that cost on to the city.
09:20:43 We may see additional costs because there is a
09:20:46 perception that the city is willing to pay a premium
09:20:50 for these programs, or programs that might go beyond
09:20:53 what it said, that cost would be passed onto us.
09:20:58 Certainly there will be a cost to enforce and police
09:21:01 this program.
09:21:03 There are suggestions that this ordinance can somehow
09:21:05 be implemented and not result in any cost to the city,
09:21:08 and that's simply not true.
09:21:15 In addition to make sure that contractors are aware of
09:21:22 this ordinance that also opens to bid protests.
09:21:28 A few weeks ago approximately 98% of all federal
09:21:31 contracts receive a bid protest or challenge.
09:21:36 Our statistic is less than that, probably less than
09:21:39 1%.

09:21:40 We would certainly like to keep that that way, and
09:21:42 it's certainly something that we are proud of.
09:21:49 When we do have a protest and a challenge, that is
09:21:52 probably the single factor -- or the factor that
09:21:55 introduce it is longest delay and additional staff
09:21:58 cost to a project.
09:22:00 And so certainly anything that would increase that
09:22:10 playing field would not be desirable for us.
09:22:13 So that's one area.
09:22:16 The second area is we believe this would conflict with
09:22:18 existing city initiatives.
09:22:23 And working for three or four years now on our SLB
09:22:26 ordinance.
09:22:26 And I am going to turn the floor over now to Gregory
09:22:29 to talk a little bit about that.
09:22:30 But this ordinance not only would challenge those
09:22:34 firms who are trying to get their foot in the doors
09:22:40 and business established are actually working against
09:22:44 the programs that we have implemented.
09:22:45 Thank you.
09:22:49 >> Gregory Hart, manager, small business minority
09:22:52 business development office.

09:22:56 I'm here to express my deep concern for the
09:22:58 unquestionable impact that a policy or ordinance of
09:23:04 this type will have on our small business community,
09:23:08 our minority, African-American businesses, women owned
09:23:11 businesses, Hispanic businesses, and any other
09:23:15 minority businesses, that we try to serve in the
09:23:18 community.
09:23:19 This administration has worked extremely hard to
09:23:22 improve access to city procurement, to increase
09:23:26 opportunities for our small business and minority
09:23:29 business community, and this particular policy and
09:23:34 potential ordinance counters that whole effort.
09:23:40 It is a potential policy that will further create
09:23:44 areas and a burden on small businesses.
09:23:49 At a time across the country in local jurisdictions
09:23:51 when we are getting judicial guidance that local
09:23:55 government bodies ought to be looking at reducing
09:23:58 burdens, such as minimizing insurance requirements,
09:24:03 general liability insurance, increasing payment
09:24:07 initiatives, reducing bonding requirements upon small
09:24:10 businesses, this is the type of guidance that we have
09:24:13 been getting from judicial, we have -- as you may

09:24:25 know -- consulted with national legal counsel on how
09:24:30 to better our programs and initiatives for small
09:24:32 business.
09:24:33 Yet a policy or ordinance of this nature will just
09:24:37 simply undermine, in my opinion, these efforts, to try
09:24:42 to impose upon small businesses a requirement, must
09:24:48 provide certain levels of insurance, certain levels of
09:24:51 retirement benefits and apprenticeship programs, I
09:24:55 think is the wrong method and approach to try and
09:25:00 encourage the business community to do the right
09:25:03 thing.
09:25:03 I have spoken to a number of our certified firms as
09:25:06 well as medium size businesses, and our small firms
09:25:10 are undercapitalized as it is.
09:25:13 These folks employ two or three people when they are
09:25:17 able to grow and increase their resources and their
09:25:20 position in terms of capitalization.
09:25:23 They, as a matter of good business, provide benefits
09:25:27 to their employees.
09:25:28 They want to be competitive in that regard.
09:25:30 And our assessment of the Tampa Bay market area
09:25:33 indicates that they are already doing that, your

09:25:38 immediate I'm and large size businesses.
09:25:40 As a matter of fact a number of our firms that have
09:25:42 grown in our program that I have spoken to are
09:25:45 providing some level of insurance.
09:25:46 And when enabled, also providing retirement benefits.
09:25:54 I will be certainly brief.
09:25:55 I did want to bring attention to an opinion that was
09:25:58 provided to us by attorney Collette Holt who we have
09:26:06 worked with.
09:26:06 She's a legal expert on these issues and has been an
09:26:10 expert witness in various litigation across the
09:26:13 country.
09:26:13 I provided her comment to you in the e-mail yesterday.
09:26:20 If you have any additional questions for me or want to
09:26:23 discuss.
09:26:28 So I would like to conclude by just making sure that I
09:26:30 express my deep concern for this potential policy or
09:26:34 ordinance.
09:26:37 As an advocate for small an minority businesses on
09:26:39 your behalf of the program.
09:26:42 The administration and moist are working have hard.
09:26:52 Thank you.

09:26:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:26:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have any written for us on
09:27:00 the number of firms that we work with and the number
09:27:02 of employees they have and whether or not they
09:27:09 currently provide these retirement benefits or
09:27:14 insurance?
09:27:14 >>> I do not have a formal report but I have in the
09:27:17 database the applicants and the applications they
09:27:19 provided.
09:27:20 We have that information.
09:27:20 >> Have you provided that to us?
09:27:22 Because I haven't seen it.
09:27:23 >>> I have not provided a report that specifically
09:27:26 addresses employees that small or minority businesses
09:27:33 currently have.
09:27:33 You may recall that one of the criteria is that they
09:27:37 must employ no more than 25 firms in order to be
09:27:40 certified.
09:27:42 But I can certainly produce some information.
09:27:45 It's in our files because we provide that and can
09:27:51 verify the number of employees.
09:27:52 >> What you have shared with us today is pretty

09:27:54 compelling, but it's also kind of general and
09:27:57 anecdotal, and it would be helpful to me and I'm sure
09:28:00 the other council members if we could see those
09:28:02 numbers specifically.
09:28:04 I mean, what you have told us is that it's very
09:28:06 difficult when a firm is getting going to provide
09:28:09 those ancillary things, which makes sense to me, and
09:28:13 as they thrive and prosper and grow they are better
09:28:17 able to provide insurance and then later retirement
09:28:19 benefits.
09:28:20 But it would be, it seems to me one of the points you
09:28:28 make is administering this would be burdensome for the
09:28:31 city staff.
09:28:32 It appears that we already do a fair amount of data
09:28:37 gathering when we go to look at minority businesses,
09:28:40 and that it would be adding two more lines on a form
09:28:43 that people are filling out.
09:28:45 Now, I understand that making sure that the
09:28:48 information that's written down is factual might take
09:28:50 additional effort.
09:28:51 But I would just like to have a fact-based information
09:29:04 to look at this issue and see whether it's something

09:29:06 we should pursue or not.
09:29:08 >>> As a general reference, the criteria from which
09:29:10 certification is based includes a small business must
09:29:16 not employ more than 25 people, their gross revenue
09:29:19 must not exceed more than $2 million.
09:29:21 Those threshold kind of give you an indication of the
09:29:25 size and the capacity of our firms, and many of them
09:29:29 if not most of them -- and we'll look at the specifics
09:29:31 in our applicant files -- have far less than 25.
09:29:36 But we'll take a low at the files.
09:29:37 >> Well, you know, there's a huge variety of firms.
09:29:41 I know that, for example, there are many small
09:29:43 professional firms that just want -- one or two
09:29:46 practitioners, and an assistant, but they do provide
09:29:49 those things.
09:29:49 And I know that we go out for all kinds of bids, and
09:29:53 we want to do what we are doing which is improving
09:29:58 minority participation.
09:29:59 But I think as wove seen from every part of the
09:30:02 economy, all things are interconnected and when we
09:30:05 have uninsured people, and we have people who suddenly
09:30:08 stop working after many years of working and have no

09:30:11 insurance -- no pension or any kind of retirement
09:30:14 benefits, it impacts our community, also.
09:30:17 So I think we can work best as a council based upon
09:30:23 information, and that's the kind of information that
09:30:25 would be valuable to us.
09:30:29 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a lot of questions.
09:30:32 I think this originally came up over a year ago, and
09:30:36 it was brought to us by a former union representative,
09:30:44 and their concern was about you making sure we are
09:30:49 using skilled labor that we are using trades people
09:30:52 who are certified, qualified to do the work.
09:30:56 And one thing, the one thing that she was sort of
09:31:02 supportive of as far as responsible employers, was she
09:31:10 said she doesn't know how to mandate with benefits
09:31:16 other than perhaps making them eligible for cobra
09:31:20 coverage in -- when their short-term job ends.
09:31:24 Well, that's an obvious advantage to the employee,
09:31:28 right?
09:31:28 So I guess my question is, are we making sure, and in
09:31:37 the example she brought up which she also mentioned
09:31:39 here is the training and welding certificates.
09:31:42 So are we already doing that, making sure that our

09:31:47 contractors, subcontractors, actually -- and I know
09:31:51 this has been a problem.
09:31:52 I don't know if it's been a problem in Tampa.
09:31:55 But it has been a problem elsewhere in the
09:31:58 construction trade where people doing the work are not
09:32:04 trained or qualified to do.
09:32:06 >>> Dave Vaughan, director of contract administration.
09:32:09 In my previous presentation specifically talked to
09:32:12 this issue of welding.
09:32:16 Our documents are specific about requiring welding
09:32:20 certificates.
09:32:21 We do enforce them on the job sites.
09:32:23 We have had jobs where we sent workers away who did
09:32:25 not have the certification.
09:32:28 For many of our large projects, such as the museum,
09:32:31 and community centers, those sorts of things, they
09:32:34 passed a threshold with the state that requires a
09:32:37 threshold inspector, which is a registered engineer,
09:32:39 who is on-site, checking for those things, as well as
09:32:43 the issues of scaffolding that was mentioned in that
09:32:50 document, and we are dealing with written safety
09:32:54 plans, specific safety meetings, as recently as

09:32:57 yesterday.
09:32:58 There was a meeting on-site about particular safety
09:33:04 aspects and part of the regular programs that take
09:33:06 place.
09:33:07 So, again, all of the kinds of provisions that they
09:33:10 are talking about are either covered by existing state
09:33:13 regulations or by provisions that we already have in
09:33:16 our contract.
09:33:22 >>MARY MULHERN: So I think what would be helpful to
09:33:24 us -- and it may northbound here already and I haven't
09:33:27 gotten that far -- is if you showed us those specific
09:33:34 statutory and code requirements, all those things.
09:33:41 Where we can find them either in the city code or in
09:33:46 the state law.
09:33:46 >>> Certainly, I can send you the statute regarding
09:33:49 threshold inspection, I can send you provisions that
09:33:51 are in our contracts.
09:33:55 >> I would like to make a motion that you do that and
09:33:58 just provide it to us, you know, when you can.
09:34:07 Don't need to necessarily report on it.
09:34:09 >>> Okay.
09:34:09 30 days would be sufficient.

09:34:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
09:34:13 Motion.
09:34:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:34:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We will hold on that until the public
09:34:19 speaks.
09:34:19 We said we would not take motions.
09:34:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Sorry.
09:34:23 And I had some other questions.
09:34:34 It sounds like we are doing a pretty good job.
09:34:40 And where it becomes more of a question, the
09:34:43 interesting thing is we are talking about the small
09:34:45 local businesses.
09:34:46 When I think some of the worst offenders in this case
09:34:50 are the big, big, you know, global companies that
09:34:55 don't actually -- aren't responsible.
09:35:00 So it becomes not so much a contract administration
09:35:03 thing, or small minority business thing, and an
09:35:07 economic development thing, which I brought up at our
09:35:13 CRA meeting when we started talking about Wal-Mart.
09:35:15 But it not just Wal-Mart.
09:35:17 It's Wal-Mart, target, Walgreen's, CVS.
09:35:22 These huge, big employers are the ones that don't

09:35:26 provide health insurance, you know, and firing
09:35:34 employees after they have been there long enough to
09:35:36 get wage increases.
09:35:39 And I think your argument is well taken that he would
09:35:45 don't want to really hurt the small and local
09:35:49 businesses, because they are the ones that actually
09:35:53 are better employers as far as benefits, wages, giving
09:35:58 back to the community and all those things.
09:36:02 But I'll bring this up at the end of the meeting, too,
09:36:04 that maybe we should have a discussion in the CRA or
09:36:08 in a workshop meeting about what kind of employer we
09:36:15 want to support, bring to the city, really between big
09:36:22 boxes and local businesses.
09:36:25 And I think we are supporting the local businesses.
09:36:30 So a couple of questions.
09:36:35 The other question I have where it does have to do
09:36:37 with our contract is I know in the last year we have
09:36:42 had attempt and actual implementation of replacing
09:36:50 city employees with privatized jobs N in the
09:36:57 janitorial and the parks.
09:36:59 I would like to know if we have a mechanism presently
09:37:02 to see if those private employers are actually

09:37:09 responsible.
09:37:11 >>> I can't speak to that because those are not
09:37:14 contracts that come through my office.
09:37:16 Those generally go through purchasing.
09:37:21 This is a little more than a guess but my sums is that
09:37:24 in the boilerplate for that solicitation, it included
09:37:27 requirements for those employers.
09:37:30 But again those contracts that I November.
09:37:36 >>MARY MULHERN: We'll bring that up later.
09:37:38 And we also want to point out that this is also a
09:37:44 question which brings up the idea of local
09:37:48 preferences, and our former city attorney advised us
09:37:53 against that, but I think that's something that I
09:37:57 would like to continue to look at because, you know,
09:38:01 this is no argument with you.
09:38:03 I think we are on the same page about wanting to be
09:38:06 able to enable smaller local businesses.
09:38:11 >> I guess one comment back to the beginning of your
09:38:19 remarks.
09:38:19 The targets in the K-Marts and the big boxes are not
09:38:23 the folks that are targeted in the proposed ordinance.
09:38:27 The ordinance is for city contracts as it goes to a

09:38:33 city-wide imposition on all employers and any
09:38:38 business.
09:38:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that's the only question that
09:38:42 might still be out there, and if you can show us the
09:38:44 statutes -- that are doing that, addressing these
09:38:51 things is just the safety of the work that's going on.
09:38:57 I think it is in the subcontracting where you lose a
09:39:00 little bit of enforcement.
09:39:03 Because that's left up to the contractors.
09:39:08 >>> Yes, but there's another aspect of that, and that
09:39:10 is contractually the relationship between the city and
09:39:13 the general contractor and the subcontractor.
09:39:17 One of the potential impacts of this ordinance is that
09:39:22 what is currently a very clear relationship between
09:39:25 the city and the general and the sub and who is
09:39:29 responsible.
09:39:29 If we interrupt that, we not only expose ourselves to
09:39:36 claims, and to issues in that regard, we also
09:39:42 potentially increase our liability, because now, "why
09:39:47 didn't you tell me that?
09:39:48 Why didn't you police that?"
09:39:51 And opens the door for additional liability, and

09:39:54 that's a concern.
09:39:55 >> It's a concern, but it's also, you know, maybe if
09:39:57 we had some guidelines or some code in place he would
09:40:03 wouldn't be opening ourselves up to that.
09:40:05 >>> I would also remind you that I have never been,
09:40:10 and I hope I have never been in front of you regarding
09:40:15 a safety issue on one of our projects.
09:40:18 We have a wonderful track record.
09:40:20 It's not that we have never had incidents.
09:40:22 We never had a serious incident.
09:40:24 We have added four floors to the parking -- Fort
09:40:28 Brooke parking garage while it was in operation.
09:40:31 Other things in downtown and congested areas with the
09:40:38 provisions and never had to come to you to explain to
09:40:41 you what happened.
09:40:41 So, again, are we creating something that isn't there?
09:40:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple of things.
09:40:54 Awhile back, the conversation came up in this entire
09:40:58 community about a livable wage.
09:41:00 And I think it sort of ties into this. I'm sorry that
09:41:01 Greg Spearman isn't here. I don't know if he's in the
09:41:09 building to come join us because I think some of these

09:41:12 issues are in Greg's domain.
09:41:14 But the people talked about a livable wage.
09:41:18 And I don't think we have any provision in our
09:41:21 contracts, in any of our contracts, yours, or Greg's,
09:41:27 or whoever's, that require livable wage.
09:41:31 I think that we often talk about leading by example.
09:41:36 And I'm really talking to council at this point more
09:41:39 than anybody, since we are workshopping.
09:41:41 But I think that as a community, as a city, as a
09:41:46 government, we should be leading by example.
09:41:49 And I think that we should identify what a livable
09:41:54 wage is, perhaps $10 an hour, something like that, and
09:41:59 that's what we should, you know, impress upon in
09:42:05 whatever contractual way we can, that our vendors
09:42:08 should strive for.
09:42:09 And I think Ms. Mulhern brings up a good point when
09:42:13 comes to the proposed janitorial contracts, when we
09:42:15 started poking a little deeper, we saw that surely the
09:42:20 city might be able to save a little here and there but
09:42:22 it was on the backs of workers who might be reduced
09:42:25 down from, you know, 13, $14 an hour that we might be
09:42:29 paying down to less than $10 an hour, which I think in

09:42:32 this day and age is tantamount to indentured
09:42:41 servitudes or worse.
09:42:43 So that's not directly on point in terms of the
09:42:47 discussion but I think we should talk about that and
09:42:50 explore that, and I think in your area, I would almost
09:42:55 be surprised if your vendors and contractors -- I
09:42:59 would hope they are above $10 an hour for construction
09:43:02 contracts.
09:43:04 But he would don't know, because we never really ask.
09:43:12 Go ahead, David.
09:43:15 >> You're correct that the livable wage is not a part
09:43:18 of the responsible employer ordinance as has been
09:43:22 presented so far.
09:43:24 On those projects that are federally funded, we do in
09:43:27 fact set wage rates by requirement, and those in fact
09:43:36 set wages for various trades, so there are a measure
09:43:40 of our contracts that do that.
09:43:44 This sort of touches upon a comment that Councilwoman
09:43:48 Saul-Sena made about the level of enforcement, and
09:43:52 policing of those contracts.
09:43:54 It is significantly higher for those kinds of
09:43:58 projects.

09:44:03 There are on-site interviews.
09:44:05 There's documentation.
09:44:06 There's a heightened level throughout the life of the
09:44:09 project.
09:44:10 And it is significant.
09:44:11 And I have been here long enough that I have been
09:44:15 through an era when there was lots of federal money
09:44:18 and we did lots of projects that way, and it was a
09:44:21 huge effort and a taxing upon our construction phase
09:44:26 forces.
09:44:27 We don't have as many of those as we used to.
09:44:30 And so the effort that's associated with it is not as
09:44:34 great.
09:44:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sometimes doing the right thing
09:44:37 involves a lot of effort, and I recognize that.
09:44:40 That part doesn't concern me as much.
09:44:43 I know that it would involve more manpower time and
09:44:47 that sort of thing.
09:44:48 Like I say, when you are doing the right thing,
09:44:50 sometimes, you know, that's important.
09:44:54 I might have missed this in your earlier discussion,
09:44:57 but do you have people on your staff that ensure that

09:45:03 worker's comp is carried by anybody who comes on our
09:45:07 job sites?
09:45:08 I mean, do they go through the record?
09:45:10 I'm not talking about anybody -- not just the general
09:45:13 contractor saying I've got worker's comp, because
09:45:16 sometimes the general will bring in independent
09:45:21 contractors who claim -- and I have litigated this
09:45:25 issue firsthand, and I know it happens out there. You
09:45:28 have independent contractors who claim, don't worry,
09:45:30 I've got coverage.
09:45:32 But you know what?
09:45:33 They have to choose between, you know, feeding their
09:45:35 families, or buying their children a bus pass or what
09:45:39 have you, and buying worker's comp that week, you
09:45:42 know, one of them gave.
09:45:44 And sometimes people don't carry the worker's comp
09:45:48 they should to protect themselves.
09:45:51 I know the city needs protection and we need to make
09:45:53 sure that perhaps we get indemnification from any
09:45:57 generals that he would already do.
09:45:58 But do we have people that police those issues as
09:46:01 related not just to the generals out there, but to

09:46:03 anybody who comes on our site?
09:46:05 >>> We police the generals and that they will not get
09:46:13 a notice to proceed until we have been provided
09:46:15 evidence of that coverage.
09:46:16 We do not police the subs.
09:46:18 That is the responsibility of the general.
09:46:20 >> Does our contract say it's the general's
09:46:23 responsibility to police?
09:46:24 I know state law says it but I'm saying does our
09:46:27 contract say it?
09:46:28 >> Our contracts speak to the responsibility of the
09:46:30 general contractor to be in conformance with state
09:46:33 regulations.
09:46:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We should probably spell it out.
09:46:38 >>> I have also never been in front of you because we
09:46:44 have never had to deal with this outside of this body
09:46:47 with accusations of fraud or being approached by an
09:46:50 employer of the subcontractor who said, hey, they were
09:46:54 supposed to have it, they didn't Vermont.
09:46:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: In the industry -- I've read many
09:47:00 cases where people get -- nobody ever knows about
09:47:03 these things until somebody gets hurt.

09:47:04 And then when somebody get hurt you start digging for
09:47:07 the paperwork and then you find out that that person
09:47:09 didn't have it.
09:47:09 The city has been lucky.
09:47:11 Okay?
09:47:16 And fortunate to have people like you who stay on top
09:47:18 of these things.
09:47:28 It's a function that could be happening out there and
09:47:30 we are not necessarily picking that up to make sure
09:47:33 the subs are doing what they need to do.
09:47:36 Yes, it might cost them a little bit more money but at
09:47:38 the end we want to make sure that everybody is covered
09:47:40 by worker's comp.
09:47:41 Everybody who is coming on that job site.
09:47:43 I know you don't disagree with that, David.
09:48:00 We have that catch-all phrase, but to go a little
09:48:03 further.
09:48:03 Then the issue of local preference.
09:48:05 We have done a little bit of research on the local
09:48:08 preference issue.
09:48:08 And I know we got a memo from David Smith and maybe
09:48:12 Chip has had a chance to look at it, or not.

09:48:15 I'm not sure.
09:48:16 But if I took a look at David Smith's memo, with all
09:48:22 due respect to David and whoever else was involved,
09:48:25 Marcy Hamilton, and also to Jo starred Stafford, rest
09:48:30 in peace, but as I took a look at the memo, there's a
09:48:36 1928 case from the Florida Supreme Court that really
09:48:40 wasn't directly on point, because the city of
09:48:43 Clearwater didn't have an ordinance that granted local
09:48:46 preference.
09:48:47 Okay.
09:48:47 They just sort of did it willy-nilly one day.
09:48:51 There was a bid and then said, we don't want to give
09:48:58 to the that out of town guy, we want to give it to the
09:49:00 local guy.
09:49:01 And they said, no, that's not the way you play.
09:49:04 Later on, in subsequent years, there was another case
09:49:06 in the city of port orange on the east coast that
09:49:10 expressly addressed a local ordinance about local
09:49:14 preference.
09:49:15 And they upheld it in 1983.
09:49:20 Based upon that, we now have cities across the state
09:49:25 including -- cities and counties including Osceola

09:49:30 county which gives a 3% local preference, Miami
09:49:34 gardens 5% local preference, Miami-Dade has a local
09:49:37 preference.
09:49:38 I'm not sure what the amount is.
09:49:43 And there seems to be some indication, I don't know,
09:49:46 maybe you can help us, if Hillsborough discussed it or
09:49:49 3% city of Lakeland and I'm saying City of Tampa.
09:50:09 Maybe we take the six or seven counties, way bay area
09:50:12 region, and try to create this thing so we can
09:50:14 encourage and foster, you know, local businesses
09:50:17 and -- I use "local" in a bigger sense, but how many
09:50:22 counties?
09:50:23 Seven counties.
09:50:24 I mean, that's a fair region to address it.
09:50:28 But this notion that we are going to hide behind a
09:50:31 1928 Florida supreme case that was not really on point
09:50:34 and has already been questioned in 1983 I think is
09:50:40 sort of ducking the issue.
09:50:49 I think to hide behind the law, I say that as a
09:50:52 lawyer -- these issues we can take a little bit
09:50:55 further and we should take a little bit further.
09:50:57 The safety training and welding, David, how do we

09:51:01 police that?
09:51:02 Do you have man power to police that?
09:51:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Work power.
09:51:18 >>> Approximately half of my in the construction
09:51:22 phase, every project has at least one person assigned
09:51:26 to it and part of their responsibility is to be
09:51:27 familiar with the contract document and what
09:51:29 certifications and certificates are required and
09:51:31 checking for that.
09:51:32 And we have had cases where we found folks that didn't
09:51:35 have them and sent them away from the job site.
09:51:43 >> So you are comfortable with the diligence in that
09:51:45 regard?
09:51:46 >>> Yes.
09:51:46 >>> I would like to continues these discussions on
09:51:58 livable wage, worker comp for subs.
09:52:02 I think throws some important things we can do not
09:52:04 only to improve our city but also like I said to lead
09:52:07 by example.
09:52:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The whole issue of local preference,
09:52:20 in terms of that, Hillsborough County took that up
09:52:23 several years ago, and the county attorney recommended

09:52:27 that we not do it, as well as the business community
09:52:30 came out in force against it as well, and talked about
09:52:35 all the repercussions.
09:52:37 I'm just putting it out so you know.
09:52:38 So once you have the public hearing it may be
09:52:40 different with the city, I don't know.
09:52:42 But in terms of the responsibility of the ordinance
09:52:46 today, let me raise this question.
09:52:51 Is this ordinance in fact in place today in the State
09:52:53 of Florida?
09:52:54 And, if so, where?
09:52:55 And, if so, what has been the impact of this
09:52:59 ordinance?
09:53:01 Does anyone have that information?
09:53:04 >>> No.
09:53:05 I know of a policy in Orlando.
09:53:06 But it's a policy.
09:53:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: See, at the workshop these are the
09:53:11 kind of parameters you want to know.
09:53:13 First off, is it in place anywhere?
09:53:17 If it is, what county, what city?
09:53:19 If so, what has been the impact?

09:53:21 Okay.
09:53:22 Those number one.
09:53:23 Number two, you're right, the first one that came up
09:53:30 about the issue of people who have been certified, so
09:53:36 forth and so on.
09:53:37 Now, I went out and I talked to at least three small
09:53:40 business persons.
09:53:41 I'm not talking about minorities and all that.
09:53:46 A minority is small business as well.
09:53:48 I'm talking about small business people, small
09:53:50 business that includes Hispanic, that included
09:53:53 African-American, it included Caucasian.
09:53:56 All of them said they could not support this, because
09:53:59 it would devastate them, and they would not be able to
09:54:02 be in a city contract, that the average health policy
09:54:09 just for one is average of $1200 a month.
09:54:14 So I'm just telling you, just on my own, just went out
09:54:19 and talked to them, hey, what do you think about this?
09:54:22 And they said, I could not compete.
09:54:27 If you all would pass this, I could not compete.
09:54:31 It would knock us out altogether out of the whole
09:54:34 bidding process.

09:54:34 So I'm just letting you all know that.
09:54:37 But, again, more information is also helpful to look
09:54:40 at what is in place, and what has been the impact.
09:54:44 Then you have, I guess, again the e-mail from Collette
09:54:48 Holt talking about the impact of what would be in
09:54:56 terms of what we are trying to do.
09:54:58 And I am going to have you come in a minute, Mr.
09:55:00 Fletcher.
09:55:00 I think it's important for us not to create anything
09:55:03 that will conflict or jeopardize something that we
09:55:06 just passed a few months ago.
09:55:08 So we have to be very careful of that.
09:55:12 While I am, in theory, in concept support this, in
09:55:15 theory and concept, but I'm not for hurting small
09:55:19 businesses or our WMBE program.
09:55:23 I'm not for that.
09:55:24 So I want to be clear on that.
09:55:25 Because it could have significant impact.
09:55:29 And then another thing, to -- you understand what's
09:55:36 going on right now?
09:55:38 I mean, we have to be very careful because of what is
09:55:41 happening right now in Washington, D.C.

09:55:46 And on Wall Street.
09:55:52 So that's the other issue that really comes to the
09:55:54 forefront.
09:55:55 So I just want us to walk very careful and make sure
09:55:58 we have all the information, make sure we make the
09:56:04 right decision.
09:56:05 Mr. Fletcher, I want to hear from you from the
09:56:07 standpoint of this ordinance, and what has been your
09:56:10 experience or any experience at this point.
09:56:16 Your recommendation.
09:56:19 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.
09:56:20 I did in, response to your question about what is in
09:56:22 place in other jurisdictions in Florida, we did do
09:56:26 some research in that regard.
09:56:30 We were not able to locate an ordinance in another
09:56:34 jurisdiction in Florida that implemented these types
09:56:37 of things that we're talking about.
09:56:40 Now, there are a number of cities and some counties
09:56:42 that have their purchasing practices in the form of
09:56:45 policies that we would not necessarily find in a
09:56:48 review that we have available online.
09:56:51 We made some inquiries.

09:56:52 So I can't categorically tell you that the only
09:56:56 jurisdiction in the state that has a policy in this
09:56:58 regard is Orlando.
09:56:59 That's the only one we are aware of at this point,
09:57:02 understanding that it is a policy that controls the
09:57:05 purchasing practices, and that this is one, the issue
09:57:10 related to benefits is one of a number of standards
09:57:13 that they can meet to demonstrate they are a
09:57:16 responsible employer, and our understanding it has not
09:57:20 come in to play in their purchasing decisions on a
09:57:22 regular basis.
09:57:23 So I did provide to Mr. Hart the response we got from
09:57:30 COLETTE Holt.
09:57:34 We kind of reached out to lawyers who had experience.
09:57:41 She's the only one that had experience that he would
09:57:42 could see.
09:57:43 Her comments, she finds that operationally there are
09:57:46 conflicts between small business, minority business
09:57:48 programs.
09:57:50 There's not a direct legal conflict.
09:57:52 It's not to say that you would have a direct legal
09:57:55 prohibition on having this type of a responsible

09:57:59 employer ordinance in place with an SB or WMBE program
09:58:07 but they do conflict with each other and it would be
09:58:10 at least a struggle to effectively operate both those
09:58:12 at the same time, and I think would you need to make a
09:58:15 policy choice of which direction you wanted to go.
09:58:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And I will recognize Councilwoman
09:58:25 Mulhern and councilman Caetano. Legally could we
09:58:29 exempt small businesses from this ordinance and this
09:58:32 only require among large firms?
09:58:34 I don't know whether that would be legal or not.
09:58:36 That's the other option that I would consider.
09:58:40 Firms having capability of doing this versus small
09:58:43 businesses or small firms and minority firms.
09:58:46 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: You certainly would have that
09:58:49 option.
09:58:49 We would need to be careful how we define these
09:58:52 threshold.
09:58:53 We would need to look at other areas that we would
09:58:55 have conflict.
09:58:56 There are certain federal requirements, these
09:58:59 provisions when we have federal projects would be in
09:59:01 conflict with.

09:59:03 There are some other things that we need to work
09:59:05 through.
09:59:05 But certainly if you all give us that direction, we'll
09:59:07 do our best to prepare you an ordinance in that
09:59:10 regard.
09:59:11 But I think you have heard what the concerns are
09:59:14 related to how these interact with the other programs,
09:59:18 and as your lawyer I will do my best to resolve those
09:59:22 conflicts.
09:59:23 But I do believe they are substantial.
09:59:28 >>MARY MULHERN: That's what -- thank you for
09:59:31 clarifying that, because I agree with you totally on
09:59:33 that, that we cannot put any more burden on our local
09:59:37 businesses that are struggling to make it anyway.
09:59:40 So if there's any way that you can research that more,
09:59:43 whether it can be a requirement for larger businesses
09:59:47 or larger contracts, I don't know how it would work.
09:59:50 And then the other thing I wanted to follow up on --
09:59:54 thank you, councilman Dingfelder, for bringing up the
09:59:57 living wage idea, because I forgot to ask at first,
10:00:02 but I'm not sure that -- and again this is -- this has
10:00:05 to do, I guess with, purchasing and with our -- our

10:00:11 contract and subcontracts, but we don't know that as
10:00:17 we are, you know, replacing city employees with
10:00:19 privatized jobs, do we even know that we are not
10:00:22 hiring illegals, those private companies that we are
10:00:28 contracting to do, you know, to privatize some of
10:00:30 these low-wage jobs?
10:00:33 And also do we know that they are, you know, even
10:00:36 getting minimum wage?
10:00:37 So I have questions about that.
10:00:39 I think that's another topic, unless you can tell me
10:00:43 we're making sure of that.
10:00:45 >>> Well, I would suggest that that goes actually to
10:00:49 one of Ms. Holt's comments and her opinion on this
10:00:53 type of program.
10:00:56 All these things that we are discussing, not all of
10:01:00 them but the one that is you mention in particular,
10:01:02 the illegal employees, the issue of whether or not
10:01:05 worker's comp is in place, the issue that was in one
10:01:09 of the proposals that we had related to whether or not
10:01:13 employees are properly being treated as contractors
10:01:18 versus employees, these are things that are regulated
10:01:20 already in different levels of government.

10:01:22 You all certainly could choose to put the resources
10:01:24 into enforcing those directly with city resources but
10:01:30 the question becomes are we going to get any better
10:01:33 results than the federal government or the state
10:01:34 government gets in enforcing those provisions already?
10:01:40 I don't have any empirical information to tell you
10:01:42 when local governments attempt to enforce these if
10:01:45 they do get better results but that would be the
10:01:47 question, whether you want to invest the resources to
10:01:49 do something that is already being enforced at a
10:01:53 federal level or a state level.
10:02:00 >> I guess the question is, is it being enforced at
10:02:02 the federal level or the state level?
10:02:04 So that's the question we need to have some research
10:02:07 on and find out if they are actually doing that.
10:02:09 It's like a lot of other things, enforcement at the
10:02:11 local level is where you are going to get the most
10:02:16 vigilance.
10:02:17 And we can't know that unless we look at, you know,
10:02:21 what the enforcement is happening.
10:02:24 And I think we would have to do our own research on
10:02:28 the contracts that we're signing, to find out if

10:02:31 anyone is looking into that.
10:02:33 And I tend to think no.
10:02:36 >>> I can guarantee you that requirements are in our
10:02:39 contracts that require compliance with state and
10:02:43 federal law require compliance with federal employment
10:02:45 laws, it would require, for instance, the
10:02:48 documentation that a person is a legal employee in the
10:02:56 United States.
10:02:56 Those are the types of things than he would expect our
10:02:58 contractors to do.
10:03:02 To get into that we need to hire staff that would go
10:03:05 and do site inspections and make sure the paperwork
10:03:08 that has been submitted to the IRS or the other
10:03:10 appropriate federal agencies actually is correct.
10:03:13 And verifiable.
10:03:16 And those are the types of things that I think were
10:03:18 mentioned earlier that northbound compliance with the
10:03:23 Davis Bacon act they do the site inspections, the
10:03:26 interviews, those types of things that are the level
10:03:28 of effort that go beyond what is typical review and
10:03:34 enforce environment contracts, and that would require
10:03:36 the additional resources that you have been hearing

10:03:38 about.
10:03:38 So that would be kind of if we are going to get into
10:03:45 that, that's what it would entail, more than just
10:03:48 doing a paper check because that is Wan already occurs
10:03:50 in my experience.
10:03:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, I think that we -- in my
10:03:55 experience, the privatizing is a new thing.
10:03:57 So we're not talking about a lot of contracts.
10:04:04 It might not be a huge burden for to us look into
10:04:07 those contracts that we are awarding and see if they
10:04:09 are actually complying.
10:04:15 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Fletcher, don't sit down,
10:04:17 please.
10:04:17 I was going to ask our practicing attorney up here.
10:04:20 I'll let you do that.
10:04:22 If a small business person had less than three
10:04:25 employees, state statutes does not require him to have
10:04:29 workman's compensation.
10:04:32 Am I correct?
10:04:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nonconstruction.
10:04:37 >>> It depends on the sector.
10:04:39 I would need to check on that for you.

10:04:42 I don't know that off the top of my head.
10:04:44 There are thresholds for different sectors, I believe.
10:04:48 Different types of employees and work.
10:04:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The construction industry is
10:04:53 stricter, and even if you are self-employed, one
10:04:56 person you have to have worker's comp because it's
10:05:02 more dangerous.
10:05:03 You're right on a shop or something like that.
10:05:06 >>> I would need to check on that for you.
10:05:07 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I concur with our chairman here,
10:05:11 what he said about this program, especially in view of
10:05:14 the fact the condition that we are in now,
10:05:17 financially, throughout the country, and he would
10:05:21 can't make it any harder.
10:05:24 Every day, there's two of them today, an auto dealer,
10:05:27 250 people in Plant City, the fish house, they are
10:05:32 going.
10:05:32 And there's going to be more.
10:05:34 Thank you.
10:05:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:05:39 After we hear from the public I would like to make a
10:05:41 comment.

10:05:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:05:43 And we also have a motion that's on the table as well.
10:05:46 Okay.
10:05:46 We'll take public comment now.
10:05:48 Anyone wishing to address council, you may come and
10:05:52 state your name and address.
10:05:53 You have three minutes.
10:05:54 >>> Joe Robinson, president of consulting engineers,
10:05:57 small business, minority business.
10:05:59 And NAACP economic development chair.
10:06:03 I had to come back.
10:06:04 I was on my way to the water Congress but I checked my
10:06:06 phone message.
10:06:07 I had to come back.
10:06:08 So I drove the interstate to keep from being late.
10:06:12 This cannot go down.
10:06:14 I agree with staff.
10:06:16 I agree with David.
10:06:17 I can't believe this.
10:06:27 Most of this is done or more.
10:06:30 This is what Massachusetts, the northern cities, where
10:06:37 they have got a lot of unions, they have got money.

10:06:39 Two or three years ago when economic times were
10:06:41 booming, fanny may, Freddie Mac, used to be government
10:06:46 agencies went privatized and look what happened.
10:06:49 We could not have the small businesses, minority
10:06:53 businesses, cannot handle this.
10:06:56 This is going to defend state all of those years we
10:06:59 put on the city minority business ordinance, let alone
10:07:03 the challenges that -- legal challenges that would
10:07:06 occur.
10:07:07 I know it's a great thing to talk about it, you know,
10:07:11 the set of laws on the books.
10:07:12 I am going to leave this here.
10:07:14 This is an opinion a couple years ago.
10:07:24 This is Massachusetts, the problems, all of that
10:07:29 sounds good, has a great economy, it's disastrous
10:07:33 where we are now.
10:07:33 And this is going to be -- I have got calls to
10:07:38 Washington, D.C. now.
10:07:39 This is a major move going down.
10:07:43 But the thing about it is, this is dangerous.
10:07:47 We have spent a lot of years building a minority
10:07:51 business ordinance to get it passed two or three years

10:07:54 ago.
10:07:54 Now we are going to come back and throw this in.
10:07:56 Actually the reason we are here is because of an
10:07:58 underlying contract that has been approved for this
10:08:04 contract, in article 12, in the contacts, I assume
10:08:09 it's not been approved.
10:08:11 Look at item 12, labor standards.
10:08:13 They have got notices, regulations, city contracts.
10:08:23 Your city contract is here.
10:08:32 Tells you what wages they have got to provide.
10:08:34 This is the reason we got here, is because of this
10:08:37 pending outstanding contract which I assume has not
10:08:43 been approved.
10:08:45 I have to get to Orlando to the water conference and I
10:08:47 hope to get there by lunch but the bottom line is this
10:08:50 is not the right thing to do.
10:08:54 If this is the case, I am going to have all my 200
10:08:57 vendors -- I am going to have a survey made out and I
10:09:01 am going to have to do it with the school board
10:09:03 vendors and everybody else.
10:09:05 Send an e-mail and say, look, this is what City
10:09:07 Council is talking about.

10:09:08 Send me your feedback.
10:09:10 And I guarantee you it's going to be no, no, no.
10:09:19 You guys can go ahead and do this but I am telling
10:09:21 you, you are not going to get the support of minority
10:09:23 businesses.
10:09:23 I can see that already happening.
10:09:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder and then
10:09:31 Councilwoman.
10:09:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Joe, thanks for coming down and
10:09:37 interrupting your travels.
10:09:41 There's a lot of things that have been discussed, and
10:09:43 you came in a little bit after a few of them, so it's
10:09:49 not just what you saw on the agenda.
10:09:52 Some of the things that I was addressing was a livable
10:09:55 wage, okay.
10:09:56 If we have -- let's just say for argument sake we had
10:09:59 a $10 per hour livable wage for anybody who deals with
10:10:04 the city, in my opinion it doesn't impact minority
10:10:10 community, any business community any different than
10:10:13 does the, you know, the non-minority business
10:10:16 community.
10:10:17 Because everybody would have to comply with it.

10:10:20 So it puts everybody on the same equal footing.
10:10:25 And I just think -- and obviously it's slightly
10:10:28 different than what you had seen on the agenda.
10:10:31 But I think it's something that's been discussed in
10:10:34 this community in the past.
10:10:35 And I think it's worth continuing the discussion.
10:10:38 The other thing we talked about and I discussed, which
10:10:41 I think is worth continuing, is the local preference
10:10:44 for the seven-county region.
10:10:46 And it's done in other parts of the state.
10:10:48 I think it's a good thing.
10:10:50 Frankly, it's a trend that's across the nation and
10:10:53 that doesn't impact minorities any different than
10:10:55 anybody else.
10:10:57 Frankly, I think could you help minorities, local
10:11:00 minority firms by helping with local preference, in
10:11:03 keeping the big companies who are out of state or out
10:11:06 of town from coming in and taking the city funds.
10:11:11 Anyway, Dave, some issues on the table that -- I
10:11:15 apologize that you weren't necessarily aware of.
10:11:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I didn't know if we finished from
10:11:23 hearing from all the public yet.

10:11:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No.
10:11:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to reassure Mr. Robinson
10:11:29 that I think that what you missed driving back here
10:11:33 was that at least the majority, and councilman Caetano
10:11:39 and I are both small business people, I don't know
10:11:41 about the rest of us, but we are totally committed to
10:11:45 small and minority businesses, and I think this was
10:11:50 brought up by some union representatives like a year
10:11:54 ago.
10:11:55 So this is a workshop we talk about it.
10:11:59 And I don't think that anyone on council was pushing
10:12:01 this at all.
10:12:02 We just wanted to have a discussion about it.
10:12:05 So as Chairman Scott said, don't call the masses yet,
10:12:12 because I think, you know, we probably agree with the
10:12:15 administration, too.
10:12:17 So don't panic.
10:12:19 And I just want to say that when we are done here, I
10:12:22 think that what we really want, because as I said
10:12:27 earlier, it's not the small local businesses that are
10:12:31 not responsible employers, it's the big ones that can
10:12:34 get away with it, can afford all those lawsuits and

10:12:40 just bat them down.
10:12:41 I think we need to look at that in the context of
10:12:44 economic development.
10:12:44 And are we giving incentives to, you know, these huge
10:12:47 global companies when what we should be doing is
10:12:50 helping our local businesses?
10:12:51 So I'll make a motion in that regard when we are done.
10:12:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.
10:12:58 Then we need to move.
10:13:05 >>> I'm Tony Cabilla. I'm the president of Energy
10:13:05 Services and Products Corporation.
10:13:09 We have about 12 employees and more or less 10
10:13:14 subcontractors, so at least 26 people are dependent on
10:13:19 a paycheck.
10:13:21 We now bid for the city and for the county and for
10:13:26 TECO and USF mainly as a prime.
10:13:32 >> What type of work?
10:13:33 >>> We do construction work.
10:13:34 So I'm only referring to things to do construction.
10:13:39 I think because it is on target it seems like a day at
10:13:42 the office, when you were talking about workman's
10:13:45 comp.

10:13:46 You know, that's almost a full-time job.
10:13:49 We were for a time getting fake certificates.
10:13:53 A lot of the work done for the city and county is
10:13:55 bonded work also so it's our neck. If we don't
10:13:58 perform, we're in trouble.
10:14:01 I have two or three pages of things that I wanted to
10:14:03 say but I think the questions that I had, you pretty
10:14:05 much are addressing.
10:14:08 I think you are on target on a lot of things.
10:14:11 And what you just said that you are pushing a new
10:14:15 ordinance, just look at the impacts of the questions
10:14:17 that you are asking from staff.
10:14:19 I think everything makes sense.
10:14:21 One thing that I need to say, we now provide health
10:14:25 insurance.
10:14:27 We are looking into how to do the retirement, because
10:14:31 we do see employees, such as me, getting older.
10:14:35 We are not going to be making an hourly wage forever.
10:14:38 And when we retire we are going to have something more
10:14:40 than Social Security.
10:14:42 But a few years back we couldn't.
10:14:44 For awhile, it was just me and my brother going out

10:14:47 there and doing the work.
10:14:49 And at that time, even a few years back, when we had
10:14:52 five or six employees, we couldn't afford it.
10:14:55 Now we can.
10:14:55 So we do have an ordinance.
10:14:57 And I think a lot of people do this, and I think as
10:15:02 you have staff go out there and look at people and
10:15:04 companies and they come back to you and report what's
10:15:06 going on, I think you will see that, too.
10:15:09 So I'm glad to participate on this workshop.
10:15:14 And this is anecdotal for me and my company over the
10:15:20 past -- since '94 we have been in business.
10:15:22 So we do know that everything that you are asking is
10:15:25 on target.
10:15:26 And please continue that way.
10:15:28 I think before an ordinance is passed, if there has to
10:15:31 be more of these workshops or maybe get some input
10:15:34 from people like myself and all -- they made some good
10:15:44 points.
10:15:44 But I think the questions are on target so far.
10:15:49 So thank you for that.
10:15:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me also say before we pass a

10:15:57 motion, my church provides a private school, academy
10:16:07 school.
10:16:07 The economy is really small business right now.
10:16:10 Right now we have 256 students.
10:16:12 This school year just started.
10:16:13 That was cut in half.
10:16:16 People going back to public schools because they can't
10:16:18 afford private schools now.
10:16:21 Or they are going to charter schools which are public,
10:16:23 too, run by the school board.
10:16:24 So we of the lost half of our clientele.
10:16:27 We have 48 employees and we had to lay off some of
10:16:31 those people because we don't have the students.
10:16:32 And we provide 50% of the health coverage, which is
10:16:38 very expensive, by the way.
10:16:39 So I'm familiar with the issue of small businesses and
10:16:42 what they are going through right now with where we
10:16:45 are with the economy.
10:16:46 So right now, again I'm not for doing anything that's
10:16:49 going to hurt small business.
10:16:51 And that is what I am sensing here on this council,
10:16:54 that right now we don't want to move forward with any

10:16:58 ordinance that's going to continue to hurt or
10:16:59 devastate small businesses.
10:17:01 Okay?
10:17:01 All right.
10:17:03 We have a motion on the floor made by -- do you
10:17:07 remember what that motion is?
10:17:08 Because I don't remember.
10:17:11 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) let me start over.
10:17:16 I wanted to have a workshop on the local preferences,
10:17:19 and I think -- I don't know, I think that's what the
10:17:24 first motion I wanted to do.
10:17:25 So put that on our next timely workshop calendar to
10:17:31 talk about local business preferences.
10:17:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:17:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:17:35 The motion that we add to our next workshop, right?
10:17:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: January or February.
10:17:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next available workshop.
10:17:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was just going to say in 2009.
10:17:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next available workshop on local
10:17:53 preference, been moved and seconded by Councilwoman
10:17:56 Saul-Sena.

10:17:56 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:17:58 Opposes?
10:17:59 Okay.
10:18:02 >>MARY MULHERN: And what date did we say?
10:18:04 >>THE CLERK: Right now we do have temporary calendar
10:18:08 for 2009.
10:18:10 I haven't finalized it yet.
10:18:13 And I believe you do have a report coming back in a
10:18:15 couple of weeks on local preference, also.
10:18:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Staff report?
10:18:25 Is that what it is?
10:18:26 All right.
10:18:27 So --
10:18:29 But you don't want -- if it's going to be long and
10:18:32 lengthy as a staff report, remember, that's only five
10:18:34 minutes.
10:18:35 So you are talking about a workshop.
10:18:36 >>MARY MULHERN: We can do the workshop after the staff
10:18:39 report.
10:18:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we dump the staff report
10:18:42 and throw it to the workshop so we can have longer
10:18:44 time to discuss it.

10:18:45 >>MARY MULHERN: And that will give staff longer time.
10:18:48 THE CLERK: You want to remove the discussion about the
10:18:51 local preference and add it to the workshop in
10:18:57 January?
10:19:02 >> Yes.
10:19:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:19:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What is this time?
10:19:06 >>THE CLERK: Right now on your January 2009 schedule,
10:19:09 you have two workshops -- one workshop already
10:19:13 scheduled for January 25th is regarding local
10:19:16 vendor process.
10:19:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's already there.
10:19:27 Starting at 9:00.
10:19:28 >>THE CLERK: You have another workshop on affordable
10:19:31 housing that day, too.
10:19:32 >>MARY MULHERN: And the other thing and I am going to
10:19:35 make this separate.
10:19:38 Did we vote?
10:19:39 Or do we need to vote?
10:19:41 >> We already have it.
10:19:42 >>MARY MULHERN: The other motion I want to make, and
10:19:44 there's some overlapping things, but a workshop on

10:19:48 economic development and the incentive that we are
10:19:58 providing to -- small businesses versus big, you know,
10:20:05 large, global, national companies.
10:20:11 What the economic benefits are.
10:20:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Local independent businesses?
10:20:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
10:20:21 Or local businesses.
10:20:22 I think he would don't even have to make it that
10:20:24 small.
10:20:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What incentive is being provided for
10:20:32 businesses that will come small and large.
10:20:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
10:20:36 But I want to delineate that they are different.
10:20:40 And some of this is just -- some of it is policy and
10:20:46 some is just priority.
10:20:47 So I want to discuss that in general.
10:20:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:20:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Would you like to have as part of
10:20:51 that a presentation by the local independent business
10:20:54 alliance?
10:20:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Sure.
10:20:58 At least invite them.

10:21:00 One of the things that I was talking about doing is
10:21:03 getting -- I'm going to shoot to get an economist here
10:21:05 to talk about it.
10:21:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:21:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, my problem is you have to have
10:21:18 both sides there, if you are talking about big boxes
10:21:21 versus small businesses, that sort of thing.
10:21:23 You have got ton provide both sides.
10:21:27 That's the benefit to having big boxes in your
10:21:30 community.
10:21:31 I will tell that you.
10:21:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Right, right.
10:21:33 I'm sure they have plenty of people.
10:21:38 We have Mr. Porter here working for Wal-Mart.
10:21:40 >>> He was.
10:21:41 >>MARY MULHERN: He was.
10:21:43 So certainly we can invite somebody from the big box.
10:21:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest -- I think we have
10:21:55 three workshops already.
10:22:01 You may want to low at February on that.
10:22:03 And then you may want to work through staff or city
10:22:06 attorney and formulate that a little bit more in terms

10:22:09 of what you want.
10:22:10 Okay?
10:22:10 >>> Really, I see it as an economic development
10:22:16 question for Mark Huey.
10:22:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:22:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:22:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded that we
10:22:24 have -- hold a workshop on the economic benefit and
10:22:29 incentives that we provide, okay?
10:22:36 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:22:38 Opposes?
10:22:39 Okay.
10:22:40 Council.
10:22:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just to tag onto a few of these.
10:22:45 I think we talked about the possibility of a livable
10:22:48 wage as inclusion, and I'm glad that David was very
10:22:53 frank to remind us that we already do that on federal
10:22:57 funded comments with Davis Bacon and perhaps there's
10:23:03 an opportunity to create sort of a local version to
10:23:06 Davis Bacon at least in terms of enforceable language.
10:23:12 The enforcement of oversight might not be as rigorous
10:23:16 but if we put that same type of language in our

10:23:18 contracts if it's big enough for the federal
10:23:19 contracts, why wouldn't it be good enough for local?
10:23:23 So I would like us to -- I think it doesn't have to be
10:23:25 a real lengthy discussion but I would like us to add
10:23:28 that to our January discussion since we are talking
10:23:30 about, you know, these similar issues.
10:23:34 And then hand in hand with that, the discussion of the
10:23:42 possibility of adding a clause, David, in our regular
10:23:45 contracts, to make sure that subs and independent
10:23:48 contractors have worker's comp.
10:23:51 We had testimony from this gentleman today, I missed
10:23:55 your name, I apologize, but who indicated that this is
10:23:58 a problem, that sometimes subs come on the job site
10:24:02 and they lie and they forge and they this and they
10:24:06 that.
10:24:07 We understand it to make ends meet but they still do
10:24:10 it.
10:24:10 And I think that our contracts should address that.
10:24:13 So I would like to add those two issues into our
10:24:18 January workshop as well.
10:24:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:24:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My only question, though, is you are

10:24:23 talking about a separate workshop.
10:24:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, sort of subworkshops.
10:24:27 I think maybe the whole workshop title is called not
10:24:32 local preference but sort of contracting issues, and
10:24:36 then you have got three subissues -- local preference,
10:24:39 the worker's comp clause, which I think is a very
10:24:43 quick discussion, Mr. Chair, and livable wage issue.
10:24:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to tell you livable wage is
10:24:50 going to take some time.
10:24:51 We went through that at the county, and that's about
10:24:56 an hour and a half two, hours, they were pushing that
10:25:04 and because what you think is a livable wage.
10:25:08 The livable wage at that time which I think was a four
10:25:12 year discussion, was about 13-something an hour.
10:25:15 So I just want you to be aware of.
10:25:17 That and the recommendation from the county
10:25:18 administrator and staff.
10:25:25 I'm not opposed to having the workshop.
10:25:28 We should have it.
10:25:28 I'm just saying that I think that's a little more time
10:25:31 than you recognize.
10:25:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, what's a minimum wage these

10:25:35 days?
10:25:40 >> 6.85, I think.
10:25:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm just saying we should be
10:25:45 leading by example and when we contract with people we
10:25:48 should demand they are not paying folks 6 .85.
10:25:51 I don't know what the dollar amount is.
10:25:54 But why don't we start the discussion in January?
10:25:57 And if it runs long, we'll keep going.
10:26:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:26:01 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:26:03 Opposes?
10:26:04 Okay.
10:26:05 We have our 10:15 time we need to move.
10:26:09 Let's wrap this one up.
10:26:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was going to suggest every time
10:26:13 we have workshops the clerk give us the calendar for
10:26:16 the next several workshops we have scheduled, if we
10:26:19 need to set additional things we know what dates are
10:26:21 available and --
10:26:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, she gave it to us, yes.
10:26:31 We just need to read it.
10:26:34 But, yes, you have given it to us.

10:26:37 Okay.
10:26:38 We need to now move to our 10:15 workshop on --
10:26:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, you had item number 3.
10:26:48 How do you wish to address that?
10:26:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the status of 3?
10:26:56 >> Item number 3 is the street address, front doors.
10:27:00 That's the one.
10:27:03 >> I did locate this in here.
10:27:08 The point is, we need that so we are able to look
10:27:11 up --
10:27:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: She's working on it.
10:27:19 Staff is in the process of getting it.
10:27:21 But they provided it.
10:27:22 So, yeah.
10:27:23 Okay.
10:27:24 Item number 3.
10:27:29 >> Move to open.
10:27:30 >> Second.
10:27:30 (Motion carried)
10:27:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I forgot what our rules are.
10:27:35 Do we need to recognize we are going to invite the
10:27:37 public to speak at the beginning of each --

10:27:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have a standing rule that allows
10:27:41 up to 30 minutes on each workshop.
10:27:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Item 3 is street addresses, front
10:27:47 doors and that sort of thing.
10:27:51 Item 4 is the -- item 3, I don't know if you have done
10:27:56 anything on it or not.
10:28:00 >>> Street addresses, fronts doors.
10:28:06 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If we just move into item 4 you
10:28:09 will see how that's being addressed.
10:28:10 It's one of the proposed amendments.
10:28:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So item 3 is tied to item 4.
10:28:16 Okay.
10:28:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to open item 3 and 4.
10:28:20 >> Second.
10:28:21 (Motion carried)
10:28:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
10:28:31 What you have before you are the July 2008 text
10:28:34 amendments for the July cycle.
10:28:39 As far as the number of tabs on page 2 of your
10:28:42 handout, there are 14 tabs.
10:28:44 Tab 10 has been removed, and moved to the January
10:28:47 cycle.

10:28:50 To give you a brief outline, there are nine initiated
10:28:54 amendments that have been initiated either internally
10:28:57 by staff or by City Council through motion, and four
10:29:01 privately initiated amendments that are at the end of
10:29:03 the booklet.
10:29:05 What I'll do -- and this is how we handled the last
10:29:07 public information meeting -- I'll go through briefly
10:29:09 the first nine tabs of the city initiated amendments.
10:29:14 And then I'll announce the privately initiated
10:29:17 amendments and then have that petitioner or their
10:29:19 agent come up and explain the reason for the
10:29:21 amendment.
10:29:26 Are you ready to go to tab 1?
10:29:29 >> Yes.
10:29:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have an extra here for the
10:29:31 audience.
10:29:32 We are going to be making some additional copies for
10:29:34 members of the public.
10:29:34 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Many of them have copies.
10:29:36 They may need some more.
10:29:38 I have gotten comments from T.H.A.N.
10:29:39 They each have their own copies.

10:29:40 And then some private comments as well.
10:29:46 The first tab, actually the first two tabs were
10:29:49 amendments that were held over from last July cycle.
10:29:52 The first one is the crematorium regulations.
10:29:55 If you go to page 3, that is the summary of the
10:29:58 crematory regulation.
10:30:00 If you recall, about a year and a half ago that
10:30:03 discussion came up because of the crematorium that was
10:30:05 proposed just outside of Ybor City.
10:30:09 And what you will note in the table that was discussed
10:30:12 is that crematoriums need to be removed with special
10:30:15 uses from commercial general, allowed as accessory
10:30:19 uses only, in commercial intensive and industrial
10:30:21 general, and those accessories to a funeral parlor.
10:30:25 And then they would be allowed as permitted uses in
10:30:27 the IH with special regulations for them.
10:30:31 27-140 on page 4, that section is for crematorium.
10:30:36 That's the special criteria for crematory in IH zoning
10:30:42 district.
10:30:44 First and foremost the use should be separated by 500
10:30:47 feet or more from a national or local historic
10:30:49 district, loading and unloading areas should be

10:30:53 screened with a 6-foot masonry wall, combustion units
10:30:59 are limited to two per establishment, so they must
10:31:02 comply with federal, state and local regulations and
10:31:05 the equipment must be certified by the manufacturer,
10:31:08 operate froe of smoke and so on.
10:31:10 That language comes straight from the EPC language.
10:31:12 I will note, and it is written in bold italics, on
10:31:18 your page, the public comment received.
10:31:20 I couldn't change the language because this is a
10:31:21 holdover from last year but I want to put it to
10:31:24 Council.
10:31:24 T.H.A.N. and maybe of the neighborhoods groups have
10:31:26 spoken up and said they would like to add not just the
10:31:28 500 feet from national or local but also from
10:31:31 residential uses.
10:31:33 So you could motion to add that if you so choose.
10:31:37 Accessory uses reads basically the same.
10:31:41 As I said crematories, they are limited to one
10:31:47 combustible unit so that would be the same on 5-A, 500
10:31:52 feet from residential uses as well.
10:31:54 Do you have any questions on tab 1?
10:31:58 >> We need to kind of keep note of changes so we can

10:32:01 make one motion, right?
10:32:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.
10:32:03 And at the end if you are willing to move all of them,
10:32:05 then I can direct you.
10:32:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do all at one time.
10:32:13 We would not make any motion until we hear from the
10:32:15 public.
10:32:15 >>> Yes.
10:32:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Also make note of that so we can make
10:32:19 one motion.
10:32:19 Thank you.
10:32:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 2.
10:32:22 The waterfront regulations.
10:32:24 This is a holdover from last year as well like I said.
10:32:27 And we met with the river board a couple of times and
10:32:31 the technical advisory committee.
10:32:33 We held two workshops, three actually, one
10:32:36 specifically for waterfront regulations, one for
10:32:38 general.
10:32:39 We had a small turnout at the one for waterfront.
10:32:42 For the waterfront regulations.
10:32:46 We have 13 neighborhoods associations in this area.

10:32:50 And just so you have a point much reference.
10:32:56 Be the ordinance is the language that was from a
10:32:58 you're ago.
10:32:58 It's from Columbus all the way to the city limits.
10:33:02 What we are really trying to understand at this point
10:33:04 is whether or not it was council's intent for the
10:33:11 other neighborhood associations and we checked their
10:33:13 schedules, whether or not it was your intent to go out
10:33:15 and meet individually with these groups, some of them
10:33:19 meet on Saturdays, meet at night.
10:33:20 We checked with them on our schedules.
10:33:23 It's difficult for staff to do it.
10:33:24 I don't know if we should be holding collective
10:33:27 meetings with council.
10:33:27 This has become a bit of a hot issue.
10:33:31 I can certainly say the river board people, they seem
10:33:36 to want to protect the river as much as possible.
10:33:38 We have gotten some considerable concern from the
10:33:42 people that live along the river or in these
10:33:44 neighborhood associations so far, that they are not
10:33:45 sure why it's happening, or is it going to hurt my
10:33:49 property, those kind of questions.

10:33:52 I can certainly walk you through what this map shows
10:33:55 but I really want some direction from you whether or
10:33:56 not we should hold a separate workshop just on that
10:33:59 with council so you can hear it directly, if we
10:34:02 continue this to the January cycle so that we can
10:34:04 actually deal with this a little bit better.
10:34:06 It really a logistical question at this point.
10:34:13 Do you want me to go through the regulation really
10:34:15 quick?
10:34:15 What this basically does is it increase it is
10:34:17 waterfront yard setback, to 30 feet.
10:34:23 Most of them are about 20 so it increases it to 30.
10:34:28 And it also requires that that rear yard that's
10:34:32 created along the river has a cap of a 30% lot
10:34:37 coverage, which for impervious surfaces, pools,
10:34:41 sidewalks, it's actually listed in number 17 on page
10:34:44 7.
10:34:46 Defined in the footnote above.
10:34:50 Pools, hot tubs, accessories and decks, including
10:34:53 those but not limited to those, basically increases to
10:34:56 bring things a little farther off the river, create a
10:34:58 better green corridor, so to speak, and also anything

10:35:01 that's placed within that yard, to limit the
10:35:05 impervious surface so there's less run-off, more land
10:35:08 to absorb any rain or any other liquid that's coming
10:35:12 off property so it doesn't run straight into the
10:35:14 river.
10:35:14 We did take two river tours about a year and a half
10:35:17 ago, and I do have pictures I could show you that
10:35:22 could show a varying degree along that corridor of the
10:35:25 river.
10:35:26 River is very narrow at certain points and very high
10:35:28 at others and the properties are developed pretty
10:35:30 differently along that segment as well.
10:35:35 I'll wait till you hear from the public on that one,
10:35:37 because the issues that have been raised.
10:35:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, I know the general
10:35:43 rule is to hold all questions till the very end, but
10:35:45 then we are -- there's such a diverse series of
10:35:48 topics.
10:35:49 Can we ask questions at the end of each tab?
10:35:53 >> That's fine.
10:35:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
10:35:55 Whenever you're done.

10:35:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I can take questions on tab 2.
10:36:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On page 7, tab 2, I guess footnote
10:36:11 17, impervious surface, it talks about decks.
10:36:17 Okay.
10:36:18 As being an impervious surface.
10:36:21 I think just from a legal perspective, I think you
10:36:23 noticed to be careful about "deck" because I think
10:36:27 most people would dough fine a deck as being pervious.
10:36:31 >>> You mean the word "deck"?
10:36:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
10:36:35 When you are talking about drainage, you build a deck
10:36:37 and you have dirt underneath it doesn't matter that
10:36:40 there's a deck there.
10:36:40 The water is still getting through the cracks.
10:36:43 I think legal just needs to look at that, because a
10:36:46 deck is, I think, not necessarily that.
10:36:48 But I think the intent, I understand the intent.
10:36:51 The intent is when you look from the river, perhaps
10:36:54 everybody wants to see more green space, and a deck is
10:36:57 not necessarily --
10:36:59 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I can certainly double check with
10:37:00 stormwater because they looked at that about a year

10:37:03 and a half ago and basically we are okay with the
10:37:04 language for impervious surfaces because I don't know
10:37:08 that a deck counts as pervious surface for stormwater
10:37:11 purposes.
10:37:11 But I don't want to conflict with another --
10:37:13 >> Just from a logical common sense perspective.
10:37:16 >>> I totally understand.
10:37:17 I don't want to conflict with another regulation we
10:37:18 have as well.
10:37:19 But I can double check on that.
10:37:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: My moving the yard to make it 30
10:37:29 more feet, from 30 feet --
10:37:32 >>> Ten more feet.
10:37:34 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: So we'll have ten more feet, more
10:37:40 fertilizer, and it will be pervious but it's going to
10:37:44 go into the river.
10:37:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The estuary board which I serve on
10:37:57 is looking -- and the river board that I serve on are
10:38:01 both looking into what you are raising, Mr. Caetano,
10:38:04 and you are absolutely correct, we are concerned about
10:38:06 fertilizer going into the record and what we are
10:38:07 suggesting is the last ten feet close to the water be

10:38:11 not just sod but that it be sort of landscaping that
10:38:17 doesn't require fertilization so it can absorb water.
10:38:22 But Mr. Shawn College, a staff person from the
10:38:25 Planning Commission, is here.
10:38:27 He's a staff to the river board and I think he can
10:38:29 address that really clearly.
10:38:32 This is the time for staff info.
10:38:38 Did you hear Mr. Caetano?
10:38:39 >>> I did.
10:38:40 And it's a very good question, actually.
10:38:42 Shawn College, Planning Commission staff, Hillsborough
10:38:45 River, planning staff.
10:38:48 I actually posed that question myself at one of the
10:38:50 meetings and I think it's a very good question.
10:38:52 Actually, I don't have the answer to it.
10:38:53 I think there is a general feeling amongst the
10:38:56 scientists that I talked to that ultimately it is
10:39:00 better to have the pervious surface, even though
10:39:05 there's the potential for the application of
10:39:08 fertilizer and pesticide because we can get at that
10:39:10 eventually with regulations such as the fertilizer
10:39:12 regulations or better buffer regulations or better

10:39:15 setback regulations. But if you have the impervious
10:39:18 surfaces, you are pretty much done.
10:39:20 There's no way to move forward and deal with it, if
10:39:23 had that helps.
10:39:42 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 3 of the vendor regulations.
10:39:44 We brought forward more of a comprehensive vendor
10:39:47 regulation change.
10:39:48 Those regulations really came out.
10:39:52 They were initially proposed back in 2004.
10:39:55 And it took about that long to get them because there
10:39:59 was some discrepancy on the council members at that
10:40:00 time in different districts of what to do with
10:40:03 vendors.
10:40:05 What was adopted was very straightforward.
10:40:08 You had to be on developed property.
10:40:09 You had to take your stuff off site every anytime for
10:40:13 annual vendors and temporary vendors.
10:40:15 You had to have a cart that looked a certain way for
10:40:18 annual vendors.
10:40:19 You had signage that was ten square feet. You could
10:40:25 not occupy more than 600 square feet.
10:40:25 You had to be 150 feet back from the public

10:40:28 right-of-way if you weren't on the side of the
10:40:29 building which is difficult in some of the more narrow
10:40:30 corridors. But that's just a general synopsis.
10:40:33 But we do have five different types of vendors,
10:40:38 annual, special event, temporary, sports entertainment
10:40:43 and Ybor City vendors.
10:40:44 Just to make this clear, the zoning regulations, we
10:40:47 regulate private property, so these are private
10:40:50 property vendors.
10:40:51 Not the vendors in the street or for special events
10:40:53 that go through the Parks Department.
10:40:58 What happened over the last year since these were
10:41:00 adopted is we have L really seen how the vendors
10:41:02 operate when come in for permits and issues that have
10:41:05 arisen daily with how they operate.
10:41:07 And also looking at Hillsborough County regulations,
10:41:11 and how ours are a little different than theirs.
10:41:14 So there are some things that make it difficult for
10:41:16 vendors just to really cross the boarder from
10:41:18 Hillsborough County to Tampa.
10:41:19 They have to change some of the things that they do.
10:41:21 So we are trying to streamline some of that as well.

10:41:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: This gentleman has to leave to go to
10:41:27 the county and he wanted me to -- let me finish -- he
10:41:35 has to leave so I was going to go ahead and give him
10:41:37 the opportunity to address council before he leaves
10:41:39 since he has to leave to go to another meeting.
10:41:41 So if you want to address council you have three
10:41:43 minutes to do that.
10:41:44 I will just give you that opportunity.
10:41:47 >>> My name is Rick Barcena.
10:41:51 I want to talk to you briefly on tab 2 to talk about
10:41:54 the waterfront lots.
10:41:55 I own a waterfront lot.
10:41:57 I actually have a home on the water with a lot that is
10:42:00 vacant to build my drain pond.
10:42:03 When we start talking about taking our front setbacks
10:42:07 and our rear setbacks, you know, it not hard to do the
10:42:10 math, 25 and 30 is 55.
10:42:13 When you have an average lot.
10:42:16 And I am going to be honest, my lot is not average.
10:42:18 You know, it's a little bit larger than average but
10:42:21 when you get a 50 by 100-foot lot you are going to be
10:42:24 taking away considerable amount of buildable space,

10:42:27 but if it's just for an accessory structure, 150
10:42:31 square foot utility shed, that everybody else would
10:42:34 normally put in the rear of their lot.
10:42:39 It's going to be a hardship for our family.
10:42:41 It's also going to be I think a valuable property,
10:42:44 that's part of our hardship, the valuable property is
10:42:46 not going to be as valuable with less space buildable.
10:42:51 And I just wanted to give you my comments.
10:42:54 I hope that I can encourage you to really take a look
10:42:56 at the ordinance that is being proposed and take a low
10:43:00 at the impact, not only economically for small
10:43:04 business and small individuals like myself, but, you
10:43:08 know, the other people that are along the river, you
10:43:11 know, and they may not be able to be here, but I'm
10:43:14 here.
10:43:15 And I am a voice.
10:43:17 And if I don't give you my opinion, you will never
10:43:19 know.
10:43:20 And so my address is north ridge.
10:43:25 I know most of you all know me.
10:43:27 And I haven't been sworn but I'm telling you the
10:43:29 truth.

10:43:32 Thank you very much.
10:43:32 And thank you, Mr. Scott, for taking my comments.
10:43:34 I appreciate it.
10:43:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
10:43:35 Yes, sir.
10:43:36 Have a good day.
10:43:37 Okay.
10:43:44 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 3, vendors.
10:43:48 When we came last year and talked about vendors, I was
10:43:52 really at a point with my staff where we posed it to
10:43:56 you two different ways.
10:43:58 Either we prohibit them or allow them with regulation,
10:44:00 because it had gotten to a point where it was pretty
10:44:03 unmanageable.
10:44:04 It was difficulties to enforce to code enforcement
10:44:06 because our regulations were very, very slim.
10:44:10 So we actually adopted these regulations and they were
10:44:13 very restrictive.
10:44:14 What's happened over the last year is a lot of these
10:44:16 people, they just don't operate the way that our
10:44:19 regulations happen.
10:44:21 And you will start seeing more and more appeals from

10:44:25 our denials of the special uses.
10:44:27 They are going to start coming to you more and more
10:44:29 often.
10:44:29 So these changes, everyone though they seem like a lot
10:44:32 of pages, they are minor in the scheme of things.
10:44:36 But there are things you have to consider whether or
10:44:39 not you actually wants to make these changes.
10:44:41 First and foremost they are still special uses so they
10:44:45 go through us for review.
10:44:46 The main goal here in the initial for annual vendors
10:44:50 is the removal of the requirement that the property is
10:44:53 developed.
10:44:59 I brought this up about a year ago in East Tampa and
10:45:02 West Tampa and some of the older parts of the city you
10:45:04 have got vacant lots.
10:45:05 People just can't afford to either build on them or
10:45:07 develop a building to put something on a commercial
10:45:10 business, but they can certainly afford a cart or they
10:45:13 can afford their mobile truck that can come on and
10:45:18 fill the food during the day and leave and we have
10:45:20 vendors spending money even on landscaping.
10:45:24 We have to deny them because they can't afford to

10:45:26 build the building essentially.
10:45:28 They don't meet the regulations.
10:45:35 Also to address the fact that a lot of them are going
10:45:37 to come to you on appeal, and I waivers being
10:45:44 requested, and I don't nobody that it's right to put
10:45:46 you in a position of constantly doing that over and
10:45:48 over again because we deny a significant amount of
10:45:50 them.
10:45:51 So either address them in the regulation or deal with
10:45:53 it on appeal.
10:45:54 So I'm trying to address it with the regulations.
10:46:01 We still require the property and it keeps the
10:46:03 property in a neat and orderly fashion, that it's
10:46:05 cleaned up every day, but the vendors can come on and
10:46:09 off the property dawn to dusk as council directed the
10:46:12 last time but the property doesn't necessarily have to
10:46:16 be developed.
10:46:16 Contribute an undeveloped site but county be neat and
10:46:19 maintained.
10:46:20 Also the vendor can meet principle structure setbacks
10:46:24 so if it's a 10-foot setback or 20-foot setback they
10:46:27 can place there.

10:46:28 You have probably seen the ones on Busch Boulevard or
10:46:31 the gas station and the barbecue guys at the corner.
10:46:34 In fact in our current regulations they cannot be
10:46:36 placed on the corner.
10:46:37 They have to be either on the side of the building
10:46:39 which a gas station would be, where the pump is, or
10:46:42 150 feet back from the right-of-way line, from the
10:46:47 property line which kind of defeats the purpose of
10:46:48 that vendor for walk-up business or drive-up business.
10:46:52 So we address that by just having them meet principle
10:46:55 structure setbacks.
10:46:56 There's also a change in the signage, and this relates
10:47:01 back to Hillsborough County regulations.
10:47:03 We have it limited to ten but the county allows 12 so
10:47:06 we were just bumping it up to 12 so the vendor is
10:47:09 coming from here to there, they can keep the same
10:47:11 signage as opposed to spending more money on signage.
10:47:17 Alternatives.
10:47:20 Special he event vendors are the same.
10:47:22 Sports and entertainment vendors.
10:47:24 One change that we had was the time that they can show
10:47:28 up and the time that they can leave.

10:47:30 We actually have a vendor task force, TPD, code
10:47:34 enforcement and zoning.
10:47:36 Are all working together, business tax are all working
10:47:38 together and this last weekend we went out, one of our
10:47:42 staff and many of the other staff went out to actually
10:47:44 go and inspect these vendors so we had a whole crew of
10:47:47 people out there on Sunday to do that.
10:47:50 And what is occurring is that we have a limit, two
10:47:53 hours before the event you can show up and start
10:47:55 setting up.
10:47:56 The problem is they are setting up before that because
10:47:58 if you are out there smoking meat or cocking, two
10:48:01 hours isn't actually enough.
10:48:02 They are setting up before.
10:48:04 So a lot of them could be potentially in violation.
10:48:06 So what we did is we addressed it by allowing four
10:48:09 hours.
10:48:10 That seems to be the right window. Four hours before
10:48:12 and two hours after.
10:48:13 It's very difficult as well with everyone leaving the
10:48:15 stadium to get everybody out in an hour to clear the
10:48:17 site.

10:48:18 For them to clean up everything.
10:48:20 Because they have to stick around and make sure all
10:48:22 the cups that people are dropping and everything else
10:48:24 is cleaned up because they can be tagged for that.
10:48:27 So we have a two-hour window afterwards.
10:48:30 Temporary vendors, those are vendors such as like on
10:48:33 page 14, those are vendors, Christmas tree vendors,
10:48:37 fireworks, pumpkins, Easter, whatever they happen to
10:48:41 be, just temporary vendors.
10:48:45 We divided this by property size.
10:48:48 And this was really geared towards larger properties
10:48:51 that have multiple events through the year with
10:48:53 vendors.
10:48:54 Such as the stadium, or MOSI.
10:48:57 Properties that are more than 25 acres in size.
10:49:00 They could have events every single weekend.
10:49:03 We had a limit on three per property per year, which
10:49:07 was basically stifling that type of activity, which in
10:49:11 those larger venues, we want to encourage that type of
10:49:14 activity.
10:49:15 They have also posed to us that they need more than
10:49:17 that because of the carnivals that they have, the

10:49:19 vendors that they have, the different radio station
10:49:22 events and so on.
10:49:24 So what we did is we split it.
10:49:27 They are allowed 12 permits a year on parcels that are
10:49:30 less than 25.
10:49:31 So essentially one a month.
10:49:34 And then unlimited permits on those parcels that are
10:49:38 more than 25 acres.
10:49:41 The two that are more than 25 acres are MOSI and the
10:49:45 stadium. If you look at any of those, shopping
10:49:47 plaza's like Britton Plaza or North Gate, they are 10
10:49:52 to 15 acres.
10:49:55 So no one really has to worry about their neighborhood
10:49:57 shopping plaza turning into that.
10:50:00 A 10-foot setback which is what they had before. And
10:50:00 the signage is a little different.
10:50:10 What we allowed for this is we are proposing to comply
10:50:12 with chapter to 20.5, which is just the building
10:50:14 factor, it's one and a quarter square foot for the
10:50:17 frontage of whatever tent they have in the setup.
10:50:17 What happens with the fireworks and the Christmas
10:50:17 trees and the pumpkins, they set up these larger

10:50:17 commercial tents, so they are taking up much more
10:50:17 space on the lots.^
10:50:26 With a 10-square-foot sign, they get one and it's this
10:50:29 big.
10:50:30 And they are worried basically that no one will see
10:50:34 it.
10:50:35 What they proposed, actually, was to meet 20.5.
10:50:37 So they get one and a quarter square foot per frontage
10:50:41 of that tent.
10:50:42 If the tent is 50 square feet, they get 75 square
10:50:45 feet, essentially, of signage.
10:50:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 50 linear feet.
10:50:51 >>CATHERINE COYLE: 50 linear feet of tent.
10:50:54 Yes.
10:50:55 I'm sorry.
10:50:55 I said that wrong.
10:50:56 Also on page 14, they actually requested that we
10:50:59 change it -- and these are the temporary vendors, the
10:51:02 people that sell the trees and the fireworks and the
10:51:05 pumpkins that we change it till 10:00 at night instead
10:51:08 of 9:00 so they can close up.
10:51:10 Sunday through Thursday 11 p.m -- sorry, 11 p.m.

10:51:17 Friday and Saturday and 10 p.m. Sunday through
10:51:19 Thursday.
10:51:19 So it's a one-hour difference during the regular week
10:51:23 and on Sunday and 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday.
10:51:26 And there are no other changes to Ybor City vendors.
10:51:31 So I can answer any questions about vendors.
10:51:35 The vendor regulation is big.
10:51:40 >>GWEN MILLER: For clarification, let's go back to the
10:51:42 vendors who cannot develop their property, bring
10:51:45 whatever they bring instead of taking away.
10:51:47 You say now that you changed some of that, do they
10:51:49 still have to come before us for appeal?
10:51:51 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If you were to approve the changes
10:51:53 in this regulation, it would be effective hopefully
10:51:55 January 1st.
10:51:56 They would be allowed then to set up on undeveloped
10:51:59 property.
10:51:59 And they wouldn't have to come on appeal.
10:52:01 We would be able to approve that then.
10:52:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, it sounds still, though, it's
10:52:06 condition based on meeting the setbacks.
10:52:08 Part of what's happening in East Tampa, my office, I'm

10:52:11 sure you have, too, gotten a lot of calls from several
10:52:14 people where those who do the barbecue stands and
10:52:18 turkey wings and all that, they shut them down.
10:52:20 Either because of meeting setback or because they are
10:52:24 required to have a rest room, which I find quite
10:52:26 interesting.
10:52:28 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes, we did require that in the
10:52:30 regulation.
10:52:31 Because right now you have to be on a developed
10:52:33 property.
10:52:33 And those bathroom facilities in that building have to
10:52:36 be made available to vendor.
10:52:37 What is happening is, the vendor can stay until dusk
10:52:42 on some properties.
10:52:43 And if they are leasing out a portion of an office
10:52:46 building, the building closes at 5:00, the vendor then
10:52:49 either has to close or stay open in violation because
10:52:52 they don't have access to the bathrooms.
10:52:53 Unfortunately, sometimes the property owner doesn't
10:52:55 allow access to the bathrooms, even though they are
10:52:58 signing a form that says they are.
10:53:00 We could potentially have countless code enforcement

10:53:03 violations with vendors.
10:53:04 We're still at another point where we've got to
10:53:09 decide --
10:53:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I'm talking about is I have a
10:53:15 truck, I pull my barbecue stand up to a lot, been
10:53:20 authorized.
10:53:22 People are going to drive by, buy my barbecue.
10:53:25 You require me to have a rest room.
10:53:27 At the end of the day, there's no building,
10:53:30 undeveloped lot.
10:53:31 At 7:00, I get in my truck, and I pull my barbecue pit
10:53:35 with me.
10:53:35 You are requiring me to have a rest room?
10:53:39 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.
10:53:40 The regulations that were adopted last year, yes.
10:53:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's not what I'm reading.
10:53:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm sorry?
10:53:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's not what I'm reading.
10:53:50 The regulation you just struck says the property owner
10:53:54 should be required to allow the vendor's patrons
10:53:57 access to bathroom facilities on the subject property.
10:54:01 That to me would imply if they exist.

10:54:04 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No, you have to go to the opening.
10:54:06 Annual vendors are prohibited on all undeveloped
10:54:10 lands.
10:54:11 You're not allowed to have it on undeveloped property.
10:54:15 We struck that language.
10:54:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just because it's developed doesn't
10:54:17 mean there's necessarily a bathroom.
10:54:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If it's developed with a building
10:54:24 that's functioning as a business, you have to have a
10:54:26 bathroom.
10:54:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think the better solution would
10:54:27 be, if the business is open, then the bathroom
10:54:30 facility should be available to the patrons.
10:54:32 If the business -- if the underlying business is open.
10:54:36 I mean, if you're going to rent -- let's say you got a
10:54:39 gas station and you're going to rent out to that
10:54:41 little barbecue stand, you know, and somebody is going
10:54:44 to sit there and eat it, blah, blah, blah, if the gas
10:54:47 station is open, then it should be allowed.
10:54:49 And if the gas station is closed by 10:00 or 11:00 at
10:54:54 night, then it wouldn't be allowed.
10:54:55 I think that's a better solution for the health of the

10:54:58 public.
10:54:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Then what about undeveloped lots?
10:55:01 I'm dealing with undeveloped lots where I'm driving my
10:55:06 truck on an undeveloped lot.
10:55:08 There is no rest room.
10:55:09 There's nothing there but my truck and my barbecue
10:55:13 pit.
10:55:13 You're telling me I cannot as a vendor operate unless
10:55:16 I provide for a rest room.
10:55:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.
10:55:19 All I'm saying, if a rest room is present and the
10:55:22 underlying business is open.
10:55:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's the ordinance now as it exists
10:55:26 today, is that right?
10:55:27 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.
10:55:29 The real crux is whether or not you can set up on
10:55:32 undeveloped property that's zoned commercial.
10:55:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: See, that's a problem.
10:55:36 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That's the first question to
10:55:37 answer.
10:55:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here again, you're talking about small
10:55:39 businesses, you're talking about those small guys that

10:55:42 come on -- I'm telling you, that pull up on a lot.
10:55:45 They cannot sell barbecue because we just prevented
10:55:48 them or prohibited them from doing it because they
10:55:50 don't provide for a rest room.
10:55:52 If I'm driving by to get a barbecue sandwich, I don't
10:55:55 need to go in your rest room.
10:55:57 More than likely --
10:55:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That's one reason why the staff is
10:56:00 proposing this, because we're dealing with that
10:56:02 particular issue, literally several times a day.
10:56:05 Because we have to tell people to walk every single
10:56:07 day.
10:56:08 We have to say no.
10:56:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: All I'm saying is, maybe we can
10:56:14 tweak what you're saying and just say if there's a
10:56:18 rest room present on the property and it's open, then
10:56:22 those patrons of the accessory use, temporary use
10:56:25 should be allowed access to that.
10:56:28 Tom, I agree with you completely.
10:56:29 If it's an empty lot and they set up the barbecue
10:56:32 stand and it's otherwise legal, then, obviously, I
10:56:35 don't care -- they shouldn't have to build one.

10:56:38 I agree with you.
10:56:40 You just drive on down the road.
10:56:41 If there's a gas station there and it's open and they
10:56:43 have a rest room and they are profiting indirectly,
10:56:47 then they should have to be allowed to keep the rest
10:56:50 room open.
10:56:52 >>GWEN MILLER: My question is, are you talking about
10:56:54 customers have to have a bathroom or talking about the
10:56:56 vendor has to have a rest room?
10:56:58 Which one is it?
10:57:00 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Bathroom has to be made available
10:57:02 to the vendor and their patrons.
10:57:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Most drive up and get what they want
10:57:07 and leave.
10:57:07 Why do you have to have one for the customer when you
10:57:11 need it mostly for the vendor who is there all the
10:57:14 time?
10:57:15 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We're not advocating either way.
10:57:17 We're just trying -- because we have to deal with it
10:57:19 on a daily basis, we're just trying to make it work
10:57:22 for everybody.
10:57:22 That's why we're bringing this to you.

10:57:24 I can change that, if the property is developed and if
10:57:26 there are bathrooms when that business is open, they
10:57:29 are made available to the patrons.
10:57:31 Otherwise not.
10:57:32 If it's undeveloped, they are fine.
10:57:36 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to clarify.
10:57:38 You're proposing to allow them on undeveloped property
10:57:40 in your changes, right?
10:57:42 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.
10:57:43 >>MARY MULHERN: If it's undeveloped, there is no
10:57:46 requirement.
10:57:46 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Right.
10:57:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's no requirement for a rest
10:57:48 room.
10:57:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Right.
10:57:53 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: We have legitimate business whose do
10:57:55 not allow the general public to use their bathrooms.
10:57:59 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.
10:58:00 They would not sign the application for the vendor
10:58:02 then.
10:58:03 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: I'm talking about a storefront.
10:58:06 I know we're not talking about storefronts now, but we

10:58:08 have businesses who don't permit the general public
10:58:11 when they go shopping in their store that want to go
10:58:13 to the bathroom.
10:58:14 They most likely have a bathroom, but it's for the
10:58:17 employees only.
10:58:18 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.
10:58:19 That's what I'm saying.
10:58:20 They probably would not sign off on the application to
10:58:22 allow the vendor to come in then.
10:58:24 That business has to sign off allowing the vendor on
10:58:27 the property and allowing them to use the bathroom.
10:58:30 If they don't want them to use it, they wouldn't sign
10:58:32 the application.
10:58:33 We had to have property owner permission.
10:58:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's a good point, Joseph.
10:58:39 Maybe we can tweak that, too.
10:58:42 I had a few questions as we go through.
10:58:45 On page 11, I appreciate the page numbers.
10:58:48 On page 11, let's see.
10:58:54 Item number 6, you've got the differentiation between
10:59:05 sites of half acre or sites half acre or more, if you
10:59:08 have a half acre or more, you can leave your whatever

10:59:13 it is there sort of permanently.
10:59:15 And I'm wondering what the differentiation -- I heard
10:59:19 what you said before about 25 acres.
10:59:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'll give you an example.
10:59:23 This one is -- it's a tough one.
10:59:26 When you go to Home Depot or Lowe's and there's the
10:59:28 hot dog stand out front, those things are tied down.
10:59:31 They don't meet building code standards, but they are
10:59:33 tied down.
10:59:34 They cannot move them on a daily basis and we have to
10:59:37 deny their application.
10:59:38 They are not allowed, even by the code we have today.
10:59:40 And they are truly a vendor.
10:59:42 And they may meet every other thing we have, setback
10:59:45 and everything else, but they are not allowed there.
10:59:47 I know we all get hot dogs when we go to Home Depot.
10:59:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: They are out there whether they are
10:59:53 allowed.
10:59:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess what I'm trying to figure
10:59:55 out --
10:59:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It was really an intensity level.
10:59:57 You can really pick any size.

10:59:59 Acre, half acre, five acres.
11:00:01 I was really trying to capture those that are on the
11:00:03 larger establishments that are sitting there that are
11:00:05 tied down, that they can remain.
11:00:08 It's really a proportional intensity issue.
11:00:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Going to the next page, page 12,
11:00:14 sports and entertainment vendors.
11:00:17 When I read this language, I just want to make sure
11:00:19 that the vendor is specifically associated with the
11:00:26 event.
11:00:28 And I know it says our operating in association with
11:00:32 and then it says, colon, any event held within these
11:00:35 boundaries.
11:00:35 I think that the preceding sentence should say, are
11:00:41 operating in association with an event, colon, within
11:00:47 these boundaries.
11:00:48 It's a subtle distinction, but the example I'm going
11:00:51 to give you is at the corner of Columbus and Dale
11:00:53 Mabry, there's always a tent out there selling
11:00:57 something.
11:00:58 It's just it changes with the season, but every time
11:01:03 you go there, there is a tent there.

11:01:05 Now, that happens to be within these geographic
11:01:10 boundaries that you've described because they are
11:01:14 obviously renting from the Sports Authority or whoever
11:01:16 owns that corner.
11:01:17 So anyway, I just want to make sure nobody tries to
11:01:21 slip through the crack just because they are within
11:01:22 that big geographic boundary, that's a huge geographic
11:01:26 boundary north of the interstate all the way up to
11:01:28 Hillsborough Avenue to the river and to Lois is
11:01:31 massive.
11:01:32 Actually, I guess if it was the Lowe's, does that
11:01:36 include -- yeah, that would include the Dale Mabry
11:01:38 location I just said.
11:01:39 So anyway, so let's just make sure that we only tie it
11:01:42 to that event.
11:01:44 A one-day event, I think, really.
11:01:46 I guess some events are two or three days.
11:01:49 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The way we handle the applications
11:01:51 internally, just so you know, they'll apply for a
11:01:53 vendor to get a placard for the Bucs season.
11:01:56 And on the application, they'll say it's for the Bucs
11:01:58 season, and they'll cite each and every day that a

11:02:01 game is occurring.
11:02:02 We'll give them one placard for all those days.
11:02:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Each of those individual days.
11:02:06 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yeah, we list the days so we only
11:02:09 have to issue one placard.
11:02:10 We save paper that way.
11:02:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We don't want to be too
11:02:14 bureaucratic.
11:02:14 It looks like the bathroom facility issue keeps
11:02:17 popping up.
11:02:17 Maybe we'll just be consistent throughout.
11:02:19 On the next page, page 14, to me, it's kind of weird.
11:02:25 We've gone from three permits.
11:02:27 This is item D-1 at the top of the page, we've gone
11:02:29 from three permits for 30 days, not to exceed 30 days,
11:02:35 all the way up to 12 permits not to exceed 45 days.
11:02:39 12 permits at 45 days each is more than the whole
11:02:42 entire year.
11:02:43 What are we doing there?
11:02:47 It just seems like we've taken this wild swing, and
11:02:51 I'm seeing a lot of fan shaking heads behind you.
11:02:57 >>CATHERINE COYLE: some of these timing changes came

11:02:58 from the industry itself.
11:03:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would have thought so.
11:03:02 >> This is really your discretion at this point.
11:03:04 The only thing --
11:03:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's a joke about lawyers who
11:03:08 bill more hours than actually exist in the year, but
11:03:11 this is sort of similar.
11:03:13 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The distinction that I would like
11:03:14 to hold on to, if we could, really came from staff,
11:03:17 was the distinction of the 25 acres of the size of
11:03:20 property.
11:03:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree with that one.
11:03:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: MOSI and Raymond James, they are
11:03:24 different than the rest of the properties in the city.
11:03:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't have a problem with that,
11:03:29 but I think we need to have a serious discussion at
11:03:33 D-1, which I think we'll probably hear from the
11:03:35 audience on that.
11:03:36 The signage, we're saying in these temporary settings,
11:03:45 we're going to allow signage that we allow as big as
11:03:47 what we do in the permanent setting.
11:03:50 How big is the typical tent?

11:03:55 I guess 50 feet you said?
11:03:57 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I used 50 because I did it in my
11:03:59 head.
11:04:00 A lot of them are between 80 and 100 feet according to
11:04:02 the people that we asked.
11:04:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So then you have 150-square-foot
11:04:08 sign and that's on one face.
11:04:11 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Any face that faces the public
11:04:14 right-of-way.
11:04:14 If they are on a corner, it would be two.
11:04:16 They are not usually hundred by hundred.
11:04:18 Shallower on the other side.
11:04:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So if it's a hundred, 125 I think.
11:04:23 So 125 would be about 10 by 10 sign.
11:04:27 I don't know if that's big or not.
11:04:29 I'd like to hear from the public on that.
11:04:31 And then the hours of operation.
11:04:32 I saw there's a than comment on that.
11:04:37 We need to look at Roman numeral VI in regard to the
11:04:41 hours of operation.
11:04:41 Thank you.
11:04:45 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Any other questions on the vendors?

11:04:47 Tab 4, I believe over the last year, I've actually
11:04:54 been talking about this amendment, and this came up
11:04:56 recently with the R classifications for alcohol.
11:04:58 This is the amendment to allow the electronic filing
11:05:02 of the semi annual reports, so this is actually
11:05:06 addressing something we've talked about earlier.
11:05:07 And tweaking the day that they are due, it used to be
11:05:10 a 15-day window they could turn it in.
11:05:13 We changed it to a 30-day window for them to file.
11:05:16 It just so happens they file in January and July,
11:05:18 which are 31-day months, so it got a little screwy, so
11:05:21 we're changing it to the 31st day of that month.
11:05:26 Also the letters we send go out certificate of mail
11:05:28 instead of certified mail.
11:05:30 Certified mail can cost upwards of four to five
11:05:33 dollars a letter.
11:05:34 We're sending them to 275 of them, it can get
11:05:36 expensive, because we do it twice a year.
11:05:39 Certificate of mail is all we require for notice for
11:05:41 any other petition that comes before you.
11:05:43 So we're asking for the same consideration for budget
11:05:46 concerns.

11:05:47 Tab 5 is landmarks, demolition by neglect.
11:05:51 I believe you heard about this over the last several
11:05:54 months.
11:05:54 I'm actually going to defer to Rebecca Kert to explain
11:05:59 the regulations.
11:06:01 >>REBECCA KERT: Rebecca Kert, Legal Department.
11:06:03 These are changes to your A.R.C. and B.L.C. codes to
11:06:07 require property owners of historic properties to
11:06:09 maintain the exteriors and not allow them to fall into
11:06:13 a condition of neglect.
11:06:14 It specifically defines what a condition of neglect
11:06:16 is.
11:06:18 As a matter of process, the A.R.C. or B.L.C.
11:06:22 administrator will formally notify a property owner if
11:06:25 they believe a condition of neglect is occurring and
11:06:27 try to get voluntary compliance.
11:06:29 There is an exception in cases of emergency.
11:06:31 If this is, in fact, passed, we will be asking Council
11:06:36 to also modify their citation ordinance so we would
11:06:39 have the option to enforce these regulations --
11:06:42 citation process.
11:06:43 Also, there's an opportunity for a property owner who

11:06:46 believes that the application of the section creates
11:06:47 an undue economic hardship to have a hearing before
11:06:51 the A.R.C. or the B.L.C. on that.
11:06:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:06:55 Thank you.
11:07:00 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.
11:07:00 Tab 6 is the proposed regulation due to the motion
11:07:07 that was made about a year ago from Council to deal
11:07:09 with the front doors on the alleys.
11:07:11 We had several reports back to you on those alley
11:07:14 units and how to deal with them.
11:07:17 And this is a direct result of that motion, is that
11:07:21 the front doors for units shall not face the alley.
11:07:24 They can face the side or they can face interior
11:07:27 courtyards if there's unique design.
11:07:29 But the units themselves are not to be addressed or
11:07:31 faced off the alley.
11:07:32 This goes back to number 3 on the agenda.
11:07:35 But alternative designs can be approved
11:07:38 administratively.
11:07:39 It's just that they can't face the rear.
11:07:40 Tab 7, garage setback regulations.

11:07:48 If you go back to page 26 this is really a
11:07:55 clarification.
11:07:56 There's been a little difficulty administering this
11:07:59 permitting wise.
11:07:59 We used to have a 15-foot setback for garages.
11:08:03 The door that faces the side street.
11:08:08 That was amended to 18 feet, because we often have a
11:08:10 one-car garage in certain circumstances to collectors
11:08:13 and arterials, it always has to be 18.
11:08:15 But then transportation could consider a lesser amount
11:08:18 based on visibility standards.
11:08:19 This really clarifies that for a one car garage, still
11:08:24 18 feet.
11:08:25 Doesn't matter what kind of street it is because you
11:08:27 are required two spaces for house.
11:08:30 So you have the one in tandem.
11:08:31 The two-car garage would follow the visibility
11:08:33 standards which is a 10-foot minimum.
11:08:35 Alternatives can be considered by the zoning
11:08:39 administrator.
11:08:40 Will consult transportation as well for visibility.
11:08:43 The visibility is section 27240.

11:08:46 It's actually in the zoning code as well.
11:08:48 But that's really just to clarify for permitting
11:08:50 purposes, because it came up a lot with,
11:08:53 unfortunately, what that really meant.
11:08:55 Tab 8, solid waste regulations, you'll note on page
11:09:01 27, there's a memo from Wanda Shea, and she is here as
11:09:04 well.
11:09:05 There was the amendment last year that came forward
11:09:08 for the four-foot walkway.
11:09:11 Council let that go.
11:09:12 You guys didn't act on it at that point.
11:09:14 It came back in this cycle, and they were going to
11:09:17 explain why.
11:09:18 We had our public information workshop, and the
11:09:20 walkway was dropped.
11:09:22 What was left in was the enclosure, if you have the
11:09:26 cart outside that the enclosure has to be four feet in
11:09:29 height to clock them.
11:09:31 I can let Wanda explain that if you'd like to hear
11:09:34 from solid waste.
11:09:35 >> This is cleanup language.
11:09:38 Elsewhere in the code, it states that the enclosure

11:09:51 height would have to be six-foot in height, and we just
11:09:54 wanted to verify and clean up so that it stipulated the
11:09:58 cart enclosures would only be four foot in height.
11:10:01 Tab nine, which is page 30, where the language begins,
11:10:15 this is the variance criteria.
11:10:19 I'll actually also defer to Rebecca Kert on that as
11:10:21 well.
11:10:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The question I have, because in
11:10:24 looking at the tab, it's sort of in the abstract.
11:10:26 I'm not sure what type of -- are we talking about
11:10:31 single-family residential on the garbage -- garbage
11:10:35 container?
11:10:36 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Difference between a refuse bin and
11:10:39 container.
11:10:39 She's speaking directly for the carts that are
11:10:42 residential.
11:10:43 Yes.
11:10:43 Like she said elsewhere in the code, requires six-foot
11:10:48 height for screening, those are dumpsters typically.
11:10:52 Four-foot height.
11:10:53 We don't want to require six feet for carts that are
11:10:55 four feet.

11:10:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: This is outdoors --
11:10:59 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If you're storing them outside.
11:11:01 Also in the code, it also requires that you have them
11:11:03 screened from the public right-of-way.
11:11:04 Your carts can't be just out in your yard.
11:11:07 They actually have to be screened.
11:11:08 If you do screen them outside of your garage or
11:11:10 outside of your house, has to only be four feet high
11:11:14 instead of six.
11:11:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just want to make sure what we're
11:11:17 requiring when we talk about a screen versus an
11:11:20 enclosure.
11:11:20 This uses the word enclosure.
11:11:22 Are we talking about sealing -- these are the new
11:11:25 carts, right?
11:11:26 Basically, we're looking at the new carts.
11:11:29 New big blue carts.
11:11:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.
11:11:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And that's why we're talking about
11:11:33 four feet, because they are probably three-and-a-half,
11:11:35 four feet tall.
11:11:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Exactly.

11:11:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are we talking about surrounding it
11:11:40 on all four sides as an enclosure?
11:11:42 And the reason I say that is, those suckers are heavy.
11:11:46 Once you start filling it with trash, they are going
11:11:50 to be really heavy.
11:11:50 And I'm not even sure I want to lift it up over an
11:11:54 enclosure.
11:11:54 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, enclosures are supposed to
11:11:57 have an opening so you can walk out of them.
11:12:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I know.
11:12:02 But I'm also -- I think the most important issue is
11:12:04 that they are screened.
11:12:07 Isn't that what we're really getting at, that it's
11:12:11 screened from the street?
11:12:12 Whether or not that third side or the fourth side --
11:12:14 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If your entire yard is fenced with
11:12:17 a six-foot fence, normal yard and you put them back,
11:12:19 we're not going to require another four-foot enclosure
11:12:23 inside the fence.
11:12:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's not my point, though.
11:12:25 My point is, as long as it's screened from the fence,
11:12:28 that should be my only obligation as a homeowner.

11:12:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That's exactly what I just said.
11:12:33 I understand what you're saying.
11:12:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But what I'm reading here talks
11:12:35 about an enclosure, and I just want -- and maybe we
11:12:41 can tweak it up to just say our real intent is that it
11:12:44 needs to be a four-foot screening.
11:12:49 Because otherwise we're going to go out and cite
11:12:52 20,000 people, because nobody is going to want to have
11:12:56 to open the front of the door.
11:13:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If you don't move it that day, they
11:13:03 cite you.
11:13:04 I got cited because my garbage can stayed out till
11:13:08 sundown.
11:13:09 The next morning I had a ticket on my door.
11:13:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I've had warnings.
11:13:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, a warning that you have to move
11:13:18 them at the end of the day.
11:13:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think they come out after City
11:13:21 Council.
11:13:21 [ LAUGHTER ]
11:13:28 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Just to make sure that the
11:13:29 screening that is provided to screen from the

11:13:31 right-of-way is four feet in height, but not
11:13:33 necessarily on the top and all the way around.
11:13:35 As long as it's just screened from the right-of-way.
11:13:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Change the word enclosure to
11:13:39 screen.
11:13:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Isn't that really the purpose?
11:13:43 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Do you want me to ask Wanda really
11:13:45 quick just to make sure?
11:13:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yeah.
11:13:48 >> She says yes.
11:13:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Moving ahead.
11:13:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm sorry.
11:13:53 I thought it was important.
11:13:54 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Variance regulations, I'll defer to
11:13:56 Rebecca.
11:13:57 >>REBECCA KERT: Rebecca Kert, Legal Department.
11:13:59 These changes are to the provisions of the VRB, BLC
11:14:02 and the A.R.C. that deal with variances.
11:14:06 We brought these forward to you based on the fact that
11:14:09 there has been some confusion amongst the board, the
11:14:12 citizens and perhaps City Council on how you apply the
11:14:14 five criteria that you're looking at when you're

11:14:16 considering the variance.
11:14:17 Do you have to find all five criteria, one criteria,
11:14:20 or none -- no criteria?
11:14:22 What we did, tried to take the five criteria down to
11:14:29 what is really the legal essence of what you're
11:14:31 looking at with a variance.
11:14:32 There are two parts to a variance.
11:14:34 There is have they demonstrated a hardship or
11:14:36 difficulty, and what is the difficulty or the burden
11:14:39 to the rest of the surrounding property owners and the
11:14:42 city as a whole?
11:14:43 As far as the hardship, the hardship as a legal matter
11:14:46 has to be unique and singular with respect to that
11:14:49 property.
11:14:50 That's criteria one.
11:14:51 The second thing it has to be, it cannot be a
11:14:54 self-created hardship.
11:14:55 You currently do not have that in your criteria.
11:14:57 I've added that.
11:14:59 That's criteria two.
11:15:00 You'll see what I removed with the criteria that says
11:15:02 that the only way to grant a variance is if there is

11:15:06 no reasonable use of the property.
11:15:07 That's a very, very significant criteria.
11:15:11 It's hardly ever going to be met.
11:15:12 I think that's part of what the initial frustration
11:15:14 was with both the VRB and City Council with all the
11:15:18 denials of the variances.
11:15:19 That's not a legal requirement.
11:15:21 And from what I've heard from City Council over the
11:15:24 past couple of years, that wasn't your intent.
11:15:26 The proposal is to remove that criteria.
11:15:28 The other three, four and five, have to do with will
11:15:32 the variance substantially interfere with the
11:15:34 surrounding property owners?
11:15:35 Is it in harmony with the comprehensive plan?
11:15:38 And criteria five is balancing, is there substantial
11:15:41 justice being done considering both the individual
11:15:44 hardship that's created and the public benefit
11:15:47 intended to be served by whatever code provision
11:15:50 you're waiving.
11:15:51 Those are all five criteria which should be met
11:15:54 anytime a variance is created.
11:15:55 So that we would propose that these be mandatory.

11:15:59 The other issue, which has caused some consternation,
11:16:03 was you used to have language both practical
11:16:08 difficulties or unnecessary hardship.
11:16:08 In some states they mean very different things.
11:16:10 In Florida they mean the same thing, so for the sake
11:16:13 of eliminating redundancy, I suggested we take one
11:16:16 out.
11:16:16 It doesn't matter.
11:16:17 Perhaps we should leave both of them back in, and I
11:16:20 would propose we add both of them back in so people
11:16:23 feel comfortable.
11:16:25 I'm available for any questions on the other changes.
11:16:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think one of the major things we
11:16:32 did -- and I can't remember if you were here when we
11:16:34 did it, Rebecca -- a few years back, was previously
11:16:40 section sub A at the top said you had to meet all five
11:16:44 of the criteria.
11:16:45 When I was on the VRB, you know, it's just very --
11:16:49 nobody can actually meet all five of them.
11:16:51 It's an impossible hurdle.
11:16:53 What we did, we softened that up and we added that
11:16:56 last line that these are the criteria that the board

11:16:59 would look at, one through five.
11:17:01 I just want to stress that we're not changing that,
11:17:06 correct?
11:17:06 >>REBECCA KERT: Actually, I am proposing that one
11:17:08 through five as they've been restated will be met.
11:17:11 They are all things that are actually legally required
11:17:14 for variance.
11:17:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not seeing that in your
11:17:17 strike-throughs.
11:17:19 >>REBECCA KERT: Well, I could put back the language
11:17:21 that says it specifically.
11:17:22 It's been a matter of some confusion about shall
11:17:24 consider where that leaves you.
11:17:27 You shall consider all of them, but then you get to
11:17:30 ignore all of them.
11:17:32 Shall consider has been legally upheld as not vague
11:17:35 because you have to consider all of them.
11:17:37 But I could tweak the language to say that they are
11:17:40 all mandatory.
11:17:41 You can't ignore -- you can't set criteria and then
11:17:44 have some of them that you ignore.
11:17:46 I think what we are trying to do is get a balancing

11:17:49 test.
11:17:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, if we adopt it the way it is
11:17:54 with the strike-throughs I'm looking at, I'm
11:17:56 comfortable with it, because it still says that the
11:18:00 board shall consider the following criteria when it's
11:18:03 making its decision about the public health, safety,
11:18:06 and the practical difficulties.
11:18:08 And those are the five criteria.
11:18:09 What I don't want to do is go backwards to where we
11:18:12 were that all five of those criteria have to be met
11:18:14 strictly.
11:18:16 Because if you do, then you're never -- you're not
11:18:19 going to meet them.
11:18:20 You know, unique and singular --
11:18:27 >>REBECCA KERT: That is actually one of the legal
11:18:29 requirements for a variance.
11:18:30 We are not bound by state statute.
11:18:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I understand that.
11:18:33 >>REBECCA KERT: But the case law says the essence of a
11:18:35 variance is that it has to be unique and singular to
11:18:38 the property.
11:18:39 If not, the courts say you need to change your zoning

11:18:41 code.
11:18:41 If everyone on the same block has the same problem,
11:18:44 then you don't need a variance, you need to change
11:18:46 your zoning code.
11:18:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I understand that.
11:18:47 But I'm just saying if you go backwards -- I'm okay
11:18:51 with the way it is right here.
11:18:53 But if you go backwards and make it any tougher then
11:18:56 again you're going to get into this nonsense where
11:19:00 nobody can meet it.
11:19:01 So, you know, if we're moving forward with this, I'm
11:19:05 fine with that.
11:19:14 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The next four tabs starting on page
11:19:16 34 to the end, those are the four privately initiated
11:19:19 amendments.
11:19:19 I'll go ahead and announce each one as we come to
11:19:22 them.
11:19:22 Tab 11, page 34, this is the proposal by Mechanik
11:19:29 Nuccio.
11:19:31 Dave Mechanik is here to present it.
11:19:33 It's requesting self-storage type use or
11:19:35 air-conditioned storage use within the CBD with

11:19:38 criteria.
11:19:40 >> Good morning.
11:19:46 David Mechanik, 305 south boulevard, Tampa, Florida.
11:19:49 We are asking that self-storage be allowed as a
11:19:54 permitted use in the central business district in a
11:19:57 very limited way.
11:19:58 We've identified and I have a client who has property
11:20:02 in the north end of the CBD and they would like to be
11:20:07 able to apply for a PD -- or a CBD zoning, which is
11:20:10 controlled by a site plan, to allow for this use.
11:20:16 And there are a number of features about this that
11:20:20 we've made to -- we believe to make it very
11:20:23 restrictive and not as a use which would create any
11:20:31 external or visual impact to the outside.
11:20:34 Firstly, it would have to be approved by City Council
11:20:37 either through a special use or CBD site plan.
11:20:42 Secondly, it would have to be part of a mixed use
11:20:47 project, which would include either office or retail
11:20:51 and residential as a minimum requirement.
11:20:54 The self-storage could not be a predominant use
11:20:59 within -- with the project as a whole.
11:21:02 We have also, which we think is a significant feature

11:21:05 of this, written a criteria in that the self-storage
11:21:08 must be part of the principal building that it's
11:21:12 located within so that it could not be a free-standing
11:21:15 type building.
11:21:16 We have also said that the written criteria in there
11:21:20 that would suggest that you cannot operate a business
11:21:22 that would strictly be for the purpose of storage, and
11:21:27 it would not be -- you know, you couldn't sell
11:21:30 products or have any retail activities within there.
11:21:33 So we believe we've crafted a series of criteria that
11:21:38 would virtually make the use invisible or not to have
11:21:43 any kind of external impact.
11:21:45 We believe and we've heard this from our clients, that
11:21:48 there is a considerable need as the downtown
11:21:52 residential population increases the need for
11:21:56 self-storage will become greater.
11:21:59 I mean, as you realize, most of the downtown
11:22:02 residential development are going to be in terms of
11:22:05 condominiums or apartments, by their definition, they
11:22:09 are going to tend to be smaller units without a lot of
11:22:12 storage.
11:22:12 So we believe that this is something that would serve

11:22:16 a good public purpose, and that through these
11:22:20 criteria, would make it a good neighbor to other
11:22:25 downtown CBD uses.
11:22:28 Be happy to answer any questions.
11:22:35 >>MARY MULHERN: My first question is, 40% of the
11:22:39 project's square footage?
11:22:41 Are you talking about the entire project?
11:22:42 So if you have a mixed-use development of condo
11:22:47 buildings, whatever, you could use 40% of that for
11:22:53 self-storage?
11:22:56 >> That would be correct.
11:22:56 Under the proposal, that's what we would be talking
11:22:58 about.
11:22:59 Again, it would not be the predominant use, being that
11:23:02 it would be less than 50%.
11:23:04 And, of course, that would also allow for retail,
11:23:08 residential, and that would be the other percentages.
11:23:12 >>MARY MULHERN: What in particular are your clients
11:23:14 talking about storing?
11:23:15 That they would need --
11:23:18 >> Typical household goods.
11:23:21 No hazardous materials.

11:23:22 There was some comment at a public meeting that Cathy
11:23:26 presented regarding that, and we would be happy to
11:23:31 incorporate additional criteria that would limit it --
11:23:34 we're just talking about normal household kind of
11:23:37 goods.
11:23:38 Nothing hazardous or dangerous.
11:23:41 >>MARY MULHERN: It sounds like a lot of storage to me.
11:23:44 >> Well, I think the facilities themselves are bulky
11:23:47 in the sense of square footage.
11:23:49 So that's how that percentage was arrived at.
11:23:56 >>MARY MULHERN: It doesn't really make sense to me if
11:23:58 you're moving into a downtown apartment or condo, that
11:24:02 it would bring everything from your ATTIC.
11:24:09 I don't know, it seems like a lot --
11:24:11 >> And it's not necessarily 40% of a condominium.
11:24:14 It's 40% of the overall square feet of a development.
11:24:19 If it's 100,000-square-foot development, which would
11:24:23 include retail and office and residential
11:24:26 condominiums, then only 40% of that total square
11:24:30 footage could be devoted to self-storage, is what
11:24:34 that's saying.
11:24:35 So it would not be 40% of the condominium units.

11:24:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think one of the -- I'll sound
11:24:49 like Ms. Saul-Sena here, but I think one of the
11:24:53 ugliest structures in south Tampa is that self-storage
11:24:57 off of Howard near Kennedy.
11:25:00 Kind of got orange in it and stuff.
11:25:03 And I apologize to the owners, but it's just -- when
11:25:07 it went up, it was kind of like this is really
11:25:09 atrocious right on the edge of Hyde Park.
11:25:12 >> I agree.
11:25:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But I'm sure the people use it and,
11:25:18 you know, it's functional.
11:25:19 But one of the things I want to hopefully stress on
11:25:22 this is that we're not changing any of our exterior
11:25:27 requirements in the CBD, central business district.
11:25:31 Any of these buildings would still have to undergo
11:25:36 Wilson Stair review, and if they come into Council,
11:25:39 we'll get a chance to see the drawings and that sort
11:25:42 of thing.
11:25:42 >> Absolutely.
11:25:43 That was part -- this -- this change doesn't address
11:25:45 that because it's already part of the CBD
11:25:49 requirements.

11:25:49 But it would have to go through the full design
11:25:51 review, and we met with Wilson as part of developing
11:25:56 these particular criteria.
11:25:57 All of that is required.
11:26:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think to me and more importantly
11:26:01 to the community, that's one of the most important
11:26:03 issues.
11:26:03 When you look at a building, you don't really
11:26:06 necessarily know what's going on inside, whether or
11:26:07 not it's an apartment or self-storage unit in that
11:26:12 ten-story building, mixed-use building.
11:26:14 We wouldn't know the difference as we walk by.
11:26:17 And I think that's the -- I hope that that's the
11:26:22 intent of this.
11:26:22 And I'll trust staff to make sure that it is.
11:26:26 >> Exactly.
11:26:26 That's what we were shooting for with that.
11:26:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:26:29 We're at 11:30.
11:26:31 We have blocked off time before 12:00 for public
11:26:34 comment.
11:26:35 So we'll have to move pretty quickly here.

11:26:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 12 is actually Mr. Mechanik as
11:26:39 well.
11:26:39 This is the alcoholic beverage regulations.
11:26:42 There are two more quickly after that.
11:26:44 >> I'll talk fast.
11:26:45 David Mechanik, 305 south boulevard.
11:26:47 I'm here on behalf of the property owner of
11:26:52 international plaza, Tampa Westshore, associates.
11:26:57 If you all will recall last zoning amendment cycle,
11:27:00 there was a consideration of allowing alcoholic
11:27:03 beverage or commonly called wet zoning approvals
11:27:08 within malls as an administrative approval.
11:27:12 Well, as the process evolved and I think to some
11:27:15 degree in response to some neighborhood comments, and
11:27:19 I think you'll hear some of those today, there's still
11:27:21 some concerns about that, that there was a -- if you
11:27:27 will, a compromise reached that would allow for an
11:27:30 administrative approval for wet zonings within mall,
11:27:35 but only those where the hours of operations are, they
11:27:37 close before midnight and only for those with
11:27:41 restricted wet zonings, so it would be restaurant-type
11:27:46 activities.

11:27:47 We are here to ask you to consider going back to the
11:27:53 original idea, which would be allow for administrative
11:27:56 approvals of alcoholic beverages -- alcohol beverage
11:28:03 premises only within malls, not -- we're not talking
11:28:07 about other types of alcoholic beverage
11:28:11 establishments.
11:28:12 Because we really haven't -- the compromise didn't
11:28:15 really accomplish anything, because we find that most
11:28:18 of the restaurants and other establishments do want to
11:28:22 stay open past midnight.
11:28:24 We also because of the nature of malls, we are
11:28:29 constantly coming before you.
11:28:31 We've had literally dozens of wet zoning applications
11:28:35 from international plaza.
11:28:37 And the idea was to try and cut down on just the
11:28:41 frequency of those types of applications.
11:28:43 We also believe because they are in a mall and I think
11:28:48 the logic behind this type of request was that it
11:28:52 would not have an external impact the way bars and
11:28:56 restaurants might if they are fronting directly on
11:28:59 public streets.
11:29:00 So we would ask for Council's consideration of this

11:29:04 request, and we would like the opportunity to work
11:29:06 with interested people to see if there's a way to iron
11:29:11 out what their concerns are and still try and
11:29:13 accomplish this administrative approval process.
11:29:16 Thank you.
11:29:23 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 13 those storage miniwarehouse
11:29:28 facilities within the Channel District.
11:29:30 So it's a similar amendment, almost verbatim in the
11:29:33 language.
11:29:34 And Jim Porter is actually the agent for that.
11:29:38 >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Council members, Jim
11:29:40 Porter, ruden McClosky, 401 east Jackson Street.
11:29:43 I realize time is short.
11:29:45 This is a similar request that Mr. Mechanik made, only
11:29:48 it's in the Channel District.
11:29:49 Currently, miniwarehouse is prohibited in the Channel
11:29:52 District, although warehouse uses are allowed but not
11:29:56 miniwarehouse.
11:29:56 Mr. Dingfelder, the intent is to incorporate it into
11:29:58 the building.
11:29:59 It would not be like the self-storage units you see in
11:30:02 other parts of the city or in the county.

11:30:03 You wouldn't know it's there.
11:30:05 Otherwise, the criteria are the same.
11:30:06 The intent is to create specific performance standards
11:30:09 to protect the public.
11:30:11 At the citizen meeting, there was a comment about
11:30:13 hazardous materials.
11:30:14 Of course, that was never the intent.
11:30:16 I added that as one of the performance standards.
11:30:18 If Council chooses to send both this one and tab 11
11:30:22 forward, Mr. Mechanik and I will work with Ms. Coyle
11:30:25 to make sure the language is substantially similar
11:30:27 enough that there are no glitches in it.
11:30:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How we're going to temporarily use
11:30:33 the empty apartments?
11:30:36 [ LAUGHTER ]
11:30:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena and Mulhern.
11:30:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know that -- thank you.
11:30:39 I know that downtown we have the design review
11:30:43 incorporated and CBD one and two.
11:30:46 In the Channel District, do we have urban -- do we
11:30:49 have design standards?
11:30:50 Do we have review by the city's urban designer?

11:30:53 >> I believe the channel district guidelines I believe
11:30:55 would -- yeah.
11:30:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
11:30:57 >> That's the intent, certainly.
11:30:59 If that needs to be made explicit, we'd be happy to
11:31:01 have that.
11:31:02 My understanding was that's part of it, and we'd have
11:31:04 to comply with those.
11:31:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I actually would like that to be
11:31:07 explicit in both 11 and 13 to say that the external
11:31:11 appearance of the structure will be reviewed by the
11:31:13 city's urban designer.
11:31:14 I think you're right, it's implicit, but let's put it
11:31:17 out there so everybody is clear.
11:31:19 >> Thank you.
11:31:23 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The final tab is Ms. Kathy Davey
11:31:26 with the Port Authority.
11:31:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry.
11:31:28 I'm going back to the storage thing, because it seems
11:31:32 very ironic to me that we approve -- tab 11, all of
11:31:38 this mixed use and residential development to happen
11:31:44 in a warehouse district.

11:31:46 So now, because that wasn't such a successful idea,
11:31:55 now we're going to go back to allowing 40%.
11:31:59 I just don't think 40% of a project.
11:32:01 All I can think is that we're -- I mean, are we
11:32:04 literally saying, okay, now we want to add a use
11:32:08 administratively to residential mixed use of storage?
11:32:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I respond?
11:32:18 I really do see this as a temporary thing.
11:32:20 The cost per square foot is down there.
11:32:22 When the market comes back, if they are temporarily
11:32:25 for the next year or two going to use some of those
11:32:28 apartments for self-storage, they are just going to
11:32:30 get one quarter of the value that they could otherwise
11:32:34 get.
11:32:34 And when the market comes back, the self-storage will
11:32:37 be gone and they'll start selling and renting the
11:32:39 apartments again.
11:32:40 That's the Channelside one, not the downtown.
11:32:44 >>MARY MULHERN: If all of the decisions on all this
11:32:46 rezoning that's happened over the housing bubble had
11:32:51 worked out to be, you know, worked out, I wouldn't
11:32:55 have a problem.

11:32:56 But I just see that that's saying, okay, we're never
11:33:00 going to be able to rent the apartments, so let's
11:33:01 create another new use.
11:33:03 And I just don't think of that as part of the plan.
11:33:07 I mean, you-all adopted this plan.
11:33:10 I didn't.
11:33:10 But you did adopt the plan, and I never really thought
11:33:13 that going back to storage and warehouses after we ran
11:33:18 all the artisan warehouses out of there.
11:33:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Consider this as part of our
11:33:25 bailout.
11:33:28 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If I could, Catherine Coyle, Land
11:33:30 Development.
11:33:31 Just to clarify, the storage in the CBD downtown, it's
11:33:34 listed as an S-2, which comes before Council, special
11:33:37 use 2 or as a site plan controlled district.
11:33:40 So it's not administrative downtown.
11:33:42 Just to clarify, the requirements in the Channel
11:33:44 District, the Channel District is a mixed-use
11:33:46 district.
11:33:47 It runs all the way from single-family residential to
11:33:49 warehouse.

11:33:50 That is kind of the irony of the Channel District is
11:33:53 warehousing and industrial uses are allowed.
11:33:56 You can actually have 100% warehouse building.
11:33:59 He's asking for 40% miniwarehouse.
11:34:01 So that's kind of the irony.
11:34:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: May not be a real issue if you allow
11:34:10 warehouses --
11:34:12 >> Really, the residential use drives the
11:34:13 miniwarehouse use.
11:34:15 There's no market unless there's substantial amounts
11:34:17 of people renting the apartments.
11:34:18 So, yes, commissioner, or Council members, it is,
11:34:22 perhaps, a temporary use.
11:34:23 But in the meantime, if there are no people living
11:34:25 there, there would be no need for the ministorage.
11:34:29 People move into smaller places and have to store
11:34:31 their goods, so the market drives -- the residential
11:34:34 market is driving this particular use.
11:34:36 Warehouses allowed, we're asking for miniwarehouse to
11:34:40 be considered as well.
11:34:43 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The final tab is for the Port
11:34:45 Authority.

11:34:56 >> Good morning.
11:34:56 I'm Kathy Davey.
11:34:57 I represent the Tampa Port Authority.
11:34:59 The zoning amendments at the Port Authority as
11:35:03 proposing will not only help the Tampa Port Authority,
11:35:06 it will benefit all of the businesses and industries
11:35:09 that do business out of the Port of Tampa.
11:35:11 The existing ordinance requires that open storage be
11:35:15 screened behind a fence and that items can't be
11:35:18 stacked higher than six feet tall.
11:35:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, due to the time
11:35:36 constraints, this one seems pretty straightforward.
11:35:38 May want to defer to the public.
11:35:42 >> Public hearing.
11:35:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.
11:35:43 Till when the public speaks and see if there's any
11:35:45 kind of rebuttal.
11:35:46 Just to save time.
11:35:47 I thought, Mr. Chairman, that might help.
11:35:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to start the public part of
11:35:55 the presentation.
11:35:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I ask her one question?

11:36:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
11:36:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Is this Port Tampa or the Port of
11:36:02 Tampa?
11:36:03 >> This is the Port of Tampa.
11:36:06 >>MARY MULHERN: It says Port Tampa.
11:36:07 You're not talking about that neighborhood
11:36:08 specifically.
11:36:08 >> No, we're talking about Hooker's Point.
11:36:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:36:14 Yes, sir.
11:36:16 >> Excuse me.
11:36:17 Good morning, my name is Tim Shusta, 100 south Ashley
11:36:22 drive, suite 1900.
11:36:23 I'm here to speak briefly in support of the zoning
11:36:26 amendment that the port authority is asking for.
11:36:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: move to Allow the public to -- move
11:36:29 to allow the public to speak for the next 30 minutes.
11:36:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You don't need a motion.
11:36:34 It's part of the rules anyway.
11:36:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Kind of jumped the gun there.
11:36:38 >> I'm sorry.
11:36:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The chair did not ask for public

11:36:40 comment yet.
11:36:41 Trying to finish with the applicant.
11:36:42 >> Well, if you want to hear me now, you can hear me
11:36:45 now or I'll wait.
11:36:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:36:49 We'll take public comment?
11:36:51 >> Okay, thank you.
11:36:51 I represent the Port of Tampa maritime industries
11:36:54 association.
11:36:55 I'm president of that association.
11:36:57 We represent 62 companies that are tenants and users at
11:37:02 the Port of Tampa.
11:37:03 These are the companies that bring the cargo into the
11:37:07 Port of Tampa, repair the ships that come to the Port
11:37:09 of Tampa.
11:37:10 And provide hundreds of jobs at high wages at the Port
11:37:15 of Tampa.
11:37:15 And we think this zoning amendment is needed to -- so
11:37:20 that those things can continue, that this is an
11:37:23 industrial area and the six-foot rule simply doesn't
11:37:26 make sense for this area.
11:37:28 And I would add one other thing, if you take a look

11:37:32 some day at the Port of Tampa maritime industry's
11:37:34 association Web site, we say at the top, the City of
11:37:36 Tampa, proud to be a seaport.
11:37:38 And we hope this Council is proud to be in a city that
11:37:41 has a seaport.
11:37:42 >> We are, thank you.
11:37:50 >> My name is Sue Lyon.
11:37:52 I'm representing T.H.A.N.
11:37:55 And you all have gotten our comments.
11:37:58 I'll go over them very briefly.
11:38:00 The crematory regulations, there are some
11:38:05 typographical errors that we want to just bring to
11:38:09 your attention.
11:38:09 I already talked with Cathy about them.
11:38:11 But we'd like to put residentially zoned property as
11:38:16 well as historic districts.
11:38:20 Under accessory uses, it shows flashing "occulting"
11:38:27 sign rather than oscillating sign.
11:38:30 We don't know anybody who wants an "occult" sign in
11:38:32 their neighborhood.
11:38:37 Cathy said it's been there forever and Nobody ever
11:38:37 noticed it until we started going.

11:38:39 I hate to tell you all, we meet hour after hour after
11:38:43 hour and read these things.
11:38:45 You can't believe how much time we spend on these
11:38:47 things.
11:38:48 Tab two, the waterfront lot regulations.
11:38:57 Than suggests that this be removed in order to allow
11:39:00 affected neighborhoods to meet with City Council and
11:39:02 have input.
11:39:03 Big article in the paper today, and you're going to
11:39:07 get lots of people calling that are upset one way or
11:39:10 the other.
11:39:10 This is my personal opinion.
11:39:16 I think it's too much to expect staff to go out and
11:39:20 meet with the individual neighborhoods.
11:39:22 If you've got 11 neighborhoods and expecting Cathy to
11:39:26 spend time going to each neighborhood individually at
11:39:29 their meeting, I think that's putting an onerous
11:39:32 burden on her.
11:39:33 I think the neighbors should be informed.
11:39:37 I think they should be contacted.
11:39:39 It's an important thing to them.
11:39:41 If you're taking ten feet out of their property or

11:39:44 twenty feet out of their property, you're changing the
11:39:47 way they live, and it's only a certain area of the
11:39:49 river.
11:39:49 You know me, I'm the environmentalist from the other
11:39:54 side.
11:39:55 We don't say that word in front of Council.
11:39:57 But I think it's environmentally sound that you look
11:40:02 at this, but you need to talk to the people who own
11:40:04 property in this neighborhood.
11:40:05 The vendor regulation, I know you all have seen this,
11:40:14 and you've been beat to death with it.
11:40:16 But we took three years with Council --
11:40:22 [cell phone ringing]
11:40:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All cell phones turned off, please.
11:40:28 >> It's a noisy one, too.
11:40:29 They just now put in the ticketing thing.
11:40:31 I think it was the last Council that code enforcement
11:40:33 can ticket these people.
11:40:35 So they make the rules and live by it.
11:40:37 We spent hours and hours and hours getting this where
11:40:41 it is, and you haven't really had a chance for
11:40:43 everybody to settle down and figure out what they are

11:40:45 doing.
11:40:45 And Mr. Scott, I didn't know he had a barbecue place.
11:40:52 He's got his truck and he brings his barbecue thing,
11:40:57 that's one thing.
11:40:58 But, all right, I've got a little picnic table I'll
11:41:02 put next to my truck, and I'm going to have families
11:41:05 and little kids sitting there, okay, where are they
11:41:07 going to go to the bathroom?
11:41:09 Not everybody just drives up.
11:41:11 The reason we worked about the bathrooms is the
11:41:15 neighborhoods object because all these vendors, and
11:41:18 it's not one little guy, and sorry to be -- I'll go
11:41:26 one more step and I'll be out of here.
11:41:28 We approve of tab 5, tab 6 we've already done that
11:41:34 about doors facing the alley.
11:41:36 I want to make one comment on the malls and their
11:41:43 alcohol thing.
11:41:45 It makes it difficult for us to agree to compromise
11:41:49 things if the very next time we get together they want
11:41:52 to change the compromise.
11:41:53 So if they expect us to compromise on anything,
11:41:56 they've got to live with their compromises and not

11:41:58 bring out the big guns and say, oh, we really didn't
11:42:01 mean that.
11:42:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
11:42:04 Thank you.
11:42:05 Ms. Lyon, I don't own a barbecue stand, but I will say
11:42:13 in East Tampa, most of the barbecue stands I see don't
11:42:18 have picnic tables on the side.
11:42:20 They are pretty much -- the complaints we've been
11:42:22 getting is they are pretty much those that pull up.
11:42:25 At the end of the day, they pull off.
11:42:26 We cannot create the regulation to kill those vendors.
11:42:34 Some of them have lost their job and gone into this to
11:42:39 try to sustain to have employment.
11:42:41 So I just want us to be mindful of that.
11:42:44 I think staff has created a regulation that will I
11:42:47 think address and Ms. Coyle, you can speak to this if
11:42:53 you want to -- or Cathy -- to address both of the
11:42:56 issues.
11:42:57 Someone coming up to sit down, that's like a
11:42:59 restaurant.
11:42:59 So then, yes, you would need rest room facility.
11:43:03 We're talking about somebody pulling in, you come by,

11:43:05 pick up a sandwich and you keep going.
11:43:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.
11:43:09 Catherine Coyle, Land Development.
11:43:11 If the intent truly is to have the cart or the
11:43:14 barbecue pit where there are no tables, we can
11:43:17 certainly stress that language that there is no
11:43:18 seating allowed along with them.
11:43:24 >> Very quickly, I would add that one of the other
11:43:28 concerns was the size of the signage that is being
11:43:31 requested.
11:43:32 And also, the extension of hours.
11:43:34 Because they could still stop serving at a certain
11:43:37 time and then have time to clean up.
11:43:39 I think the closing time means that you close your
11:43:43 business.
11:43:44 You can still clean up.
11:43:46 But under that tab, regarding the vendors, I just
11:43:51 noticed, and I didn't notice the day of the meeting
11:43:54 and I don't know if it's always been there, but S-1
11:43:57 under OP and OP-1, which is professional office, we
11:44:02 have a lot of that around us.
11:44:04 And there's very little in the city itself, and I'm

11:44:07 not sure why OP and OP-1 were put in there as S-1
11:44:13 uses.
11:44:13 And I would really like you to consider -- everything
11:44:16 else is really a commercial -- a commercial property.
11:44:18 This is a professional office.
11:44:20 So that's a personal because than hadn't reviewed
11:44:25 this, I hadn't seen it until now.
11:44:28 As far as going back to the wet zonings at the malls,
11:44:30 once again, we just made that compromise.
11:44:32 Council, you must remember.
11:44:33 And now they are coming back to ask you again.
11:44:36 And I guess if you deny them again, they'll come back,
11:44:39 but, please, we did compromise on this.
11:44:41 This is not only concern from the neighborhood, but
11:44:45 there are those other businesses that want to sell
11:44:49 alcohol that feel that you have to go in a mall to get
11:44:52 it approved without coming to Council.
11:44:55 Please leave it as it is and don't change that one.
11:44:58 As far as the VRB, I'm now a little confused, because
11:45:03 what Rebecca said is that legally that you must have
11:45:10 those five conditions must be met.
11:45:14 I'm hearing Council say that you'd consider them.

11:45:19 Could we really get clarification on what that VRB, so
11:45:22 that the neighborhoods know what is what.
11:45:26 Everything else we really had -- we agreed with
11:45:30 everything else as far as the storage at the port.
11:45:33 Our big concern with the storage at the port is, for
11:45:36 example, in a hurricane, and they say that they pile
11:45:40 these 90-foot stacks of rocks.
11:45:47 In a hurricane, those rocks could be blown right into
11:45:49 the aquarium.
11:45:50 How do you protect the storage from not flying around?
11:45:53 And we did recommend to them that they go to the
11:45:57 Channel District and Harbour Island, those residents,
11:45:59 and talk to them about this and explain to them what
11:46:03 they might be seeing in the future.
11:46:05 And we just also asked them at that time that they
11:46:09 find out what other ports do and how they manage not
11:46:14 to have this stuff blowing around or -- not right
11:46:22 where they could damage other property.
11:46:24 Those were our concerns about the port.
11:46:26 Other than that, I think sue covered most of the
11:46:29 others, and there are still other members who will
11:46:31 bring other issues.

11:46:32 But, please, with the OP, OP-1 and vendors, please
11:46:35 remove that and please don't change the mall issue.
11:46:38 We just got that one accomplished.
11:46:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Kert.
11:46:44 Ms. Rebecca still here?
11:46:45 Attorney from the city here, someone want to address
11:46:49 the issue?
11:46:56 >>REBECCA KERT: What was the question?
11:46:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The question was about the issue on
11:47:02 the five issues that must be met in order to declare a
11:47:07 hardship.
11:47:09 Misunderstanding, is that right?
11:47:12 >> Well, at one point she said it must be met and then
11:47:17 this says it should be considered.
11:47:18 So what is it?
11:47:21 >>REBECCA KERT: They are the mandatory criteria.
11:47:22 You have to consider each and every one of them when
11:47:24 you're making the determination whether there's an
11:47:26 unnecessary hardship or an undue -- a practical
11:47:30 difficulty or an unnecessary hardship.
11:47:32 You must consider all five of them.
11:47:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Consider.

11:47:39 >>REBECCA KERT: You can't ignore any of them.
11:47:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's how it reads.
11:47:46 Shall consider.
11:47:47 >> Good morning, Chairman scott, council.
11:47:48 My name is Gary Ellsworth.
11:47:51 I'm With south Seminole Heights Civic Association.
11:47:54 I'm up here to address tab two, which is waterfront
11:47:58 regulations.
11:47:59 I also find myself compelled to talk briefly about tab
11:48:02 3 vendors, specifically washroom facilities.
11:48:05 While we're wringing our hands about washroom
11:48:08 facilities, please keep in mind about washing our
11:48:10 hands.
11:48:11 I'm not sure if this is the intent of the ordinance,
11:48:13 but I know I would feel more comfortable if somebody
11:48:16 cooking my food for hours had some place they could
11:48:19 wash their hands once in a while.
11:48:20 That seemed to have been missed completely in the
11:48:23 discussion.
11:48:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I tell you what, if I'm going to go to
11:48:25 a place, either I'm going to trust them to use rubber
11:48:30 gloves or I don't buy from them.

11:48:32 >> On waterfront regulations, I have a couple of
11:48:36 concerns on this as a neighborhood leader.
11:48:38 Number one, I don't know if property owners have been
11:48:42 notified of this in any way other than if they read
11:48:45 the Tribune this morning.
11:48:46 I knew about it, but I'm not sure if property owners
11:48:52 did.
11:48:52 And maybe Ms. Coyle and her diligent staff set a high
11:48:58 bar when we did the former base zone project where
11:49:01 they mailed out notices to everybody in Seminole
11:49:03 Heights to tell them about this project.
11:49:05 I think that this also deserves the same consideration
11:49:07 for those who would be impacted that they receive some
11:49:11 type of notification so that they have the opportunity
11:49:13 to come and speak.
11:49:15 I'm not a property owner on the river, but I have
11:49:17 several neighbors who are.
11:49:19 The other question I have is why Columbus Drive.
11:49:23 Why are we only worried about impact from the river
11:49:26 north of Columbus Drive and not south of Columbus
11:49:29 Drive.
11:49:30 And these are just the things that, you know, just

11:49:34 questions out there that I think property owners need
11:49:40 to know and need to have an opportunity to come and
11:49:42 speak.
11:49:42 Probably not between 10:30 and 12:00 on a weekday.
11:49:46 Thank you.
11:49:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to say all the Civic
11:49:54 Association leaders of all the neighborhoods that
11:49:56 fronted on the river were told about this and whether
11:49:59 they let their constituents know, I don't know.
11:50:02 >> Susan long, 920 broad street.
11:50:05 Let me clarify by saying I'm speaking for myself, not
11:50:08 for the Neighborhood Association in this case.
11:50:09 I took the liberty when I heard about this of personal
11:50:14 flyering every single waterfront property in old
11:50:18 Seminole Heights.
11:50:19 I received -- some people talked to me face to face.
11:50:21 Other people sent me e-mail.
11:50:23 I have to tell you, there is a difference of opinion.
11:50:25 The difference of opinion as to whether or not this
11:50:27 should be approved tends, from what I can see, depend
11:50:32 on the depth of the lot.
11:50:33 If they have a two, three hundred foot lot, that's

11:50:36 great.
11:50:37 Hundred foot lot, they are not nearly as excited.
11:50:39 I had a couple of people write me.
11:50:41 They asked if I would read their comments into the
11:50:43 record and I would like to do so.
11:50:45 My name is James Schuster, 312 east Hollywood street,
11:50:49 Tampa, a Hillsborough River front property.
11:50:52 Please voice my opposition to the proposed riverfront
11:50:54 property setback to 30 feet.
11:50:56 I am not sure what the reasoning is behind this
11:50:57 change, but I spoke with the office of Catherine Coyle
11:51:00 and was told it was for the prevention of yard waste
11:51:02 into the river.
11:51:03 Needless to say, I'm not happy with the thought of
11:51:05 giving up an additional 25 feet of my valuable
11:51:08 buildable riverfront property for nothing.
11:51:10 I'm also disturbed there was no advance notice of the
11:51:12 workshop.
11:51:13 I only received the letter Sunday the 21st.
11:51:16 I wish I had known sooner to attend the workshop and
11:51:19 get a better understanding of this matter.
11:51:21 Regards, james Schuster.

11:51:22 This is from Kenneth and Karen Bullard.
11:51:25 334 West Rio vista court, Tampa, Florida.
11:51:28 As lifelong Tampa residents, we fulfilled the dream 19
11:51:31 years ago and bought a house on Hillsborough River.
11:51:34 It seems like ever since that time, the government has
11:51:36 chipped away our inalienable rights.
11:51:39 Enough is enough.
11:51:40 Just because we happen to live on the river does not
11:51:42 mean we are elite and/or rich.
11:51:46 We have worked a lifetime to live where we want to
11:51:47 live.
11:51:47 And for you to take away our rights in property is
11:51:49 unconscionable.
11:51:51 The last one I got after I had left my house, so I
11:51:52 didn't get to print it out, but it showed up in my
11:51:53 e-mail.
11:51:54 It said, Thank you for the opportunity to comment via
11:51:56 e-mail on this proposal.
11:51:57 It would seem that to make this change without
11:52:00 contacting all of the property owners who would be
11:52:03 affected by this change would be a little shortsighted
11:52:06 unless the plan is to slip it in while no one is

11:52:10 looking.
11:52:10 I would suggest a six-month hold on this plan while
11:52:13 all of the affected property owners are contacted and
11:52:15 given a reasonable period of time to comment.
11:52:17 There is no urgency which would require action at the
11:52:20 present -- at the present time.
11:52:21 Along with other riverfront property owners who are
11:52:24 unable to be with you today, I request a time out to
11:52:29 allow consideration by those who are affected.
11:52:31 Alfred A. swan the fourth.
11:52:33 7508 park drive, Tampa, Florida, 33610.
11:52:37 Personally, I think there's a wide difference of
11:52:42 opinion depending on where you live.
11:52:44 As Mr. Ellsworth stated, there's serious concern about
11:52:47 why it stops at Columbus.
11:52:50 What is it north that north of columbus you can do
11:52:52 what you want to and south of it -- you know, you can
11:52:54 do what you want to in south, but you can't -- it's a
11:52:54 prevailing opinion.
11:52:55 I don't think that's accurate, but I've had that
11:52:57 statement made to me numerous times.
11:53:00 This is stated as a waterfront property item and yet

11:53:02 it only deals with the river.
11:53:04 There's lots of waterfront.
11:53:06 We were told it was because they were starting to
11:53:08 build minimansions up north on the river.
11:53:12 There are lots of minimansions south.
11:53:15 If we do it, let's make it even across the way.
11:53:17 On the vendor item, page 10, it indicates that the
11:53:21 vendors are not allowed within the old Seminole
11:53:23 Heights local historic district or this local, as you
11:53:27 know, there are some local historic districts that may
11:53:30 be approved in the future.
11:53:32 I recommend that that part be written just to say
11:53:35 within local historic districts, every time you add
11:53:38 one, you don't have to rewrite it.
11:53:40 Just a suggestion.
11:53:41 Thank you.
11:53:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:53:42 Next speaker.
11:53:47 >> Good morning, Council.
11:53:48 I'm mike brooker.
11:53:50 I live on the Hillsborough River, and have for almost
11:53:53 20 years.

11:53:54 I own four properties on the water.
11:53:55 Due to time, I'll try to be real brief.
11:53:58 A couple of things that were brought up that I'd like
11:54:01 to comment and then finish on my comments.
11:54:03 I'm not speaking for any association, even though I do
11:54:06 own property in two associations, I had not been
11:54:08 contacted, so I don't want you all to think all the
11:54:11 residents who live on the water have been contacted by
11:54:11 their association.
11:54:16 there were comments earlier about decks -- the written
11:54:21 part.
11:54:21 I think there was a misunderstanding.
11:54:22 Some decks are solid surface decks, impervious.
11:54:25 Some decks are wooden decks where water can flow
11:54:28 through.
11:54:28 So I think that would be a clarification in the
11:54:30 terminology.
11:54:31 Also, the Columbus Drive was brought up.
11:54:34 I own property north and south of it.
11:54:36 I do know that south of Columbus, I think 11 or 12
11:54:42 houses so not affected very much.
11:54:44 And I think the largest house down south of there is

11:54:47 3200 square feet.
11:54:48 I don't consider that a minimansion.
11:54:50 It's not mine.
11:54:51 Mine is smaller than that.
11:54:52 I do own a lot also on the river.
11:54:54 And if this was made 30-foot instead of what it
11:54:59 currently is, it would become a nonbuildable lot.
11:55:01 And I just paid $310,000 for it.
11:55:04 I wouldn't be too happy about that.
11:55:06 I think that should be considered.
11:55:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How deep is that lot?
11:55:13 >> I bought it about a year and a half ago.
11:55:15 I do not know the answer to that, sir.
11:55:17 Little less than hundred.
11:55:21 It really would make an unbuildable lot.
11:55:24 Some things to consider also, as far as impact on the
11:55:32 residence as far as how much greenspace.
11:55:34 Greenspace is good.
11:55:36 I'm an environmentalist.
11:55:37 But it's brought up, you put more grass out there, you
11:55:39 have to put herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers.
11:55:43 I don't know what you put in front of it, ten feet.

11:55:46 Probably put trees or shrubs.
11:55:49 You still have to take care of them.
11:55:51 I don't know what else you put out there besides rock.
11:55:54 That would not be more green.
11:55:55 It would be less green.
11:55:56 Something to think about.
11:55:59 Also, a lot you couldn't build on, become less worth,
11:56:03 less taxes for the community.
11:56:05 And also -- you know, there are a lot of pluses and
11:56:13 minuses and I don't want to go on any more.
11:56:15 Not speaking for anyone, but like you to consider it
11:56:18 because there are 11 or 13 communities involved from
11:56:21 there all the way up to the boundaries of the city.
11:56:24 They are all different.
11:56:25 I've been on the river 20 years boating and you go
11:56:28 from an area maybe 400-foot wide up to 50-foot wide.
11:56:32 And there are different regulations in all of those.
11:56:34 I don't think one bill will fit all needs.
11:56:37 Thank you.
11:56:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:56:44 >> Good afternoon.
11:56:45 Shawn college.

11:56:45 601 East Kennedy Boulevard.
11:56:47 I'm speaking to you today in my capacity as staff to
11:56:50 the Hillsborough River interlocal planning board and
11:56:53 technical advisory Council.
11:56:54 This issue did come before them on a number of
11:56:57 occasions.
11:56:58 Staff of the city did attend and there was a good
11:57:00 discussion on more than one occasion.
11:57:02 I would want to point out a couple of things.
11:57:05 Firstly, there is representation on the Hillsborough
11:57:07 River board of citizens that live on the river.
11:57:10 So you should know that.
11:57:11 The TAC and river board in particular their interest
11:57:17 is the protection of the integrity of the river, and
11:57:20 also they think there's a valid concern for trying to
11:57:22 have consistent regulations between jurisdictions on
11:57:25 the river.
11:57:26 During their discussions of the item, they did have a
11:57:29 consensus that they were in support of what was being
11:57:33 proposed currently by staff.
11:57:34 A couple of things came up in the discussion that I
11:57:38 wanted to point out to you as well, is that

11:57:40 Hillsborough County has a 30-foot setback on the books
11:57:43 now for freshwater wetlands or freshwater areas along
11:57:47 the river.
11:57:48 Actually whether saltwater influence, it's 50-foot.
11:57:51 Also interestingly enough, in Temple Terrace, which is
11:57:54 also adjacent to the city on the river, lots after
11:57:58 1987 have a 25-foot setback.
11:58:01 Lots platted after 1999 in Temple Terrace have a
11:58:04 200-foot setback from the river.
11:58:06 So I think we're moving in the right direction.
11:58:09 From what the river board has been stating in their
11:58:12 discussions and their consensus to try to bring things
11:58:15 more consistent and more adequate for the protection
11:58:17 of the river.
11:58:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The only question, though, is -- not
11:58:23 necessarily a question to you -- but the size of the
11:58:26 lots -- most of the lots in the county much larger
11:58:31 lots than they are in the city.
11:58:33 So you have to take that into consideration.
11:58:34 Hillsborough County, we could do 30-foot setback.
11:58:41 >> That's correct.
11:58:41 And as you stated, also, in all these jurisdictions,

11:58:44 where there would be a hardship, because of the small
11:58:46 lots, they are issuing variances.
11:58:50 It doesn't prevent them from construction.
11:58:55 >> Good morning, Council.
11:58:56 Gary brown, 114 south Oregon.
11:58:59 I also own property on the Hillsborough River at 1208
11:59:03 west charter.
11:59:04 I stood before you during the last cycle, made you
11:59:07 aware of the fact that there wasn't enough public
11:59:08 awareness of the issue.
11:59:10 The conversation as it occurred amongst Council
11:59:11 members, as I recall, was we needed to step back,
11:59:16 contact stakeholders, property owners, et cetera, get
11:59:18 their input.
11:59:19 Council -- excuse me, staff is doing the best job they
11:59:22 can with the resources that we have.
11:59:23 We understand that.
11:59:24 It's still very obvious, based on the -- that people
11:59:28 don't know about this, don't know enough about this.
11:59:31 I don't want to repeat that again.
11:59:33 One of the issues that I did raise or one of the
11:59:35 questions I did raise in the last two workshops, which

11:59:38 were attended by four property owners at the first one
11:59:40 and maybe five or six at the second, was how many
11:59:43 property owners are we affecting.
11:59:46 Guess was somewhere around 600.
11:59:48 Just to satisfy my own curiosity, I contacted the
11:59:52 Hillsborough County property appraiser's office, and I
11:59:54 have a list that I'll submit to you.
11:59:57 It's over 900.
11:59:58 I think in light of all of these comments and
12:00:03 conversations, the best thing to do is get directly to
12:00:06 these people.
12:00:07 Give them an opportunity to weigh in, and I think we
12:00:09 should be looking for ways to increase property values
12:00:12 and enhance our tax revenue and not decrease it.
12:00:15 Thank you.
12:00:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
12:00:18 Next speaker.
12:00:20 >> Steve Michelini.
12:00:21 There are a couple of issues I'd like to address.
12:00:23 One of them is the wetland setback issue.
12:00:25 First of all, it's a complicated issue.
12:00:27 It's not easily understood.

12:00:29 And when you start applying 2008 jurisdictional issues
12:00:35 and regulations to lots that were platted in the
12:00:38 '20s and the '30s and houses that were developed,
12:00:42 you're going to obviously run into problems.
12:00:44 When you start squeezing that envelope and I know
12:00:46 you're concerned about height issues, but when you
12:00:49 squeeze the envelope and you also have to apply the
12:00:53 flood zone regulations, going to inevitable cause the
12:00:56 houses to get higher, which is going to block the
12:00:59 views and the other things that you want to protect.
12:01:03 We have other concerns about protecting with the City
12:01:05 Code.
12:01:06 Cautiously.
12:01:09 This is not the time to move forward with this.
12:01:11 There's a lot of work that has to be done and a lot of
12:01:13 considerations have to be made.
12:01:14 You have both hard surface areas along the river that
12:01:18 are seawalls.
12:01:20 You have riprap and ground that gracefully terminates
12:01:28 into the water.
12:01:29 You have a lot of other issues that are affecting this
12:01:31 that need to be looked at.

12:01:32 In terms of the multifamily town house layout issue,
12:01:36 if you remember, we talked about naming the alleys,
12:01:42 ways and alleys, giving them names so that people have
12:01:48 pride in them so they maintain them, so they convert
12:01:51 them.
12:01:51 I know we've taken some of the Council members on
12:01:53 tours to show you what can happen when you effectively
12:01:56 utilize an alley, you landscape it, and it becomes a
12:01:59 means of access.
12:02:01 If it has a name, it can have an address.
12:02:04 I think the issue that you had before was, especially
12:02:07 in the older neighborhoods, was the alleys had become
12:02:11 places to hang out.
12:02:12 Sources of prostitution, drugs, and crime.
12:02:14 When you use an alley on an effective basis, routinely
12:02:19 you eliminate those things.
12:02:20 You don't dump trash in your front yard.
12:02:23 So if you start eliminating the use of those alleys,
12:02:26 then what you've done is effectively turned us back
12:02:31 into an area in an era when the alleys were being used
12:02:36 for nefarious purposes.
12:02:38 Our intent here is to clean them up and have them

12:02:40 used.
12:02:42 Development comes in, they are required to pave those
12:02:44 alleys to City of Tampa standards for access for
12:02:47 emergency vehicles.
12:02:48 They are also required to provide access from the
12:02:50 front to the back for emergency access.
12:02:54 Before we start talking about redesigning the rest of
12:02:57 Tampa because of one area that may not be desirable,
12:03:00 this code applies citywide.
12:03:02 So when you want to start using it in Tampa Heights or
12:03:05 in the East Tampa, you're not going to be able to use
12:03:08 it and your eliminating a significant means of
12:03:10 cleaning up the alleys.
12:03:11 The third issue is the VRB I think -- I'm not sure, as
12:03:17 Margaret pointed out.
12:03:18 I'm not sure what the rules are or what they are
12:03:22 proposing be done.
12:03:23 I would like clarification on that.
12:03:24 Finally, on the wet zoning issue, you've got a $500
12:03:28 penalty in there for people who are late.
12:03:30 That's punitive.
12:03:31 It's not meant to be -- I mean, it should be something

12:03:34 less than punitive.
12:03:35 It's meant to damage people.
12:03:37 Most of the ones that are your violators are small
12:03:40 businesses that for whatever fault, either because
12:03:43 they have a bookkeeper or they have a time problem,
12:03:47 and I appreciate that they've extended it to 30 days
12:03:50 now.
12:03:50 But these are small businesses that you're affecting
12:03:53 with a $500 penalty.
12:03:55 It's not a fee.
12:03:56 It's a penalty.
12:03:57 And I urge you to address that issue.
12:04:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:04:03 Next speaker.
12:04:06 >> Good afternoon Council members.
12:04:08 Grace Yang, 201 North Franklin street, Tampa, Florida.
12:04:12 I'm here to speak about tab 12.
12:04:14 I'm here representing Glimcher properties limited
12:04:19 partnership, which owns the Westshore plaza mall.
12:04:23 We're here to speak in support of the proposal that
12:04:26 Tampa Westshore Associates through Mechanik Nuccio is
12:04:29 proposing.

12:04:29 To the best of my recollection, when this issue first
12:04:34 came up in the last tech amendment cycle, the midnight
12:04:38 close that's been imposed on the restaurants under an
12:04:41 S-1 process, I think that midnight closing hour was
12:04:44 something that came up very late in the course of the
12:04:47 discussions.
12:04:48 And certainly, Westshore plaza mall was not -- was not
12:04:54 agreeing to be bound by any compromise on that issue.
12:05:00 You may recall at the time that I did appear before
12:05:04 Council to ask that Council reconsider this in the
12:05:08 July text amendment cycle to see if we could allow the
12:05:12 restaurants under the S-1 process to be open past
12:05:15 midnight on certain days of the year.
12:05:18 The midnight close, 365 days a year is a bit
12:05:23 burdensome on restaurants, on specific days of the
12:05:26 year when they would like to be open a little later
12:05:29 for parties and such.
12:05:30 I do hope that Council will allow us to continue to
12:05:35 work with city staff and to work with the
12:05:38 neighborhoods to try to see if we can reach some
12:05:42 additional agreement to try to move away from the
12:05:45 midnight close, 365 days a year.

12:05:47 And to see if there are ways that we can work to get
12:05:54 less of these mall special use permit requests before
12:05:59 Council to be able to allow businesses to be slotted
12:06:04 in and out of the malls for the businesses.
12:06:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have three gentlemen on the wall.
12:06:12 After that, we will not take any more public comment.
12:06:14 Our rules call that we allow for 30 minutes.
12:06:16 We've gone past that.
12:06:18 I'll allow the last three gentlemen.
12:06:19 After that, we'll close public hearing and then we'll
12:06:22 take action so we can let you all go to lunch.
12:06:27 You kept saying the S-1, through the S-1 process,
12:06:31 which is the administrative process, right?
12:06:33 >> Yes.
12:06:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it needs to be clear to
12:06:35 Council, it's not that we've got a blanket prohibition
12:06:40 on restaurants and later uses and that sort of thing.
12:06:44 It's just that I think what the neighborhoods want,
12:06:47 than especially has pushed for and the compromise that
12:06:50 we worked out, when it's going to be later than
12:06:53 midnight, it would come to Council.

12:06:55 And we've had a few of those, and, yes, you know, it
12:06:58 takes us a little time to work it through Council.
12:07:01 I think that's sort of the protection that the
12:07:03 community is asking for.
12:07:05 It's not really a question as much as a comment.
12:07:08 I think it's important to clarify that, that we're
12:07:11 not -- it's not a prohibition of malls, restaurants
12:07:14 after midnight.
12:07:15 It's just that those need to come to Council.
12:07:18 Was that an S-2?
12:07:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Actually, the way the language was
12:07:24 put in, it would be on appeal.
12:07:25 We would deny it and then they'd ask for the extra
12:07:28 hours form you.
12:07:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe if you want to do it straight
12:07:31 up as S-2, if that still exists.
12:07:33 I don't know.
12:07:36 >> The way I understand it under the way chapter 27
12:07:38 currently reads on this is, if you have a restaurant --
12:07:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, ma'am, we can't get into debate
12:07:43 on this.
12:07:44 It's public comment.

12:07:45 You had your three minutes.
12:07:46 It's not open for debate.
12:07:49 >> Thank you.
12:07:49 Appreciate the time.
12:07:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:07:54 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to say before we close the
12:07:58 public hearing, I did have a question for the port
12:08:00 representative.
12:08:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If you had a question, that's fine.
12:08:02 I want to make sure -- I want to get through with the
12:08:05 public comment and not take any more, unless Council
12:08:08 has questions because we'll be here until 1:00.
12:08:12 Mr. Johnson.
12:08:13 >> I'm Wofford Johnson, 4625 Longfellow Avenue.
12:08:19 First of all, I'd like to thank Cathy and Julia for
12:08:23 conducting that public information session last week.
12:08:25 It was very good, very informative, and we do
12:08:27 appreciate that.
12:08:28 I'd also like to thank than's zoning committee for the
12:08:32 effort they put in with the meetings and so forth and
12:08:36 sue and Margaret both outlined a few of the areas that
12:08:40 we have some concerns with.

12:08:41 I think you got an e-mail last night that really kind
12:08:49 of -- brief statement on each of the tabs from the
12:08:51 standpoint of what than's position is or is not.
12:08:55 In addition to that, I sent you an e-mail a couple of
12:08:57 days ago regarding the temporary vendors, and I'm not
12:09:01 going to go into that in detail now.
12:09:02 But I just would ask that you do look at those, both
12:09:05 those documents as we move forward.
12:09:09 With that being said, I have nothing else.
12:09:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
12:09:15 Next speaker.
12:09:18 >> Kurt Jurado.
12:09:21 1105 west Indiana.
12:09:23 Here about tab 2 and the river situation.
12:09:25 I do understand, lived on the river 50 years.
12:09:28 20 years my house now and 30 years with my parents.
12:09:32 I've seen the river bad, and I think it's getting
12:09:39 better every day.
12:09:40 The storm -- not the stormwater, but the sewer
12:09:42 pipeline that they did in the '80s was huge.
12:09:45 Used to go by the station on my boat and sometimes the
12:09:51 overflow of the sewage would be coming right into the

12:09:53 river.
12:09:54 When you fixed those pipes, the river has gotten
12:09:57 progressively great, better, since that time.
12:09:59 Obviously, the one thing we have left on the river is
12:10:02 the stormwater runoff from the streets and from the
12:10:04 yards and all that kind of stuff.
12:10:07 I understand that's a big problem, but by cutting back
12:10:14 on the few yards up and down the river, my personal
12:10:16 situation, I am three lots away from a 36-inch storm
12:10:19 drain.
12:10:20 So you're going to tell me and my six neighbors close
12:10:22 to the storm drain, we're going to stop your 30 feet,
12:10:26 in the meantime, that 36-foot storm drain drains 200
12:10:30 houses from up in the neighborhood.
12:10:31 That's going to be a hard fix.
12:10:34 I don't know if it can be fixed, guys.
12:10:36 I really don't know, unless you're prepared to buy the
12:10:39 land, buy the storm drains.
12:10:41 Because these storm drains go up and down the river
12:10:43 all the way up to the dam.
12:10:47 I'm against this.
12:10:48 I think that the river has gotten better, a whole lot

12:10:51 better since we fixed the sewer lines.
12:10:55 But by restricting just a few guys on the river and
12:10:59 not addressing the main storm drain problem, I don't
12:11:01 think it's going to help.
12:11:03 I think it's a very small percentage.
12:11:05 Thank you.
12:11:09 >> Hi, glad to see me as the last speaker?
12:11:11 I'm rich brown, 1214 park circle.
12:11:17 That's on the river.
12:11:18 Like some of the other speakers who also own a
12:11:24 buildable lot on the river.
12:11:25 That being said, I support the recommended changes to
12:11:29 the river overlay.
12:11:30 I think they are relatively mild, appropriately green,
12:11:35 and the benefits in the long run will be significant.
12:11:37 The river is a singular aspect for Tampa.
12:11:42 Anything that helps maintain or enhance its character
12:11:46 is worth doing.
12:11:47 I've seen other jurisdictions on a river, a canal,
12:11:51 intercoastal, where you get the concrete canyons that
12:11:54 can block out the sun.
12:11:55 That's starting to happen on some parts of the river

12:11:58 north.
12:11:59 You've certainly seen it happen on some of the streets
12:12:01 in south Tampa that have changed nature over the last
12:12:03 ten years.
12:12:04 My river neighbors and I have talked about this issue,
12:12:10 and our general consensus in our area, just speaking
12:12:13 for our area, is that in the long run, this will help,
12:12:17 help maintain the quality of the river, quality of
12:12:20 life, and in the long term, keep our property values
12:12:24 up.
12:12:25 Square footage is not the only measure of something
12:12:27 that's valuable.
12:12:28 To the argument that this is an intrusion of
12:12:31 government into property rights, I say the privilege
12:12:35 of living on the river goes with some
12:12:39 responsibilities.
12:12:39 More important and more difficult to maintain the
12:12:43 river quality than it is, say a street in some
12:12:47 residential neighborhood.
12:12:48 From being screened at the airport to speed bumps to
12:12:54 having to turn off my cell phone before I came in
12:12:56 here, individuals always have to give up some of their

12:13:01 options for the betterment of the whole community.
12:13:03 And I think these changes in river code are for the
12:13:09 benefit of the community and are worth doing as the
12:13:13 process goes along.
12:13:14 I strongly urge you to support them.
12:13:16 Thank you very much.
12:13:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There was a question.
12:13:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, my question for the --
12:13:25 [microphone not on] to neighborhoods and I think in
12:13:35 particular the Harbour Island and Davis Islands.
12:13:41 So I just wondered if you could address that concern.
12:13:46 >> Okay.
12:13:47 First, I'd like to point out on the map that the port
12:13:49 did not include in its exemption area Channelside area
12:13:54 where the port is.
12:13:57 On the other side of the channel to the west of the
12:13:58 channel where the Port Authority headquarters is,
12:14:01 because that does have those residential condos there.
12:14:05 As to the other areas of the port that's been there
12:14:08 operating for about a hundred years, but I have
12:14:10 Mr. Steve fiddler here.
12:14:13 He's our senior director of operations.

12:14:15 And he can address more specifically how the port
12:14:18 operates in dealing with stacking of material.
12:14:21 >>MARY MULHERN: And one other question.
12:14:23 Is this because you just realized that you weren't in
12:14:25 compliance?
12:14:27 Is that why this --
12:14:29 >> Yes, this came to our attention.
12:14:30 A tenant that was investigating property at the port
12:14:33 for their business had an outside attorney go through
12:14:38 everything that could possibly impact that.
12:14:40 The port, frankly, we didn't know that this was on the
12:14:43 books.
12:14:44 When you look at the ordinance, it's designed for
12:14:47 residential neighborhoods.
12:14:48 It talks about residences, houses next to each other,
12:14:54 fences, city residential fence six feet.
12:14:56 So it appears from the way it's been drafted that it
12:14:58 was a residential ordinance for those areas, and it
12:15:02 wasn't intended to impact an industrial area such as
12:15:05 the port.
12:15:05 So when it was brought to our attention at that point,
12:15:09 we needed to address it to make sure that we weren't

12:15:12 in a violation.
12:15:20 >> I'm Steve fiddler, the senior director of
12:15:22 operations at the Tampa Port Authority.
12:15:24 I've been there for 30 years, and the emergency
12:15:29 planning that we go through is rather extensive.
12:15:31 There are several committees that we use.
12:15:34 There's constant efforts done in the operating
12:15:37 procedures and processes that are applied.
12:15:38 We also look at where the particular cargoes are
12:15:44 staged and stored in relation to the adjoining
12:15:48 residential areas such as Harbour Island.
12:15:50 If you notice from the chart, this parking channel
12:15:53 area, everything across the channel from Harbour
12:15:55 Island is basically liquid petroleum.
12:16:01 There is one facility that uses its storage area
12:16:04 behind another structure that helps guard and protect
12:16:06 against any activity that might be imposed on it by
12:16:12 heavy winds.
12:16:12 You've got to look at the physics.
12:16:14 The physics of the natural friction of the material as
12:16:17 it's stacked on the ground and the fact that it slopes
12:16:20 down, it's generally not of any -- at any threat in

12:16:26 high winds.
12:16:26 If there is a threat to high winds and any commodity
12:16:29 that we look at, then we have regulations and rules
12:16:33 and procedures that need to apply where we lower that
12:16:37 stack, we mitigate it, put tarps over it, we do
12:16:40 whatever is necessary to mitigate it for any
12:16:42 particular threat that we've made to be imposed upon.
12:16:48 There are a lot of complexities to it.
12:16:50 The fact that the port itself has been around over a
12:16:53 hundred years and it's been primarily a bulk port,
12:16:57 meaning bulk aggregates, bulk phosphates, bulk
12:17:02 petroleum, general cargo in the containers that we do
12:17:05 today, in addition to all that, and, quite frankly,
12:17:08 the container being eight-foot height exceeds the
12:17:11 six-foot limit.
12:17:12 Even a single container overlooks this.
12:17:14 It's ironic that this ordinance actually would apply
12:17:22 to a heavy industrial area such as the port itself.
12:17:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:17:31 Thank you.
12:17:31 Thank you very much.
12:17:31 What I'd like to do now is close the public hearing.

12:17:35 >>GWEN MILLER: It's a workshop.
12:17:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, the workshop.
12:17:37 And then take each item and vote on them.
12:17:41 Motion to close?
12:17:44 >> Move to close.
12:17:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second.
12:17:47 All in favor, signify by aye.
12:17:50 Why don't we go down each one --
12:17:57 >> Tab by tab.
12:17:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Would you like to go tab by tab?
12:18:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
12:18:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: On tab one, Mr. Chairman, I'd like
12:18:03 to ask the staff to include the recommendation from
12:18:06 than on 500, any residentially zoned property --
12:18:13 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Let me clarify that it should be
12:18:17 residentially used property.
12:18:19 --
12:18:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me ask a question, since you've
12:18:22 been going.
12:18:23 I need to know -- I need to know how staff looked at
12:18:27 what than submitted.
12:18:29 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It was handed to me right before

12:18:30 the workshop.
12:18:31 I have glanced through it.
12:18:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have concerns about that, whether
12:18:34 you had opportunity to review that.
12:18:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But they've discussed it.
12:18:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, listen, at the end of the day,
12:18:41 staff made recommendation to this board, and I want to
12:18:45 make sure whatever is submitted that they had an
12:18:48 opportunity to review anything so that we are in
12:18:50 compliance with whatever comes before us.
12:18:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I did briefly look at it before we
12:18:55 came in.
12:18:56 I really wanted to hear from them as well.
12:18:57 And I can go tab by tab and let you know what I think
12:19:00 about each one.
12:19:04 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to follow up on that.
12:19:06 I'm not really comfortable that the Council had time
12:19:09 to review all this.
12:19:10 I just wanted to clarify what you're asking us to do
12:19:14 today.
12:19:14 Is this --
12:19:17 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Transmit to the Planning

12:19:19 Commission.
12:19:19 >>MARY MULHERN: So if we do that, and it comes back,
12:19:23 at that point, it's not really -- we're not really --
12:19:26 are we able to make changes?
12:19:28 Substantive changes?
12:19:32 >>JULIA COLE: Julia Cole, Legal Department.
12:19:35 You can direct substantive changes today on the
12:19:37 nonprivately initiated amendments.
12:19:40 You can direct changes after they come back from the
12:19:43 Planning Commission and we'll have to make sure the
12:19:45 changes wouldn't impede what the Planning Commission's
12:19:49 decision was.
12:19:50 It does lead me to a point I wanted to make, in this
12:19:53 batch, you actually have both battlements that were
12:19:56 initiated by City Council, staff-initiated amendments
12:19:58 and privately initiated amendments.
12:20:00 And we need to separate out the privately initiated
12:20:03 amendments.
12:20:03 This is a workshop for you to hear from folks, but
12:20:07 this is not the public hearing on those matters.
12:20:09 As it relates to the privately initiated ones, you
12:20:11 really are in a situation where you do need to direct

12:20:14 those towards the Planning Commission, understanding
12:20:16 that is not a vote to assess them, so that they can
12:20:19 come back to you after the process has reviewed, has
12:20:22 gone forward.
12:20:26 It also is as it relates to the amendment, you can
12:20:29 make suggested changes to those.
12:20:30 It's really up to the applicant to indicate whether or
12:20:32 not they want to make the changes or not.
12:20:34 As it relates to the other amendment, it is within
12:20:37 your discretion to decide whether or not to forward
12:20:39 those to the Planning Commission at all.
12:20:41 I did want to separate those two issues.
12:20:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Cole, what you're saying to us,
12:20:46 the last four, I think, are private.
12:20:48 They need to go to the Planning Commission?
12:20:52 >>JULIA COLE: They have a right as a privately
12:20:54 initiated amendment to be heard in the public forum
12:20:56 through the Planning Commission proceedings and
12:20:58 ultimately back to City Council on a first reading
12:21:01 public hearing.
12:21:07 >> I do have some comments on the last four based on
12:21:10 the comments that were made by the petitioners and

12:21:10 some subsequent changes that were submitted by them as
12:21:10 well.
12:21:14 Tab one, I would ask to transmit to the Planning
12:21:16 Commission with the modification, separating the
12:21:20 500-foot distance, not just from local and national
12:21:22 historic districts, but from all residential uses as
12:21:25 well.
12:21:28 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: I have a question on that.
12:21:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, that was a motion.
12:21:33 >> Second.
12:21:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, you have a question.
12:21:38 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: On the first page, accessory use
12:21:40 crematorium about a size, they can only have one
12:21:44 combustion unit.
12:21:46 Do they come in different sizes?
12:21:50 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The combustion unit?
12:21:52 They are different sizes.
12:21:53 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Shouldn't we specify here.
12:21:55 They could have one where they could put a hundred
12:21:58 people in at once.
12:22:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No, it's not that size.
12:22:03 You can't burn multiple bodies at the same time.

12:22:07 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Talking about a crematorium.
12:22:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes, it's one body at a time.
12:22:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
12:22:19 Opposed?
12:22:20 Tab 2.
12:22:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 2, waterfront regulations.
12:22:24 If I could, just to remind you, I know it's been
12:22:26 called a river overlay in the past.
12:22:28 Directed by Council.
12:22:29 These have been sitting around about a year.
12:22:31 If you want to move it out --
12:22:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I suggest we take it out.
12:22:34 I suggest there's a lot of controversy around this
12:22:37 issue and I think we should take this out for staff
12:22:39 further to meet -- make sure they meet with all the
12:22:41 people on the river and have input.
12:22:43 I hear some people saying, yes, we need it, but if I
12:22:47 bought a lot for $310,000 and I can build on it and
12:22:50 you all come and put a regulation that makes it not
12:22:53 buildable, I would be highly upset.
12:22:55 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Maybe you can put your barbecue
12:22:57 thing up there.

12:22:58 [ LAUGHTER ]
12:23:02 >>JULIA COLE: If I can put some context into the
12:23:05 comments.
12:23:06 You've heard a lot of comments about not receiving
12:23:09 individual notice and frustration about the fact that
12:23:12 it wasn't superclear as to whether or not it was the
12:23:15 intent to have staff go out and actually go to all the
12:23:19 13 different homeowner associations, which do
12:23:22 sometimes fall on Saturdays, I mean, it is a pretty
12:23:25 significant amount of staff time to do that.
12:23:29 They did hold public information meetings.
12:23:31 As it relates to the individual notice, and you've
12:23:34 heard me say this before with these types of
12:23:36 amendments, there's no obligation.
12:23:37 Legal obligation on the part of the city to send out
12:23:40 individual notices.
12:23:41 And that is at quite a cost.
12:23:43 It's something that is not within the Land Development
12:23:44 Coordinations budget to send out individual notices
12:23:47 for amendments to the general code, so that is not
12:23:52 something they have typically undertaken.
12:23:53 It's not something that City Council has typically

12:23:56 requested to have that kind of individual notice.
12:23:58 As I said, it's not legally required.
12:24:00 Whether or not it's a good idea from a policy
12:24:02 perspective, that is within your jurisdiction.
12:24:03 And if that's something that you want to do, please
12:24:06 know LDC does not have that budget from what I've been
12:24:09 told so I don't know where the money would come from
12:24:11 on that.
12:24:12 That's about six to nine hundred notices.
12:24:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All I'm say -- I'm not prepared to
12:24:16 support this today as is, based on what I've heard.
12:24:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move that we put it off
12:24:20 until the next cycle and that we try to -- I will take
12:24:25 money from my city council budget to spend on mailing,
12:24:30 not fancy mailing but direct mailing to the list
12:24:33 Mr. Brown provided explaining the pros and cons of it.
12:24:37 It's really timely, because we are going to be
12:24:39 discussing the protection of the river in terms of
12:24:44 fertilizers, which this relates to.
12:24:46 And I think in the context of discussing this, we
12:24:49 should also look at perhaps setbacks related to the
12:24:55 size of the lot.

12:24:55 Because what's appropriate for a 100-foot lot, might
12:24:58 be different from a 70-foot lot.
12:25:03 I think that's something else we should look at.
12:25:05 The point made by Mr. Brown is the river is a
12:25:07 tremendous asset, and we need to look at how to
12:25:09 protect it.
12:25:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder and then
12:25:13 Mulhern.
12:25:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree with Ms. Saul-Sena, I'd
12:25:18 like staff to expand this discussion and ordinance,
12:25:22 including legal staff to see if we can create sort of
12:25:26 different lot types so if somebody has a lot, a
12:25:30 hundred feet in depth, maybe we regulate them X way,
12:25:34 and if they have a lot a little bit larger, then you
12:25:36 have equal protection issue that Ms. Cole will have to
12:25:39 look at.
12:25:40 But, you know, there might be a rational basis.
12:25:45 Somebody has 150 deep lot and we impose this, it's not
12:25:48 a big deal.
12:25:49 But if you've got 100-foot, yeah, I've got hundred
12:25:53 foot lot in Palma Ceia.
12:25:55 It starts getting cramped when you come in from the

12:25:57 back to the front.
12:25:58 I agree with Ms. Saul-Sena.
12:26:02 You also have 900 property owners, many of them are
12:26:05 City of Tampa, I noticed.
12:26:07 But if we mail to them 50 cents each, it's 450 bucks.
12:26:11 If Ms. Saul-Sena and the rest of us can chip in out of
12:26:14 our Council budget to do that, I think it's money well
12:26:18 spent.
12:26:18 Because we need to get everybody involved and not just
12:26:21 let them know, but also let them know that we're going
12:26:24 to have a meeting to tell you about this and get your
12:26:29 input.
12:26:29 >> That's my question.
12:26:32 Given the nature of this request and the comments that
12:26:34 you've heard so far, especially if you do an
12:26:36 individual notice and take it from me who does
12:26:39 individual notices on community plans to 9600 people,
12:26:41 you could wind up having several hundred people come
12:26:44 out.
12:26:44 I don't know if there's a certain forum for that.
12:26:46 I would recommend -- if I were sitting up there, I'd
12:26:48 want to hear from the people, especially if letters

12:26:50 are coming from you, saying here are the regulations,
12:26:53 what do you think?
12:26:54 There's got to be some way for people to talk back
12:26:56 other than 900 individual e-mails to you, which would
12:26:59 be where do you talk about that?
12:27:01 So I'd recommend some kind of workshop occurs with
12:27:04 Council at some point in the future before --
12:27:06 hopefully before January or maybe by January.
12:27:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest that we put that on our
12:27:14 agenda for future discussion, next meeting, because
12:27:18 we're not going to get through here today.
12:27:20 We remove it for now and put it on our agenda for
12:27:23 discussion.
12:27:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to make one comment.
12:27:26 Was it another Mr. Brown who got this list for us.
12:27:31 934 people.
12:27:33 Maybe the Neighborhood Associations would want to get
12:27:38 in touch with those people.
12:27:40 The other thing is, I think that we might be able to
12:27:46 find the money in the budget somewhere other than the
12:27:49 City Council budget.
12:27:50 In that big reserve we have.

12:27:55 If we're going to pay for notifying.
12:28:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the motion is that we remove
12:28:03 item -- tab 2.
12:28:04 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It continue to the January cycle, I
12:28:06 would say.
12:28:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Let's put it on discussion at our
12:28:11 next regularly scheduled meeting under staff reports
12:28:14 and discuss it then.
12:28:15 I can make a proposal for how to deal with it.
12:28:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: How does it look for the next meeting?
12:28:23 >>THE CLERK: Your next meeting for October 2nd is
12:28:25 your regular.
12:28:26 You have quite a few public hearings, including about
12:28:29 six appeal hearings.
12:28:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's move it to the 16th.
12:28:33 What about the second meeting?
12:28:36 >> This is just a discussion on how we're going to
12:28:38 deal with it.
12:28:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It can be very lengthy, as you can
12:28:41 see.
12:28:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
12:28:42 16th under staff reports.

12:28:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and second.
12:28:45 All in favor, signify by aye.
12:28:47 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 3 is the vendors.
12:28:51 What I heard directed from Council is if there are
12:28:55 bathrooms -- if it is a developed property, there are
12:28:57 bathrooms available to the public, if they are
12:28:59 available to the public, then they can be used by the
12:29:02 vendor and the patrons.
12:29:03 Simple if statement essentially.
12:29:05 Clarify the boundaries on page 12 for the sports and
12:29:07 entertainment vendors, which Mr. Dingfelder mentioned.
12:29:10 There would be no seating allowed so there's no
12:29:12 additional picnic tables around.
12:29:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No seating for those vendors who don't
12:29:21 have a rest room facility, they are just driving by.
12:29:25 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No seating for undeveloped
12:29:27 properties when rest rooms aren't available.
12:29:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Good idea.
12:29:36 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess my question is, Council ready
12:29:39 to move forward with this considering than's
12:29:41 recommendation.
12:29:41 We already discussed this, but I just in particular

12:29:44 like to hear from Chairman about whether this is
12:29:50 something we should -- since we did revise the
12:29:53 regulations in 2007 and than would like us to give it
12:29:59 some more time to see how the regulations are working.
12:30:02 Or if you feel that it's important to change this
12:30:05 now --
12:30:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm only speaking for those
12:30:08 individuals who contacted my office on West Tampa on
12:30:10 that one single issue.
12:30:13 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If I may speak from the staff
12:30:15 perspective.
12:30:16 We've been dealing with this for a year.
12:30:18 And sometimes when you have the regulation in front of
12:30:20 you in black and White, it reads one way.
12:30:23 When you're actually trying to administer it and you
12:30:26 literally have people screaming at you on a daily
12:30:29 basis, it can be very difficult.
12:30:30 We're trying to address the actual administration of
12:30:33 the code and dealing with that industry.
12:30:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:30:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question.
12:30:37 On the temporary vendor, I mentioned this earlier,

12:30:40 we've gone from three events per year to 12 events per
12:30:44 year.
12:30:45 30 days to 45 days, we've exceeded the number of days
12:30:48 in a year.
12:30:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: She changed that.
12:30:51 Go ahead.
12:30:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Did you change it?
12:30:52 Temporary?
12:30:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No, actually, I was going to go
12:30:55 through the list of things I had and hopefully be
12:30:57 directed on many of them.
12:30:59 That was one of them.
12:31:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I thought you were done.
12:31:01 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No.
12:31:02 I got cut off.
12:31:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You mentioned that.
12:31:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I didn't hear her say it.
12:31:06 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I hadn't gotten to it yet.
12:31:07 The one mentioned by Susan long was on page 10, that
12:31:11 if -- it specifically restricts vendors along the
12:31:15 local historic district of Seminole Heights and Ybor,
12:31:18 but also to any future local historic districts, I can

12:31:21 add that language in.
12:31:22 And then on page 14, number 1, the number of permits,
12:31:27 and really, this is truly a policy decision if you
12:31:30 want it to be six, if you want it to be eight, if you
12:31:32 want it to be ten.
12:31:34 Want it to be two.
12:31:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'd say six.
12:31:37 If it was three that was a problem, why don't we go to
12:31:40 six instead of going crazy with 12.
12:31:42 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Number five, you had a question
12:31:44 about the signage.
12:31:45 I had it circled about whether or not you wanted to
12:31:47 limit signage on those tents.
12:31:50 >> I guess it's all right.
12:31:51 >>CATHERINE COYLE: And number six, the hours.
12:31:55 That was a question as well that you had me circle
12:31:58 that one, whether or not you wanted to extend it to 10
12:32:01 or 11.
12:32:02 10 Sunday through Thursday and 11 Friday and Saturday.
12:32:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Council, do you have any thoughts
12:32:09 on that?
12:32:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Public is saying no.

12:32:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we should leave --
12:32:13 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Right now it's 9 p.m.
12:32:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The thought of our staff getting
12:32:23 pummeled is a very uncomfortable thought.
12:32:25 In deference to the staff considerations, I think that
12:32:27 we should clarify and clear up what we have in front
12:32:33 of us.
12:32:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Add hours?
12:32:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, no, no, no.
12:32:37 Just in terms of this whole ordinance.
12:32:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We're moving forward with the
12:32:41 changes.
12:32:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Stay with the hours we've got.
12:32:47 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That actually ends that one.
12:32:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion?
12:32:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
12:32:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion is to support what's
12:32:54 before us with the tweaks that we just added.
12:32:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
12:32:59 Motion by Councilwoman Saul-Sena seconded by
12:33:03 councilman Dingfelder.
12:33:04 [Motion Carried]

12:33:07 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 8 is solid waste.
12:33:09 And just to clarify to that the enclosure is actually
12:33:13 the screening from the right-of-way.
12:33:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We need to vote on tabs 4, 5, 6, 7.
12:33:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Those have no changes recommended
12:33:22 from us or from my discussion with you.
12:33:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
12:33:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need to move it since it had no
12:33:28 changes?
12:33:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We need to move it to transmit it.
12:33:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Directing it to transmit it to the
12:33:34 Planning Commission.
12:33:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Which one?
12:33:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 4, 5, 6.
12:33:38 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question about 5, because I
12:33:41 haven't been able to look at this at all.
12:33:43 Demolition by neglect.
12:33:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I support that one.
12:33:57 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Than supports that one as well.
12:33:59 >>MARY MULHERN: I support the concept.
12:34:00 I haven't looked at this.
12:34:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Come back as an ordinance.

12:34:05 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to point out that in the
12:34:08 last 24 hours I've had an attorney who has done a lot
12:34:15 of pro bono work for the city recommend to help
12:34:20 because she has statutes on demolition by neglect.
12:34:25 So I want to make sure that this is the best statute
12:34:29 we can write.
12:34:30 I guess if we can change it after the Planning
12:34:36 Commission.
12:34:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion.
12:34:39 Motion by Councilwoman Saul-Sena, seconded by
12:34:41 councilwoman Mulhern.
12:34:42 All in favor -- this is four, five and six.
12:34:45 All in favor?
12:34:45 Opposed?
12:34:47 [Motion Carried]
12:34:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Actually, tab 7 had no comments.
12:34:50 According to than, they supported it as well.
12:34:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion?
12:34:53 Motion by councilwoman Miller.
12:34:57 Second by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
12:34:59 All in favor, signify by saying aye.
12:35:01 [Motion Carried]

12:35:03 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 8 was solid waste.
12:35:05 I was going to go back and work with Wanda just to
12:35:10 modify that it's really a four-foot screening so that
12:35:10 they are screened from the right-of-way, not
12:35:11 necessarily an enclosure.
12:35:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Screening.
12:35:18 Motion by Councilman Dingfelder, seconded by
12:35:22 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
12:35:23 [Motion Carried]
12:35:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 9 the variance regulations.
12:35:26 I know there were some discussions.
12:35:28 Really a decision at this point.
12:35:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I'd like to hold off on that, too.
12:35:33 Because I think that -- I don't feel like we've gotten
12:35:39 all the answers we need before we make this change.
12:35:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Number 9.
12:35:45 >>MARY MULHERN: This was a staff recommendation,
12:35:47 right?
12:35:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: From the Legal Department.
12:35:49 >>MARY MULHERN: A legal recommendation?
12:35:51 Is there a reason why we can't hold off on this for
12:35:56 the same period that we are with the --

12:36:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Till January.
12:36:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's going to come back anyway, right?
12:36:05 >> Yes, it will come back in ordinance form where if
12:36:08 there were some changes you could make.
12:36:10 It was a recommendation from the Legal Department,
12:36:11 because there's been some confusion on how to
12:36:13 implement what you currently have.
12:36:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think we should move it, because it
12:36:17 allows you the opportunity still to make the changes
12:36:20 when it comes back.
12:36:21 At least we get it in the process.
12:36:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you okay with that, Councilman
12:36:26 Dingfelder?
12:36:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yeah.
12:36:28 >> So moved.
12:36:28 >> Second.
12:36:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:36:34 >>REBECCA KERT: I wanted to make clear, when you moved
12:36:36 that over, when you I spoke to you earlier about the
12:36:39 variance language, I recommended put back in the
12:36:41 language, about reincluding the terms unnecessary
12:36:44 hardship, and I just want to make sure.

12:36:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
12:36:47 That is part of it.
12:36:48 Moved and second.
12:36:49 All in favor, signify by saying aye.
12:36:51 [Motion Carried]
12:36:52 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 11 and 13, since they are
12:36:55 similar in nature, just different districts, those are
12:36:57 the self-storage, air condition storage, slash
12:36:59 miniwarehouse.
12:37:00 If I could really quick with changes.
12:37:02 I want to make sure that -- I want to go back and work
12:37:05 with each petitioner to make sure that the language is
12:37:07 consistent in each district, if they have the same
12:37:10 provisions for the most part as far as the criteria.
12:37:13 Clarify that there would be no storage of hazardous
12:37:16 materials and so forth.
12:37:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
12:37:18 I thought we added it in the language anyway.
12:37:20 Didn't we add that?
12:37:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: One of them did.
12:37:24 One of them hadn't.
12:37:26 I want to make sure it's consistent between the two.

12:37:28 And also, that there will be design reviews stated
12:37:31 explicitly.
12:37:33 >>MARY MULHERN: We have to transmit this, is that
12:37:35 right?
12:37:36 Because it was proposed.
12:37:37 >> Yes.
12:37:37 >>MARY MULHERN: But I would like to say for the
12:37:42 private entities that are proposing this, I would
12:37:46 like -- I don't think I have a problem with 11, but
12:37:48 with 13, I'd like to make sure in the Channel District
12:37:54 that this is something that the considerable number of
12:37:59 homeowners living there now are in support of.
12:38:01 Because we have homeowners associations.
12:38:06 So I'd like to make sure that they are on board for
12:38:08 that.
12:38:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion for 11 and 13.
12:38:14 >> So moved.
12:38:15 >> Second.
12:38:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor, aye.
12:38:16 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Tab 12 was the workshop from
12:38:19 Mr. Mechanik about the alcoholic beverages.
12:38:20 And there was a great discussion on that.

12:38:22 So I'll leave that to you on how you want to -- I
12:38:25 don't know that he agreed to anything other than what
12:38:27 the language is, so probably transmitting it as is.
12:38:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My understanding, Ms. Coyle, is
12:38:33 that we have no choice but to transmit, but I would
12:38:38 like to say personally that that doesn't indicate that
12:38:40 all these necessarily supportive of it when it comes
12:38:43 back based on the comments from the neighborhood.
12:38:46 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes, just to make it clear, it's a
12:38:48 transmittal.
12:38:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll further than that and propose
12:38:51 that in our resolution that it's abundantly clear --
12:38:56 we'll take a vote right now.
12:38:57 That it's abundantly clear that Council does not
12:38:59 support this.
12:39:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
12:39:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can transmit it and comply with
12:39:06 the ordinance, there's nothing wrong with saying that
12:39:08 our resolution would make it clear that we don't
12:39:10 support it.
12:39:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
12:39:15 All in favor, signify by saying aye.

12:39:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Clarification on what that motion
12:39:21 was.
12:39:21 The motion I believe -- the motion -- well, I
12:39:24 believe -- if I can.
12:39:29 [everybody talking at once]
12:39:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The motion includes those changes,
12:39:34 Ms. Coyle -- the motion included those changes, the
12:39:39 clarification of the design standards and to make the
12:39:42 language compatible between the two.
12:39:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: 12 is to transmit as is and the
12:39:50 motion stating that Council does not support it as is.
12:39:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we cost past 11 and 13.
12:40:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We passed 11 and 13.
12:40:02 That was 12.
12:40:03 Now we're on 14.
12:40:04 >>CATHERINE COYLE: 14, there is a clarification --
12:40:07 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: We didn't take a vote on 12.
12:40:09 He made a motion.
12:40:10 We didn't vote on it.
12:40:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yeah, we voted.
12:40:11 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: No, we didn't.
12:40:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's do it now.

12:40:16 >>THE CLERK: Made the motion.
12:40:18 You want to transmit.
12:40:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Made the motion.
12:40:21 I carried the motion.
12:40:23 He says I need a clarification on the motion, is what
12:40:25 he says.
12:40:25 Nevertheless -- all in favor, signify by saying aye.
12:40:30 Opposed?
12:40:30 >> Nay.
12:40:31 >> He interrupted.
12:40:34 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The final tab, just a modification
12:40:37 to the boundary.
12:40:38 This is from the agent to specify that it's Causeway
12:40:41 Boulevard to the City of Tampa city limits to the
12:40:43 south.
12:40:44 I'll submit that as well as part of it.
12:40:47 >> So moved.
12:40:48 >> Second.
12:40:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and second.
12:40:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When you transmit, Cathy, just fix
12:40:52 the typo, because it does say, as Mary pointed out, it
12:40:56 says Port Tampa when it should say Port of Tampa or

12:41:00 whatever the appropriate language is.
12:41:03 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yeah, they actually wrote that
12:41:05 themselves.
12:41:05 I'm assuming that's what they call themselves.
12:41:07 Yes, I'll clarify that with them.
12:41:09 Absolutely.
12:41:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on 14, all in favor,
12:41:12 signify by saying aye.
12:41:13 Opposed, same sign.
12:41:15 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.
12:41:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question on 14, I apologize, I
12:41:18 meant to bring this up before.
12:41:20 While we're doing this, Cathy, don't we have this
12:41:22 problem in every industrial district in the city?
12:41:25 Surely all these industrial districts are stacking
12:41:29 things higher than six feet.
12:41:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: You'd be surprised how many code
12:41:33 enforcement actions we have because of that.
12:41:35 A lot.
12:41:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: My point is -- maybe it's for the
12:41:38 next cycle, but when they abut a residential, I want
12:41:41 to be concerned about it.

12:41:42 When they don't abut residential, Lord knows it's
12:41:46 industrial and they should be stacking --
12:41:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: This particular amendment got us
12:41:50 starting to think about it.
12:41:51 Industrial districts are allowed to have walls eight
12:41:53 feet high, but the piles would be six feet.
12:41:56 We also talked about proportions of properties.
12:41:59 Some are acres of properties.
12:42:00 And their nearest neighbor is several hundred feet
12:42:02 away.
12:42:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's address that next cycle.
12:42:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What's the motion?
12:42:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Motion is that we should address
12:42:11 the height of open storage issue in all districts in
12:42:14 the next cycle.
12:42:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's moved and second.
12:42:16 All in favor, signify by saying aye.
12:42:19 Opposed? Okay.
12:42:20 All right.
12:42:21 Anything else?
12:42:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Under new business, I understand
12:42:24 from our attorney Chip Fletcher that in the next few

12:42:27 weeks, we're going to be getting the TECO franchise
12:42:30 agreement.
12:42:31 This is a huge deal.
12:42:32 It's a 25-year agreement with our utility.
12:42:35 I'd like to schedule during our October meeting at
12:42:38 11:00, a discussion of the TECO franchise proposal.
12:42:46 >> Which meeting?
12:42:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: October.
12:42:48 It's October 23rd.
12:42:52 At 11:00.
12:42:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want that at a time certain?
12:42:58 Stop what you're doing at 11.
12:43:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's a workshop day.
12:43:02 I think you already have a full workshop.
12:43:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have several, but I think some
12:43:10 of them aren't going to be that long.
12:43:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I won't be here on the 23rd.
12:43:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you want to do it on a different
12:43:16 day?
12:43:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
12:43:18 All in favor, signify by aye.
12:43:22 Opposed?

12:43:28 >> Receive and file.
12:43:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: One more item.
12:43:30 And I don't know if you all addressed this last week
12:43:32 about mike Flynn.
12:43:38 Sally Flynn was here earlier.
12:43:40 Wonderful community organizers and community activists
12:43:42 in Ballast Point.
12:43:43 Sadly enough when I came back from my vacation, I
12:43:46 learned that we had lost mike Flynn last week.
12:43:50 I don't know, some of you know mike, some didn't, but
12:43:53 he was a great environmentalist.
12:43:55 He organized these events where hundreds of people go
12:43:59 out and put these oyster structures out in the bay.
12:44:05 He had been doing that for years.
12:44:08 He's a wonderful, wonderful guy, great husband,
12:44:10 father, grandfather.
12:44:12 The easy one is to do a commendation, which I'll be
12:44:15 glad to work on and get his family here.
12:44:19 But what I'd also like to do is perhaps work with
12:44:22 parks and the Mayor to maybe place a little plaque or
12:44:24 something down along the Bayshore right next to one of
12:44:27 these oyster beds that he helped create.

12:44:30 And I'll check and see what the constraints are and
12:44:35 that sort of thing.
12:44:36 This is a great guy.
12:44:37 And we're sorry to lose him.
12:44:38 Our best to Sally and his family.
12:44:42 >> Second.
12:44:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Been moved and second.
12:44:44 All in favor, signify by aye.
12:44:46 Opposed?
12:44:48 [Motion Carried]
12:44:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to receive and file.
12:44:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Hold it.
12:44:50 We have a memo from Chief of Staff questioning a
12:44:56 workshop on the MacDill Air Force Base.
12:45:01 30-minute workshop with the City of Tampa on October
12:45:04 the 23rd to brief Council on the release of their
12:45:08 air installation compatible use zone study.
12:45:13 They are requesting that on the 23rd as well.
12:45:14 30 minutes.
12:45:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we have a written report
12:45:20 from them on this?
12:45:21 I move that we at our October 16th meeting have a

12:45:24 written report from them, and if we feel like we need
12:45:28 something else beyond that, that we do something on
12:45:32 the 16th.
12:45:36 >> Second.
12:45:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
12:45:37 Moved and seconded.
12:45:38 Fine with me.
12:45:39 All in favor, signify by saying aye.
12:45:42 [Motion Carried]
12:45:42 Okay.
12:45:42 The last thing I want to move that -- she's not here.
12:45:48 I had a meeting the other morning with the West Tampa
12:45:50 chamber.
12:45:51 They are running into a problem with our sign code.
12:45:54 That is that they want to put -- evidently got money
12:46:00 from the county to redo Howard or something.
12:46:02 And they want to put decorative monument statue with
12:46:08 little contribution at the bottom.
12:46:11 They were told by staff they couldn't do it.
12:46:12 It doesn't meet -- even though it's done with the
12:46:15 Mayor beautification committee, you can do that but
12:46:18 can't do it under your sign ordinance.

12:46:20 So what I would like to have done is Julia Cole take a
12:46:23 look at this.
12:46:25 >> Second.
12:46:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And report back to us on this, because
12:46:27 in my discussion with her, she was saying that really,
12:46:30 I guess I shouldn't say this on record that we have a
12:46:32 lot of issues with our sign code right now.
12:46:35 So we need to -- so we just need her to come back at
12:46:42 our future meeting, I guess.
12:46:47 30 days.
12:46:47 I'll say 30 days.
12:46:49 >> Second.
12:46:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I add an amendment?
12:46:54 A lot of times these monuments are considered public
12:46:57 art, so it might be something to ask the public art
12:47:02 director to come and see if there's some way to work
12:47:05 around the sign code.
12:47:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, your last regular
12:47:10 meeting in October is the 16th.
12:47:11 Would you like it the first meeting in November on
12:47:14 November --
12:47:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, that would be fine.

12:47:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Under staff reports.
12:47:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, um-hum.
12:47:18 >> So move.
12:47:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I moved that.
12:47:20 John seconded.
12:47:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: All those in favor, aye?
12:47:27 Opposed nay?
12:47:28 Passed unanimously.
12:47:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
12:47:30 Receive and file.
12:47:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
12:47:32 >> Second.
12:47:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor, signify by aye.
12:47:34 All right.
12:47:34 We stand in recess until 6:00.
12:47:36 Thank you.
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.