Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, May 7, 2009
9:00 a.m. Session

DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this 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.


(City Council meeting called to order at 9:05 a.m. by
Chairman Thomas Scott.)
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council is will now come to
order.
The chair will yield to you Mr. Caetano.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Our invocation today is by
Michael White.
Michael is with Four Seasons Lawn Care which is also a
pesticide company.
I have known Michael for 21 years when he first

started in business.
He's a great man and he's also a preacher.
Michael.
Please stand and remain standing for the pledge of
allegiance.
>> Let us look to the Lord.
Heavenly Father, we thank you, Lord God, for this
another day.
Lord, we know that you are the Lord and the fullness
thereof the world and may they dwell therein.
Lord, we ask that you bless this meeting today.
We ask that you bless the City Council.
Lord God, that they would make good decisions, Lord
God, on your behalf.
Lord God, we realize that all things should be done in
decency and order.
Lord God, we come here just for you.
Lord, we ask now if you allow the words of our mouths,
the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in Thy
sight, O Lord our strength and our redeemer.
In Jesus name we pray.
Amen.

(Pledge of Allegiance)
(9:06 a.m.)
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Roll call.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA:
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
>>MARY MULHERN: Here.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
Okay.
Board members, we have several ceremonial activities
this morning.
What I will do is make the presentation to the Lee
Moffitt cancer society and then move up to Betty
Johnson here, and we will have Mr. Miranda introduce.
Council members, I am going to ask if all
representatives of H. Lee Moffitt cancer center, and
we are very aware of the work they are done in regard
to cancer research.
This single-family a dreadful disease.
My mother died from cancer a few years ago, so I am
very much aware of the disease, and the impact that it
has not only on the person but the families that goes

through a very trying, very, very difficult time.
It was a very difficult time for me, for my family.
And so I want to salute Moffitt today for their work,
what they are doing, not only for this community but
around the nation.
Moffitt has a great reputation.
So today on behalf of the City Council, Moffitt Monte
May 2009, I want to present this commendation whereas
the Tampa City Council joins the Moffitt cancer center
in promoting to make May Moffitt month and more than
100 that you cases of cancer are diagnosed throughout
Florida every year, accordingly we the members of
Tampa City Council encourage involvement, support, and
funds in the fight against disease, and whereas we
invite all citizens join to make May Moffitt month and
partnering with Moffitt as they pursue their mission
to contribute to the prevention and cure of cancer.
Now therefore be it proclaimed that the Tampa City
Council does hereby wishes you success in the effort
to treat those afflicted with cancer and developing
new methods to combat this disease, signed by all
seven members of City Council.

Again, thank you all for the work that you do.
You hill recognize the need throughout this city and
throughout the nation.
And you do a great job and we really appreciate it
very much.
(Applause)
>>> My name is Shana with the Moffitt Cancer
Foundation, and I want to thank you for recognizing
Moffitt Cancer Center and thanks so much.
On behalf of my colleagues, Chanelle Reed and myself,
thank you for the work being done and to our partner
committee.
Thank you.
>> Thank you to City Council, on behalf of Moffitt
corporate partners for, involved in helping the
awareness making May Moffitt month.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The Moffitt center has more valet
parking in one day than all the hotels in the City of
Tampa combined.
The work that you do, and the employees you have are
always smiling, always bringing uplift, and we commend
you.

>> I would like to say, you don't need to say anything
about Moffitt.
Moffitt is the greatest place in the world to go to.
Anybody that doesn't go to Moffitt they are going to
miss out on a lot, but it saves lives and helps other
people, and I'm very proud to be one of the members
that has been there and I am proud of what you do to
help the people that go to Moffitt and I will always
support Moffitt.
Thank you for all that you do.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I would like to ask Betty Green
Johnson and family members to come forward at this
time to present Ms. Green this commendation who served
the City of Tampa 36 years.
36 years here.
And it's always a pleasure.
On one job, that's an accomplishment.
Some folks don't work 36 days.
[ Laughter ]
36 years.
This commendation is being presented to you for your
many years of service and work here, and presented to

Betty Green Johnson, began her career with the City of
Tampa, the utility accounting division, the revenue
and finance department where she advanced to her
position of administrative position 3, supervisor at
the time of her retirement.
Most of her career was spent in the customer service
section where quality customer service was provided
through her experience and expertise.
These qualities she gave and taught other employees
the true meaning of loyalty and devotion to both the
City of Tampa and its customers.
Betty provided leadership and guidance, in her
involvement with the City of Tampa black history
committee, serving as its president for seven years.
The black history committee became incorporated in
2006 under her tenure.
The Tampa City Council does hereby commend and
recognize the dedication, the hard work by Betty Green
Johnson, 36 years of service to the City of Tampa.
And as a president and dedicated officer, a member of
the black history committee, we extend our well wishes
for a most deserved retirement.

Ms. Johnson, on behalf again of Tampa City Council, we
would like to present with you this commendation.
Congratulations.
>> 36 and a half years, that's a long time, and I see
my sister, I have worked almost as long as she is old.
But I want to say to chair Scott and City Council
members, I appreciate, I'm honored, and I will always
remember this, and something for others to hopefully
follow, stay on the job for that long, is nothing.
We had our ups and downs but most of it was enjoyable.
And I want to say to each member of the utility
division, I applaud you, and I want to say of course
to my black history members, you're under fine
leadership.
Frank Crum is our new president.
I want to ask council to continue to support, I know
that you will, to support the City of Tampa black
history committee because we are all about awarding
scholarships to black American students.
That's our goal to educate the community, not just
Tampa but the surrounding community and the world
about black history.

There is something new every day that's going on.
But without us getting the word out, because our story
is so oftentimes not told.
So to our new president, Mr. Crum, I call him doctor
crumb, and to all our fine members, Lenoy Russell and
to all the new officers, I thank you, I commend you,
and I know you are going to throw your support behind
the committee and help us to continually award
scholarships to African-American students.
Thank you once again.
[ Applause ]
I would like to introduce -- Mother's Day is Sunday
and sometimes I take this for granted, but not all the
time.
This lady to my left is my mother.
Her name is Vera Floyd.
She's been putting up with me for 55 1/2 years and
that says something for her.
And I love her.
She's my mother.
And mothers day is coming up so you don't know what's
going to happen within the now and then.

But this is my mother.
[ Applause ]
>> Mrs. John Johnson, on behalf of the City of Tampa's
black history month, first I would like to say the
City of Tampa and the City of Tampa's black history
committee has received a special gift in the form of
Betty Johnson, and thank you for allowing us to
receive that gift.
You have been a dedicated employee and a fabulous
leader for our community.
You have given of your time, and you have poured out
your heart for the City of Tampa's black history
committee.
And I have also got to say that at times you just
spontaneously burst out in songs, just because you're
happy.
That's something that you do.
And I love that about you, because not only do you
have a happy-go-lucky nature, you have made the lives
of a lot of young people better because of what you
have done in terms of giving them a chance to go to
college.

So thank you from the City of Tampa's black history
committee for all that you have done.
You have been a wonderful ambassador for Tampa's
heritage and history.
And in your honor, we are going to start a scholarship
called the presidential awards scholarship to honor
you for all that you have done.
Thank you so much.
[ Applause ]
(9:18 a.m.)
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's my pleasure this morning to
introduce the president of MOSI, or the museum of
science and injury, Mr. Wit Ostrenko.
He is going to make the presentation this morning, the
national Hispanic scientist of the year, and announce
that person's name, I believe.
>> Wit Ostrenko, for 21 years.
MOSI does a lot of things in this community 365 days a
year.
A lot of is it for our young people in this community,
whether they can afford to come to MOSI or not, we
have a program for them.

One of the things that I'm really proud of is we have
tackled the dropout rate of Hispanic children both
boys and girls, which is 30% of those students do not
make it through high school.
We started doing a mentorship to show that kids can
become an astronaut, a scientist, a medical doctor,
and as those people speak to the children, 1700 kids
will come to the science center this year to see our
national Hispanic scientist of the year.
I would like to introduce you to Mario Garcia from our
board, who is the chairman of this year's national
Hispanic scientist of the year.
And I want to also introduce to our title sponsor for
the last eight years, and I would like to introduce
you to the vice-president and general manager of
Bright House, Carlos del Castillo.
>> Good morning.
I'll be brief.
I know you have a busy day.
Bright House networks is proud to be the title sponsor
of the national Hispanic of the year scientist award.
Children need to be nurtured in the classroom to

understand why they are sitting in a classroom
translates into their future.
With the dropout rate that Wit mentioned across the
nation it's important that these types of programs are
supported.
The reality is, in fact, a lot of children don't
understand how to connect the dots between the
classroom and their careers is one of the reasons why
we support this program.
And this program does help them understand that they
can become scientists and doctors, as wit mentioned,
or City Council members if that's their choosing.
It's important that they understand that the doors are
open to them to be able to do that, and the mentorship
program that this award puts in front of them is very
key.
Whether they are a scientist or doctor or nuclear
engineer, which is what this year's recipient is, he's
a Cuban born gentlemen, named Nils Diaz, a Ph.D. from
the university of Florida and obviously going to be a
very key mentor for the young ladies and gentlemen in
the classroom.

So that's why Bright House is very proud to be the
sponsor of this program.
It helps, with the help of this program it helps Tampa
be in the national spotlight, and that's why we
support this, because Tampa is already a wonderful
place to live, and if we can help make it a little
better, then we'll definitely support that.
Hope to have see you at the gala in October.
Thank you for your time.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
[ Applause ]
Now we will have a review of the agenda.
(9:22 a.m.)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Before you, you have the addendum to
the agenda.
We will begin with item number 39, in order, that's a
request for the written request of Ralph Metcalf to
remove this item from the agenda today.
Item 85 is to present to you a substitute ordinance
which will include a sunset provision of two years
from the effective date as directed by City Council
and offered to you by assistant city attorney Rebecca

Kert.
Item 87 is a request by city attorney Chip Fletcher to
substitute page 4 in the ordinance amending chapter 15
parking.
Other changes to the agenda, item 92 is regarding the
budget analyst position.
There's been a request to move that item to the end of
staff reports and unfinished business.
Item 93, the renaming of 18th Avenue park, there's
a request to move the item to the beginning of the
public comment section.
Item 94 you have receipt of a memorandum from Chip
Fletcher regarding lobbying disclosure.
Item 103, a receipt of resolution I prepared for
direct flights from TIA to Cuba.
Item 104, a PowerPoint presentation which will be
made.
A copy has been previously presented to council.
I believe those are the changes to the final agenda.
And if there are no other changes I would ask it be
approved.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Number one, in the future I would

like to keep with our policy shorten our calendar day.
And I see there's a request for a nine-minute walk-on,
and we should -- I think that's pretty unusual.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I was going to bring that up under
new business for future agenda.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: For future.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Exactly.
And council will be able to take that up.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then I move the substitutions and
other changes suggested by the attorney.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I think the commendations we said we
would keep on the regular agenda since those are
awards we make on a workshop day.
That's my recollection.
I stand to be corrected on that.
We can check on that and have clarification:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: The question is what kind of
commendations on regular days?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thought we were putting all
commendations on our workshop days.
We don't have any time up --
We'll take a look at it.

Thank you.
Motion and second.
All in favor?
Opposes?
The second by Councilwoman Miller.
We will move to the public commentary.
Way want to do first is address the issue of the Al
Barnes park.
Mr. Barnes wife is here.
His son Al Barnes is here.
SABRINA.
Hannah Barnes.
Angel Barnes.
Those that are here.
The whole family will come forward.
As you know, Mr. Barnes served on the Sports Authority
appointed by the mayors and served many years on the
council here and the council voted to remain 18th
street park.
And we are going to be doing that this morning under
the first reading of the ordinance number 93.
So what I would do now is --

>>MARTIN SHELBY: First reading normally what you do,
ideally what you want to do is take any public comment
relating to an ordinance under general public comment.
>> Mrs. Barnes: I would like to thank Mr. Thompson,
he got the ball rolling.
We are very honored and very humbled by this.
We thank you for taking this into your consideration.
Thank you.
>>> Good morning.
This is a very, very worthy and wonderful thing you
are doing.
Al Barnes was a great asset to the educational
community, to Hillsborough County, and to the
thousands of young people he touched in his life.
Thank you very, very much.
We greatly appreciate it.
>>THE CLERK: Your name for the record, please?
>> My name is Vince Thompson.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the family want to
speak?
Councilman Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was just going to say good

morning, welcome.
We are so pleased that you all could come down in
honor of Al.
I met him just a few times, but when I read the story
so lovely in the newspaper, and I think it spoke to
not only all the students that he touched, but that
the mayor was one of them, as I recall, reading.
And it sound like he's a great guy and great I am
expiration to so many and we are sorry for your loss
but we hope that this honor is some small consolation
for you.
Thank you.
>>> I didn't mention his sister, Bonnie Gibson that's
here.
She just came in.
>> Thank you for joining us.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you all very much.
I need to ask legal a question on this.
It's stated on the agenda 10:30, even though we moved
it up.
I need to get a legal opinion, can we take it up?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Legally, council, normally what would

happen is if you wish to -- first of all it's not set
as a public hearing.
So there is no legal notice requirement that prevents
you from taking it up sooner.
The issue is to allow the public to be able to address
it.
And that's why I asked that you take public comment
before you move it.
However, a valid point does get raised whether there
are people who might be tuning in or come in after
10:30 to want to hear any council discussion about
that.
So some discretion, legally you can, but it's an issue
of council discretion.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: If you have the family wait, please.
And council, if I can remind council.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: What we can do is take it now and
10:30.
So -- I think.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Although, council, may I remind you
that this is on for first reading and public hearing.
It is not, does not become official until the second

reading and the adoption public hearing, at that time.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
We will go ahead and take it now and then come back at
10:30 and do it officially.
>>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance of the city of Tampa,
Florida renaming certain real property at 2902 N. 32nd
Street at 18th Avenue, Tampa, Florida has been
accepted as the dedicated park property that is
currently known as the 18th Avenue park, open
space, to Al Barnes park, providing for severability,
repeal of all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herein, providing an effective date.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded by councilman
Caetano.
Any questions?
All in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposes?
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
Second reading of the ordinance will be held May
21st at 9:30 a.m.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
May 21st.

Thank you.
[ Applause ]
We will take other public comments at this time.
Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Public comments:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Is it council's pleasure to ask those
people who have items on the agenda to speak first and
give preference to those items on the agenda.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: If you have an item on the agenda
today, you can speak first.
>>> Benjamin Buckley, working for the City of Tampa,
work in the building department.
And I'm here about the two plans, the reorganization
and the layoffs in the building department.
Just last week, to let you know I represent some
employees, many employees, and we have a lot of
concerns about the reorganization.
And I have a list that I submitted last week to
Cynthia Miller and Thom Snelling.
I would like to present that to the council.
And page 1 out of the Florida building code with some
highlights here.

The concern is that the reorganization and the layoffs
has been very fast, and sudden.
There was no -- not a lot of discussion amongst all
the employees, the citizens, and I want everybody to
know that the primary concern of our department is the
safety, welfare and health of the public.
And we think that there's a lot of issues here with
some of the happenings that are going on.
And since the announcement, we came up with this list.
And we are interested in improving the building
department.
We think that's an internal test, but we want to make
sure that it's not at the expense of the citizens, the
public, and the employees.
And we respectfully ask that the two plans, the
reorganization and the layoffs, not to be executed
until a full account of the effects be brought forth
as an agenda item at this public forum.
And that's what I request.
Thank you.
(9:32 a.m.)
>>THOMAS SCOTT: If you are speaking to an item on the

agenda, move to the front so we can move.
If you are speaking to an item on the agenda you can
move towards the front.
We give preference to those items that are on the
agenda first.
>>> Spencer Kass, 1001 North Howard Avenue.
There's three items I wanted to bring up that are on
the agenda.
The first one is item 47, which is a report of the
streetlights.
As council may or may not be aware there was another
audit report done in 2002.
That report used to be on the City of Tampa Web site
but has been pulled down, and I think there's some
reported issues on that that needs to be discussed
such as why it is that our inventories are up, when
they plan to have inventories fixed, the initial '02
report calls for mapping out if streetlights were
being evenly disbursed throughout Tampa.
The audit report doesn't touch on that subject.
I would ask respectfully that council get a copy of
the '02 water report.

I only have a couple pages of it, and compare it to
the current report and find out when these items are
going to be taken care of.
According to the count we are off by 2,000
streetlights.
I think just for monetary reasons that report should
be kept track of.
Next is item 101-66 which is the neighborhood
stabilization plan.
I have to talk before Ms. Miller so I don't know what
she's going to say, but hopefully part of what will be
covered will be some sort of economic analysis.
I received an economics report from the board of
realtors last night that showed one of the major
problems in Tampa is too much inventory.
It seems the plan in Tampa is to put more inventory
back on the market.
I don't see how that makes sense.
What you will end up doing if they are going to buy
these lower-than-market costs, sort of what the plan
is, you are going to end up undercutting the tax base,
you are going to have people go, well, look, the city

just bought these, they are going to pay 100,000 for
the lot, you should lower my property taxes.
You could end up with a real quick spiral and the city
competing against private people who have places to
rent.
There's plenty of affordable units currently available
in the City of Tampa.
It $700 a month.
It doesn't get much cheaper than that.
Finally on item number 95, permit fees, there's a
couple issues.
When City Council raised the cost of permit fees,
there was not a copy of the report by the outside
consultant given to City Council.
I pulled up the files on the computer, and the report,
it doesn't show how the building department came up
with these new fees.
I can tell you the budget committee asked for a copy
of that report and so far over the past two months, it
hasn't been turned over by the administration.
There are businesses, licensed businesses that are
suffering tremendously because of this.

I know for a fact there are people going in to bid on
projects to do work that we need permits, they are
showing people what they want to charge for it and
what the permit fees are, and the residents are
telling people, do without the permits.
And because they are licensed contractors, they are
telling people, we can't do that.
We don't want to put our license in jeopardy.
So only unlicensed contractors to do the work.
We discussed this in Drew Park.
I think there needs to be some serious consideration
about waiving City of Tampa building fees for one
year.
Dropping them down to zero.
Subsidize the building department for a year.
It's more important to protect the health and safety
of our residents than it is for the City of Tampa to
grab a couple of extra dollars.
Thank you.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me ask a question.
You have businesses, is that right?
>>> Yes, sir.

>> Are you faced with a loss?
>>> No.
>> You are note.
The city is looking at a $50 million something loss.
I assume if you were running the city that you would
have -- if you were the mayor of the city you would
have zero cost for permits?
>>> I think --
>> That's what you said.
>>> I would at least do analysis, if you bring your
costs down to zero.
>> I didn't ask you that.
I just asked a question.
>>> Yes, I would.
>> You would?
>>> Yes.
>> So you would have how many employees being
subsidized by the general fund, by the general
employees who have no cost involved, but they are the
ones that are going to have to supplement that
department.
>>> Well, the citizens.

>> Right, the citizens.
So which is better, those that are going to get
something, pay for something, or those that are not
going to get something pay for everything?
>>> Well, since we already subsidize it for some
things, for example, council lowered the fees for tree
trimming, to subsidize other things.
There's also been no consideration in the City of
Tampa as to the city makes it's money with property
taxes.
You don't really make your money off the building
permit fees.
Or --
>> I don't want to debate, but property taxes don't
even cover the police and fire.
Now that.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: We can take that up later on.
We have a lot of speakers here to address.
>>> Pete Johnson, 301 Druid hills, Temple Terrace,
Florida, to speak on item number 97.
I very shortly looked over this document, and I see
that an awful lot of money was eaten by the City of

Tampa because of residential property being
homesteaded.
Okay.
Obviously, there is no reason for us to put a fine on
a residential property.
It's legally uncollectible.
I suggest that we develop a citation program that once
the notice is given out to the homesteaded property
that immediately a citation is issued within the legal
ramifications of due notice, which is 14 days.
There's in a sense in having all of these figures that
don't mean anything whatsoever.
Second of all, I got some good news and some bad news.
I have been very involved with a couple of
neighborhood associations along the Nebraska Avenue.
The drugs and prostitution activity is so bad that on
a recent Sunday we had a clean-up, and I counted 10 to
15 prostitutes out at sock on a Sunday morning.
I mean, they were coming onto us trying to clean up
the garbage.
It was disgraceful.
I have finally gotten with Jane castor.

She has really put the punch in making the correction.
But I question, what are we going to do?
What is the plan after we arrest all these people?
How can we keep this down?
And its consistency.
TPD needs to be consistent about this problem.
I have got a list here of at this point 34 arrests in
three stings.
If there's 34 arrests, three nights that they are out
there, can you imagine what the neighborhood has to
live with on a daily basis?
I got these all for you to read.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> My name is Donald Phillips, 142 West Platt street,
here to address item 99, motion to develop harsh
penalties for high-end water users.
Friends, citizens, honorable members of the council, I
come before you today not in an official capacity but
that as a concerned leader of your community,
attempting to help my community.

I understand that we have many challenges regarding
water supplies.
I will encourage you to fund creative, aggressive
solutions to fix the issue rather than grandstanding
with regressive, punitive measures that will not fix
the problem, that casts our largest philanthropic
people in the community into bad light, whose
generosity exceeds that of the city's contribution at
times to our universities, museums, parks, zoo,
charities, is short sighted.
The methods -- messages you are sending to the pillars
of our city single-family we intend to present you as
the problem of our community.
Issues like this that drive wedges in our city are not
productive and will result in disenfranchising these
people in our time of need.
Do this enough and imagine our city without the
Wallaces and their unending donations to the zoo,
Joshua house, et cetera, et cetera.
The Glazers and their recent $5 million contribution
to the children's museum.
And our sports business.

David strawberry and his selfless contribution to the
Tampa university and the millions of dollars that his
family has contributed.
Steinbrenner and the Yankees and their spring training
camp, tug boat business.
We owe them more than incremental amounts of water.
So on and so on, if this isn't intuitive, it is
Biblical, do not cast your Pearls before swine.
You are handing out aspirin for cancer.
Cure the disease.
Involve the wealth and the minds of hey-end users in
real solutions for the city's problems.
To those of you that feel you have true leadership
potential, engage these successful people in finding a
solution to their issues and others.
Remember that when you are worth a couple hundred
million dollars and have a generous wallet, the entire
world beckons.
Thank you for your leadership and your prudent
stewardship.
>>> My name is Judy Ellis, 1874 walrus way south in
St. Petersburg.

I represent a nonprofit organization working to reduce
noise pollution.
The residents of Tampa came to me for assistance and I
am here today to offer a solution.
The problem is the so-called boom car, a vehicle
equipped with one or more sub woofers designed to
maximize noise over the greatest possible distance,
morning, noon and night.
The police department does its best but these are
moving targets.
Nearly everyone is bothered by these cars, but about
10% of us have a serious physical response to them
that ranges from pain in the chest to tremors,
sweating, and nausea.
The sustained level of adrenaline brought on by these
boom cars is sufficient to take years off a person's
life, and also generates aggression so that on the
average of three times a month, somewhere in this
country, someone is beaten, stabbed or shot, often
it's law enforcement, because of this noise.
This is also a drug-related noise.
Police in many cities now know that at least one car

in four stopped for noise will produce drugs, guns or
people wanted on warrants.
In St. Petersburg, we have found a simple cost
effective method of controlling this problem.
That is allows the citizens to go online to the police
department and enter a noise complaint form with the
car tag, description, date, time and location.
The police department runs the tag, identifies the
owner, and generates a nonpunitive letter reminding
the offender that we have a state law that says no
more than 25 feet from the car, and asking the person
to respect his neighbors.
It works it tells violators that someone is watching,
it tells violators the police now know about him and
he doesn't know what a second offense might bring down
on his head.
The cost of all of this is a 44-cent stamp -- sorry,
Monday -- and volunteer of the police department to
run the tags.
We believe that 80% of the people who receive letters
like this alter their behavior.
In many parts of St. Petersburg peace and quiet have

been restored, people are enjoying their front yards
again.
And after this program was available in St. Petersburg
for one year, it was adopted by Largo, Clearwater, and
Gulfport in rapid succession.
As far as we know, Dallas is considering doing it
right now.
I urge you to adopt a soft letter program for the
people in your city being victimized this way.
It not only gives people a sense of regaining control
over their environment, it gives the police something
else to do except to say, sorry, we didn't see it, we
didn't hear it, there's nothing we can do.
The police hate saying "there's nothing we can do."
This gives them something they can offer to citizens.
Thank you very much.
Are there any questions about this?
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
Next speaker.
(9:46 a.m.)
>>> I'm glad to be here.
I had surgery for cancer Friday and it was very

successful.
I just say my daddy died in '57 with the same problem
and God is good.
My name is Marian Daniels, 3708 -- Tampa, Florida.
We have a problem.
The problem is noise coming from cars like Miss Ella
said.
It's out of control.
I have the petition here of 347 citizens that
complained.
It goes on from the time that I wake up to the time
that I go to bed.
It's very annoying.
I work construction and build ships for 30 years.
I'm tired.
I'm taking a beating.
Some neighbors say, don't do anything, don't complain,
it's not going to do any good.
I also have a letter from Posey battery on 40th Street
that's affecting the business.
You site can't do business because the noise is so
bad.

You know, it's very upsetting.
I have a letter here from so many companies that has
complained.
Branny wine apartment.
They are complaining about noise.
It's out of control.
And some people are looking the other way and they are
saying, it's a small problem.
But it's a big problem.
It's out of control.
When I can't sleep at night, I'm up at 3:00, 4:00 in
the morning sleeping with ear plugs on, it's a
problem.
And I don't want you all to overlook this problem.
We need to change to save our society and work on this
property.
It is a serious problem.
One thing when the governor of New York first took
over, he said, we have got to take care of all the
little problems, so they don't become big problems.
He said we are going to take care of the noise.
And if we take care of these little problems they

don't become big problems.
Thank you very much.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can ask if you can geographically
give us a location.
I understand north bay where it's at.
>>> Yes, north bay and MLK.
The noise.
You go to the supermarket 22nd and Hillsborough.
>> Hillsborough, 22nd.
>>> MLK and 26th.
It's all over the city.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say this.
It may be in the city but it's not all over the city.
That's why I am asking for a geographical thing so I
can ask the police department what you just asked for.
Because I don't hear that in my district.
>>> 26th and MLK.
37 and Shelton.
40th Street and --
>> So you are saying for 40th street on the east
to 15th street on the west, and from Blake to the
south to Hillsborough on the west?

>>> Right.
It's all the way up the Hillsborough River going
north, like if you are going north.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, then
Councilwoman Mulhern.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I always envision somebody brings
us a problem with a solution, especially an
inexpensive solution.
And I think that the communities in Pinellas that have
tried this soft letter approach have obviously had
some good success with it.
And I think we should ask and I'll make a motion that
the police department come back to us in 30 days and
we can give them examples.
I just want to say, Mr. Miranda, I love sidewalk
cafes, and somebody who is sitting outside, I hear
these cars, too.
>>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to point out and
actually ask if there's anyone from the administration
here, but we have an item on our agenda today, number
8, approving a memorandum of understanding between the
Hillsborough County EPC, which is the Environmental

Protection Commission, who is charged with noise
abatement and measuring that, between the city.
So I think it may be -- I wasn't sure.
All I know was this was on there.
And the noise level was the issue.
So maybe we could hear from someone.
It looks like the city might be looking into this
already.
>>> What Ms. Melees is saying, we don't need to keep
running from this.
We run from too many problems and allow our society to
get worse.
This problem is getting worse and worse.
When I started complaining, I was the only one that
complained, the police department tells me they need
everyone in the neighborhood to complain.
>>MARY MULHERN: I don't know if someone seconded.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, she's going to make a motion
after public comment:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, I'm just concerned that
item number 8 -- and I do see the prosecutor David
Shobe and Mr. Fletcher is here, these may be related.

>>MARY MULHERN: That's what I was bringing it out now:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I just wants to be clear.
>>MARY MULHERN: But it does have to do with --
Noise.
>>MARY MULHERN: Noise.
>> It's basically a mutual aid agreement to just
changing how we are divvying up assignments between
the police department and EPC.
That's all that is.
>>MARY MULHERN: I wasn't suggesting a solution.
It just looked to me that there might already be an
issue that we are looking at.
>>> But Mr. Miranda is right.
If you live in Hyde Park, live in New Tampa where the
neighborhood association is real strong, they don't
take a beating like we do.
We have taken a beating.
>>GWEN MILLER: We are going to work on it.
We'll work on it.
>>MARTIN SHELBY:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I guess this is a question that Mr.
Fletcher or Mr. Shobe can address but I want to make

sure that item number 8 if you are asking for a motion
for TPD top do something that this memorandum might
shift that responsibility away from TPD.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, we'll come back and see what the
motion is and get legal involved.
I think we need to have legal take a look at what they
are doing first before we do anything.
I think we can have legal.
So we'll talk about it in just a minute.
Let me finish public comment.
>>MARY MULHERN: Let me just say thank you for bringing
that up.
I think I would like to pull that item 8 for
discussion before we pass on the consent agenda.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
Next speaker.
>>> I would like to say good morning to City Council
members.
And I appreciate you giving me some time to speak.
I know you are really busy.
I would just like to make this short.
My concern is the same letter.

I stay in East Tampa.
My name is Samuel L. Mobley.
And I work with the police department concerning this.
I work with Jason, also work with the captain, and
actually, I call just about every other day about this
noise.
And I live between Chelsea and from 40th Street to
50th street.
And my area from Easton Avenue to 44th street.
It's a small area but it creates a lot of noise when
you have drug dealers coming in there with their loud
music.
Now, what they actually do is they wait till they see
me, and they actually turn it up higher, because they
know that I am the one that's complaining.
Now, we have a thing, they say boom-boom that they
have with the police department, in order to look into
the situation.
But we do need some help.
Trust me.
Now, I do work with the nomination committee, the
revitalization committee for the City of Tampa.

And I chose to work with them concerning this.
I try not to be a pest.
Way mean by a pest is calling all the time.
But when it gets to the point that you can't sleep,
your windows are vibrating, and you can't even talk
inside your own house, and to have to live with that
noise, I don't think it's fair to me.
And I do know that Mayor Iorio has a concern in East
Tampa, because she has a revitalization committee at
this time.
And this is one of the big problems that we have.
And most of the time you have the live music, it is
involved.
So I would appreciate City Council looking into this
and try to help our area so it can be safe for us.
I appreciate that very much.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
Next speaker.
>>> My name is John Miller.
Oasis Irrigation.
My business resides at 3331 west Main Street in Tampa.
The other gentleman spoke earlier about the water,

about and that's a point I probably didn't consider,
day one I was probably one of the guys that said, hey,
just raise the rates.
But that is a very valid point.
Some thought about raising the tier rate rates and
charging our affluent City of Tampa Wes residents more
money and the last thing we want to dop is make those
folks mad.
But that same note those affluent City of Tampa
residents are the folks that can afford to probably
hire the water truck you talked about for many
years -- or many months, I'm sorry.
We have done a lot of research on the water trucks.
They are anywhere from a minimum of 100 up to $300
anytime you water your lawn.
The average Joe, the average resident cannot afford to
spend 400 to $1200 per month for a water truck and
keep their lawn alive.
I'm sure City Council has noticed the City of Tampa
landscape has started to take a very big turn for the
worse.
We have dying sod everywhere.

We have trees that are suffering.
Dead plants.
City of Tampa is becoming and will become an
aesthetically ugly city if we continue note to allow
any water at all to be used.
Rain season is coming.
We hope it's coming soon.
It's been an issue for the last ten-plus years.
Every year we have a drought.
Every year the water gets to that critical stage.
And every year we get rain.
Our reservoir fills up.
The reservoir fills so high it actually overfills the
dam.
And next season, same thing happens.
I won't mention any reservoir levels.
I think the reservoir is better than it was last year
and a few previous years.
I would like to ask City Council to amend the current
ordinance and impose the original city recommendations
to allow a little bit of water every other week so
that we can at least try to minimize our landscape

losses and get us to the rainy season, and the big
thing is we need to figure out, which we all know the
water source, I think we are working towards that.
We have actually had our first meeting with the
tactical committee, came up with some good ideas and
working with Brad Baird so I think that's going to be
a good thing and try to present a lot of water
conservation ideas to where we don't constantly run
into.
We need more water, another source of water for our
residents. Anyway, thank you.
I appreciate your time.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I am just going to
make some general comments.
I am not going to speak directly to the remarks that
were made.
I don't believe the city government came out with a
preference A and preference B.
They gave us two choices when those choices came down,
this council chose one of the two.
Let me also say that for over 35 consecutive days, the
flows and the measurements of the river have been the

lowest in over 60 years.
Let me also say that the public deserves an applause
for what they have done in conservation.
In May of every year, on watering on Tuesdays and
Sundays, we are over 90 to 95 million gallons, and the
report to you on non-watering days last week, we did
64 million, and on watering days 62 million, or
increase of only 2 million.
If we were to go to 95 million and spend the extra 60
or 70 million gallons, this reservoir, which now is at
9.02 works not be at 9.02.
It would be at 18 or lower.
And that means when it gets to 16, the pressures in
the pumps will not be able to pressurize the water to
send to West Tampa and all of South Tampa.
These are not easy choices.
None of us here made a choice based on items without
fact.
These items were discussed here at length.
These items were brought to us at length.
These items were debated at length.
And the gentleman has some right to say that.

I believe that we have not done an adequate job.
You see, during the rainy season, over half a million
gallons, 500 million gallons, go over the dam during
some parts of the day, after the taking of Tampa Bay
water, and after the taking of the city water supply.
We need more -- I'm sorry, I'll stop right now.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, we can continue on.
We have about eight minutes left so we are going to
run out of time here.
Next speaker.
(10:01 a.m.)
>>> Sal Chillura, landscape, Thonotosassa.
I too am talking about the water restrictions.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just stop.
No one else need to get in line because we are going
to stop this shortly.
No one else needs to get in line after that gentleman
there.
Sir, after you we are not taking any more comments.
Okay?
>>> The reason why I am here is I have a lot of
customers, in the Tampa area calling me, now seeing

the concern that they are losing high investments as
the earlier gentleman spoke about the more affluent
customers.
The tiering is fair but also unfair.
I think one thing that should be probably done is
maybe take into consideration the size of the
property, because you can't expect somebody with a
5-acre parcel to use the same amount of water as
someone with a half acre lot.
So something like that probably should work well.
It was a good point that Mr. Miranda said about the
wintertime.
I think there should be some things done to better
hold our water with the reservoir or what have you in
the wintertime and maybe also institute an
every-other-week watering or something to that effect
in the winter when we don't need to water every week
to save the water for when we do need it in the
summertime.
I mean, I think restrictions are going to need to be
in place.
We just have to kind of tweak them and see when is the

best time to do it to minimize damage.
We always encourage Florida friendly first, the right
turf, the right plant, the right place.
That's key.
However, there's a lot of people how the there that
have a big investment right now and until they change
their 10,000 square foot St. Augustine lawn to a bahia
lawn, that's a big expense and probably a lot of
people very well to do that and some homeowners might
have to change their restriction because a lot of them
mandate St. Augustine and that's a problem.
Bun -- one of the things I noticed about the gallon
usage off the chart provided was the actual water
consumption has gone up over the past two weeks, about
6 million gallons a day.
On watering and non-watering days.
And I think a lot of that has to do with people
watering with their hose or now over the last two
weeks you see the stressed out yards, so they are
trying to save what they can.
If you take into consideration the 6 million gallons a
day, that's 42 million gallons a week.

When we were allowing watering we were using 14
million gallons a day on the watering days times two
days a week, that's 28 million gallons.
So in effect over the last two weeks we have increased
that side of the consumption.
Whether it's from people cheating or people going out
there trying with the hose the best they can or
running their low volume, that 4 million gallons a day
from two weeks ago, it was on nonwatering days 59.6
million.
This last week it was 64.8.
And two weeks ago on watering days it was 60 Pointe
.3.
This weak it was 66.26.
So slightly over 6 million a day.
I think allowing people to moderately water their
yard, it's going to be a big hit on those two days,
but over the course of the week may actually save
water.
I would like to see the council vote for that, just to
give some of our customers and your constituents some
relief in the fact that they are going to have to

relandscape, and do a lot of things.
And in these hard economic times that's going to be a
burden on a lot of people as well as getting
everything established after -- if everybody doesn't
landscape that's going to be a big burden on the water
supply.
We are going to be using a lot of water to get
everything reestablish established.
I know you guys have a tough decision and we
appreciate you gays making the effort.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
Next speaker.
>>> Campbell Burton, north 13th street in Sulphur
Springs.
I would like to say that I agree with the soft letter
possibility of dealing with noise.
We have a terrible noise problem in my neighborhood,
also.
But it's usually the same people, and I think it would
be very helpful and further a letter from TPD will
have a lot more effect than a letter from the EPC or
someone else.

I don't think that would get the message across.
But I am here to talk about water.
I'm a landscape contractor.
I had a client call me yesterday who was able to hook
up to reclaimed water.
But in the meantime water truck costs $295,000 to
water a 10,000 square foot property and that's not
realistic to think that she'll ever do that again.
I'm here to urge you to consider a vote on possibly
amending the existing ordinance to an every-other-week
watering.
I was at a townhouse complex yesterday afternoon, that
as we know the housing market is depressed, and of the
seven unit complex only six are empty.
Only one is actually occupied.
And as I walked around I noticed that it just looked
like a giant hay field.
I said are you able to hook up?
They said, no, we are between Swann and DeLeon but
our street will not allow us to get to reclaimed
water.
Reclaimed water costs on average about $1,000 per

client for me to hook them up to by the time they get
a meter and we convert them over.
And I can sell that to every client I have if it was
available but unfortunately it's only available to
that 8,000 potential people in the whole city.
And I don't know if the figures are correct, but I
read that we have we dump 50 million gallons of
reclaimed water into the bay because we cannot
contribute it and I think that is a real shame, and I
understand that that's a major investment of
infrastructure to expand that program, and the city
feels the economic downturn just like the private
sector does.
But I think long-term that is the answer.
I think water with potable water is not a great idea
but I think the idea of at least allowing every other
week to allow to keep some of these properties alive
until it rains, until we get back on track, is
certainly worth looking into.
And I understand that the reservoir is low.
But I think it's something we should definitely
consider.

Thank you.
>> Sir, we are having a workshop on the expansion of
our reclaim water system on May 28th at 9:30 here
in council chambers.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: I'm here on behalf of the World
Trade Center Tampa Bay and in support of your item
number 103 regarding expanded trade to Cuba.
Just recently, we issued a press release.
I provided copies to you, which I think Marty can
contribute.
Basically, Watt says is the president of the World
Trade Center along with his Board of Directors has
voted in favor of organizing a fact finding mission to
Cuba within the next several weeks.
There are several formalities which must be met in
order for this delegation to be approved.
However, jack wirily, Jose Caliente will be leading
that delegation.
Both of them are Cuban Americans who lived in the be
the area since the 1960s.
The delegation's purpose will be to identify trade
opportunities and expanding other opportunities for

communication and cultural as well as economic
exchanges with Cuba.
If you will notice, there is also provided to you a
workshop panel discussion involving the port of Tampa,
and experts from Tulane university as well as the
University of Florida, which will be held on May
29th at the university club.
And if you are interested in participating in that,
you should contact the World Trade Center at
813-864-4401.
And that is encouraging expansion of trade between the
Tampa Bay area and Cuba.
And certainly would encourage council to participate
if you wish.
Thank you.
>>> My name is Captain Cliff Conatser, and I have a
small business on the river, taxi, as well as a tour
boat.
The reason I am here is to extend a wake zone for a
future meeting you may have.
From Rick's down to the performing arts.
You can go as fast as you want.

60, 70 miles per hour, whatever you want to do.
And the reason we don't have it changed is because
with what the FWC told me is you need citations,
accidents, before they can change any of.
This now, I'm sure that we haven't had as many
citations written as we could have.
Obviously we don't have enough people to watch those
waters.
Accidents, I don't know if we have had them or not.
I keep trying to get reports on it to find out what
those accidents may have been in the past.
The wake zone, I have been coming under bridges, boats
doing 40 miles an hour in that area.
And I have to give way obviously because a 40
mile-an-hour boat is probably going to be laying on
top of me if I keep going.
There's kayakers in that water.
There are people in row boats.
If they come out from behind one of those bridges with
what these boats are allowed to do 40, 50 miles an
hour, if they come from behind one it's going to be
too late for that boat to stop.

They have no brakes.
So it's just safety.
I hate to see a serious accident -- excuse my voice, I
had surgery awhile ago and I lose saliva, so I
apologize.
I hate to see a serious accident happen before we
change it.
And the FWC, like I said, said we have to have reports
to serious accidents or citations to change something
like that.
We don't need to wait until that happens before we
change it.
A serious accident, a fatal accident is not the reason
to change something that should be done already.
I have had bad experiences in that area.
It's like a speed zone.
They just do whatever they want, race whenever they
want.
Captain Larry is going to say something about it, too,
so I turn it over to him.
Thank you very much for your time.
>>> Thank you very much.

I'm Lawrence Salkin, the operator of the Tampa water
shuttle.
We operate seven days a week, 12-14 hours a day on the
beautiful waters of Tampa.
I see more of what goes on in the water than I think
any other person in Tampa.
And as Captain Cliff says, I am gravely concerned with
the zone that we are talking, that is approximately a
mile from Rick's down to the Performing Arts Center.
On a daily basis, I see people going through that area
at anywhere from 50 to 50 miles an hour on boats.
And this creates a very serious problem for everyone
on the water.
We have kayakers there.
We have the sculling crews from Tampa university as
well as smaller boats.
And these wakes that these boats create can be as high
as five feet high.
Okay.
This is enough to overturn a kayak.
This can take an entire crew on a rowing show and put
them in the water, okay, as well as the effect it has

on smaller boats, which as little as -- and I have
seen this happen -- people being thrown from the seats
to the floors of their boats or even being ejected
from their boats.
This area that we are talking about on the
Hillsborough River is like a drag strip.
Now, it has a place in the middle where above it is a
no-wake zone, below it is a no-wake zone, to all of a
sudden have an open speed zone, which technically
shouldn't be, because it is going under bridges, and
not supposed to go quickly under bridges, but it
becomes a speed zone.
And it's sort of like taking a five-block strip of
Tampa street and make it a 75 mile-an-hour zone.
I don't think would you do that.
That makes no logical sense.
And there's also no practical reason for this area to
be unrestricted.
But that's what I see happening on a daily basis.
My second point that I would like to make about this
zone being traveled so quickly and the wakes being
created is really a dollars and cents one.

You see, when boats go through this area, creating
these wakes, the City of Tampa is going to be paying
hard dollars for this.
And this is because the degeneration of the sea walls,
the barricades around the bridges, as well as the
footing to the bridges.
Now, that comes from the city.
You will have to pay for that.
And the cumulative effect of these boats going through
there throwing these large wakes is going to be paid
for by the citizens of Tampa.
And, the bucks are already tight and you don't need to
spend more.
My third area that I would like to address in the
speed zone here is this is where Manatees travel
through.
I see them every single day.
These Manatees travel through here both individually
and in groups.
And in essence you have created a kill zone for them.
(Bell sounds).
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.

>>> Thank you very much.
Thank you for the time.
(10:15 a.m.)
>>> My name is Natasha Linehouse, and I reside at 811
west Louisiana Avenue.
>> State your name again, please?
>> Natasha Linehouse, 811 Louisiana Avenue.
I hear of an alleyway that's in between Louisiana and
Osborne directly behind, there's a drugstore, and the
gas station on the corner.
The owner of the drugstore.
>> Rose Ferlita.
>> Has had -- the majority of the alleyway, the
neighborhood uses it.
We have some pictures of the house that's right next
to it.
They either use it to get into their backyard, the
alleyway right there, and now it's now a space that
you can barely walk through it, you know.
And we have gotten neighbors to sign the petition,
because no one was even notified of that there was
going to be mostly close the alleyway, and we felt

like there could have been some type of notification
there, you know.
It was going to be closed so the people even living
next door can make a judgment to how they may be able
to get into their driveway, I mean, the driveway where
they can park their cars.
So it's been a concern of the neighborhood, and we
have some pictures, actually, of how that's affecting,
you know, the way there.
And I don't know if there's a way for us to show.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Before we go any further, may I sea
say it's my information that that alley was closed
April 28th of 05 under CO-4-39.
The ordinance was 2005-110.
The alley was closed.
>>> It's been open.
>>> 2000.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just telling you way got from my
aide.
And you can go talk to her and she'll show you that
the alley was closed.
She'll pull up the ordinance and give it to you.

>>> When did they close this?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: April 28th of 05.
>>> No, they just did it this year.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Maybe they did it this year but the
alley was closed.
>>> I came in 2005.
They told me they come to see what's the problem.
I haven't seen anybody came to the house to see the
problem.
Like I told him.
And I have my trailer out in the front.
Now give me a citation about my trailer. If they
close the alley, I can't get in my backyard.
The only way I can get in the backyard, had to go all
the way around.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not disputing that's incorrect.
>>> Well, we didn't get no notice that they was going
to close it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: We can ask legal if you all take a
look at that.
>>> Because nobody informed us about that at all.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, if you get with legal they'll

take a look to see if they can clear that up and tell
whether you it's been officially closed or not.
Thank you.
Do you want a motion about the noise ordinance?
>>MARY MULHERN: I want to pull that item from the
agenda.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm not talking about 8.
Way want is a motion to refer to legal to take a look
at what they did in St. Pete K.we do that?
>>MARY MULHERN: Was that her motion?
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I don't know.
I am going to give up -- what I am going to refer is
legal take a look at the ordinance or whatever they
have and say take a look at it and come back to
council with a report or recommendation on that.
Okay?
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
All in favor of that motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Saul-Sena, that's your motion.
I was looking for you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a of others.

>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I was just taking that off.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to say how long?
>> 30 days is fine.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The soft all right, report back to
the --
We are asking legal to take a look at it, and make
sure that we can do that, and what it's all involved
and them make a recommendation back to us in 30 days.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: As long as you are picking up from
the community's comments, I would like to make a
motion in regard to the no-wake zone from Rick's on
the river down to the Performing Arts Center.
That's an issue that has come up -- I'm sorry, you
need to vote on that?
>>GWEN MILLER: We voted on it:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: You voted on the sought letter.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to make a motion to
get staff to give a report back in 60 days on the
issue of no wake zone, the possibility of implement
ago no-wake zone from Ricks down to the arts center,
that is an area, we have a lot of crew teams in that

area and other slower water users.
And that would be my motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
(Motion carried)
We go to our regular agenda at this time.
And what I would like to do, council, is we can have
read to us, we took up a couple of items regarding
comments of council, or statements, my understanding
is you ask reinforce to that.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Does that include a chair rotating
motion?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe you are referring to 4-I,
reads as follows, council members shall refrain from
speaking more than twice on the same subject at the
same meeting and should not be recognized by the chair
to speak a second time if another member who has not
spoken to the question desires the floor.
Rule 4-J says council members shall limit time for
their remarks on agenda item to no longer than five
minutes.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's been in effect since when I

was chair for five years.
Unless a council member hasn't spoken.
You can have two bites and that was it.
That's how it was then.
We have more rules here than the United States
Constitution and we are still not functioning.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, that's the same resume but
has not been enforced.
Now the chairman wants to enforce it.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Good.
I'm glad he is.
He can be chairman again.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: So be mindful that this is what
council adds to our strategic planning so we plan to
enforce that.
Okay?
Is there anyone who wishes to ask council for
reconsideration on any legislative matter?
Legislative matter for reconsideration?
>>> Two items that I would like to ask for
reconsideration on from your agenda last time.
The first one is I would like you to reconsider file

E-2009-17.
It's not on this one.
It was on your previous one.
That's why it's up for reconsideration.
That was the collective bargaining agreement that gave
out the raises to City of Tampa employees.
There were certain facts that council didn't have at
that time.
And I would like to put those facts into the record so
that you can make an informed decision if you want to
go through with those raises.
First, as has been said the City of Tampa doesn't have
the $3 million that it needs for the raises.
Secondly, the budget hearing last year, Bonnie Wise
told council that spending that money out of the
reserve funds for tax cuts is fiscally irresponsible.
She said it's just as fiscally irresponsible to spend
it on raises.
So nobody asked her at the time of the hearing what
her thoughts were and whether you should be spending
that money.
It was extremely divisive to give out raises at the

time when there were nearly 30,000 residents in the
City of Tampa that don't have jobs.
Our unemployment rate is over 10% in the now in the
City of Tampa.
I don't think that council took into account the fact
that there's debate going on about light rail.
And when I spoke to people in the county that the city
had given out raises this past year they said they
would never vote in support of light rail, where the
city is showing that it can't be fiscally responsible
with taxpayer money.
I don't think any of the same tests that we used last
year to determine if taxpayers should get a tax cut
were used in a contract and I think it should be
reconsidered.
That's the first time I want to ask for
reconsideration.
I don't know if you want to do both things I want to
ask reconsideration on.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: If they want to take that up
separately they can or they can hear both requests at
the same time.

Whether to take action is your call.
Do you wish to hear?
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Go ahead.
>>> The second was B-2009-46, an agreement with the
committee of 100, $288,000.
I have nothing against supporting things but I'm all
for it.
Nobody is more in favor of it than I am.
The problem is there was in a report as to what
happened with the money we spent last year or the year
before on this contract.
You know, there's no definitive results being asked
for in these contracts.
This year's is better than last years.
But before we go and spend another $288,000 on a
program, I think it's fair to the citizens that we
first see what the results are and get a report on
what the results were.
That's the other item I would ask reconsideration on.
(Bell sounds).
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
THE WITNESS:

>>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can address a couple things.
With regard to Mr. Cass' second issue with the
agreement of the committee of 100, just a remainder,
that was an agreement that was retroactive to October
1st.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: For moneys previously budgeted.
It does not affect and it will come back and has to
come back -- come back again for FY-10.
That's the first thing.
Number two is with regard to both requests, because
these are authorizations for the mayor and the
administration to enter into an agreement, normally
what happens is when the mayor signs the agreement,
council loses jurisdiction.
So I assume that both of those are assigned.
I cannot state with certainty.
If you wish me to choir I will.
But very well with the action that took place several
weeks ago, council, once those agreements obviously
have been signed would lose jurisdiction over the
opportunity to rescind that.

>>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
We can verify that.
But I can almost guarantee you, it probably wasn't
signed because I signed off, the mayor signed off, and
I sign we take action and then it goes over to the
mayor the same day.
So I assume that has already taken place.
But the clerk can report back to us after lunch.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to compliment you, Mr. Cass,
on your really careful scrutiny of the city's business
and bringing these things to our attention.
And I think the points you raise, which is what are we
doing with these increases at the time we were looking
at job cuts, what are we doing with contracts that are
not very specific in terms of what we expect and I
think it would be appropriate, Mr. Chairman, first
find out if indeed the agreements have gone into
place, if you can check on that, Mr. Shelby, that
would be useful.
But also to ask Mrs. a ways for the two issues you
raised first of all to see what these proposed salary
increases were, and secondly to make sure that in our

upcoming budget that any money that we give to the
committee of 100 is much more specific in terms of our
expectations for finding out what exactly was
accomplished for our public investment.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I think you have to be very
careful we've the charter.
I don't know how the chart area louse us to deal with
that, with City Council.
That's a whole other issue.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Just asking for information.
That was my intent was to ask for information.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That was a motion.
>>MARY MULHERN: I want to say that I believe the
contract that council agreed to was retroactive, also,
to last fiscal year, so basically it was the agreement
between the administration and the union that was made
for this past fiscal year, current fiscal year's
contract.
Which was made, I don't know when.
And the rank and file are actually not receiving the
pay increases.

And it was to retroactively at that.
So that's also kind of in the same category as the
appropriation for the committee of 100.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Miranda.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am not trying to do anything.
When I was sitting in Mr. Caetano's seat, which is a
very nice seat, got smart there, I remember making a
statement during the negotiations, and not this time
but the time before, and I offered on the table that
we take a 5% cut across the board, so that the
citizens cop get the same amount of service and the
employees wouldn't be laid off.
And it may have been four, may have been six, but I
said five.
That was never caught fire.
So there was no sense of going any further.
Now we have the results we are going to have to face.
We have a $54 million budget deficit so I'm told.
12 million of that comes from negotiation, hopefully,
between the mayor and the people who are represented
by the three unions, and that's 12 million.
Well, you do the math.

There's still 42 million that's got to come from
somewhere.
And so it will be by my estimate composition of, "A,"
less projects being done, and, "B," less employees
being on staff.
So I have a sense to agree with you but that's where
I'm at.
I tried but I didn't swim too far.
>>> I appreciate it.
Thank you.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I need a second for councilwoman's
Saul-Sena's motion.
It may be broken up because one is for information.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: If you can rephrase.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Let me be clear.
They are both asking for information.
One is specifically on the raises.
And the other is specifically on the deliverables from
the community of 100 top see what we can expect in
terms of accomplishment for the investment we are
making.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.

Seconded by councilman Caetano.
Make when do you want that to come back?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One should be able -- I would say
two weeks.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: So we can get that back in two weeks.
Let me run through committee reports and then bring up
staff reports real quick.
We have an ordinance, too.
Read number 4.
>>MARY MULHERN: We didn't do the approval of the
agenda, did we?
I would like to remove --
We'll do it.
Okay.
Number 4.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I move an ordinance
for first reading, an ordinance for the city of Tampa,
Florida amending ordinance 2008-186 by correcting a
scrivener's error, providing for graphic insert,
diagram 8.2 for section 27-180 alternative parking
requirements, providing for repeal of all ordinances
in conflict, providing for severability, providing an

effective date.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Recently, we had a controversial
zoning which was talking about parking and adequacy
and I asked people would get credit if they got
bicycle parking instead of car spaces and I was told
that as we update all of our ordinances to reflect
those newly adopted comp plans that we would do that.
So I wanted to say I'm eager when we receive back our
improvements in chapter 27 that we accomplish
executing some bike parking for car parking to
encourage bicycle use.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Dingfelder.
All in favor say Aye.
Councilman Gwen Miller.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
Second reading of the ordinance will be held May
21st at 9:30 a.m.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you want to hold this till later to
come speak on it?
>>MARY MULHERN: I don't see Chip here.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: He just walked out.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, just pull it and we can come

back.
>>MARY MULHERN: Pull it and we can come back.
Fine.
Number 8.
>>GWEN MILLER: I move 5 through 7 and 9 through 15.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried).
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Parks and recreation.
Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move items 15
through 41.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I believe 29.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did I go too far of?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll second it but I would like 18
and 19, I know that it's $25,000, but what is it for?
I know it's for creation of portfolio.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I can speak to that if you like.
Actually, we see so many images in this very room.
It's every year our Public Art Committee has committed
$25,000 for which we get 25 images.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded by councilman
Miranda.

(Motion carried)
Public Works Committee, councilman Miranda.
(10:34 a.m.)
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, there's one item I
believe that was asked to be held, number 39.
I spoke to that department as I do in most cases, on
all of them, and that right now, we are not creating
or manufacturing the pallets, and won't be for another
two months or there will be no problem.
The single source delivery was the individuals who
were buying the pallet that we make out of our sleds
wanted to have more of a coating on them and that's
what this was for.
But we are trying to change the operation so we can
have different sources and different forms of path
pallet, I guess.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: That's been moved from the agenda
based on the earlier motion.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So then I move items 30 through 41
with the exception of 39.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second it.

And speaking of 39, I saw that as a single-source item
earlier in the week for dust control.
And I'm aware there's a lot of different products out
there for dust control so I sent an e-mail to Mr.
Metcalf and staff just kind of questioning why that
would be single source.
I guess they pulled that back to take a second look,
and working with Mr. Miranda, I appreciate that.
So I'll be curious to see what they come out with down
the road.
Thank you.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
All in favor signify by saying Aye.
Seconded by councilman Dingfelder.
Finance Committee.
Mary Mulhern.
>>MARY MULHERN: I would like to move 42 through 49.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second muscle mum I would also like
to make a request related to one of them.
But we can vote on it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded by
councilman Dingfelder.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, 47 was
discussed, the streetlight program.
I don't mind moving this but I would like to ask --
We are in the middle of a motion here now.
We can come back to.
That all in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposes?
Okay, Councilwoman Mulhern.
>>MARY MULHERN: Related to item 47, the audit report
on the streetlight program, I would like to have a
staff report from Mr. Daignault or Mr. Lee or whoever
we need to hear from regarding the comparison to the
audit in 2002 and what the results of that were.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Could you recommend a date?
>>MARY MULHERN: Next council meeting.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: The 21.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
All in favor of? Opposes?
Okay.
Building and zoning.
Councilman Caetano.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to move items 50 to

69.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
(Motion carried)
Okay.
Transportation, councilman Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I move items 73-79.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
(Motion carried).
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: As to item 79 I want to give a plug
and shout out to WMNF's tropical heat wave in Ybor
City on May 16, 2009.
Everybody needs to check it out.
>>GWEN MILLER: I move items for public hearing items
8380 through 84.
>> Seconded by councilman Dingfelder.
We move to our staff reports at this time.
Then we'll come back.
>>CHARLES FLETCHER: On item 91?
>>GWEN MILLER: Number 39.
What number was that you pulled?

Number 8?
>>THOMAS SCOTT: We are not at that point just yet.
We'll come back to that.
What I want to do is take up item 91, the staff
report.
Item 91.
We are on the 10:30 time certain item which is staff
report.
It's item 91.
>>JAN MCLEAN: Assistant city attorney.
Item 91 is to give you an update on the proposed
landfill and aggregate in Pasco County, and I was here
two months ago and let you know that the Florida
department of environmental protection has issued a
notice to deny their application for construction
operation of the landfills.
Subsequently, the applicant aggregate has filed a
petition challenging that denial, and in conjunction
with that, three parties, WRB, Nestle's's water and a
group of individual fired in support of the DEP's
denial.
There's been one intervention by crystal springs

reserve who was granted the leave to intervene.
At this point in time they are scheduled for discovery
over the course of generally the summer, and the
hearing has been scheduled for a three-week time
period beginning in September and ending in early
October.
After that, you would have a recommended order come
out from the department, from the administrative law
judge, and we would find out what the results of that
are.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If it's appropriate at this time I
would like to make a motion to ask the city attorney
to reevaluate the city's ability to intervene in
support of the Florida department environmental
protection, set the administrative proceedings
regarding the denial of the permits for the proposed
Angelos aggregate landfill.
In other words, when something is this close to our
dear responsibility that we have with the Hillsborough
River and when other property owners around that
basically in the same boat that we are, I think it's

paramount that we get the legal department involved,
and which is very little expense the department of
environmental protection has done the Yeoman's work
and I would like to ask that.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
(Motion carried)
Councilman Dingfelder and Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Miranda, it's really scary when
our minds start going in the same direction.
>> Well, your hair-do is getting like mine.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was the question I had.
I was sort of surprised that we weren't intervening or
we hadn't intervened earlier because you mentioned
crystal springs I guess was one of the intervenors.
Have we talked about that in one of your quarterly
briefings?
>>> We have discussed it.
I have been in close communication with Tampa Bay
water whose interests are aligned with ours on this
issue.
They have not at this point, they have decided not to

intervene, but that lies with the decision with their
general council.
There may be further discussion along the lines.
Crystal springs has only recently granted the leave to
intervene, and with that, there may be some basis for
the city to have the standing to be a party through
the intervention.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Crystal springs probably pulls
maybe a million gallons a day out of that water
source, and how many millions of gallons do we get?
So anyway I totally concur with your motion and Ms.
Saul-Sena's second.
Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
This underscores the value of your providing these
quarterly reports to us.
And so do we need to be specific in terms of timing
with Mr. Miranda's request that you evaluate our
ability to participate and come back?
Or do we need to say 30 days or 60 days?
>>JAN MCLEAN: I think at this point in this juncture
it would be for our office to look at the totality of

the evidence and the petitions and other documents
that are already submitted to the administrative
proceedings and make the determination of what whether
to intervene or not.
We can always come back and tell you what it is that
we have done.
But I think that would be best left to the analysis of
the city attorney's office.
>> Let's say 60 days.
>> 60 days would put us in July.
That would be right in the middle of discovery.
I can give you some update on what's going on.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion and second.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor say Aye.
Opposes?
Okay.
Item 93 we just need to read this again so we can make
sure legally we are covered.
Item 93.
>>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance.
City of Tampa, Florida renaming certain real property

located at 2902 north 32nd street at 18th Avenue
Tampa, Florida that has been accepted as dedicated
park property and is currently known as the 18th
Avenue park, open space, to Alfred Al Barnes park,
providing for severability, providing for ordinances
or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith, providing
an effective date.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano being absent
at vote.
Second reading of the ordinance will be held May
21st at 9:30 a.m.
(10:44 a.m.)
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 94.
Mr. Fletcher.
>>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.
Some time ago there was a request whether
communications with the city attorney's office are
covered by the city's lobbying code.
The answer is yes, they are.
I provided a memo earlier this week kind of outlining
the provisions, and just the one point on motion, a

lot of the litigation activities were learned in
discovery or before judges or those types of things
probably wouldn't be just because they are not trying
to influence our determinations or recommendations,
but when we met with someone related to something
coming before council, or recommendation to council
that would fit the definition of lobbying, and they
would need to file the proper disclosures and notices.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Council?
Don't need to take action on that.
Item 95.
>>CINDY MILLER: Director of growth management
development services here on item 95 which is a report
as to the number of permits issued gel revenue
generated from permits.
I do want to refresh council's memories from late last
year and put on the chart that you see in our
PowerPoint presentation at that time.
Of this item -- and I will come back to it, but I just
want to point out this was the cost summary that we
had identified as the expenses that were to be
recovered from permit fees, hopefully on a gradual

basis to be able to work up to that.
But I would like to point out that when it comes to
those employees that were historically considered my
department growth management department services
number 78 in number, the budget for that for salaries
and wages eh loan was almost $6 million.
Also other construction service employees that are
housed at our facility that are paid for by other
general fund departments were nine, and we have fire
marshals office and police department.
And those were some of the salaries we were attempting
to recapture.
The permit fee increase or has been alluded to as a
permit fee increase, and it was an increase for a
number of categories.
However, there was also some categories of permits
that went down, and it varied across the board as to
how that could be impacted.
What we attempted to do is to have the cost of issuing
a permit match the revenues generated for that permit.
So, therefore, if it took three hours to accomplish
something we wanted to in effect have the division

reimburse for that three hours.
We weren't trying to make excess funds.
We weren't trying to necessarily generate revenue
per se, not a profit.
What we are trying to do is offset our expenses.
Historically we have only been able to see through
permit fees 35% of our budget covered.
General fund and other departments were generating the
other 65%.
In effect the general fund was subsidizing the
construction service division.
Fourth first six months of fiscal, the budget at that
time we were attempting to recover was just what I
alluded to as being the growth management development
services employees of 3.2 million.
So even in the first six months of fiscal 2008 we were
in effect still running the deficit with the general
fund to subsidize this portion of our budget.
And that would not -- was not the entire budget.
The 3.2 adds up to 6.4.
A total budget is closer to $12 million when you
consider everybody who is included in the process.

For the first six months of fiscal 2009 a total
revenue has gone up to 2.2 million.
What we were hoping to recover more of those expenses
so we wouldn't have to have subsidy.
Therefore 5.2 is what we were attempting to recover so
you can see just in the first six months we were in
about a $3 million deficit whereof we hoped to be,
very frankly because of activity.
There is no doubt about that.
Ism going to show you that on the next slide.
This shows a comparison for the first quarter.
We do expansions of existing houses and not
necessarily starting new construction.
Commercial new starts, same situation.
We are down 41%.
When you look at commercial permits of all types, it's
only down 15.
Frankly, only down 15 I think is good news.
Total permit number of all categories is down almost
13.
Revenue is up 12% because we have been attempting to
recover those costs.

So from that standpoint, we are looking that we have
had increase in revenue, permit activity is down, but
I just want to basically bring your attention back to
that first slide.
Even if we try to recover what we had each before the
permit fees for the last six months we are at a loss
of $1.1 million.
Even if we show some improvement the next six months,
I don't expect to see anything that will improve and
probably looking at whether it's 1.8 million deficit,
but again that's still not covering the other
employees that we hope to be able to include in our
budget.
I know that there's been some discussion as to whether
permits should be rolled back or eliminated.
Unfortunately, the situation is the general fund has
been subsidize diagnosis construction division for a
number of years, probably forever.
Even in the best years, the deficit that was being
supported was about 1.5 million on an annual basis.
That was in 2005 to 2006.
And, unfortunately, if we see any diminishment of what

we can attempt to collect, we would be looking at
either additional layoffs in my division and
department, or look at other departments that are a
general fund.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just one question.
We appreciate your thorough reports as always.
I don't know what we want to call them, reduction in
force, layoffs, I think you are doing that, we have
about 20, 25 folks who are going to lose their jobs.
In this period of time in that department.
How much savings does that represent for that
department, either I guess annually might be easier
than dealing with the six.
>>CINDY MILLER: Yes.
Luckily, councilman, we hope the number will be fewer
than.
That we have had some attrition so we are hoping it
will be closer to a number of 15 or 16, because we
have already had some individuals take retirement, and
so that's an improved situation.
>> But it's 20-something positions.

>>> It's still 20-something positions.
Even if we use a conservative estimate of 50,000
that's a million dollars.
Trying to look at how the various sections and pay
levels, it could be as much as 1.3 million.
That's salary and benefits.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Miller, in a normal track
development, where we have like a cookie cutter home,
in other words, all homes are the same, how many
inspectors do you normally send out to inspect that
type of a development?
>>CINDY MILLER: I am going to ask Mr. Barrios.
He knows more of the staffing specifics.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Let me rephrase my question.
Let's say you go to a high-end type of development.
How many inspectors normally go out to inspect?
>>> John Barrios: Our inspectors are trace specific.
There are technically five different trades on
residents.
It really doesn't matter, councilman Caetano, if it's
accustom home or attract home.

Five disciplines, being basically site engineering
inspections, building, plumbing, mechanical and
electrical.
So there's typically five.
And regards to the total number of inspections that
are typically required by Florida building code, that
can exceed 35 inspections on a typical house.
>> So when you send out an inspector you have five
different phases that they have to inspect.
Are any of your people qualified to do more than one
type of an inspection?
>>> At this point there are a handful of individuals
that are certified and licensed in multiple trades.
And part of our effort now is to try to encourage that
and move in the direction of having multi-discipline,
multi-license inspectors to cut down the number of
trips and the number of physical inspections that have
to be done.
>> How many inspectors are in that category right now?
>>> Approximately five or six is my recollection in
terms of the multiple license staff members that I
have currently on the I am respects side.

>> Because not all construction -- I realize you have
to follow the code.
But when they go out to a cookie cutter-type home the
only difference you are going to see is the layout
inside, but structurally everything is the same except
for the front of the house, maybe a different
elevation.
So do you still send five inspections out for one of
those homes?
>>> Exactly.
Again, the Florida building code that we are required
to follow requires certain stages of the construction
to be inspected.
In our current organization, we have all these
specialists, and then they go out for their respective
areas so it doesn't matter if it's a cookie cutter as
you describe or a subdivision type home or custom
home, still various stages are required to be looked
at.
>> So you utilize the experience of these people who
are certified in maybe three or four different
categories as an inspector.

>>> At the current time the way we are currently
organized, Mr. Caetano, is trade specific.
So a building inspector looks at the structure, an
electrical inspector looks at only the electrical
portion of the work.
The reorganization that we are planning will begin to
take advantage of those multiple licenses so that an
individual who is licensed in more than one trade will
be able to look at multiple areas of the building.
For homes specifically, one of our minimal
requirements would be to have certification in all
areas.
State law in Florida allows for an individual to have
what's called a one and two-family dwelling license.
That license allows that inspector to review all
aspects of the structure, residential, plumbing,
mechanical, electrical.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Now the potential layoffs, are
they from one specific department?
>>> No, sir.
>> They are going to be throughout?
>>> John Barrios: It is throughout the organization.

>> So most of these are probably lower-level employees
financially?
>>> No, sir.
It is across the board, including management.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: So, in other words, if you lay
four people off from plan review, most likely a senior
management will have to go, also?
>>> Well, yes, granted the 20-odor so staff persons we
are talking about represents roughly 20 or 25% of
staff.
We looked at the entire organization, and we are
looking at making that type of reduction across the
board.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Thank you.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I understand what Mr.
Barrios said.
The problem is that these houses don't come up from
the ground, from the initial when they start making
the foundation to the roof in one day.
So, therefore, everyone if that inspector had a
category of five licenses, they inspect everything, he
or she would have to go back various times because it

takes 45 or 60 days, as I see now, quicker than Watt
was.
It used to take many, many months because of the
economy.
They are right on it right now and it takes about 60
days to get a house completed from what I have seen in
the neighborhood.
So what I'm saying, even if all that was the fact,
your man hours would be almost the same, unless you
didn't do an inspection which I don't recommend.
So, therefore, your individuals would be in the field
just as long as they are today, everyone if they had
various licenses.
Am I correct or not?
>>> Well, Mr. Miranda, it is true we are required to
still look at all the various stages of construction.
You are correct, that timing in terms of how you build
things remains the same.
However what we would be able to do on a rough-in
inspection where we are looking at the installation of
the duct work and the electrical wiring to consolidate
that, and rather than do that incrementally, do it

when it's all ready.
Same thing on the final inspections.
Oftentimes, most of those trades are completed at the
time that we are wrapping up the project and rather
than send five, six different inspectors for different
trips they can perhaps make one trip, look at it all
at one time.
That inspection no doubt will take a little longer,
for sure, but will save the trip time and the multiple
efforts from individuals.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
>>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
I think what I would like to ask is maybe you come
back in two weeks, and I have a number of questions
that I just got from sitting here about the
reorganization and restructuring of the permitting
process.
And I don't think -- I haven't even had time to read
them yet.
But in the meantime maybe you could look at these
questions.
They are the questions from the employee that was here

earlier, and some other employees have signed onto
this, about the reorganization.
And then there are people in the field who are
concerned about the restructuring, and in some ways
the opposite of what Mr. Caetano was saying in that
they feel that the trades are specific the differences
are important enough that inspections, the oversight
of those should be specific to electrical, plumbing,
whatever.
So I just don't think that we have time touch ask the
questions but if we could get some answers to some of
these questions, I have pages and pages of this, at
our next council meeting.
>>CINDY MILLER: I will be happy to come back but may I
first say there was a small group of employ that's met
with me that give -- gave me the same questions.
I haven't seen what you have but I believe they were
the same questions I had.
And the commitment I made to all of my employees is
since questions are coming in I am meeting with all of
my employees during the intervening couple of weeks.
So I don't do want to check the calendar from the

standpoint, if you don't mind, I would like to share
this information with my employees, and I will be very
happy to come back and state it publicly.
But I think my employees are entitled to the answers,
with some meetings with me.
So I'm scheduling those starting sometime next week,
and my aide is about to get those scheduled.
And I'm not, as I said, he -- a month would be fine.
But if two weeks works let me come back and double
check the calendar.
But I do want to let you know that I am meeting with
every employee, every group of employees that wants to
meet.
We are trying to schedule early morning, late
afternoon, and so that not only that division but all
my other divisions.
Because they could be impacted as well.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: You want to come back in two weeks?
>>MARY MULHERN: She's going to check.
>>CINDY MILLER: I do believe that will work.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano?
(11:01 a.m.)

>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mrs. Miller, I have been getting
a lot of calls from employees.
I understand the gentleman who was here this morning,
it's his second time that he has come here.
I commend him for coming here, because he's Mr.
Barrios' employee, and if it were out in the private
sector, he would probably be on the road looking for
another job.
But as chairman of the building committee,
construction, I want to have a sort of a forum where
we can have people come in and express their opinions.
And we are not going to make any recommendations out
of that.
But so that everyone can air their feelings at this
workshop.
>>CINDY MILLER: I'll leave that up to council but to
let you know that, I am doing that with my employees
already.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.
So I'll be setting a date to speak with the clerk and
find out what I have on my agenda.
So that we can set up a meeting.

>>THOMAS SCOTT: You are setting up a meeting?
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
We'll invite anyone who wants -- it's going to be a
public meeting.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Fletcher may need to speak with
that.
We can meet with anybody but I want to caution you
again with the charter, what our roles and
responsibilities are here, because again we cannot
dictate to the administration when it comes --
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: That's not what we are going to
do.
Mrs. Saul-Sena has meetings all the time.
She calls a meeting, and if you want to come to it,
you come to it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
You can do that.
But my only point is, you can do that.
The point is, sometimes you can give people hope when
you really don't have -- not in your jurisdiction to
be able to address their concerns, is what I am
saying.

Listen, I try to tell people the truth and be upfront
on issues what we can do and not do.
The charter is very clear on what our roles and
responsibilities.
We can have meetings.
We can listen to them.
But Mr. Fletcher, you need to speak to that what you
can do and not do:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's right.
The charter is very clear, that's an administrative
side of the city.
And so while it's meeting with employees and employees
petitioning council, as long as that's not interfering
with the day-to-day operations of the individuals'
jobs or the administrative roles, that's fine.
But at the end of the day, the reorganization is
pretty much in the hands of the administration.
Your role there would be at the time of the budget.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Now do you have control once you get
the budget.
That's a different issue.
But, yes, you have a right to have meetings.

You can do that.
Okay.
Thank you.
>>THE CLERK: There was no second to Mulhern's motion.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, to come back.
>>THE CLERK: For two weeks.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: That's fine.
Moved and seconded.
All in favor say Aye.
Opposes?
Okay.
Let me also say, too, to that, the clerk just handed
me a note here, the collective bargaining agreement
was approved by council on April 16th, '09.
The contract has been signed by both the chairman and
the mayor.
We'll take up our next item.
Item 96.
>>KAREN PALUS: Parks and recreation director.
You have asked me to come forward and share with you
what we are doing as far as parks and recreation as a
result of drought tolerant plants and switching to

microirrigation in our rain centers.
And I did a little briefing for you all back in
October so I'll bring you up to speed on where we are
at.
Traditionally, with our organization especially over
the last nine years, we consistently try to plant
appropriate material, and as low volume as possible at
each of our location where is that's appropriate.
So we continue to move in that direction.
Again, working towards our water savings and our
restrictive devices that we can implement within those
facilities.
I do want to share with you some good news.
Our central control system as you know, I shared
before that manages all of our irrigation systems, an
automated system that's on my computer, and the
weather stations presented, they are operating and we
can manage forecasting and monitor that.
We are getting ready in the next few weeks to install
some additional rain centers, so they will go out
there throughout the city that will help us manage
those, if we have rain in New Tampa but you don't have

rain in South Tampa, our water system still operates.
It also gives us the ability to really monitor based
on that.
And the factor with the enviro factor that we have, it
monitors the soil so we know.
It really helps conserve our water and manage that
appropriately.
>>MARY MULHERN: It seems to be 50% of our discussion
seems to be about water so I have a couple of
questions for you.
That's great about the weather sensors.
What percentage would you say of your irrigation and
the park has that kind of technology?
>>KAREN PALUS: For the park system?
We have everything connected to our meter system right
now.
We do not have everything on our medians and
rights-of-way in those locations that are under clean
city.
We have a good bit of it on there.
I think from my report from October, I think about 80%
of our irrigation is connected through that, 18% is on

our medians, which is overseen by clean city, and like
tree establishments and such.
>>MARY MULHERN: 80% of the park land has that?
>>> Moving in that direction.
We would like to have it all 100 percent is our goal.
And as we do renovations, as we do anything new, we
make sure we are establishing the proper systems up
front.
>> On that same topic are you looking at opportunities
for grants and stimulus funding for this type --
>>> We have been monitoring any opportunities that are
out and available for us and for our applications.
>> Then my next question, I know that the parks
department had wanted to resume watering and get that
exception, and then was turned down by the mayor.
When it became public.
And this is a hard question for you.
But just as the parks director, do you feel that
looking at your green things growing that we should
ease those restrictions somewhat, that we put on the
no sprinkling, no watering restriction?
>>KAREN PALUS: As far as our parks system overall, we

are with everybody else, we are in the same situation,
and we need to manage that and manage that
accordingly.
When it comes to our athletic field that is Juan of
the things that the professionals and knowing who is
out there on the field day in and day out, that is a
concern and we are trying to work with our
administration on how we manage that and how we are
able to keep water on those field so that they can be
safe and playable for all of the uses day in and day
out especially this time of the year our busiest,
busiest time.
>> So all the sports field, the athletic field.
And what is your feeling about -- I know it's huge in
the rights-of-way and everything.
Do you think the lack of ability to water right now is
going to harm them to the point where it's going to be
costing us money after the season is over?
Are we going to have to be replacing grass?
I just want to get a sense from the city what the
effect of this is.
Because we hear from the industry a lot, and big

users, but I don't really have a sense from the
experts on park land and grass and plants.
Is there going to be some costs associated with this?
For us?
Dollar wise?
>>> Honestly, yes, I'm assuming at some point in time
there will be some can costs associated with that.
We are trying to mitigate our general park grounds and
such as far as supplementing the reclaimed water and
the water trucks.
You will see them out and about and staff trying to
manage those particular areas.
The athletic field again is really the framework of
the concerns for the safety of those children and
trying to keep them in safe and playable conditions.
We are going to monitor that as closely as we can and
try to find ways to move forward.
We are looking at wells systems for our athletic field
and things kind of going in that direction to really
look at how we can better handle our uses, and
athletic field, it's an opportunity there with those
children that are on there that we have got to

maintain a high level of standard and keep them
playable and safe.
And that's our goal.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena and councilman
Dingfelder.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: First of all I wanted to compliment
you on using drought tolerant plants and having such a
widespread use of rain monitors.
I think that's exactly the direction that we need to
be going.
Secondly, I know at the end of this month we are
having a report on reclaimed, phase 2, and I would
hope as you strategize for the best use reclaimed we
really identify park sites as being able to use that.
And lastly, during some portion of our council meeting
today, I am going to bring up the idea of looking at
watering twice a month for our citizens as well as of
course our Parks Department, because that might just
be enough to keep it alive.
I grew up in Tampa.
I went to parks and I always had sand spurs because in
those days we didn't have irrigation and things just

died and were full of weeds and sand spurs and as a
kid I felt down a lot.
I hated it.
It was horrible.
And now things are so great in the city, I would hate
to see us move backward.
>>KAREN PALUS: And I do want to let you know that we
continue to work very closely with Brad on the
reclaimed water and my staff and has been intertwined
as far as moving that into many of our parks that we
have accessibility for.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Karen
and Brad for all your hard work.
A couple of questions.
The issue came up during the week about the Bayshore
little league ball field on Davis Island.
And you and I talked about it and I'm glad to hear
that we are moving forward to get that reclaimed.
Is that correct?
>>KAREN PALUS: Yes.
In fact, we anticipate by tomorrow or first thing
Monday morning there is just an additional connection.

We had the southern portion of the field that so we
needed to make those additional connections.
>> Are there any other park areas, ball field that
have access to reclaimed that are currently not using
reclaimed?
>>KAREN PALUS: We have done a few things that we are
in the middle of moving forward.
I think there's still one in phase one on Bayshore,
but many of them we have been able to handle.
I think we have got just about everything on ours that
we have accessibility to.
>> And lastly, the reporter actually asked me this
question yesterday and I didn't have an answer for him
in regard to, are facilities like the ball field and
that sort of thing, are they individually metered?
Because there was a question in terms of how do we
know we are doing a better job if they are not
individually metered, you to be able to show that year
after year?
>>> Currently, they are not individually metered
throughout the entire park system.
We have a lot of our athletics that have everything

that's potable, if it's irrigation, if it's restrooms,
if it's water fountains, concession stands are all
linked to one meter.
We are trying to look to separate those, as we do move
forward and as we do move projects and things, we try
to separate that irrigation system out.
But a lot of our old infrastructure and such, for
example, Belmont Heights little league, that one
meter.
We have to end up subtracting what we know water
levels we are putting on, and managing so we can kind
of back out with it.
Actually irrigation versus what they use for all the
other uses.
>> So there is a meter for that entire facility.
It's not like we just have a pipe going to the
facility, period?
>>> No.
There's several meters at many locations.
>> Okay.
Thank you.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

Item 97.
>>CHARLES FLETCHER: We have been doing these quarterly
reports for some time on collections.
Related to code enforcement.
I can tell you that compared to 2008, the first
quarter of 2008, we are slightly below what we had
last year.
We collected about $200,000 during the quarter last
year, and we are at about half that this year.
I believe that part of that is an effort to work a
little more with folks to get them into compliance,
and have that triage type approach that we had.
We have been discussing with council.
So unless there's some specific questions, that's
really all I had prepared to report today.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions by council?
Okay.
Thank you.
Item 98.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 98, I see council members
absent.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I think this is Councilwoman's

Saul's -- is she here?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to hold this for full
council or take it up now?
>> We are going to at that time up.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay.
Council, the motion was that city staff be requested
to appear before council under May 21st, 2009, to
provide a report regarding whether the property at
3809 west Estrella street had applied for a home
occupation license, to provide a report regarding the
status of the property.
The motion was not adopted.
The motion was made by council member Saul-Sena,
seconded by councilman Miranda.
It was not adopted with council members Dingfelder
voting no -- excuse me, council member Dingfelder
voting no and council member Miranda and Caetano being
absent at vote, council member Mulhern was absent.
If council is prepared to vote, all it requires is a
vote by council at this time.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we read the motion again?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just to bring back what it was,

it's been some time, and these things fly by kind of
quickly and I know some home occupations and what
else?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: This is in relation to a settlement
of a lawsuit, and maybe Mr. Fletcher is more
appropriate to answer the question.
>>CHARLES FLETCHER: If I may, Mr. Chairman, my
recollection is there was litigation related to land
use matter.
One of the issues raised by the plaintiff in that case
is was the business operation on this property, was
requested by council that it be evaluated, and it was,
and it was -- I don't remember the exact
recommendation of the land use department, but it was
essentially thatch there was not any obvious activity
outside the structure at this point in time, but that
they recommended a business license to be appropriate.
Apparently there had not been one.
That was the report back to council.
And I think that one of the council members had
requested that it be reported back again a second
time, and that is my recollection of procedurally

where we are today.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano?
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Is this the one where we were
ordered by the court to issue?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Next door.
>>CHARLES FLETCHER: The property adjacent.
Petitioner's case is they were surrounded on virtually
all sides by commercial activity.
This was zoned residential, but they put on evidence
and pictures that there was commercial activity at
this site.
And that was the genesis of council's desire to have
the appropriate city staff evaluate whether that was
accurate.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
It is my understanding that it meets all the
qualifications.
It was some type of construction business or something
to that effect, if there was a crane or something
that's been removed and it's going to look just like a
house, there will be no other activities than the

phone and so forth.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If that's the way it is, that's
perfect.
There have been complaints from neighbors that there
were construction materials, and construction vehicles
parked there.
So what this motion is just to check out that it is
indeed what they said.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Not to kick a dead horse, but I
don't know how many complaints there were from
neighbors.
I think there was complaint from the litigant who was
trying to prove a point.
So, anyway, I didn't support the motion.
I won't support the motion.
I think we should just move on.
>>GWEN MILLER: Who made the motion?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: It's already been made.
It's on the floor.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
3-2.

>>THE CLERK: Can we have a roll call?
Saul-Sena -- roll call?
>>GWEN MILLER: A roll call.
>>THE CLERK: Saul-Sena, yes.
Miranda, no.
Dingfelder, no.
Miller, yes.
Scott is absent.
Mulhern, no. Caetano, yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We need Reverend Scott.
>>GWEN MILLER: Just hold it till he comes back in.
We'll move on to item number 99.
>>BRAD BAIRD: Brad Baird.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe this is another 4-C item.
Did you wish to take up Brad's comments?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: He's just going to give his weekly
report.
Then we can deal with the other issue later.
>>GWEN MILLER: Number 98.
>> Did you want to go back to 98?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move we reopen the vote on 98.
>> Second.

(Motion carried).
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>THE CLERK: The motion failed with Miranda,
Dingfelder, Scott, Mulhern voting no.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: 99.
>>BRAD BAIRD: Director, Tampa water department.
Good mornings.
As always I would like to start with the big picture.
On the Elmo, I have the drought situation throughout
the State of Florida.
As you can see, the peninsula is still in the severe
drought showing red or brick red.
The panhandle has shown some relief from the flooding
that you saw a couple of weeks ago.
To show you, on the left is April 15th, three
weeks ago.
And the picture of Florida the graphic on the right
shows it as of yesterday.
So you can see it dried up a little bit in the
panhandle but essentially has been no change.
In the peninsula including the Tampa Bay region.

>> Help with us those colors, Mr. Chairman, because
it's hard to differentiate exactly.
What I'm curious about, is the bay area worse than the
central Florida colors?
I can't tell which side of that.
>>BRAD BAIRD: The bay area colors are slightly better
than central Florida which is slightly better than the
counties down south shown in pink.
Pink and purple which is not shown on here are the
worst drought index colors which indicates that the
soil is extremely dry.
And the vegetation is subject to fire.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So our color relates to that 550 to
559?
>>BRAD BAIRD: Correct.
We are slightly better than shown last time because of
a couple of rains that we got, that we received in mid
April.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
>> The Hillsborough River and's water desalination
plant continue to be the only non-groundwater supplies
for the region.

A little bit of good news, the Tampa Bay water
desalination plant is producing 20 million gallons a
day today.
And it's scheduled to be at full production next week
at 25 million gallons a day.
Just got that word this morning.
That's good news.
Now let's focus on Tampa.
The current demand last week, I think you heard some
of the numbers this morning.
But to reiterate on watering days, 66.3 million
gallons a day average, nonwatering days 64.9.
So only a little over one million gallons a day
difference between a non-watering day and a watering
day.
However, that has increased on watering days up 6
million gallons a day in the previous two weeks.
I a tribute that -- I know there was a question
earlier on that.
I a tribute that to the increase in hand watering.
Remember that earlier last month, we had a couple of
rains, as I mentioned.

And the hand watering was not needed as much, as
people see that their lawns are drying up, they are
getting out there and hand watering.
I think this tells the story in a nutshell, this graph
is a graph of our demands.
And you can see before the restrictions took place on
April 3rd, that we had rather prominent, or
increase in demand on the two watering days of
Tuesdays and Sundays.
After April 3rd, it dropped 10 million gallons a
day on a non-watering day and anywhere from 20 to 25
million gallons a day on a watering day.
And as you can see, in the last week or so, it's
creeped back up, and again that's I believe due
primarily to the increase in hand watering.
On watering days.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question
on that graph before it leaves us?
>> Yes.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: With those -- previously, prior to
April 1st, you know, we had these big spikes.
And then we have big spikes and drop.

Now we dropped way down early on when everybody is
talking about it.
And now we are bumping back up and looks like we are
approaching mid 60s, mid to high 60s.
How does that average out?
And how does that average compare to those big spikes?
In the March-April context.
>>> Comparing to March --
>> I mean I can look at the spikes and everything.
But in terms of just total usage, total, I don't know,
total average uses.
I'm not sure how you want to put it.
>>> Yes, that equates to about 15 million gallons a
day average.
Again, 10 on non-watering days and 20, 25 on those two
watering days averages to 15 million gallons a day
savings.
>> That was in the post April condition?
>>> That would be the end of April as compared to the
end of May -- I mean end of March.
I'm sorry.
>> But now what you are seeing is we are creeping back

up into higher stuff in May, and I'm wondering how
those numbers compare.
>>> Well, I would say the average is coming down from
15 million gallons a day down to 12, 11, you know,
it's affecting the average by a few million gallons a
day.
But I might add that since April 3rd, we have
saved through the restrictions approximately 450
million gallons or almost half a billion gallons.
Which is over a third of our storage in the reservoir.
So the bottom line is the restrictions are working,
albeit painful, but they are working.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Baird, I understand the
graphic, but I think the treasure picture would be --
and I don't want to drop a question.
I know you have the answer.
You may not have it with you.
But if you compare last year's gauges like you have
that chart, to this year's gauges, would you see that
in April you would have about an 85 million gallon use
of water on watering days, and in May, you may go up
as high as 95 million gallons on watering days.

Is that a true statement?
>>BRAD BAIRD: That's a true statement.
It's actually understated.
We have seen in May several times going over 100
million gallons a day.
And that's with just one day a weak watering.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So if we are at 64, everyone if we
had an increase of six as was stated earlier, you are
still 30-some million on that watering day below last
year's and that was the objective of your department.
>>> That's correct.
The 450 million gallons that I quoted earlier does not
include the comparison to last your, which is
approximately double that.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
(11:30 a.m.)
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Before you move forward, you had a
question.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do the numbers here you are sharing
with us reflect reclaimed use?
>>BRAD BAIRD: They do not.
That's finished water for potable only.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have a comparison of last
year's reclaimed use versus this year's?
>>BRAD BAIRD: Yes, I do, but I don't have that with
me.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe when you come next time you
can have that because I am completely convinced that
the future is expanding the use of reclaimed as widely
as possible, and that will be the vehicle that takes
the pressure off our potable water, while still
enabling the city to look attractive.
And I think that that kind of information needs to
be -- when you come next time if could you bring that
number, as well as the increase in the number of
reclaimed users since the beginning of 2009.
And also how that compares to the total potential
field of users.
>>BRAD BAIRD: Yes, I will be happy to do.
That since you bring up reclaimed water, I have very
good news.
Three weeks ago you asked a report back on how many
reclaimed folks are connecting.
We have over 400 new customers as of April 1st

that are either hooked, most of them are hooked up
now, or are pending hookup.
So that's 400.
What is that, about 12 a day.
So it's increased dramatically.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to make a statement.
If you look at the math mathematics of that that is
greater to or equal to the last two years, in one
month.
>>BRAD BAIRD: That's correct.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Brad, how detrimental would it be
if we went to watering every other week?
>>BRAD BAIRD: Can I get to that when I finish the
report?
I want to get to the next couple of -- next couple of
graphs.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
>>MARY MULHERN: I'll let him finish and then raise a
question.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to know the savings versus the
financial impact once we get through that.
Is there a way to monitor that and check that?

>>> Yes, there is.
>> So you will be able to provide that information, I
guess, at some point?
>>BRAD BAIRD: Yes.
And I can bring that back as well in two weeks.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I think it would be very helpful.
Okay.
Continue.
>>BRAD BAIRD: I would like to talk real quickly about
the river flows.
Our primary source of drinking water is the
Hillsborough River.
And that's what makes Tampa unique.
Our current river flow is 18.4 million gallons a day.
And as you can see from this graph, the red line is
our current flow.
The line just above that are record low flows for
that date.
So we have had -- continue to have record low flows in
the Hillsborough River for that date, not for all time
because that's been confused in the media, record low
flows for that date since March 19th when we first

discussed the ordinance.
Here at City Council.
And that's 50 days straight of record low flows for
that date.
And that is based on two gauges in Hillsborough River.
One of the gauges has -- we have been keeping records
for 69 years.
So when you hear -- and I make that point, because
when you hear that, you know, we see this every year,
and, yes, we see a dry season every year from March
15th to June 15th, roughly.
But what we don't see every year is the tail end of a
three-year drought that's breaking records on the
Hillsborough River.
And that's a difference.
Tampa's reservoir continues to hold steady at 19 feet.
Actually last time I talked to you, we were at 20
feet.
Which is half full.
>> Pull that over a little more, Brad.
We are at 19 feet which is less than half full.
Big thank you to our customers for conserving.

So that we are able to maintain that reservoir at a
level that gives us enough water to make it to the end
of the dry season.
To answer councilman's Caetano's question, this is a
graph that I show every time, every report, that shows
the minimum level we would like to see.
That's on the blue line.
The green X'es are daily recordings of the reservoir
level.
And then the red line is just for reference, the 2000
drought, the last time we had a risk or danger of
running out of water in the reservoir.
As you can see, we are about a half a foot above where
we were in 2000, primarily due, or I think almost all
due to the restrictions that were put in place.
And we are about a foot above the minimum line that we
would like to see to make it to the end of the dry
season.
My answer to councilman Caetano's question would be
that a foot above the line is good insurance, but I
would recommend not enough to change the restrictions
we have in place.

If the green X'es continue to go flat across that
graph, and where we end up with two feet, or two-plus
feet, I think then at that point you could consider
doing that.
That would be my recommendation.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Baird, the northern part of
my district is going to be paying for everything
that's going to go to these 8,000 or home homes that
you are getting a week right now.
I don't think it's fair.
Okay.
For the amount of taxes that is generated in the
northern part of my district, we should have reclaimed
wallet up there.
It's not fair.
It's just not fair.
I was out watering the other night, and my neighbor
says, Joseph, be careful, there's an alligator,
because he had no water to go to.
That's how bad it is.
I mean, we have got a lot of money invested in our
lawns up there. I know I do and so do my neighbors.

And it's just not fair that we are spending all this
money, and we probably won't see reclaimed water up
there for 15 years or more.
The way I hear it.
The city hasn't done what they are supposed to do.
And I'm a little envious of the southern part of our
city, that we don't have it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda then Councilwoman
Miller.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to comment on some
statements to clarify the facts.
Takes five houses to get reclaimed.
My area and your area of the city are never going to
see reclaimed so I don't want to hear I'm excluded.
I'm permanently excluded and I realize that.
And the way it's set up, if everyone hooks up to the
reclaimed system -- and that may be the next ordinance
when it comes up -- then no one pays for that benefit,
the benefit is paid by those that are using the
reclaimed water and getting charged by a thousand
gallons to generate the refuse pneumonia to pay off
the bonds.

So somebody may say, I got left out.
Well, now what?
You got to wait your turn.
Not everything was created in one day.
This city is making great strides.
Yes, we are dumping 55 million gallons.
During new business I am going to bring some startling
revelations of what I think we ought to do.
But I am going to hold my remarks till then.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, I was going to say,
there's a lot of parts of the city does not have
reclaimed water and I would love to have it because my
yard is going, too.
And I have to resod whenever we come back to get the
water.
So waiting to see if we can get it and that might be,
what, 15 years, Mr. Miranda?
Or never get it.
Might never get it.
>>BRAD BAIRD: On the May 28th workshop, that is
one of the pieces of information that will be
presented.

What does it mean to provide reclaimed water
throughout the city?
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Dingfelder, council ma'am
Mulhern.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Hindsight is 20/20, but I would
argue look at the city of St. Petersburg.
How many years ago did the city of St. Petersburg
start with putting in a reclaimed water system?
30?
Okay.
City of Tampa was sitting here fat and happy because,
hey, we got a river.
Okay, we don't need to worry about it.
All right.
So I think we need to look back and say that we made a
big mistake, 20-something years ago the city should
have started putting in reclaimed system, and then we
wouldn't be having this argument today which is really
unfortunate.
I look forward to the 28th to hearing all the
innovative ideas that the administration is going to
bring to us on a huge variety of issues, on this issue

of reclaimed water, and the water Chris that we are
in.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
Councilwoman Mulhern, then councilman Miranda.
>>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
My question was Mr. Caetano's whether we could afford
to relax the restrictions and allow watering every two
weeks.
And the yellow graph you showed us, I'm wondering if
you could come back in two weeks with that same -- the
other yellow one.
The usage.
The first one you showed.
That one.
I think it is interesting because it looks like the
use has gone up.
Spiked.
And it's really gone up to what -- I mean, I know
there's no way to guess in the last year's statistics
were interesting but I think there has been a lot of
education, there have been those hookups to reclaimed
water, and one thing about South Tampa is there are

some pretty big water users there.
So I think that can account for some of our savings.
Basically what I would like to see is the same graph
in two weeks, and since -- I wasn't here when the
first emergency ordinance was voted on, but I was here
for the second one, and I voted to -- with the
majority to not have -- not allow watering at all.
But I would like us to be able to review that in two
weeks based on the use, you know, the same sort of
usage chart and based on what you said, whether the
other chart with the green squigglies on, if the water
use had leveled off, and the reservoir is at a level
where you think that we might be able to do that, I
think we should discuss it and considering the fact
that we had apparently there was an ordinance already
prepared to do that, which may need a little bit of
tweaking, if that ordinance could be available on that
date, not that we are going to adopt it, but if we
have -- might have your recommendation, and just the
reality of how much usage and how much water we are
saving, and review it.
Because I really think because our Parks Department,

and because it is just getting drier and drier.
And who knows?
Maybe we will have those rains and we won't need to
allow people to water once every two weeks.
But I think people deserve to have us at least look at
that in another couple weeks.
That's a motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can we vote?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If you want to vote on that motion,
Mr. Chairman, you may.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me speak to the motion because my
understanding is you were coming back to give us a
recommendation on where we were and all that in two
weeks.
>>MARY MULHERN: Is it two weeks?
>> That's what he said.
>>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
So my motion is there be an ordinance be prepared in
case we should decide to allow watering every two
weeks.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If I can add a little bit to the
motion, if I may.
Given when we anticipate, God willing, the rains begin
in June, and two weeks we are in the middle of May,
that would allow, according to my understanding, if we
were to vote on a motion to allow people to water once
every two weeks, that would allow most property owners
to water twice between then and when the rains begin.
Which might be enough to keep a lawn alive.
And that's my thinking.
That we are not looking at a projection for years in
the future.
We are looking at this critical gap between a very
parched lawn, it's deck and potential survival.
So that's -- if you could get with Ms. Palus to have
the people who are better equipped to speak to lawn's
viability, that would be critical information.
And then project what those two watering dates would
mean in terms of the projected use during those dates,
and when the rains begin.
I think that that's the calculus, that's the balance,
the information that council will need to make that

kind of decision.
(11:45 a.m.)
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, there's a motion.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to amend the motion.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: It depends on what amendment you have.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: My amendment is we take a vote on
this today.
Two weeks may be too late for some of the lawns, okay?
People are irate.
It's not fair.
Two weeks it's going to be too late.
We postpone everything just like we have postponed,
bring reclaimed water.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can't wait to speak.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me address the issue.
His motion was to amend the motion.
Actually, the motion was made was come back in two
weeks.
You are saying let's vote on it now.
You are making a motion to vote on it now.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I support his motion.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: But there's a motion on the floor.

There's a motion on the floor.
His is not an amendment.
He's making a new motion to vote today now.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I don't want to put it off for
two weeks.
I want it today.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, but -- we are on the main
motion.
The main motion is that we bring it back in two weeks,
his recommendation.
That was seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
He's making another motion which is adversarial, in my
opinion as chairman, to the main motion, and that is
he wants to vote today, and she says bring it back in
two weeks, okay?
So the question becomes at this point, do you want to
remove your second and then don't have a motion?
Or do we stick with the main motion?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to keep my second.
>>MARY MULHERN: I call the question.
Could I call the question on my motion?
>> We went through this.

>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I second it.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Can I inquire of the clerk?
Whose motion was the original motion and seconded on
the table?
>>THE CLERK: Mulhern seconded by Saul-Sena:
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And that is to bring the item back in
two weeks.
And now I believe Ms. Mulhern, did you call the
question?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: She did and I seconded it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: And therefore now there is a motion
without discussion on calling the question.
You can either vote in favor of calling the question
or not.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: So the motion on the floor now is on
the question, okay?
Calling the question.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me speak to that motion.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Can't speak to calling the question.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll make a motion after that.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor of calling the question
signify by saying Aye.

Opposes? All opposes say Nay.
>> The motion failed.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me speak to the motion,
Mr. Chairman.
I don't know why we flip-flop.
We should be at McDonald, flipping and flopping
hamburgers.
What we have here today is a serious situation that's
not going to get any better.
The gentleman that was in charge of this water
department just told us that.
If it was to have rained last week and ponding four or
five inches I could understand that.
Let me say this.
When you look at the consumptive water use and where
it came from, it didn't come from the river.
We bought 27.38 million gallons of Tampa Bay water.
How much longer are we going to be able to do that?
We bought 18.27 million gallons from the bypass canal
which is almost at one of its lowest rates today.
How long are we going to be able to do that?
We took 7.69 million from the aquifer storage wells.

How many more gallons do we have there?
Because we store like a billion, and we have been
hitting it for a long time, much sooner than we
usually do.
The drought started in the beginning of the season,
not at the end of the season.
So what I'm saying is, if we are going to play with
numbers, let's have the correct numbers.
And it's not -- I'm not here to try to change
anybody's vote.
You got elected just like I did.
I'm just not a good politician.
I tell it like it is.
You can accept it or reject it.
We have a crisis here.
And the crisis is that at one time if we kept using
what we were then, we would have no reservoir with
water.
We wouldn't have any water in the reservoir.
If people in South Tampa, you are talking about the
lawns today and the people in West Tampa that you are
talking about the lawns today wouldn't have water to

drink.
So what's more important?
A lawn?
Or water to drink?
Or water to live on?
>> Thank you.
That's a motion on the floor we have for Mr. Baird to
bring back in two weeks a recommending looking at
lifting the restriction.
There's a motion on the floor.
It's your motion.
>>MARY MULHERN: My motion that we have an ordinance
prepared, was part of the motion.
Because he's coming back anyway.
So I clarify that, that a motion be prepared.
I'm sorry, an ordinance be prepared, and we'll have
the discussion, but it will be available should we
vote to adopt it.
So we won't have to wait another two weeks to actually
do anything by which time hopefully it will be
raining.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I support Mary's motion but then

going to support Joseph's afterwards.
I think we need to move as expeditiously as possible
that because Mr. Baird comes back every two weeks, if
we see that we are getting, the little green lines
aren't horizontal, that they become treacherously
vertical we can shift and in the meantime maybe keep
our lawns.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.
All in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposes?
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Miranda
voting no.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to make a motion
that we lift the restrictions to water every two weeks
starting this Sunday with the people in the uneven
numbers.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have the right to speak on that.
Again, I want to caution these individuals who
flip-flop more than burgers at McDonald's that this
is not the right thing to do.
You are going to jeopardize the public health and

welfare of this wonderful city, and individuals that
can water today.
There's no water exemption that you can't water.
It says you can water one day a week with a hose.
Now, I don't know how much difficult it is to water
with a hose, but my wife does it because she loves it.
Once a week on Tuesdays.
And I understand it.
Later on I am going to talk to water users, when I
have time, and I am going to bring that up, and I am
going to bring a lot more on reclaimed and recharged
and break of lines and water summits, I am going to
talk a lot under new business.
So this is very irritating to the general public.
We flip-flop.
We change.
We have no direction.
And we are heading in the right direction by having no
direction.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.
You are not going to finish today, Mr. Baird.
I have to deal with something at 12 noon.

>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I saw Mr. Fletcher and his staff
fidgeting so we'll see what legal has to say on the
motion.
>>CHARLES FLETCHER: I was just not 100 percent clear
on what the motion was.
And if the desire of council is to make a change to
what is applicable now, then we need to get an
ordinance drafted and get you acting on that.
If the desire is to clearly articulate council's
position so that next week, or two weeks what the
prior motion was we have an ordinance here, that's
fine.
But just by motion of council, we can't change what's
in the current emergency ordinance.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The motion is for an ordinance to
be drafted and brought back.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: The motion that councilman Caetano is
requesting is that staff -- requesting that the board
first of all overturn our prefer ordinance and put
into effect this coming Sunday back to the original
watering restrictions.
That's in essence the motion.

>> The desire for the every-other-week.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Starting this Sunday with the
uneven numbers.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Which is not back to the original.
The original was once a week.
So it's every other week.
>>> Okay.
I think we have the information we need to draft it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: So the motion then, request, Mr.
Caetano, is that legal bring back this afternoon an
ordinance.
>>> And Brad just reminded me we will have to go back
and look at what the water management district's
modified phase 4 order is which is slightly different
than what's in the rules.
They issued an emergency order owing creating certain
standards.
That would be the minimum that we would be able to go
to, which I don't think is inconsistent with the
motion, but we will need to evaluate that and draft
the ordinance accordingly.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I am not going to support the

motion.
Mr. Brad made clear he can come back in two weeks with
a recommendation.
We have come this far.
And I think we should stay the course, stay the course
for two weeks and see what staff brings back
Mr. Caetano, I have the floor.
I would suggest, council, I urge to you stay the
course, please, stay the course. This is a critical
issue for our community today.
Public health and safety issue.
And we made great strides, and I would urge you stay
the course.
Okay?
Yes.
Councilman Caetano.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Two weeks may be too late for
some people.
If somebody is dying out in the street, you get
somebody there as soon as possible.
And some of these lawns are dying.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

12347 thank you.
The city's investment in our public recreation areas
could be lost, and we will have to reinvest in new
sod.
It's possible the rains will begin earlier than the
middle of June.
And this week, next week, might be the critical week.
This amount of water will not put us in danger.
We will hear back from Mr. Baird in two weeks.
And we can assess it on a weakly or biweekly basis.
But I think this might be the critical week where
watering will allow certain areas.
>>GWEN MILLER: This is a critical week, okay, how
often, are you going to wait to see if it rains?
Are you going to let them wallet every other week
until it rains?
It will be critical then.
Mr. Baird said 19 feet.
Every other week until it rains, how long is it going
to get?
>>> We'll have to report.
I missed the first part of the question, I'm sorry.

>> We are at 19 now.
If they water every other week until it rains, how low
is it going to get?
>>> How low is it going to got?
I don't have that now.
I can also include that.
I can also include if we had adopted the twice a
month, you know, what that would have meant.
And I believe that would have meant below the blue
line.
So we can look at that as well.
>>> That part is critical.
It's not critical to water.
But if your lawn is almost dead and watering every
other week is not going to help it.
I know it's not going to help mine.
Mine is about gone.
Water is not going to take back.
I am going to have to resod.
I don't think it's that critical.
It's critical we keep that water flow up to level.
And I am think we have to stop telling ourselves we

need to water the lawn and keep the water for our
health like we need to drink and cook with and it's
more important than giving to our yards.
To me it's very important.
And I cannot support it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.
All in favor of the motion, all in favor of the motion
signify by saying Aye.
Opposes?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Call for a roll call vote.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: It failed.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to hear who voted.
>>THE CLERK: The motion failed with Miranda, Miller,
Scott and Dingfelder voting no.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Mulhern.
Okay, roll call vote.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
>>MARY MULHERN: No.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: No.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.

>>GWEN MILLER: No.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Failed 4-3.
>> Like the Yankees Rays game last night.
>>THE CLERK: Mulhern, you voted?
>> It was "no."
>>THE CLERK: I have the motion failed with Miranda,
Miller, Scott, and Mulhern voting no.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, council.
It's two minutes to 12.
I need to be at the park for this proclamation.
So we'll stand in recess until 1:30.
Thank you.
(City Council recess at 12:00 p.m.)



DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this 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.






Tampa City Council
Thursday, May 7, 2009
1:30 p.m. Session

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

13:35:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
13:35:24 order.
13:35:24 Roll call.
13:35:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
13:35:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
13:35:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
13:35:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
13:35:37 We are going back to number 99.
13:35:40 Is Brad here?
13:35:41 Did we finish everything with you?
13:35:44 Did we finish?

13:35:46 Was there any questions for Mr. Baird?
13:35:54 So we can't do the vote until we get a full --.
13:35:58 Number 99.
13:36:02 We can't vote until we get a quorum.
13:36:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: On number 99?
13:36:08 >>GWEN MILLER: We can't vote until we get a quorum.
13:36:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The administration is going to
13:36:21 address that issue on the 28th.
13:36:24 (off microphone)
13:36:26 So just withdraw the motion.
13:36:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Make a motion to withdraw then?
13:36:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll second that so that we can
13:36:33 have both sides discussion from the administration and
13:36:38 legislate.
13:36:39 >>GWEN MILLER: A motion and second to withdraw number
13:36:41 99.
13:36:43 All in favor?
13:36:44 Opposed, Nay?
13:36:55 Number 90?
13:36:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 10 a.m. public hearing.
13:37:06 You may need to swear in witnesses for that one.
13:37:09 I'm sure you will need to swear in witnesses.

13:37:17 Madam clerk?
13:37:20 If you are here to speak on number 90.
13:37:24 (Oath administered by Clerk).
13:37:31 >>ERIC COTTON: Land Development Coordination,
13:37:33 V-09-144.
13:37:35 A request for 220 East Davis Boulevard, petitioner
13:37:40 named is Palori equities, a 2(COP-R).
13:37:52 Ever which allows for selling of beer and wine,
13:37:55 requesting a 4(COP-R), for --
13:38:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: This is 220.
13:38:03 I knew there was a number there.
13:38:05 220.
13:38:09 >>ERIC COTTON: These are pictures of the site.
13:38:12 Here is the restaurant.
13:38:14 They are asking for a couple of waivers.
13:38:16 The standard waiver is for parking and such that are
13:38:18 listed in the staff report.
13:38:21 This property is currently wet zoned.
13:38:23 It has from ordinance 2004-297 which was a 2(COP-R).
13:38:32 The DRC found it consistent with the following
13:38:35 requests which is attached to the staff reports.
13:38:38 If the council is to approve this, that they be

13:38:41 directed to modify their staff report between first
13:38:45 and second reading under the site plan data to state
13:38:48 that they the required parking is 46 spaces, not 33
13:38:52 spaces, and if council has any questions I would be
13:38:55 happy to answer.
13:38:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just one.
13:38:58 Is the footprint staying the same as the 2(COP-R)?
13:39:03 >>> That's my understanding.
13:39:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There was an extension of the
13:39:07 footprint out into that patio area.
13:39:09 Is that staying, also?
13:39:11 Okay.
13:39:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Officer Miller?
13:39:18 >>> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police
13:39:21 department.
13:39:21 City of Tampa police department has no objections to
13:39:24 this special use.
13:39:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public wish to address
13:39:29 council on this petition?
13:39:30 Anyone here from the public wish to address council on
13:39:32 this petition?
13:39:34 Do you want to state your name and address for the

13:39:36 record, sir?
13:39:37 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'm here on behalf of Palori
13:39:40 Equities.
13:39:40 Just to answer Mr. Dingfelder's question, the
13:39:42 footprint remains exactly the same as it is currently,
13:39:45 and change of series from a 2(COP-R) to a 4(COP-R).
13:39:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
13:39:53 >> Second.
13:39:53 (Motion carried).
13:39:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Council?
13:40:00 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to read the ordinance.
13:40:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 90.
13:40:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This is a public hearing.
13:40:19 If council is inclined to approve the request the
13:40:22 motion is to make sure the changes between first and
13:40:26 second reading are done, that the required number of
13:40:28 parking spaces from 33 spaces to 46 --
13:40:38 >>STEVE MICHELINI: A reduction from 46 to 8.
13:40:44 >>ERIC COTTON: The actual site plan has required
13:40:47 parking of 46 to 33.
13:40:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.
13:40:52 I move in the that same order that was presented.

13:40:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you read the ordinance, though?
13:40:57 Number 90.
13:40:59 I'll read it.
13:41:00 I move an ordinance for first reading repealing all
13:41:03 ordinance number 2004-297 approving a special use
13:41:08 permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, small venue
13:41:11 and making lawful the sale of beverages containing
13:41:14 alcohol regardless of alcoholic content, beer, wine
13:41:17 and liquor, 4(COP-R), for consumption on premises only
13:41:21 in connection with a restaurant business establishment
13:41:24 at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land
13:41:27 located at 218-220 East Davis Boulevard, Tampa,
13:41:34 Florida, and more particularly described in section 3
13:41:37 hereof, approving waivers as set forth herein, waiving
13:41:41 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
13:41:44 findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
13:41:47 conflict, providing an effective date.
13:41:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Dingfelder.
13:41:52 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
13:41:54 Opposes?
13:41:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena being
13:41:57 absent at vote.

13:41:58 Second reading of the ordinance will be held May
13:42:01 21st at 9:30 a.m.
13:42:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are back to item 100.
13:42:13 >> Gregory Hart, small business and minority
13:42:16 development office, here today to provide you
13:42:19 assistance with regard to the appointment of the equal
13:42:23 business opportunity advisory committee.
13:42:25 At your April 16th meeting, council was provided
13:42:29 information with regard to suggestions that the
13:42:33 administration had made in terms of the categories of
13:42:36 representation and the charge and mission of this
13:42:39 equal business opportunity advisory committee.
13:42:42 Council has seven appointments, the mayor has nine of
13:42:47 which the mayor has selected her appointees, and they
13:42:49 are in place and ready to serve.
13:42:56 I do have with me some material in case you should
13:42:59 need it.
13:43:00 At this time same material that was provided on April
13:43:02 16th which is the outline of the committee process
13:43:08 and the suggested categories of representation so I'm
13:43:12 here as a resource for your needs.
13:43:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Council, to GOP back to the

13:43:19 recommendation, and I have a copy of what he's talking
13:43:21 about there, evidently the mayor already made her
13:43:24 recommendations for those persons or appointees, and
13:43:26 in the category they have for us, I don't have a
13:43:30 problem with the other categories but I think the last
13:43:32 two we ought to specify whether we want small
13:43:35 businesses there, professional industry.
13:43:42 I just think we should look at those two together.
13:43:44 >>MARY MULHERN: We already discussed this.
13:43:50 I don't understand.
13:43:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's back before us to today to see
13:44:01 what we want top dop with our seven appointees, how we
13:44:03 want them to be advertised, in other words.
13:44:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
13:44:07 Okay.
13:44:07 I agree with you.
13:44:08 I think we should just strike that.
13:44:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The other categories are fine.
13:44:14 The last two should be small business owners, I guess.
13:44:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know that they have to be
13:44:23 small business owners.
13:44:28 Where did that go?

13:44:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?
13:44:40 Those are the categories for the mayor that she
13:44:43 appointed.
13:44:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A woman-owned business.
13:44:49 Hasn't that always been a big part of this program?
13:44:52 >> Any of those can be.
13:44:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm just say field goal we are
13:44:55 going to specify, why don't we specify a woman-owner,
13:44:59 woman, small business owner, something like that?
13:45:02 >>> Certainly that's your discretion.
13:45:03 Our guidance was simply that there be a good diverse
13:45:10 representation of members reflecting the program in
13:45:12 the community.
13:45:14 >>MARY MULHERN: I think it should be four out of seven
13:45:20 should be women because that would reflect the
13:45:22 population.
13:45:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Why can't we say African-American?
13:45:30 >>MARY MULHERN: African-American, is a female.
13:45:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: African-American person.
13:45:42 >>GWEN MILLER: African-American female.
13:45:45 Not African-American, period, but African-American
13:45:47 female, because you have Caucasian female.

13:45:50 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm saying representative of the
13:45:53 population.
13:45:53 There's more women than men.
13:45:55 A little bit more.
13:46:09 >>GWEN MILLER: African-American female.
13:46:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Which one?
13:46:13 On the first one?
13:46:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Down at the bottom.
13:46:21 Professional?
13:46:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know.
13:46:24 My feeling when we brought this up, I think we had the
13:46:26 sense to appoint people that are diverse, and I don't
13:46:29 know, did the mayor have categories for her?
13:46:33 I know we already talked about this.
13:46:35 Okay.
13:46:38 Oh, right here, okay.
13:46:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And she's already made her
13:46:41 appointments.
13:46:42 If this list is accurate she's already appointed these
13:46:44 persons; is that right?
13:46:47 >>> Yes.
13:46:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And you have Eric brown on here which

13:46:52 she listed ethnicity and his name and Cohen, Davis,
13:46:58 Elliott --
13:47:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we say for those last
13:47:03 two, why don't we say two representatives at-large who
13:47:10 represent the WMBE community?
13:47:12 So that way it would be broad enough to be woman,
13:47:15 minority, or small business or whatever.
13:47:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: At-large?
13:47:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Representative of the WMBE
13:47:26 community so that way you get a little more
13:47:28 flexibility.
13:47:29 So a woman, a minority, or small business.
13:47:36 Does that work for everybody?
13:47:38 >> It works for me.
13:47:38 >> Fine with me.
13:47:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you want to make that as a motion?
13:47:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Replace the last two with something
13:47:43 to that effect.
13:47:48 >> Last two at-large representative on the WMBE
13:47:51 community. So that means that they could be
13:47:55 African-American female, could be Spanish female, could
13:47:57 be small business owners.

13:48:01 Considered at-large.
13:48:03 Do we have a second on the motion?
13:48:06 >> Second.
13:48:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
13:48:08 Opposes?
13:48:10 Okay.
13:48:11 >>> Mr. Chairman, we had suggested and expect your
13:48:14 solicitation would occur through the clerk's office at
13:48:18 the intake as is the case with most if not all of your
13:48:22 appointments to committees and so forth.
13:48:23 >>GWEN MILLER: When do they expect to us appoint
13:48:30 people of?
13:48:31 >>> I think whenever the clerk's office can post
13:48:35 solicitation and get things on the calendar, so as
13:48:38 soon as possible.
13:48:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder do you have a
13:48:42 workshop scheduled July 23rd at 9:30 a.m.
13:48:46 regarding the first annual report so you may want to
13:48:48 have it before that date and I guess it would be up to
13:48:50 the clerk to back date that to allow for the
13:48:52 appointment.
13:48:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.

13:48:55 So the clerk can do that, right?
13:48:57 They can do that and start advertising it and then we
13:49:00 can be ready to appoint them prayer to that July
13:49:06 workshop date.
13:49:07 Okay.
13:49:10 Any other questions on that?
13:49:11 Thank you.
13:49:12 Item 101.
13:49:14 Ms. Miller?
13:49:15 >>CINDY MILLER: Good afternoon.
13:49:22 Cindy Miller, director of growth management and
13:49:24 development services.
13:49:25 We are just setting up an easel with a map that I
13:49:28 reviewed and distributed to you in the meeting to
13:49:32 basically reflect our neighborhood stabilization
13:49:35 program, in neighborhoods that are eligible target.
13:49:39 I am going to move to the hand Mike.
13:49:40 >>GWEN MILLER: It's on.
13:49:41 Just start talking.
13:49:45 >>CINDY MILLER: I will move around here to the other
13:49:47 side.
13:49:51 Basically I would like to give a very brief outline of

13:49:54 what our neighborhood stabilization process is and
13:49:57 what you will see coming before you on future agendas.
13:50:00 When it comes to the yellow areas, the best way to
13:50:03 refer to those is call those eligible areas.
13:50:06 Areas that are like the blue-green color.
13:50:09 They are our target areas.
13:50:11 What you will see, hopefully your agenda late June or
13:50:15 the one meeting you have in July is that for the areas
13:50:17 in yellow, we are looking there at being divided and
13:50:23 as you may recall neighborhood stabilization program
13:50:25 is required to have at least 25% of the money.
13:50:30 Then for members of our community that have median
13:50:34 income of 50% or less, family of four, under $30,000.
13:50:38 We believe that permanent rental is the means by which
13:50:40 we should accomplish that.
13:50:42 We have solicited proposals and have received them
13:50:45 from social service entities, forming the league for
13:50:48 housing partnerships, business partnerships, includes
13:50:52 contractors, other appropriate professionals to be
13:50:54 involved with this.
13:50:56 We will be reviewing those proposals from a staff
13:50:59 standpoint and will be presenting our recommendations

13:51:01 to you, as I said the end of June or at your July
13:51:06 meeting.
13:51:06 We believe the form of the contract will be something
13:51:08 very similar to what you would see with a community
13:51:10 development block grant, so that you would be able to
13:51:13 see both the dollar amounts, what type of property
13:51:15 they would be looking at, and also be able to have a
13:51:19 time line for when they would need to accomplish the
13:51:21 work.
13:51:21 So very similar to what you have seen in the CDBG
13:51:25 project.
13:51:26 When it comes to home ownership, those are the
13:51:28 blue-green areas.
13:51:29 And the target areas, Sulphur Springs, north Tampa
13:51:33 community, and university square to the north, and old
13:51:36 West Tampa near 275.
13:51:44 Our next steps will be to have a rehabilitation
13:51:48 proposing, request for qualifications released.
13:51:51 In that case what we believe we will be looking at
13:51:53 will be for both private and not-for-profit
13:51:58 organizations.
13:51:59 We provided the funds ton acquire a house or

13:52:02 multifamily -- doesn't have to be a single-family
13:52:04 unit -- acquire, rehabilitate, and then to sell to
13:52:09 first-time eligible homeowners.
13:52:10 And through the program there is also means for down
13:52:12 payment assistance for those homes.
13:52:16 We also will be embarking upon -- we hope to have
13:52:25 request for proposals available to the public for
13:52:27 their review and their submittal within the next few
13:52:29 weeks.
13:52:30 So basically I hope to have that by the first week of
13:52:33 June and be back to you again six or eight weeks,
13:52:38 probably two months after that.
13:52:44 We are looking at acquiring what I would call
13:52:46 dilapidated housing, particularly Sulphur Springs.
13:52:49 We have been working with the neighborhood
13:52:50 association.
13:52:51 I was at a meeting just about a week and a half ago
13:52:53 along with the police department doing a presentation
13:52:57 on our neighborhood stabilization program.
13:52:59 They are very concerned about abandoned, dilapidated
13:53:02 structures.
13:53:02 There's been problems with frankly folks occupying

13:53:06 those houses that are committing criminal acts, and we
13:53:08 are also very concerned about if there is either other
13:53:12 activity, there has been at least one arson, whether
13:53:15 it was deliberate or not, we really want to be able to
13:53:19 acquire properties that are vacant and abandoned and
13:53:22 be able to tear them down at this point and at a later
13:53:26 date come back and do new construction.
13:53:29 We are hoping to get land assemblage so we can rebuild
13:53:31 the neighborhood so we are looking at hopefully a
13:53:34 series of houses in a row.
13:53:35 That will be a little longer to come back to you with
13:53:38 the standpoint of new construction.
13:53:40 I have heard earlier speak under the audience agenda,
13:53:43 and very frankly we are hearing a little bit of
13:53:46 everything from every member of the community.
13:53:47 In some cases it's where folks want us to provide more
13:53:50 affordable housing, more affordable rental, in other
13:53:53 cases some people are saying that there's enough
13:53:56 stock.
13:53:57 I can tell you for the folks that we are servicing
13:53:59 within our eligible areas and in the target areas,
13:54:02 they do not have enough safe, affordable housing.

13:54:05 So from that standpoint, there might be what I would
13:54:08 call area median income, or higher, maybe if you are
13:54:12 talking 150% of area median income, there might be an
13:54:16 overabundance of housing stock but not good housing
13:54:19 folks for folks at 120% or less.
13:54:23 120% or less is roughly the $75,000 for a family of
13:54:26 four.
13:54:26 So we do believe this is an important program for us
13:54:29 to continue on.
13:54:31 Let me also address an aspect that is not neighborhood
13:54:34 stabilization per se, but would be some supplemental
13:54:37 funds to this program.
13:54:39 In that case, there has been briefed to you, and I
13:54:43 believe when you sit again as a CRA, there will be a
13:54:46 request to modify the budget of East Tampa to provide
13:54:49 TIF funds to be used for acquisition, rehabilitation
13:54:53 of structures.
13:54:55 I'll wrap up in 30 seconds.
13:54:57 (Bell sounds)
13:54:58 To rehabilitate those houses, bring them up to code,
13:55:00 and then be able to either rent or sell them.
13:55:05 Have some flexibility from that standpoint.

13:55:07 With that $1 million allocation of TIF we also intend
13:55:11 to match HOME and state dollars of an additional one
13:55:15 million to be used in East Tampa to be able to support
13:55:17 that program.
13:55:18 So we are looking at neighborhood stabilization, TIF
13:55:22 funds, HOME and ship funds as well as stabilization
13:55:26 money for those areas especially in West Tampa, and
13:55:28 the area along Columbus, generally, that is an
13:55:34 historic district for Ybor City but is in the East
13:55:36 Tampa CRA.
13:55:37 So we are hoping to use all available resources to be
13:55:40 able to get some good appropriate improvement in the
13:55:44 housing stock throughout the neighborhood.
13:55:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions?
13:55:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
13:55:54 I think Spencer Kass made a good point this morning
13:55:58 about the fact that we do really have -- there's no
13:56:01 question that there's huge inventory of homes all over
13:56:05 Florida, and certainly in Tampa.
13:56:09 I understand especially Sulphur Springs that they do
13:56:13 have those houses that are in really bad shape that
13:56:17 are a hazard, and those do need to go.

13:56:20 But I'm wondering, I just think that our focus should
13:56:26 be on rental, it should be -- our priorities should be
13:56:30 renovation.
13:56:33 And I think the problem isn't that -- you know, if
13:56:38 there's a problem, the problem is with the market, and
13:56:41 that housing is still not affordable.
13:56:43 But I think I would like to see some numbers, like if
13:56:47 you look at those targeted areas, how many -- are
13:56:52 there empty homes in those neighborhoods, and what is
13:56:58 the median cost for the available housing?
13:57:05 And it just makes more sense to me in every way to be
13:57:08 renovating instead of tearing down and building new
13:57:12 homes.
13:57:14 It's hard to believe that with, you know, whatever we
13:57:19 have, the new housing starts that are half empty, and
13:57:22 it's also a matter of maybe thinking -- I know you --
13:57:28 are you -- this is a choice that you made about which
13:57:31 areas you want to spend the money in, right?
13:57:36 >>CINDY MILLER: It was a choice, however, when it
13:57:38 comes to rehabilitation, I would say other than
13:57:40 Sulphur Springs, all of the other neighborhoods,
13:57:43 rehabilitation is the emphasis.

13:57:44 When it comes to Sulphur Springs, that was the area
13:57:47 that had the most foreclosures, just driving up and
13:57:50 down the street we saw the most abandoned foreclosed
13:57:53 or abandoned houses generally, empty houses.
13:57:56 We couldn't always tell if they were abandoned or
13:57:59 whether there was other issues going on.
13:58:01 But as I mentioned before, we would go up and down the
13:58:04 street and see maybe 40% of the houses on a block
13:58:07 vacant, which is not a good sign.
13:58:09 So I totally agree with you and staff that our
13:58:14 emphasis will be renovation especially when it comes
13:58:18 to the north Tampa area, the university square area,
13:58:21 and old West Tampa, as well as throughout these other
13:58:24 eligible areas that are in yellow.
13:58:27 When it comes to the rental that I mentioned we are
13:58:29 getting proposals, there we are looking at rehab.
13:58:33 I don't believe that if there is any proposal that
13:58:36 it's emphasizing a teardown and rebuild.
13:58:39 That's something we will certainly scrutinize but we
13:58:42 are looking at the vast majority being renovation in
13:58:44 some way, shape or form.
13:58:45 We tried to look at what the neighborhood need was.

13:58:48 And I think that's why we are not doing a cookie
13:58:50 cutter approach.
13:58:51 We are trying to look at what the neighborhood needs
13:58:54 and respond along with consultation with neighborhood
13:58:57 presidents.
13:58:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
13:58:59 And I agree, you know, these really dilapidated homes
13:59:02 that are, you know, just sitting there waiting to be
13:59:07 occupied, and not taken care of, that those should go,
13:59:11 but I don't necessarily think that that means we need
13:59:14 to build something right there.
13:59:16 I mean, if we have housing stock in other parts of the
13:59:18 city, that can be renovated to become available, I
13:59:22 think that makes more sense.
13:59:24 And I also think that, you know, the idea of, in East
13:59:30 Tampa, of acquiring, you know, trying to acquire lots
13:59:33 to build on, right now doesn't make sense to me.
13:59:36 I know I have a map of all the empty lots that we
13:59:38 already own in East Tampa, and where I would like to,
13:59:41 you know, people to be able to plant gardens.
13:59:44 But, you know, I don't see that as being a really good
13:59:48 investment right now.

13:59:49 >>CINDY MILLER: We are not planning on acquiring
13:59:54 vacant lots in East Tampa.
13:59:55 That's where working through various housing partners,
13:59:58 we are looking at providing them the money to acquire
14:00:01 and rehab.
14:00:02 We are not looking to acquire vacant lots in East
14:00:04 Tampa.
14:00:05 >> And not acquiring to tear down for new development?
14:00:08 >>> Maybe the one area we are primarily looking at
14:00:11 from the standpoint of acquisition and tear-down is
14:00:14 Sulphur Springs.
14:00:15 I have spoken with the neighborhood president up
14:00:16 there, and he and I are of the same mind as appears to
14:00:20 be the rest of the neighborhood folks that I met with
14:00:22 a couple of weeks ago, and in that case, we realize we
14:00:26 need to do some land assemblage to make at good
14:00:29 product but we would not be looking at building new
14:00:31 houses maybe for a couple of years.
14:00:34 And hopefully watch we would see is our first outflow
14:00:37 of the neighborhood stabilization money would be for
14:00:39 acquisition to tear down there, rehab in other places,
14:00:43 then as we sell the houses, some of that income comes

14:00:48 back in, and in a couple of years we build new houses
14:00:50 in Sulphur Springs.
14:00:51 So we are trying to look at it from a business
14:00:54 standpoint as well.
14:00:55 So I think that's what we are trying not to do the
14:00:57 cookie cutter approach but Sulphur Springs has a
14:01:00 desperate need to get some of these areas cleared
14:01:02 away.
14:01:02 >> Right.
14:01:03 I just don't think we need to build any houses in the
14:01:05 near future.
14:01:06 I hope that's not part of the plan.
14:01:08 Then the other thing I wanted to say, and I think we
14:01:10 might have talked about this already, but I hope that
14:01:13 you are going to be working in conjunction with the
14:01:17 stimulus money that's becoming for energy efficiency.
14:01:26 I keep forgetting what they call that.
14:01:29 >>> There is a presentation later today on that.
14:01:31 >> But also that as those renovations are being done,
14:01:35 that all the renovations are green, that they are
14:01:41 toward energy efficiency, and if there's landscaping
14:01:49 involved, that we might be able to promote some, you

14:01:51 know, edible food and native plants, and all those
14:01:55 things that we need to do.
14:01:58 >>> That will be something we will be considering in
14:02:00 the proposals.
14:02:00 We already require in our rehab contracts that there
14:02:03 be energy star appliances.
14:02:06 I was reading through something that was more for
14:02:10 future guidance from HUD, but I believe they will
14:02:13 authorize us to use NSP.
14:02:16 Energy stars, I believe there is something else for
14:02:18 water conservation like water save appliances or
14:02:21 something like that.
14:02:22 So we already have it in our rehab contracts, low-flow
14:02:26 toilets, all kinds of things of that nature.
14:02:28 So we already have that in our specs.
14:02:30 And we'll continue to enhance that as more energy
14:02:34 efficient, water efficient appliances come available
14:02:38 under the HUD program.
14:02:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
14:02:42 Thanks.
14:02:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
14:02:43 Okay.

14:02:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Miller, go back a minute.
14:02:47 You said the million dollars of TIF funds and possibly
14:02:49 a matching million dollars out of some other funds.
14:02:55 How do you apply those funds into the construction
14:02:58 activities of the programs?
14:03:00 >>CINDY MILLER: We would basically do the same thing
14:03:03 as what we are doing with the neighborhood
14:03:04 stabilization.
14:03:05 We will solicit proposals to have again private and
14:03:11 not-for-profit organizations proposal on acquiring
14:03:15 houses, fixing them up, selling or renting.
14:03:18 And we would -- it would just be another source of
14:03:21 funds to match with the TIF funds.
14:03:23 So we would do it as a separate solicitation, than the
14:03:28 NSP money, just because we want to get moving on the
14:03:31 NSP because we do have some significant time frame
14:03:33 constraints.
14:03:34 We want to get moving quickly.
14:03:36 >> I recognize that the banking situation in our
14:03:42 community and the world has changed a lot.
14:03:44 But back in the Freedman administration which some of
14:03:51 you were serving here then and probably a little bit

14:03:53 in the Greco administration, there used to be, I
14:03:56 think, a lot from the city.
14:04:02 >>> We still have those.
14:04:04 As you may recall from my housing presentation, I
14:04:06 believe you are talking down payment assistance, which
14:04:09 is a loan -- basically providing the down payment
14:04:12 assistance so that new homeowners can qualify for
14:04:16 private lending.
14:04:17 >> Right.
14:04:17 But that's just a component of it.
14:04:19 But I think there was also, when you had folks who
14:04:22 might not have qualified under the strictest
14:04:25 guidelines, the banks said, the traditional
14:04:28 conventional loans, and the banks said, well, we don't
14:04:31 feel too good about this, the city would step up, if
14:04:34 we felt comfortable about those families, and give the
14:04:37 banks, I think, some type of guarantee.
14:04:40 That was my understanding of those earlier programs.
14:04:45 Does that sound familiar, Linda?
14:04:48 >>CINDY MILLER: Those were items that was in place
14:04:50 when I was internal auditor.
14:04:53 I would recommend that we not do that at this time.

14:04:56 >> All right.
14:04:57 It just seemed like maybe there was a better way to do
14:05:01 it.
14:05:01 It just seemed those were good ways to leverage our
14:05:04 money, let the banks lend, you know, the big chunk of
14:05:08 money, you know, that we would sort of underwrite
14:05:11 those if they went belly up.
14:05:15 >>> The dilemma is there was not sufficient federal
14:05:18 funds to back up those guarantees to the banks.
14:05:21 You may recall a couple of years ago, I did a
14:05:25 presentation that showed how much we had to repay HUD.
14:05:28 That was part of the dilemma we got into.
14:05:31 So what we do do that is very effective from the
14:05:35 standpoint of lenders is we provide the down payment
14:05:38 assistance, which can be 20% of the housing price, and
14:05:43 depending upon the income qualifications can be as
14:05:45 much as $50,000.
14:05:47 I'm not talking 20% where you are talking about
14:05:51 $250,000 house.
14:05:52 We can go up to $50,000 if that's what it takes to put
14:05:55 a family into a house.
14:05:57 We require it to be fixed rate.

14:06:01 Folks have to have low enough other debt so that we
14:06:05 are not setting them up for failure.
14:06:07 That has been very successful, when we put that out
14:06:10 for down payment assistance, the money is gone in two
14:06:13 days, we had no problems getting the banks to
14:06:15 participate.
14:06:16 >> I like that program.
14:06:17 And I think it's admirable.
14:06:18 I'm just not sure, you know, let's say for a million
14:06:21 dollars, if you get $20,000, you know, per family or
14:06:25 something like that as an average, you get 50
14:06:28 families, it doesn't seem to go as far as perhaps some
14:06:32 other things.
14:06:33 But you and I can talk about it.
14:06:34 >>> We can talk about that but I do have concerns
14:06:38 about that from my former life.
14:06:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
14:06:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Ms. Miller.
14:06:43 Is there any opportunities out of these funds to stop
14:06:45 what we have now?
14:06:46 The areas that you mentioned are certainly the areas
14:06:49 that have the most code enforcement problems.

14:06:53 And is there any opportunities to lend a hand, fix a
14:06:58 hand, and stop the problem with code enforcement by
14:07:01 loaning moneys to these homeowners to fix whatever is
14:07:06 wrong so that we don't continue to be chasing our own
14:07:10 tail?
14:07:12 >>CINDY MILLER: We already do that.
14:07:13 And we have become even more engaged with code
14:07:16 enforcement on that.
14:07:18 Shirley Foxx-Knowles has been one of the leaders in
14:07:21 getting us talking a couple of months ago so that if
14:07:23 the code enforcement officer sees a homeowner that
14:07:27 appears to need additional assistance, they refer it
14:07:30 to Sharon West of our housing community development
14:07:33 division, and again if they are income qualified and
14:07:37 we have been able to do that through rehabilitation,
14:07:39 many of our own, or referring them to center for
14:07:41 women, or other entities that can be of assistance.
14:07:45 >> I understand.
14:07:46 Thank you.
14:07:46 One other statement.
14:07:49 Although it's been mentioned about not building homes,
14:07:51 I have an approach that says you just can't leave a

14:07:58 vacant, if you are going to knock down three or four
14:08:00 houses, there's already three or four empty lots,
14:08:03 something has to be replaced.
14:08:05 If not, that seed won't grow.
14:08:08 So I'm not opposed to starting something in different
14:08:12 areas where you build a home, to entice others to
14:08:16 come.
14:08:17 That's what started downtown with the renovation was
14:08:20 done downtown.
14:08:21 But it wasn't on homes.
14:08:22 It was on businesses and different things to
14:08:25 accomplish, and the convention center such as the
14:08:28 hotel, the Marriott.
14:08:29 And these are things that to me I'm wide open to
14:08:33 discussion for all of it.
14:08:34 Thank you very much.
14:08:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Caetano?
14:08:38 Okay.
14:08:39 Thank you, Ms. Miller.
14:08:40 Let me just say, and I hear what council is saying,
14:08:43 but, you know, these are evaluated on each of their
14:08:48 own merit.

14:08:49 This is just one thing.
14:08:50 First of all you have to spend the money within the
14:08:52 time frame to HUD.
14:08:56 That we have to understand.
14:08:57 Second thing, all of these houses may not be
14:08:59 affordable.
14:09:01 That's a misnomer too as well.
14:09:04 And the other thing, a lot of investors are buying up
14:09:07 a lot of the property to reinvest and get money out of
14:09:11 it.
14:09:12 So that's the other thing.
14:09:13 I know in our Florida housing Monday, they are having
14:09:17 extreme problems trying to get these houses because by
14:09:20 the time they go to look at the property to buy them,
14:09:22 investors have already picked them up and gotten them.
14:09:25 They are gone.
14:09:26 So those are some of the challenges you have.
14:09:29 And then it may not always be what's cost effective to
14:09:33 renovate, if you can it's one thing, but may not be
14:09:37 cost effective to revamp those homes.
14:09:41 So sometimes you have to evaluate them on each merit
14:09:44 and do what is in the best given the amount of money

14:09:46 you have got, given what HUD's revelations are, in
14:09:50 order to do a good job.
14:09:51 And I think Sulphur Springs, and the county also has
14:09:59 targeted right above there in what they call New K
14:10:06 City, university used to be suitcase city, the
14:10:10 university area.
14:10:10 So that's a good working relationship in trying to
14:10:13 pull those together.
14:10:13 So I commend you and your staff for that.
14:10:16 And the county.
14:10:21 You all are doing a it great job working together to
14:10:23 try to make some things happen for Hillsborough
14:10:25 County, the City of Tampa.
14:10:26 I commend you for that.
14:10:27 >>> Thank you.
14:10:29 Sharon West has been a real leader in making sure we
14:10:32 communicate with our colleagues at the county.
14:10:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
14:10:34 Now we'll take up the next item.
14:10:36 And that is 102.
14:10:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, I guess Mr. Caetano
14:10:43 and I would make a motion.

14:10:44 I have been listening fought to the debate on this
14:10:48 issue and I think you have been long past on this
14:10:51 issue -- I actually know that they heard from us
14:10:54 verbally, and so I think we can, as far as I'm
14:10:57 concerned, just strike that and move on because I
14:10:59 think they are way past.
14:11:03 And they moved in a good direction.
14:11:04 They are reducing the salary of the Executive
14:11:06 Director, at least hopefully during the hunt for the
14:11:10 new Executive Director.
14:11:11 It's your motion, Joseph.
14:11:13 But as far as I'm concerned.
14:11:15 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: How about the assistant?
14:11:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know what they are doing on
14:11:19 the assistant.
14:11:21 I know they got a problem with that because I heard
14:11:23 them address it when I was watching them on TV that
14:11:26 day.
14:11:28 Anyway, I'll withdraw my second on that one.
14:11:31 I think it's kind of moot at this point.
14:11:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
14:11:36 Yes.

14:11:36 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to say I don't really think
14:11:39 it's appropriate for us to be telling -- I would love
14:11:44 to be able to tell all those people who got bailed out
14:11:47 and all those CEOs that they can't have the money,
14:11:51 the bonuses that they are going to get and the
14:11:53 salaries they are going to get.
14:11:54 But as City Council, I don't get why we would do that.
14:11:58 Why stop at the Sports Authority?
14:11:59 I know plenty of other people who I think are making
14:12:02 more money than they deserve.
14:12:03 I just don't like the idea in the future.
14:12:12 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: And the complexity of the job,
14:12:14 looking at the cost, the gentleman who was in charge
14:12:18 there has a more tedious job and has more employees
14:12:21 than the Sports Authority.
14:12:23 And that guy at the Sports Authority is making
14:12:26 probably double of the pay, what our number one man in
14:12:29 the construction department makes.
14:12:32 So they have to be --
14:12:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, you heard me, though, right?
14:12:41 We can be here all day on this subject probably and
14:12:43 look at this.

14:12:44 You got varying degrees.
14:12:46 You can't just say, okay, we are going to limit it to
14:12:48 the mayor.
14:12:49 The mayor and her own staff is making more money than
14:12:53 she does so what are you going to do with that?
14:12:56 So come on, I just have a problem of us trying to set
14:12:59 policy for another agency that we don't have
14:13:01 jurisdiction over.
14:13:02 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Maybe you can change that when
14:13:04 you get there.
14:13:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is the motion to remove this by
14:13:08 unanimous consent?
14:13:10 >> Yes.
14:13:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You don't need a motion, just by
14:13:13 unanimous consent.
14:13:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
14:13:15 Item 103.
14:13:27 >> Item 103 is a resolution I prepared expressing
14:13:31 council support of direct flights from Tampa
14:13:33 International Airport to Cuba.
14:13:37 You have the wording in front of you.
14:13:39 Again it's for your review and approval if you chose.

14:13:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me just say this.
14:13:55 If all the flights to Cuba come from Miami, Tampa is
14:14:00 an extreme disadvantage.
14:14:02 Whether you are on one side of the issue or the other
14:14:04 side, I understand them both and I sympathize with
14:14:06 those who have been hurt, whose family has been
14:14:08 jailed, whose son has been murdered or whatever, and I
14:14:13 really, really sympathize with those families.
14:14:16 On the other hand, why should only Miami, and the
14:14:22 Hispanic community, have an advantage that this great
14:14:26 city of ours, and this area in which we live, has more
14:14:30 generations of Cuban Americans than Miami has.
14:14:34 Because they have been here since the 1880s.
14:14:38 In Miami, they did start before the Mariel.
14:14:46 I want to thank Congresswoman castor for saying this
14:14:49 should be a reality, and council colleague Mulhern for
14:14:53 bringing it up to the council, that this should be a
14:14:56 reality, that if someone has a right to fly from
14:14:59 Miami, why shouldn't they have the right to fly from
14:15:01 Tampa?
14:15:02 And that's what this is all about.
14:15:04 So with that said, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for

14:15:10 giving me the floor.
14:15:12 >>MARY MULHERN: And I just think it's wonderful that
14:15:18 at this time people in Tampa are realizing that it's
14:15:23 really the heritage we have here that we need to be
14:15:26 taking advantage of for our own economic development,
14:15:33 and every day you open the paper and more people are
14:15:35 in favor of doing this.
14:15:36 This is a step of that we can do, you know, hopefully
14:15:40 with the help of Congress, and legally at this point
14:15:43 just to add flights but, you know, there's other
14:15:47 things we need to do including there's a bill in
14:15:49 Congress that would extend the ability for everyone to
14:15:54 travel to Cuba, so that it's not just Cuban-Americans
14:15:59 that can go, which will, I think, be a great boon to
14:16:03 our local economy, and I think Miami, New York, all
14:16:05 these other cities are ready and already doing it.
14:16:08 We have to really try to get ahead of things.
14:16:11 So I'm glad to see that the chamber and the port is
14:16:17 even talking about it now.
14:16:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to approve the resolution?
14:16:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
14:16:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

14:16:23 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
14:16:26 Opposes?
14:16:33 Item 104.
14:16:39 Mr. Smith, before you come forward, can we take item
14:16:42 104, 105 and 106 and get them out of the way, if you
14:16:46 don't mind?
14:16:46 And then we'll take you right after that.
14:16:48 We can take item 105 and 106.
14:16:52 They can come forward.
14:16:57 Who is going to introduce this item?
14:16:59 So we can get this out of the way here.
14:17:02 >>> Director of contract administration.
14:17:03 I had not planned on speaking on this item.
14:17:05 I believe Steve is coming over to speak to it.
14:17:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Oh, he's coming over?
14:17:13 Have you been briefed on it?
14:17:15 >> I was briefed on it.
14:17:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You don't have any questions on it?
14:17:18 This is on the improvements, the stormwater and all
14:17:25 that, CH2M hill.
14:17:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
14:17:35 I want to compliment, David, you and construction

14:17:37 services and public works.
14:17:38 When this came to us a couple of years ago there were
14:17:41 all kinds of logistical challenges.
14:17:43 And you have come back with a program that looks as if
14:17:46 it will accomplish some repairs that we needed
14:17:49 forever.
14:17:49 And it will not destroy the tree canopies, brick
14:17:53 streets in the neighborhoods, it will not
14:17:55 substantially inconvenience neighbors, and I think you
14:17:58 have been very creative in your finding another way to
14:18:03 accomplish this project.
14:18:05 It will be much less impact on the neighborhood.
14:18:09 So thank you for your creativity.
14:18:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We will just move the resolution
14:18:16 unless you want to make some comment, but we
14:18:19 appreciate you briefing us on this item, and it's been
14:18:22 moved by Ms. Miller, waiting on a second.
14:18:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
14:18:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
14:18:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I have some questions about this.
14:18:30 And there's a lot on here, a lot of different parts of
14:18:37 the city, whether different engineering, things going

14:18:40 on and a lot of money being spent, and what jumped out
14:18:43 at me, and waive a problem with, and I don't think I'm
14:18:46 ready to vote to approve one part of this, which is
14:18:50 the change order number 1, which is the Westshore
14:18:56 area, stormwater drainage.
14:19:03 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: That would be task order number 26.
14:19:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I'm sorry, task order number 26.
14:19:12 And the reason I'm concerned is because of the
14:19:16 problems we had the first time, we all recall with the
14:19:19 neighborhood, and weighed to completely go back to the
14:19:22 drawing board.
14:19:24 So it was months and months ago that I saw an initial
14:19:29 like one-page, a very primitive drawing about how we
14:19:32 were going to move this stormwater underneath the city
14:19:39 over to the bay, the canals over there, and then I
14:19:44 heard from a lot of the residents who live on the
14:19:47 particular canal where the outflow is going to be, and
14:19:52 I know that you have been talking to them, I think you
14:19:55 have, and chuck Walter.
14:19:56 But as of this morning, they didn't feel like their
14:20:01 questions had been completely answered, and I'm hoping
14:20:03 that they are answered.

14:20:05 We just don't know the answers yet.
14:20:07 But you can tell us, because their big concern is the
14:20:13 particulates and the silt and the fact they just
14:20:18 invested as a neighborhood in dredging that canal,
14:20:20 where the outflow is going to be, and they are very
14:20:23 concerned that they are just going to have the same
14:20:28 problem and the same buildup happening there, and
14:20:33 basically with what one of these constituents wrote
14:20:36 was that they met with Mr. Walter, and he stated that
14:20:39 no more water would flow into our canal than already
14:20:42 does.
14:20:43 The flaw in the statement is the fact that now instead
14:20:45 of letting gravity move the water to different bodies
14:20:48 of water, the city will be diverting waters.
14:20:51 And then that's the major concern for them, that there
14:21:03 would be an environmental engineer involved in the
14:21:06 project that would make sure that the smallest
14:21:12 particles of silt and metals would be caught.
14:21:16 And Mr. Walter told them that this was much too
14:21:19 expensive.
14:21:20 So I don't feel like we have answered this very
14:21:23 legitimate question that these citizens have, since,

14:21:26 you know, we have been trying to figure out how to
14:21:28 dredge these canals and how to help them do it and we
14:21:31 haven't gotten there yet.
14:21:32 But they got together and paid for it and they feel
14:21:34 like they are going to be punished for it.
14:21:36 So I'm not convinced that we have answered their
14:21:39 questions.
14:21:40 So I would like to put this off until I've heard
14:21:47 from -- because this is buried in here, and, you know,
14:21:52 if we hadn't really looked at it, actually, Mr. Vaughn
14:21:59 did give a briefing, but we haven't, now -- the last
14:22:03 time I heard this was a very problematic solution.
14:22:06 Now you are asking us to approve design for it.
14:22:09 And I'm just not ready to do that.
14:22:11 The other thing I wanted to say was, we are taking
14:22:14 money -- or getting money from SWFWMD for cleaning,
14:22:19 for the purpose of cleaning up these waters.
14:22:22 And I think that we had the responsibility to show
14:22:26 that we are going to be filtering that water before it
14:22:28 goes back into the bay.
14:22:29 So I need to have those questions answered before.
14:22:32 And I don't mean right now, because I think that the

14:22:35 constituents need to hear about this, too.
14:22:41 Before I can vote to approve this.
14:22:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda and councilman
14:22:46 Dingfelder.
14:22:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I like council member Mulhern have
14:22:50 some concern regarding the project, not the
14:22:54 availability of the construction and the new process,
14:22:58 and I want to appreciate the two gentlemen that I met
14:23:01 with to discuss the project.
14:23:03 I did bring up something out of the box that said if
14:23:07 this is all factual, my problem is to spend 25 or 26
14:23:11 million or 22 million for something that happens on a
14:23:15 rare occasion.
14:23:16 It's not a daily occasion, it's not a flooding.
14:23:19 And I know we have a problem there.
14:23:21 But to spend that kind of money on something that
14:23:23 happens twice a year, in my book, may be contra to the
14:23:31 expenditure.
14:23:32 I suggested to those gentlemen that the water swirlers
14:23:33 be put instead of at the end but at the beginning of
14:23:38 the intersection close by, that we pump that water,
14:23:42 once it's clean, back into the reclaimed system, and

14:23:45 use it as reclaimed water, which is possible, if I
14:23:48 understood the conversation that we had.
14:23:51 I'm not trying to change the wheel or create the spoke
14:23:55 or anything like that.
14:23:56 But since we are trying to fix the total problems of
14:23:59 water, and the drought, I thought that this would be a
14:24:02 possibility, that instead of throwing it into the bay
14:24:06 after it was clean, don't throw it in the bay.
14:24:08 Clean it before you spend the $26 million and the
14:24:13 infrastructure which is much better than it was before
14:24:15 where you had to go south -- east on Sterling and into
14:24:19 neighborhoods, trees and all that kind of stuff.
14:24:23 I thought that this had not been brought to them
14:24:25 before, and it's not their fault, but I just thought
14:24:29 there could be a possibility where these things could
14:24:31 be done on the front end instead of the back end and
14:24:34 get that same water and reuse it in the neighborhood,
14:24:37 because reclaimed water in through there doesn't go
14:24:40 all the way down.
14:24:42 It stops somewhere around Cleveland, or just south of
14:24:45 Cleveland, and Westshore.
14:24:48 And we are getting that close to it.

14:24:50 We could use those same lines to pump the water back
14:24:52 out and use it for reclaimed.
14:24:54 But that was just a suggestion that I brought up.
14:24:58 >> It's very cool.
14:24:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Dingfelder.
14:25:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Twice in the same day, Charlie, you
14:25:07 and I are on the same path.
14:25:08 A couple months ago that issue came up about storing
14:25:11 the stormwater.
14:25:12 And I talked to stormwater staff about it.
14:25:15 And they told me that the problem is, where do you
14:25:18 store it when you need it?
14:25:21 And because obviously we don't have capacity in South
14:25:31 Tampa to build big storage tanks.
14:25:33 But I believe it is a good idea to look at creating a
14:25:37 solution.
14:25:37 What I was going to say, Steve, related specifically
14:25:39 to this project.
14:25:40 Let me say a couple things.
14:25:41 For one, in 2003, council, we went to the community,
14:25:45 and we said, we are going to implement a stormwater
14:25:48 fee, and we did.

14:25:50 We didn't take it to the voters.
14:25:51 We just did it ourselves because we thought it was a
14:25:55 necessary and a positive thing.
14:25:56 And one of the things that the mayor sold the
14:26:00 community on doing it is to say we could raise about
14:26:03 $100 million over X period of time, and we had this
14:26:07 big laundry list of projects that we were going to
14:26:09 accomplish.
14:26:10 Maybe 100 million might be off, Steve, but that was a
14:26:14 lot of money.
14:26:15 And there was a big laundry list of projects that we
14:26:17 were going to try to accomplish.
14:26:18 And we have already accomplished some of them.
14:26:20 Chuck is in the audience.
14:26:22 He can tell us about them.
14:26:23 And we are in the process of doing these.
14:26:25 We are doing five or ten projects a year, right,
14:26:28 Chuck?
14:26:29 Something like that.
14:26:30 But one of the big projects that was like number one
14:26:32 on the list was the flooding on Dale Mabry in South
14:26:36 Tampa in front of out there by the Publix, and N that

14:26:40 whole area.
14:26:40 That was like one of the big projects.
14:26:43 Okay, the mayor moved forward on one of the ideas, but
14:26:48 logistic I didn't work because it was going to tear up
14:26:52 a neighborhood and tear up the trees and really tear
14:26:54 up the Palma Ceia community so we rejected.
14:26:57 That but now we are back with a different idea.
14:26:59 But it's still going to fix, hopefully, if it works,
14:27:02 going to fix the same flooding problem.
14:27:05 That problem has been there, Charlie, you know it's
14:27:07 been there for a long, long, long time, probably --
14:27:11 it's a natural problem frankly because it's a low
14:27:13 area.
14:27:13 But I believe that this council and the mayor, we
14:27:17 could all be heros if we leave the administration two
14:27:20 years from now, and if we accomplish that and fix it.
14:27:25 So that's why I have been supportive of Steve and his
14:27:28 people in moving forward on studying this.
14:27:30 Now, the folks over towards Westshore, the Culbreath
14:27:34 bayou folks and Beach Park folks, and the folks who
14:27:37 are out there in the canal that you mentioned, Mary,
14:27:40 they have legitimate concerns.

14:27:41 Some of them are environmental concerns.
14:27:44 Some of them are neighborhood disruption concerns.
14:27:46 So what Steve and I talked about was that after this
14:27:50 project gets 30% designed, you will have a lot more
14:27:55 information at that point.
14:27:56 Right, Steve?
14:27:57 And what we I think agreed upon, but I want to you
14:28:00 agree upon it as you are standing there at the podium,
14:28:02 is at the 30% design phase you will come back to us
14:28:06 and go back to the community and you will say, okay,
14:28:08 this is where the pit is going to be.
14:28:10 This is how long we think we are going to be out there
14:28:12 disrupting that street.
14:28:13 This is where we are going to dump it into that canal,
14:28:16 and this is how we are going to make sure that it's
14:28:18 clean when it goes out into the bay.
14:28:20 Those are the types of things that we would like to
14:28:23 hear at 30%.
14:28:24 If you could just confirm that, and I will support it
14:28:27 today.
14:28:31 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you, council members.
14:28:32 Again this is another one of those long-standing

14:28:35 issues in the city that we are trying to deal with, if
14:28:39 it was simple or easy, it would have been done long
14:28:41 ago, and it hasn't been.
14:28:43 To answer Ms. Mulhern's questions, the issue of water
14:28:49 being cleaned up.
14:28:50 It is certainly not going to be treated to drinking
14:28:53 water standards.
14:28:54 But it will be the same volume of water that's going
14:28:57 there today, considerably cleaned up.
14:29:01 Everything that floats in it, everything that settles
14:29:04 to the bottom, will be taken out of that water.
14:29:06 So the water that would be discharged out there -- and
14:29:09 we don't know the exact location -- it's going to be
14:29:13 significantly cleaner than the water that goes there
14:29:16 now, and will continue to go there if we don't do this
14:29:19 project.
14:29:21 And one of the major issues of the folks along those
14:29:23 canals has been that there is sediment and other items
14:29:28 in those waters.
14:29:30 So again, this water is going to be considerably
14:29:33 cleaner than what goes there now.
14:29:35 Same volume of water.

14:29:36 Because that's where it goes naturally.
14:29:40 As far as using this for reclaimed, that's a
14:29:43 possibility.
14:29:45 Of course, when it rains like that, we don't need
14:29:48 reclaimed.
14:29:49 When you have that volume of water that it floods that
14:29:51 intersection, everybody is trying to get it out of
14:29:54 their yard and off the road.
14:29:56 It's not a time when we need to be irrigating.
14:29:58 So we would have to find a way to store it somewhere
14:30:01 until it could be then introduced back into the
14:30:03 reclaimed system, and then you would have to see if
14:30:06 the volume is sufficient or worth whatever the cost
14:30:10 would be to do that.
14:30:11 So that's something we can look at.
14:30:14 With regard to stormwater fees, you all do remember
14:30:17 that the stormwater assessment fee can only go to
14:30:22 operations.
14:30:22 So those moneys do not go for capital projects.
14:30:26 It is U tax and general fund dollars, other general
14:30:31 fund dollars to be used for the project.
14:30:33 So again just to refresh your memory on that.

14:30:36 On the 30% design, we met with the folks in the
14:30:43 Sterling, Granada area where we were going before to
14:30:47 tell them what was going on and met with probably
14:30:50 three groups now in the other side, on the other side
14:30:52 of Dale Mabry, where this trenching underground
14:30:59 project would go.
14:31:00 And we did commit to them that as soon as we did have
14:31:03 details, we did know where the pits and the locations,
14:31:07 that we would come back and brief them.
14:31:08 We have told them that it would be in the
14:31:10 right-of-way.
14:31:10 It is going to be below the roots of trees.
14:31:12 It's going to be below utilities.
14:31:14 It does not prevent anybody from having access to
14:31:16 their property, all of which were problems in the
14:31:19 other project.
14:31:21 We are going to try through design, good design and
14:31:26 engineering, to minimize the impact even further.
14:31:29 But again we are just looking at a couple of pits that
14:31:32 would be there and temporary, just during
14:31:35 construction, and then they would GOP away.
14:31:37 So again we are hopeful that we will be able to move

14:31:41 forward, by going through the design process, and
14:31:44 certainly we'll be back to council at the 30% stage as
14:31:49 well as the community and let them know where we are
14:31:52 and what we found and the level of information that we
14:31:54 have at that time.
14:31:55 Be glad to do that.
14:31:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I love Mr. Miranda's idea that maybe
14:32:02 he can be the engineer, the environmental engineer on
14:32:04 the project.
14:32:07 I don't know what the solution is, but it sure makes a
14:32:10 lot of sense, but if we are going to capture the
14:32:12 stormwater to put it into the reclaimed system.
14:32:15 So maybe you can look into that.
14:32:17 I mean, I don't know the mechanics of how you would
14:32:21 divert -- could you divert that water there.
14:32:24 But I think it's a great idea.
14:32:26 I'm not convinced, I don't see how you can be
14:32:30 diverting all the stormwater that's currently going
14:32:33 through different processes and to different outlets
14:32:38 and the bay.
14:32:39 You are going to divert to the one place.
14:32:42 I saw the drawings that you are going to ask for the

14:32:47 design to happen on, and I don't understand how you --
14:32:52 why we should be spending money on design, 30% design,
14:32:59 for something that if we are not convinced that it's
14:33:02 going to solve these problems.
14:33:04 And these problems are none of the things you
14:33:07 mentioned.
14:33:08 The problems -- there are two problems.
14:33:11 Is the water going to be cleaned up?
14:33:13 Is it still going to be silty?
14:33:14 And I haven't seen that.
14:33:16 I mean, I have had no actual explanation about that.
14:33:19 And is it going to be this outflow into a freshly,
14:33:26 expensively dredged canal?
14:33:27 So those questions haven't been answered for me.
14:33:30 I would love to see Mr. Miranda's idea, at least
14:33:34 examined.
14:33:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, my understanding is based on
14:33:40 some of the recommendations you have to move forward
14:33:41 and get to the 30%, and answered Mr. Miranda's
14:33:46 question and a few other questions. But did I
14:33:48 understand you saying that if we don't do anything,
14:33:50 the same water is going to continue going into the bay

14:33:54 dirty and silty, that this process would help clean it
14:33:57 up?
14:33:58 It's going to go there any way, if you don't do
14:34:00 nothing, if you just let it sit there and don't touch
14:34:03 a thing it's going to still into the canal, is that
14:34:06 right?
14:34:08 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: That's correct, yes.
14:34:09 >> So this here helps clean it up, is that correct?
14:34:11 >>> That's correct.
14:34:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I thought that's what I heard.
14:34:14 I just want to be sure.
14:34:15 Yes.
14:34:16 >>GWEN MILLER: And this has been going on ever since I
14:34:18 have been on council and nothing has been done about
14:34:20 it.
14:34:20 I think it is now the time to do something.
14:34:24 The community is begging us to do something about that
14:34:26 drainage and all the water, and we didn't do anything
14:34:29 until now we have a solution to do it.
14:34:33 I think now is the time to do it and I agree with you,
14:34:35 Mr. Daignault, that we need to do it and 30%, let's
14:34:39 see what's going to happen.

14:34:40 And you are going to come back and let the community
14:34:42 know.
14:34:42 That's all you can do to them and they are willing to
14:34:46 listen to you.
14:34:48 They are agreeable with you.
14:34:49 So what else can we do?
14:34:51 But go ahead and try to do what's going to solve the
14:34:56 solution.
14:34:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: When I met with Mr. Daignault I
14:34:59 believe you told me the water was going through a
14:35:01 process of two steps where it would be almost
14:35:03 purified, that we could --
14:35:07 >>> It won't be purified to drinking water standards
14:35:10 but will capture any of the -- anything that's
14:35:12 floating in there and anything that settles to the
14:35:14 bottom, the heavier sediments that fall out.
14:35:16 Both of those things will be treated or taken out of
14:35:18 the flow, which currently go into that exact canal
14:35:23 through natural drainage and other ditches that it
14:35:26 gets out there now.
14:35:27 Those will be taken out of the flow.
14:35:29 >>> Rate.

14:35:31 So we could talk about this for a couple more years
14:35:33 and still have the same problem, I think.
14:35:35 I'm ready to vote on it and let's get the project
14:35:37 going.
14:35:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion made seconded by Councilwoman
14:35:49 Saul-Sena.
14:35:49 On 105 and 106.
14:35:51 All in favor?
14:35:53 Opposes?
14:35:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and Miranda
14:35:56 voting no.
14:35:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
14:36:13 Number 104.
14:36:14 Mr. Smith is here from administration.
14:36:16 >> Darrell Smith, chief of staff.
14:36:20 I am here today for item 104 providing a report on the
14:36:24 status of the City of Tampa's participation and the
14:36:28 stimulus program.
14:36:30 And I would like the PowerPoint presentation to come
14:36:32 up, please. The American Recovery and Reinvestment
14:36:32 Act of 2009.
14:36:45 The ARRA, I am going to refer to at the stimulus

14:36:49 program for simplicity and our participation as
14:36:51 regards the program grants portion.
14:36:55 The purposes of the stimulus program from the federal
14:36:58 level certainly to preserve, create jobs, certainly
14:37:02 could promote economic recovery and assist those
14:37:05 impacted by the recession.
14:37:09 Providing investment to increase economic sufficiency.
14:37:14 Invest in infrastructure that will provide long-term
14:37:16 economic benefits for the country.
14:37:17 And to stabilize state and local governments so that
14:37:21 we can continue to provide essential services.
14:37:26 Our goal as we administrator the stimulus plan is
14:37:36 shown here.
14:37:39 Certainly shovel ready or timing within four to six
14:37:41 months is very important to be able to expend funds
14:37:43 and get projects started.
14:37:46 We also need to consider reducing our operating costs
14:37:49 and making sure that we prioritize projects that have
14:37:53 an excellent return on investment.
14:37:56 Certainly we are very interested in saving or creating
14:38:00 jobs, improving the environment, and enhancing the
14:38:04 quality of life in the City of Tampa.

14:38:09 We are only talking today about stimulus grants but
14:38:12 rest assured we are looking at any other grant
14:38:14 opportunity that is out there in order to acquire
14:38:16 additional funding for the City of Tampa.
14:38:22 Our city of grants team is shown here.
14:38:24 We have 15 primary departments that are typically
14:38:26 involved in grant opportunities for their respective
14:38:31 department meeting on an ongoing basis to look at
14:38:34 opportunities in the grant environment for stimulus
14:38:38 funding and grants, there are basically three
14:38:40 categories that we are working.
14:38:43 One is the formula allocation that's utilizing
14:38:47 existing funding mechanisms like the community
14:38:51 development block grant funding mechanism, using those
14:38:55 allocations to find by formula to get funds into the
14:38:59 various communities.
14:39:01 The good thing about this mechanism is that the amount
14:39:08 that is defined, as long as we can put forth a program
14:39:11 that's consistent with the requirements of the
14:39:13 respective grants opportunity.
14:39:17 But we still must obtain approval for the program in
14:39:21 order to obtain the funds.

14:39:23 The second category is the competitive grant category
14:39:27 and that's merit-based, depending on how well our
14:39:30 grant application matches the goals and requirements
14:39:32 of the grants.
14:39:34 And the third category is low-interest loans,
14:39:36 primarily we are talking about the state revolving
14:39:39 fund, loans that are made at very low interest and
14:39:44 they are primarily focused on infrastructure
14:39:46 improvements in the water, stormwater areas, utility
14:39:50 functions.
14:39:53 Looking at the community development block grant
14:39:56 opportunity is the $1 million formula allocation.
14:39:59 The focus on maximizing job creation and economic
14:40:02 benefit, and certainly a very positive, the projects
14:40:07 involved in this grant should promote energy
14:40:10 conservation, smart growth, building techniques or to
14:40:15 reduce emission.
14:40:18 The city will be giving priority to projects that can
14:40:20 be within 120 days of the grant agreement, and we will
14:40:27 be utilizing the RFP process to solicit proposals, and
14:40:32 we'll also be participating as a city for our own
14:40:35 projects that might meet the requirements of the

14:40:38 grant.
14:40:39 The homeless prevention grant is bringing
14:40:43 approximately $1.5 million to the city.
14:40:45 Focused on preventing individuals and families from
14:40:49 becoming homeless and helping those experiencing
14:40:52 homelessness to be quickly rehoused and stabilized.
14:40:57 The funds are providing -- will provide rental
14:41:00 assistance, housing relocation and stabilization
14:41:03 services.
14:41:04 We already have the RFP on the streets for this
14:41:09 program.
14:41:09 We will be looking to get those applications back in
14:41:12 and processed in order to meet a June 1st is our
14:41:17 next deadline for processing that particular grant.
14:41:23 The energy efficiency, conservation block grant
14:41:28 funding, is $3.7 million, is another formula
14:41:33 allocation.
14:41:34 And this grant provides oh federal grants to local
14:41:37 governments to reduce energy use and fossil fuel
14:41:42 emissions and to improve energy efficiency.
14:41:44 In order to participate in this grant, the city will
14:41:48 have to submit an energy efficiency and conservation

14:41:51 strategy in conjunction with the grant application.
14:41:56 Looking at the individual element of this grant, the
14:42:01 projects that we are currently focused on, one is to
14:42:04 develop a comprehensive green carbon footprint
14:42:09 inventory for the City of Tampa, looking to improve
14:42:12 our municipal parking garage as far as the lighting.
14:42:17 We are upgrading traffic signal lamps to base them on
14:42:23 L.E.D. or light emitting diodes, and will be looking
14:42:27 at projects in city-wide energy management projects.
14:42:33 As far as the greenhouse gas inventory you see here,
14:42:36 the elements of that inventory, the government
14:42:40 operations, to conduct the carbon footprint study,
14:42:43 identifying and ranking greenhouse gas emissions and
14:42:47 reductions, looking for energy efficiency cost
14:42:51 savings, trying to validate sustainable nature of our
14:42:54 capital projects to better position the city to
14:42:57 receive stimulus funds in this area in the future.
14:43:03 Municipal lighting projects, we will be looking at
14:43:05 high efficiency lighting, changes to reduce the energy
14:43:10 use by about 55%, also provide a longer lamp life and
14:43:16 standardize our fixtures in our parking garages, cost
14:43:19 of about $1.25 million.

14:43:22 You can see there on the slide the payback time very
14:43:27 minimum really when you look at three years to obtain
14:43:30 that payback.
14:43:31 The schedule will be based on an August funding
14:43:36 availability.
14:43:37 You see there at the bottom where we could go to
14:43:39 construction, begin construction in October of this
14:43:42 year.
14:43:48 The LED upgrade is a very significant policy to change
14:43:51 over those bulbs in many signals throughout the city,
14:43:55 provide also additional operational and maintenance
14:43:57 savings, as well as the savings in energy costs of
14:44:01 between 60 and 70% to 1.92 million, the payback, 2.25
14:44:08 years.
14:44:10 Energy management systems are shown here, focus on
14:44:13 optimizing the operational hours of lighting,
14:44:16 equipment, fresh air, usage, anterior space,
14:44:19 temperatures, in the various buildings throughout the
14:44:21 city.
14:44:23 Cost shown $472,000 in the payback period really
14:44:27 varies on the projects that we include.
14:44:30 And the police department, public safety, we are

14:44:32 looking at Edward broom memorial justice grant, again
14:44:38 formula allocation to purchase technology to support
14:44:41 TPD's crime reduction efforts, look into continuing
14:44:45 deployment, and in-car technology, and to further
14:44:49 their objectives of acquiring criminal data systems to
14:44:53 support public safety.
14:44:56 In the arts area, we have already submitted a grant of
14:44:59 $50,000, the focus on creating and preserving jobs,
14:45:05 two contractor jobs would be involved in this
14:45:07 particular grant, will be administered through the
14:45:10 lights-on Tampa area as shown there.
14:45:14 Another grant in the competitive area focused on oh
14:45:17 preventing and reducing violent crime, and will be
14:45:21 funded, or submitted to Hillsborough County, the focus
14:45:25 on the anti-gang initiative.
14:45:27 And again that has already been submitted.
14:45:30 Another Edward Byrne memorial grant of $2.8 million.
14:45:36 And what's happening in order for us to balance the
14:45:39 FY-10 budget, we are in need of eliminating 30
14:45:46 civilian jobs in the police department.
14:45:49 This grant, if approved, will allow us funding
14:45:54 reimbursements in order to keep those 30 jobs on the

14:45:58 rolls for the city for the next two years.
14:46:05 And we also have some loan requirements, loan
14:46:14 opportunities and projects that will be processed
14:46:18 through the state's revolving fund, and the water
14:46:22 department, we are going to be soliciting $20 million.
14:46:26 We put in the application for the loan to replace
14:46:28 water mains in the downtown area and in the Davis
14:46:32 Island area.
14:46:34 Construction will start planning for October of this
14:46:36 year.
14:46:40 And the area of stormwater, we are going to be asking
14:46:42 for a $10 million loan to focus on Drew Park drainage
14:46:48 improvements to supplement funding sources shown at
14:46:56 the bottom of the slide.
14:46:57 Other stimulus initiatives that we are considering,
14:47:00 Cindy may have covered, if there is a phase 2 of the
14:47:04 NSP program coming out.
14:47:06 We are looking at the possibility of trying to obtain
14:47:11 approximately $32 million out of that second round.
14:47:13 And in the transportation area, we have already been
14:47:19 participating in the FDOT allocation going for the I-4
14:47:26 Crosstown connector.

14:47:27 With regard to the 32 million, working with the
14:47:38 Housing Authority.
14:47:39 There are many hurdles but it's a very high priority
14:47:42 project for the city.
14:47:42 We need to be pushing very hard to get whatever
14:47:44 funding we can for it.
14:47:47 The Crosstown connector, very important project, very
14:47:51 expensive project, stimulus formula, all of it, or 90%
14:47:57 of it went to FDOT dedicated through that project.
14:48:00 $105 million total.
14:48:10 Our formula dollars, we already submitted applications
14:48:14 for approximately 3.2 million.
14:48:16 And our loan applications will total 30 million, and
14:48:20 that will result of in the possibility of $41 million
14:48:24 going into the local economy, creating jobs, creating
14:48:27 additional economic opportunities for the community as
14:48:31 well as the projects themselves.
14:48:35 Other initiatives shown here for the possibilities
14:48:38 that we have discussed.
14:48:40 As far as the city, revenue and finance department is
14:48:43 the overall department responsible for coordinating
14:48:47 stimulus and grant opportunities, the point of contact

14:48:50 is Sharon Fox, and we have developed a Web site.
14:48:56 Staff will a -- that will allow approximate public and
14:48:59 members of the city to go to that Web site, and
14:49:02 provide information to them on the program, pushes for
14:49:10 this program is transparency and accountability of the
14:49:13 use of the funds.
14:49:14 So we are committed to that, and we'll continue to
14:49:19 provide updates on the Web site whenever we can.
14:49:22 Council, that concludes my presentation.
14:49:24 I will be glad to answer any questions that you have.
14:49:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena?
14:49:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: First I want to apologize to my
14:49:30 fellow council members.
14:49:31 I have to leave at three for a tourist development
14:49:33 council meeting but potential source of revenue so
14:49:35 it's very for.
14:49:37 Thank you very much, Mr. Smith.
14:49:38 I November that everybody is scrambling for stimulus
14:49:42 dollars.
14:49:43 And I have spoken with a number of people in the
14:49:44 community who vice-president ideas which haven't yet
14:49:46 been reflected in things that we have done.

14:49:49 And I just want to make sure that there are going to
14:49:52 be opportunities for council members to come to the
14:49:53 administration as members of the public come to us
14:49:57 with ideas and for you all to consider them.
14:49:59 And I know that Sharon fox has other responsibilities
14:50:03 like dealing with the legislature, and I just want to
14:50:06 make sure that she has enough time and attention to --
14:50:14 I feel such a rare opportunity for us, and I want to
14:50:17 make sure that we are as creative and aggressive as
14:50:21 possible in getting and applying for stimulus dollars,
14:50:24 not just the obviously allocated ones but for
14:50:28 creativity in partnership with other community
14:50:31 adventures maybe we'll be successful in getting it.
14:50:34 I want us to be as aggressive as possible.
14:50:36 So what I would like, if you could come back at our
14:50:38 next council meeting, which is in two weeks, not to do
14:50:41 another presentation for us, but if any of us have
14:50:44 heard, or if people in the community want to bring
14:50:46 some things to you.
14:50:47 I know that the deadlines at the end of May, we are
14:50:52 working as fast as we can.
14:50:53 I just want to make sure there are as many

14:50:55 opportunities as possible for the City of Tampa to
14:50:57 benefit in this recovery act.
14:51:01 >>> Yes, ma'am, I totally agree, and very committed to
14:51:04 inputs from council members, and every member of the
14:51:06 community, we'll be able to provide inputs to us, and
14:51:11 particularly the mayor's TECO conservation task force
14:51:15 will be very helpful opportunity for us to solicit
14:51:19 ideas that pertain to these grants.
14:51:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
14:51:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
14:51:29 I had a number of questions about some specifics
14:51:32 there, but I just feel like in general, as you went
14:51:36 through these lists, a lot of these projects actually
14:51:43 I thought we were already doing, and especially -- and
14:51:47 I understand we are in a bad budget situation, and
14:51:49 this is an opportunity to use money to plug those
14:51:54 holes.
14:51:54 But I also feel like if we already had money budgeted
14:51:59 for this job, we should be doing more, creating new
14:52:02 jobs out of this money.
14:52:05 And I especially have questions about the energy --
14:52:14 the measuring our carbon output and all that.

14:52:17 I know over a year ago that I actually introduced
14:52:21 someone I met who had done that study as a graduate
14:52:24 student for the city of Clearwater, and would have
14:52:27 done that for us.
14:52:28 So there are things on here that we should very well
14:52:32 have been doing already, and that's kind of
14:52:35 disappointing, because I had hoped especially when we
14:52:43 had our green officer appointed, and I had thought
14:52:49 that a lot of this had been done measuring our carbon
14:52:53 output and our energy use and all that, I thought that
14:52:56 was being done currently by staff.
14:52:59 And I think we missed opportunities where we could
14:53:02 have, as I said, have volunteer people doing it.
14:53:05 So I think the concern we had this workshop on green
14:53:11 jobs a few weeks ago, and the room was full, and
14:53:14 people had a lot of ideas, and I'm hoping that, you
14:53:19 know, they have been coming directly to the
14:53:21 administration, but I just feel like this is like
14:53:25 looking at, you know, the budget plan, like I feel
14:53:29 like a lot of this is deja vu and thought it was
14:53:32 already happening.
14:53:33 I'm sorry the budget, we have been in such bad shape

14:53:36 that they weren't.
14:53:37 But the carbon footprint, all those things, I thought,
14:53:40 should be to get our banner out on the GMLB that says
14:53:45 we are a green city or whatever, but we had to do a
14:53:47 lot of these measurements already.
14:53:51 And I just really feel like, you know, we just got
14:53:55 this today, and this is all actually information that
14:53:59 council has been asking for, since I have been on
14:54:02 council, pretty much, but what we are doing.
14:54:05 So anything that has to do with our green effort.
14:54:08 So I'm glad we finally got this.
14:54:11 But it makes me wonder if this was happening before we
14:54:17 got economic stimulus money anyway, or if it wasn't
14:54:20 going to happen, but we just were waiting for it to
14:54:23 happen.
14:54:25 I also had some questions on in particular about the
14:54:32 homeless prevention money.
14:54:34 I mean, you're telling us that you had to get Sharon
14:54:41 Folks, this really overworked employee, the
14:54:44 responsibility for -- for, you know, all of these
14:54:48 grant and loan applications.
14:54:49 We have a homeless coalition in Tampa.

14:54:51 So why are we doing an RFP as the city when we could
14:54:56 have just given the homeless coalition this money and
14:55:00 had them do it for us.
14:55:02 I mean, maybe that's who is going to answer the RFP.
14:55:05 But I feel like -- I'm just not sure that in
14:55:11 particular is something that we should have done.
14:55:14 So, and I would like to go a little further than Linda
14:55:19 and suggest that there is a lot of money out there,
14:55:23 there are a lot of grants.
14:55:24 I have a list of them right here that I am not going
14:55:27 to go over.
14:55:28 But especially the competitive grants.
14:55:30 We can't -- I know we are not applying for them
14:55:34 because probably we don't have the staff to do it.
14:55:36 So I think it would be a really good idea to do an RFP
14:55:40 for someone to come forward and do work on economic
14:55:46 stimulus and green jobs grant applications for us.
14:55:53 It would pay for itself, no doubt, pretty quickly.
14:55:56 And we could even find a grant somewhere, you know, on
14:56:01 that stimulus, federal stimulus Web site that we could
14:56:05 even find to fund that.
14:56:07 So I think that's our best way to make sure that we

14:56:13 can use this opportunity to get the most we can out of
14:56:18 it, and really to create jobs, because I know this is
14:56:24 a huge challenge to find things that are ready to go,
14:56:27 and that are already for your formula allocations, but
14:56:33 I also feel like it's a great opportunity that we have
14:56:36 to take advantage of to do some of those green steps
14:56:40 that we want to do especially and create more jobs.
14:56:43 So I hope that that's something you will think about.
14:56:46 And I don't know if that's come up in the energy task
14:56:49 force.
14:56:49 But it could be a really good way for us to figure out
14:56:52 how to get the help and the funding to do some of this
14:56:55 stuff.
14:57:04 >> Darrell Smith: And your point about trying to get
14:57:06 an external consultant to help with us the stimulus
14:57:09 funding, and there are a lot of folks out there trying
14:57:12 to get involved in that.
14:57:17 We have 15 different departments involved in this
14:57:21 program, and those departments know the operations,
14:57:29 and as long as we are able to dedicate enough time for
14:57:32 to us -- for them to focus on going through all the
14:57:35 grant opportunities that are out there, in their

14:57:37 respective areas, we feel that we are in a good
14:57:42 position to be able to accomplish that work.
14:57:45 Now, we are considering going out with a request for
14:57:51 information asking for inputs on any ideas that a
14:58:00 consultant could bring to the table for the City of
14:58:02 Tampa that would enable us to improve our renewable
14:58:12 energy approach, to find cost savings in our heavy
14:58:15 industry areas like the water plant and the wastewater
14:58:18 plant, and to give us inputs on how we could improve
14:58:23 the utilization of our vehicles, and decrease the
14:58:26 energy consumption there.
14:58:27 And in that way, we would ask the marketplace to look
14:58:31 at the City of Tampa, bring your knowledge to the
14:58:34 table, and give us recommendations on what we could
14:58:38 consider, and then we can possibly entertain
14:58:41 negotiation was the respective consultant that might
14:58:44 even have a grant part thrown into the contract as
14:58:53 long as looking at grants and processing grant.
14:58:56 At this point we feel fairly confident that we have a
14:58:58 good grasp on some of these grants.
14:59:03 >>MARY MULHERN: The point that I'm trying to make is
14:59:05 this is new money, it's new technology, and we are

14:59:11 trying to create new jobs, around new industry, which
14:59:15 is a green industry.
14:59:17 So we don't have that staff.
14:59:20 We have staff that does their job, and it's getting
14:59:24 smaller and smaller, because of our budget crunch.
14:59:26 So I think that you cannot generate something out of
14:59:34 nothing, you know.
14:59:36 If you don't have the people, and the expertise
14:59:39 already here to do that, then we physically do not
14:59:46 have the bodies to do that.
14:59:47 Thom Snelling and Sharon Fox and Cindy Miller, I mean,
14:59:52 I don't know how many hours they are working.
14:59:54 But I think they need some help to figure out a way to
14:59:58 help us.
14:59:58 And I just think that the best, you know, to find
15:00:03 someone who would do the research, the grant writing,
15:00:06 and don't have to do the grant writing, maybe finding
15:00:09 the money, they can be funneling it to those
15:00:11 departments, they can be advising them how to do it.
15:00:15 And the other thing I have to say is that there are,
15:00:19 you know, private companies that have had all kinds of
15:00:22 ideas for years about how we could save energy, and we

15:00:26 could have been using to finance this.
15:00:27 We have performance contracting we could have been
15:00:30 using.
15:00:30 So we need to start doing that right now.
15:00:32 We don't need a consultant to tell us, you need to do
15:00:37 this.
15:00:38 I mean, we know what we need.
15:00:40 We need to, you know, reduce our fuel consumption,
15:00:43 reduce our electricity use, you know, get those LED
15:00:48 lights, all of these things.
15:00:50 We don't have to reinvent the wheel.
15:00:52 Everyone else is already doing it.
15:00:54 And I just want the City of Tampa to step up and get
15:01:01 in on this and get more of what we can instead of
15:01:04 just, you know, plugging up holes.
15:01:11 >>> I wouldn't characterize our efforts as plugging
15:01:13 holes.
15:01:14 And I will comment on the performance contracting.
15:01:16 We have used that approach in the past.
15:01:17 We have already been in talks with companies within
15:01:20 the last six months, where we intend to use that as an
15:01:24 approach, in the appropriate places, and that's

15:01:28 certainly on the table, and as long as they can show
15:01:30 savings, and we are comfortable with the
15:01:34 recommendations that they are making, and any loans
15:01:38 that are involved or reasonable rates, we would be
15:01:41 glad to entertain that.
15:01:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
15:01:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair,
15:01:50 Mr. Chairman.
15:01:51 Thank you, Darryl.
15:01:52 It's a good presentation.
15:01:53 I think it's a good list.
15:01:55 I think it's a lot of really good projects on there.
15:01:57 And I'm really pleased that the stimulus money is
15:02:00 headed our way.
15:02:04 I had two questions, and one of them as a motion.
15:02:08 On the homeless prevention page, one of the things was
15:02:14 short term rental assistance, which I think is
15:02:17 extremely important when people lose their jobs, and
15:02:20 they are living month to month or day to day for the
15:02:23 government to step in and try to keep them in their
15:02:26 homes.
15:02:31 Doesn't Tampa county -- Tom, you can help me we've

15:02:34 this -- doesn't the county already have a prosecute
15:02:36 program with that?
15:02:37 And if that's the case have we looked to use the
15:02:39 county as a provider for that?
15:02:40 >>CINDY MILLER: Director of growth management and
15:02:46 development services.
15:02:47 The county does have a program similar to this as do
15:02:50 other social service entities within our city.
15:02:52 So that is one reason why we are doing the RFP.
15:02:57 There is probably coming to mind two or three entities
15:03:00 within our city that are providing that kind of
15:03:02 service, which is why the RFP is out there for them to
15:03:05 be able to respond.
15:03:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I saw you mention the RFP and I'm
15:03:09 glad to know there are nonprofits that are doing that.
15:03:11 I assume they are knot nonprofits.
15:03:13 I just want to make sure that we have serious
15:03:15 discussion was the county as a potential provider.
15:03:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We had a meeting on Monday.
15:03:24 And they have been collaborating and talking on this
15:03:27 particular issue.
15:03:29 So I wanted to point out particularly to the homeless

15:03:36 coalition that the county, number one, is your social
15:03:38 service provider within Hillsborough County.
15:03:40 That's number one.
15:03:41 Number two is the city and county have really been
15:03:43 working hard together on affordable housing on this
15:03:45 issue of homelessness, and together.
15:03:48 I just want -- they are doing it already.
15:03:51 It's a close communication and relationship.
15:03:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was thinking the or would hope
15:03:57 the overhead in using the county as a provider might
15:04:00 be less than others.
15:04:01 I just wanted to toss that out.
15:04:03 Thank you.
15:04:05 And David, if I could.
15:04:09 The other question I have is, I saw the press releases
15:04:15 about the solar arrays out at Lowry Park that I think
15:04:20 Lowry Park put in with TECO, university was involved,
15:04:23 I think.
15:04:25 I think that's wonderful.
15:04:27 With the sunshine state we all need to be taking
15:04:29 advantage of the beautiful sunshine that we have and
15:04:32 trying to use that sunshine to generate electricity.

15:04:35 Now I know the technology is not what it needs to be,
15:04:38 et cetera, et cetera.
15:04:38 But obviously it's good enough to stick out there at
15:04:42 Lowry Park and generate some electricity.
15:04:44 So what I would love to see -- and I know I have put
15:04:47 you on the spot, unless you have the answer off the
15:04:50 top of your head -- but I would like to know maybe two
15:04:52 weeks from now on this being in the form of a motion
15:04:55 is if we could maybe see what it would cost to put a
15:05:01 solar array on top of something like the convention
15:05:04 center, to utilize -- I mean, you put a beautiful
15:05:08 white roof on there.
15:05:09 I can't imagine anything better an white ref for solar
15:05:12 panels.
15:05:13 But, you know, potentially cover that whole convention
15:05:17 center with solar panels, you know, how much would the
15:05:20 upfront investment be, and how much power would it
15:05:23 generate, and how much money would it generate for the
15:05:25 city to do that?
15:05:27 Because I'm thinking these are really good projects
15:05:30 that you have here, the energy management system, we
15:05:33 are going to be reducing.

15:05:34 We are going to be reducing our power needs, and
15:05:37 that's a good thing.
15:05:37 But maybe either now or down the road, when we have
15:05:41 another little stimulus money opportunity, maybe we
15:05:45 can butt some solar arrays on top of that roof.
15:05:48 Would you be amenable to at least looking into that,
15:05:51 David?
15:05:52 >>> Yes, sir.
15:05:53 David Vaughn, Contract Administration.
15:05:56 A couple responses to your comments.
15:05:58 One is we have been in discussions off and on over the
15:06:01 last couple of years with various vendors and entities
15:06:05 looking into these opportunities.
15:06:08 When we started construction on the Tampa Museum of
15:06:10 Art, for example, I was get getting lots of
15:06:14 suggestions from the public about cover that roof with
15:06:16 solar panels, and we did some numbers, and we looked
15:06:19 at it, and we could have covered the entire roof and
15:06:23 not met the hot water need in the entire building.
15:06:26 So the technology is coming along.
15:06:28 I will also share with you that I have been invited to
15:06:31 a meeting to hook up with the TECO folks that have

15:06:34 partnered with the zoo on their project to see what we
15:06:36 can do in the city, and whether I have a report for
15:06:39 knew two weeks or not, but we are going to meet with
15:06:41 them and see what we can --
15:06:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The only reason I said two weeks is
15:06:47 if you all are working on some sort of May deadline
15:06:50 and if you came back with astounding numbers saying
15:06:52 maybe this is a better way to generate electricity
15:06:55 instead of using this money, to save electricity.
15:06:58 I kind of doubt it but at least if there's some
15:07:01 preliminary numbers that you can feed us.
15:07:03 >>> I can tell you rate now we will not come back to
15:07:06 you with the kind of payback and instant benefit from
15:07:08 the projects that we have proposed, nor will we be
15:07:11 able to meet the time line imposed by the stimulus
15:07:14 dollars in order to get those projects on the street
15:07:18 and do what is going to be required with that.
15:07:21 But that doesn't mean we don't look at this and we
15:07:23 don't figure out a way to get into those kinds of
15:07:27 programs and begin developing those.
15:07:33 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say something to your
15:07:35 suggestions.

15:07:36 The Orlando convention center is doing that right now.
15:07:42 They are putting a solar roof on the convention
15:07:44 center.
15:07:46 We know they are doing it.
15:07:47 And the project at the zoo with TECO, the zoo and USF,
15:07:53 and they are just starting the press release, just the
15:07:56 announcement.
15:07:58 I don't think they have done it.
15:08:01 That's a new project.
15:08:05 >> By the same token, we don't want to wait till they
15:08:08 are done to start talking.
15:08:09 >> Right.
15:08:10 But I'll second your motion to look into it.
15:08:15 But David said two weeks isn't enough.
15:08:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe a month from now will be
15:08:19 fine.
15:08:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
15:08:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
15:08:23 I agree with everything that's been said, the payback
15:08:25 on things that are a little longer, the technology is
15:08:27 still lagging behind, the cost of the manufacturing of
15:08:30 the solar items are much more expensive now than it

15:08:34 will be five years from now, ten years from now.
15:08:36 And it will take half as much then to do what we do
15:08:39 now at 100 percent cost.
15:08:42 To do something like my house alone -- and 100
15:08:46 percent -- would cost $45,000.
15:08:52 Not my lifetime or my kids' lifetime will we get that
15:08:55 money back.
15:08:55 So what I'm saying is it's got to be a balance between
15:08:59 nature and reality of cost.
15:09:01 There's a lot of different things that are going on
15:09:03 throughout the world in heat.
15:09:07 Sweden has solar panels that do a lot for the city.
15:09:12 Spain, Savilia Spain has this magnetic field where the
15:09:17 sun hits and creates electricity, generators, and they
15:09:23 say by 2014 the whole city of 600 that you is beyond
15:09:27 that.
15:09:28 Whether successful or not, let's see what happens.
15:09:31 But there's a lot of things that we are doing.
15:09:32 In New York City, in the rivers, and underground
15:09:38 turbines that are moving water to create the energy
15:09:44 and I think a restaurant and half a parking garage.
15:09:48 These things are costly.

15:09:49 And there's where the balance has to come in.
15:09:52 But you can see how a lot of that is made and stuff
15:09:56 like that.
15:10:01 But it's very interesting to see how things are coming
15:10:03 along, because the possibilities of doing these things
15:10:05 are getting greater and greater, and we shouldn't
15:10:08 depend on any one source of energy.
15:10:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
15:10:11 >> There's a motion made.
15:10:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I know.
15:10:18 Any other questions?
15:10:19 Anything else, Mr. Smith?
15:10:21 There's a motion on the floor.
15:10:22 Been moved and seconded.
15:10:23 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:10:25 Opposed?
15:10:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Did you want to speak to allow public
15:10:32 comment on this, or wait till the end of the meeting?
15:10:36 >> Yes, because it's not a public hearing.
15:10:37 >>MARY MULHERN: We are almost done, I hope.
15:10:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
15:10:44 We'll move to item 8.

15:10:46 That is the item pulled by Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:10:49 Item 8.
15:10:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I pulled this because of the
15:11:00 public comment about the concern about the noisy --
15:11:15 much in that neighborhood.
15:11:16 Since this item was on the agenda I was concerned
15:11:18 about whether this memorandum of understanding would
15:11:22 in any way affect our ability to, as I think we
15:11:27 already had a motion to ask the police department to
15:11:30 look into doing those letters.
15:11:34 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.
15:11:36 There are really two different things.
15:11:38 The vehicles kind of thinking conceptually are a
15:11:43 mobile source of noise, and there's a statute on that,
15:11:46 which I think was alluded to in the public comment
15:11:48 where if it's audible within 25 feet then there's a
15:11:52 citation under state law that would be issued.
15:11:55 >> Per vehicle?
15:11:57 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: That would be per vehicles.
15:11:59 What we are dealing with in the city's noise
15:12:01 ordinance, and the Environmental Protection Commission
15:12:04 regulation on noise, what I would call static or

15:12:09 stationery sources of noise so focused on businesses,
15:12:13 residences, entertainment venues, those types of
15:12:16 things.
15:12:17 And in the past, there was I guess you mate say a
15:12:21 separation, or they divvied up the types of couple
15:12:28 different lines, but now it's really focusing more on
15:12:31 EPC handling, commercial and general type sources of
15:12:35 noise, and Tampa Police Department handling
15:12:40 restaurants, bars, those types of venues and
15:12:42 residential.
15:12:43 So it's much clearer separation of who has what
15:12:48 responsibilities, and that's really all it's doing, is
15:12:51 not changing the standards, or eliminating even the
15:12:54 police department's ability to cite folks for noise
15:12:58 violations.
15:12:59 It's just more clearly delineated, who is responsible
15:13:01 for what areas.
15:13:02 >>MARY MULHERN: So because of that state law, does
15:13:06 that mean, can our Tampa police be enforcing that?
15:13:09 >>> And they do.
15:13:10 They do.
15:13:10 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.

15:13:12 Good.
15:13:12 Well, we made the motion for them to look into the
15:13:15 letter.
15:13:16 Okay.
15:13:16 Thank you.
15:13:17 I'll move that item then.
15:13:21 >> Second.
15:13:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:13:24 (Motion carried)
15:13:25 Let's take up item 85 real quick and then come back to
15:13:37 92.
15:13:38 Well, let's get the public out here with second
15:13:41 readings and then come back.
15:13:43 Council Mulhern, that's your item on the
15:13:47 budget advisory.
15:13:49 Number 92.
15:13:51 Let's take up 85, second reading on the proposed
15:14:05 ordinance.
15:14:05 If you are going to speak, stand up and be sworn at
15:14:08 this time.
15:14:08 (Oath administered by Clerk).
15:14:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Need a motion to open.

15:14:12 >> So moved.
15:14:13 >> Second.
15:14:13 (Motion carried).
15:14:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 85.
15:14:15 We have a substitute ordinance for that.
15:14:17 Yes?
15:14:18 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
15:14:19 Yes.
15:14:21 The ordinance that contains changes made at the last
15:14:25 meeting, the sunset provision in 2011.
15:14:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: This is a public hearing.
15:14:31 Anyone wishing to address council on item 85.
15:14:34 >> Good afternoon.
15:14:35 Spencer Kass representing landmark realty and the park
15:14:40 neighborhood association 10010 South Howard Avenue.
15:14:43 We have a couple concerns about this.
15:14:45 First of all, and I expressed these concerns to staff
15:14:47 earlier in the week.
15:14:51 There's a real concern that what ends up happening
15:14:53 under this ordinance is that you prevent people who
15:14:56 want to go forward with projects today from going
15:14:58 forward with those projects because they will face

15:15:01 higher fees as a result of somebody else got a
15:15:05 continued permit.
15:15:06 The way it works in the City of Tampa is you are going
15:15:08 for permitting.
15:15:10 At that point the City of Tampa figures out basically
15:15:13 your various usage amounts, for example, water
15:15:18 supplies supply 10,000-gallons, if your project is
15:15:22 going to use up the rest of capacity then you are
15:15:24 fine.
15:15:25 The next guy goes in, and the capacity has already
15:15:27 been allocated to you.
15:15:28 He could be faced with having to pay the fee that is
15:15:30 make up the difference.
15:15:32 It's very complex.
15:15:33 I discussed it with the water and the transportation
15:15:35 department, which is what you can have, someone that's
15:15:41 prepared to go forward today and having to pay the
15:15:43 higher fees.
15:15:44 I don't think we should be doing anything that would
15:15:46 prevent a project, someone who might want to go
15:15:50 forward today from going forward today by facing those
15:15:54 higher fees.

15:15:54 I don't know how many of you have gone down and seen
15:15:58 the former truck site what it looks like.
15:16:00 I understand that the city will use code enforcement
15:16:02 to take care of this.
15:16:06 If you imagine what it looks like, imagine someone's
15:16:10 residential house being next to something like that.
15:16:11 That's why on behalf of the association, I'm very
15:16:15 concerned over the fact that you can have things --
15:16:17 I'm not saying code enforcement isn't doing their
15:16:19 best, but you can have things like that that go on
15:16:22 forever.
15:16:23 And one of the other things we mentioned to staff, I
15:16:26 don't know what it is under the bankruptcy code, and
15:16:29 under the bankruptcy code what sort of continue
15:16:31 continuances people go K get top drag this process out
15:16:35 even longer.
15:16:36 It's a real concern of ours.
15:16:37 Therefore I ask until those other issues are able to
15:16:39 be addressed that you not continue with item 85.
15:16:42 Thank you.
15:16:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think those issues were raised at
15:16:47 our first public hearing, and legal, do you want to

15:16:49 address those?
15:16:50 Because my understanding is that will not happen, and
15:16:52 also that these sites will be monitored.
15:16:55 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Well, there are provisions in the
15:17:01 code to put conditions requiring the site be
15:17:03 maintained.
15:17:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
15:17:06 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: And made safe.
15:17:07 Really the choice is, the way it was described and
15:17:11 discussed and put together the way I see it, is the
15:17:13 choices giving an extension and still having some
15:17:16 leverage to get folks to maintain their property and
15:17:18 keep it safe, or have an abandonment, a worse case
15:17:24 where you have no leverage.
15:17:25 So from our perspective this is better than having
15:17:28 abandoned properties.
15:17:30 And I can't speak to the bankruptcy code issue.
15:17:33 They can't use the bankruptcy code to extend
15:17:36 deadlines.
15:17:37 They would use the bankruptcy code to prevent us from,
15:17:39 say, putting a code enforcement lien or putting
15:17:43 something that would be in the nature of litigation,

15:17:45 bankruptcy stays, any type of litigation.
15:17:47 But they would still very much to go through all these
15:17:50 extensions and applications like we have in this code
15:17:53 provision.
15:17:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In other words they aren't exempt
15:18:00 from bankruptcy.
15:18:00 They have to continue top do the same thing that
15:18:02 someone that's not in bankruptcy would have to do.
15:18:08 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
15:18:09 That's correct.
15:18:09 We just would not be able to --
15:18:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me ask something of the legal
15:18:15 department.
15:18:15 When we do these extensions of time does that involve
15:18:17 the water and sewer?
15:18:20 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I don't believe so.
15:18:21 I did not read this as providing for the water and
15:18:23 sewer.
15:18:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: She's saying no, it does not but come
15:18:26 say that on the record, please.
15:18:27 >>CINDY MILLER: Director of growth management
15:18:29 development services.

15:18:30 This is for chapter 5 items only which is construction
15:18:33 permitting.
15:18:35 And plan review.
15:18:37 It does not include anything regarding the water
15:18:39 department.
15:18:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So we would have to make a separate
15:18:42 motion later on.
15:18:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the public wish to
15:18:46 address council?
15:18:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
15:18:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
15:18:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Miranda.
15:18:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move an ordinance --
15:18:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Substitute.
15:19:03 I move an ordinance substituted for second reading of
15:19:12 adoption, file E-2009-8 CH 5, ordinance of the city of
15:19:18 Tampa, Florida making revisions to the City of Tampa
15:19:20 code of ordinances chapter 5, building code, amending
15:19:24 5-105.3.2, time limitation of application, amending
15:19:29 section 5-105.4, conditions of the permit, repealing
15:19:35 all ordinances or parts of ordinance in conflict
15:19:38 therewith, providing for severability, providing an

15:19:41 effective date.
15:19:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Miller.
15:19:44 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:19:48 Oh, I'm sorry, record your vote.
15:19:52 That's right.
15:20:09 >>THE CLERK: I'm not sure why it's not coming up but
15:20:11 the motion passed with Caetano, Dingfelder and
15:20:18 Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
15:20:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 86.
15:20:24 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Assistant city attorney.
15:20:27 We are here on the second reading for an ordinance
15:20:33 making comprehensive changes to the public Nuisance
15:20:35 Abatement Board ordinance.
15:20:44 Anyone from the public to address council on number
15:20:46 86?
15:20:47 >> Move to close.
15:20:50 >> Second.
15:20:50 (Motion carried).
15:20:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:20:54 86.
15:20:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Sorry.
15:20:56 I move an ordinance being presented for second reading

15:20:59 and adoption, an ordinance from the city of Tampa,
15:21:02 Florida making revisions to City of Tampa code of
15:21:05 ordinances chapter 5, building code, amending section
15:21:05 5-105.3.2, time limitation of application, amending
15:21:05 section 5-105.4, conditions of the permit, repealing
15:21:05 all ordinances or parts of ordinance in conflict --
15:21:17 I'm reading the wrong ordinance.
15:21:20 Sorry.
15:21:23 I can't get input from both ears at the same time.
15:21:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 86.
15:21:29 86.
15:21:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Move an ordinance for second reading
15:21:34 and adoption, an ordinance of the city of Tampa,
15:21:36 Florida making comprehensive revisions to City of
15:21:38 Tampa code of ordinances chapter 14 offenses,
15:21:41 repealing section 14-636 public Nuisance Abatement
15:21:43 Board in its entirety, creating article VII section
15:21:48 14-282 through 14-290 reserved, creating article VIII
15:21:55 public Nuisance Abatement Board, providing for repeal
15:21:57 of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
15:21:59 severability, providing an effective date.
15:22:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

15:22:04 Record your vote, please.
15:22:14 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena, Caetano
15:22:17 and Dingfelder being absent at vote.
15:22:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 87.
15:22:23 Item 87.
15:22:25 And page 4 has been substituted.
15:22:30 >>> Justin Vaske, legal department.
15:22:32 I have before you a second reading of an ordinance
15:22:35 that amends section 16-had -- 157-41 of the city code
15:22:43 and I have provided substitution.
15:22:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
15:22:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I guess when I read through parts
15:22:51 of that ordinance some people were creating havoc and
15:22:54 not wanting to pay and so forth and so on.
15:22:56 >>> That's my understanding from staff.
15:22:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
15:23:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public wishing to
15:23:02 address council?
15:23:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
15:23:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Move to close.
15:23:06 (Motion carried).
15:23:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to move an ordinance to be

15:23:12 adopted for second reading, an ordinance of the city
15:23:14 of Tampa, Florida amending City of Tampa code chapter
15:23:17 15 parking, article II, differentiation I, general
15:23:20 parking regulations, section 15-41, said amendment
15:23:24 being necessary to provide for additional regulations
15:23:27 and prohibitions for parking vehicles at single
15:23:31 parking spaces at pay stations in city lots, garages,
15:23:35 public streets and other property, providing for
15:23:37 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
15:23:40 effective date.
15:23:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
15:23:48 Record your vote, please.
15:23:49 Item 87.
15:23:51 Record your vote.
15:23:52 Regulation, the parking regulation.
15:24:14 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
15:24:15 Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
15:24:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 88.
15:24:24 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Assistant city attorney.
15:24:28 This sew second reading of an ordinance that would be
15:24:30 making amendments to chapter 23.5, the city code,
15:24:33 which is the civil citation process.

15:24:36 The changes are changing the definition of repeat
15:24:41 violation to include persons who have been found
15:24:44 guilty by reason of default.
15:24:46 Class 1 violations as being amended to add code
15:24:50 sections 19 and 22, class 3 violations being amended
15:24:56 to include sections -- from chapters 22 -- just
15:25:04 chapter 22, I'm sorry.
15:25:06 Class 4 violations are being amended to include
15:25:09 sections from chapters 22, 25, and 27.
15:25:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't Vermont any questions to
15:25:24 ask directly other than this is the same ordinance
15:25:26 that the first ordinance was passed.
15:25:28 Are any provisions they have to go to court, should
15:25:34 they choose to not pay the fine?
15:25:38 >>ERNEST MUELLER: That's correct.
15:25:39 They can either pay it or challenge in the court.
15:25:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Public hearing.
15:25:42 Anyone wishing to address council may come forward.
15:25:46 >>> Spencer Kass, 1001 North Howard Avenue.
15:25:50 Mr. Miranda mentioned this before.
15:25:53 There are basically two approaches.
15:25:55 One approach is we go out, we try to punish the 3% of

15:25:58 people who do things wrong.
15:25:59 The other approach is we try to help the 97% of people
15:26:02 who have do things right.
15:26:04 I don't know if you have actually read what sections
15:26:05 of being jammed into this $400 fine.
15:26:09 This thing is like if you repair a sidewalk without a
15:26:11 permit, it's a $400 fine.
15:26:14 I think if you repair a sidewalk you should be
15:26:18 applauded.
15:26:18 That's great.
15:26:19 It's beyond me that we are so busy trying to come up
15:26:22 with every little thing to bother people about.
15:26:25 I mean, the way this is set up, if you are a business
15:26:28 owner and you put out one of those triangle signs that
15:26:31 come around, and they give you a warning, they'll give
15:26:33 you a warnings they come back and it's still there,
15:26:36 you are going to get stuck with a $400 ticket.
15:26:38 So you are saying go to court.
15:26:42 I really what the city should be focused on is with
15:26:45 all these departments, all these you people running
15:26:47 around giving out violations and fines and everything
15:26:49 else, instead the city should be working to try to

15:26:52 encourage to get businesses open, get things moving.
15:26:54 As I said earlier today you have a lot of people who
15:26:57 don't have a lot of jobs, now.
15:26:58 Seems to me that the city should be a little more
15:27:01 focused on, say, adopting reefs, something we have
15:27:05 been working on five years still hasn't been resolved
15:27:09 in this city, instead of saying, oh, here's a local
15:27:11 business owner, let's go give him a hard time.
15:27:14 You can also focus your attention on, say, the snipe
15:27:17 signs N.front of my building every morning at Howard
15:27:19 and cypress I have to get someone on the cell to your
15:27:23 to rip down signs.
15:27:24 I realize I can tell the city to do it.
15:27:27 You don't tray to shut their phone lines down or fine
15:27:30 them or hunt them down.
15:27:31 You can find them pretty easy.
15:27:33 There's a phone number right on the sign.
15:27:35 That you are not focused on.
15:27:36 But the average Joe in this city who is trying to make
15:27:40 a living, then you are prepared to go after
15:27:46 full-fledged.
15:27:47 And I personally think it's wrong.

15:27:49 And I have spoken to many businesses. They think it's
15:27:52 wrong.
15:27:52 There are a lot of businesses that feel they are being
15:27:54 harassed now by some of the departments who are
15:27:56 looking for more and more revenue.
15:27:57 I think it's a very unfortunate way for the city to
15:28:00 go.
15:28:00 I encourage you instead to support the 97% of people
15:28:04 who are trying to do things right and give them a hand
15:28:06 up instead of knock them down.
15:28:09 Thank you.
15:28:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the public?
15:28:14 Okay.
15:28:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Spencer, wait, I wanted to ask you
15:28:18 something.
15:28:19 Can I ask him something?
15:28:25 I'm not familiar with every detail of this.
15:28:30 So if you are willing to go through it and show me the
15:28:33 section, not right this minute, but I'll vote against
15:28:37 this if you will go through and show me which things
15:28:44 you have problems with, you know, ask that we maybe
15:28:47 continue this.

15:28:49 But I can't just -- I'm not familiar enough with it to
15:28:52 say that, you know, that I won't accept it overall.
15:28:59 I just need to know the details.
15:29:04 So I move to continue this if I can get a second.
15:29:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll give a second, but when I
15:29:11 asked Mrs. Miller about some of that money coming down
15:29:15 had the possibilities of helping out people, she said
15:29:18 yes, code enforcement to help solve some of the
15:29:21 problems that are residual, that keep coming up.
15:29:25 I'm talking about the 3%, those individuals, I believe
15:29:32 the majority of them are doing something not because
15:29:34 they want to do it, because they don't have the
15:29:36 necessary moneys to do what they feel they have to do
15:29:43 to solve the problem, so therefore they are in
15:29:45 violation the first time, they are in violation the
15:29:48 second time they appear, and these are the ones that
15:29:50 I'm trying to get solved, so that we can have a
15:29:52 breather, so that these individuals, and some of them
15:29:57 are 80s, to us it may not be a stressful thing, but
15:30:02 when you get to that age ever little thing like this
15:30:06 is health related stress.
15:30:08 I can understand the other side.

15:30:10 If you put a snipe sign on and they come give you a
15:30:13 warning and since we don't have all the necessities we
15:30:18 need, bicycle lanes, someone is ride ago bike and hits
15:30:21 the sign, then what do you do?
15:30:23 So it's half of one, six of another.
15:30:26 The problem resolves around itself.
15:30:28 We talked about civil citation to expedite the
15:30:32 process, not to pull it back.
15:30:34 It was very lengthy.
15:30:36 It was costing a lot of manpower.
15:30:39 And the job wasn't getting done.
15:30:41 I believe -- and I agree with what was said about the
15:30:43 snipe signs.
15:30:44 You can go to any corner in the West Tampa area today
15:30:47 and you see a sign, call so-and-so, 1-787-something,
15:30:54 one bath bungalow, $39,000, $59,000.
15:30:57 You think the city was for sale.
15:30:59 But all they have to do is get those code enforcement
15:31:02 officers, pick it up and put it in the trunk.
15:31:05 I guess maybe that's too difficult.
15:31:07 But that's one thing I would do.
15:31:08 And I'm not running that department.

15:31:11 But that, the more they put up the more I take down.
15:31:15 Sooner or later they run out of money.
15:31:17 Sooner or later you become victorious by doing a
15:31:20 simple thing of picking up the signs.
15:31:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Why don't you make a motion they do
15:31:24 that?
15:31:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll make it later, Mrs. Miller.
15:31:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone to speak to the motion?
15:31:32 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I really want to make two
15:31:34 comments.
15:31:35 From our view the idea with the civil citation
15:31:37 process, to make things simpler and less onerous for
15:31:41 individuals that are dealing with code enforcement.
15:31:44 We actually expect -- we don't have hard numbers, but
15:31:48 the expectation is it will actually be somewhat of a
15:31:51 reduction in revenues, because it will be less than
15:31:54 going through with the big numbers that you see on
15:31:56 these code enforcement liens.
15:31:59 But the other part of it is, we think, we are hopeful
15:32:03 that this will be a tool to do things like snipe signs
15:32:06 and those other types of things that are very
15:32:08 transient, that move quickly, that somebody once they

15:32:11 get notified that there's a violation, they just take
15:32:13 it out and it's not an issue, that can be issued on
15:32:16 the spot.
15:32:17 So I think we are on the same page here in terms of
15:32:19 how we want to change the code enforcement process.
15:32:22 If you want to continue it and get some more comfort
15:32:25 with it, that's fine.
15:32:26 But I think from a policy standpoint, what we are
15:32:30 presenting to you all is consistent to what we are
15:32:32 hearing from council here and in prior meetings.
15:32:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I ask a question?
15:32:45 He's saying it's a $400 fine.
15:32:47 What was that feign before, for that violation?
15:32:49 >>> Anything that's in here has not been a part of the
15:32:55 civil citation process.
15:32:57 All of these code sections are being added so that the
15:33:00 city, if they need to enforce it by civil citation,
15:33:03 they can.
15:33:04 If the code section is not in here, specifically, then
15:33:13 like under the 400s they haven't been able to enforce
15:33:15 it.
15:33:17 Under the class 1s there is the kind of catch-all

15:33:20 provision saying that if we haven't specifically named
15:33:22 this code section, we can enforce it with a $75 fine
15:33:28 or a class 1.
15:33:30 But I think in answer to your question is the ones
15:33:35 under the class 4 are not enforceable by the civil
15:33:38 citation prior to this.
15:33:39 >> So how did you come up with a $400 fine?
15:33:46 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I'm sorry, if I may clarify.
15:33:48 If they were enforceable they would go to the code
15:33:50 board and be a code board process and that would be a
15:33:54 maximum of $500 and those will run if not cured within
15:33:57 a certain period of time and those are those dollars
15:33:59 that we bring to you each month, how much we have
15:34:01 collected through fines, what's pending, what do we
15:34:03 have in liens?
15:34:05 So what it's doing is taking it out of that process
15:34:08 and moving them to a process that's much more like a
15:34:11 ticket, a speeding ticket or a ticket for watering or
15:34:14 something like that, where you don't have these
15:34:16 running fines adding up over a period of months,
15:34:18 years, whatever.
15:34:20 It resolved the issue more quickly.

15:34:22 So I'm not sure how they came up with the different
15:34:25 gradations.
15:34:26 We worked with the various different staffers to say
15:34:28 75, 150, the different classes.
15:34:31 But they are all less than the maximum by the Code
15:34:38 Enforcement Board.
15:34:39 >> Last week I had code enforcement come to New Tampa.
15:34:42 They picked up 19 signs.
15:34:43 Okay.
15:34:44 J&J pressure washing.
15:34:47 Evidently the gentleman is looking for work, okay?
15:34:49 And if we are going to impose a $400 fine you are
15:34:52 going to put more stress on him and his family.
15:34:57 And I would rather see the code enforcement officer
15:34:59 pick the signs up, and after awhile J&J is going to
15:35:03 see, why am I putting these signs up?
15:35:05 They are disappearing.
15:35:08 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Are you talking about what's called
15:35:09 the snipe signs?
15:35:11 >>: Yes.
15:35:12 >>ERNEST MUELLER: That's not even in here.
15:35:14 That's not part --

15:35:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: That's not part of it?
15:35:19 >>MARY MULHERN: I just have a quick question for you,
15:35:22 Ernie.
15:35:22 How do you have a violation that's not named?
15:35:27 Maul it isn't specifically a code section.
15:35:30 I probably said it wrong.
15:35:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
15:35:33 We didn't mention that but it's $75.
15:35:38 >>> We go through and we are very specific.
15:35:41 That certain subsections are subject to these
15:35:44 classifications so something that's minor is $75.
15:35:48 Something that's creating flooding problems under the
15:35:51 stormwater section which is something we have had
15:35:53 trouble figuring out how to enforce is more.
15:35:56 And so while it doesn't specifically call out, say,
15:35:59 the sign violations, we could issue a $75 here if it
15:36:05 was made a priority, and that was decided that folks
15:36:09 were going to focus on that.
15:36:10 But really what we have tried to do is like I said
15:36:13 create something that's more understandable, it's
15:36:14 easier to deal with, and is more efficient in terms of
15:36:17 process and time, not something that's going to raise

15:36:21 revenue.
15:36:21 In fact, as I said, because these are lower than what
15:36:24 the code board can impose, the expectation is they go
15:36:28 down slightly.
15:36:29 >>MARY MULHERN: I would still like to ask for a
15:36:32 continuance so I can go over this with Spencer and
15:36:34 then hopefully with Ernie and just make sure, but it
15:36:39 doesn't seem reasonable.
15:36:40 So till our next meeting.
15:36:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.
15:36:43 It's been moved for the continuance to our next board
15:36:46 meeting, and seconded by councilman Miranda.
15:36:49 All in favor of the continuance signify by saying Aye.
15:36:52 Opposes?
15:36:53 Okay.
15:36:54 So we'll continue that to our next regular meeting.
15:37:00 >> Item 30.
15:37:05 >> Which is really 430.
15:37:08 >> To make a motion later on and help change some of
15:37:11 that.
15:37:12 [ Laughter ]
15:37:12 Item 89.

15:37:23 >>> I'm asking council to improve encroachments on
15:37:33 embassy suites downtown.
15:37:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's the overhang of those
15:37:38 buildings, four or five of them.
15:37:40 >> Right.
15:37:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public wishing to
15:37:44 address council on 89?
15:37:46 >> Move to close.
15:37:47 >> Second.
15:37:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:37:50 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance for second reading
15:37:54 and adoption, an ordinance authorizing certain
15:37:59 existing and proposed encroachments existing
15:38:02 architectural features and building encroachments and
15:38:05 proposed balcony building and roof overhangs, over
15:38:09 portions of the public rights-of-way known as Franklin
15:38:11 Street, Channelside Drive, and Florida Avenue in the
15:38:15 City of Tampa, Hillsborough County as more
15:38:17 particularly described herein subject to certain terms
15:38:19 covenants conditions and agreements as more
15:38:22 particularly described herein, providing an effective
15:38:23 date.

15:38:24 ENC-09-02.
15:38:30 >>GWEN MILLER: 89, second reading.
15:38:34 Moved and seconded.
15:38:35 Record your vote.
15:38:39 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
15:38:40 Saul-Sena being absent at vote.
15:38:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That concludes all of our second
15:38:48 readings.
15:38:48 We are back now to item 91.
15:38:52 92, I'm sorry.
15:38:53 92.
15:39:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know that we really need to
15:39:04 have a discussion.
15:39:04 There were a couple of appointees who had resigned, so
15:39:08 I had asked council to make more appointments.
15:39:15 I at first suggested that we turn this into the same
15:39:17 process we have for our other committees.
15:39:19 I don't think there was support for that.
15:39:21 So I would just like to ask, I know that you appointed
15:39:28 someone and we are waiting.
15:39:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT:
15:39:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My understanding Mr. Chairman is my

15:39:38 understanding of what constitutes dual office holding
15:39:40 your appointee would be able to serve.
15:39:42 I believe he is available if you wish to appoint him.
15:39:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Fine.
15:39:47 And Mr. Dingfelder had appointed someone, too.
15:39:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ma'am?
15:39:55 >> (off microphone).
15:40:00 >>MARY MULHERN: I was wondering if -- Joseph, I know
15:40:05 that your appointee has been working out of the
15:40:08 country, if you are going to appoint someone else.
15:40:13 >> Iraq.
15:40:13 >> Do you want to try to appoint someone else?
15:40:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
15:40:18 We will appoint someone else.
15:40:23 >>GWEN MILLER: How many more meetings are they going
15:40:25 to have?
15:40:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Miranda we found a capable
15:40:29 appointee to the committee, and my aide has advised me
15:40:32 that Gina Grimes will accept it.
15:40:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
15:40:39 Marty, can we pass a resolution approving -- do we
15:40:42 need to pass a resolution?

15:40:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe initially you have a
15:40:45 resolution that appoints them.
15:40:47 Society if you or your aides can get me that
15:40:49 information by the next regular meeting I'll have a
15:40:51 resolution prepared with the name of your appointees.
15:40:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know that we are everything
15:40:58 another meeting between now and then so it will be
15:41:00 feign.
15:41:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You mean we have to have a resolution
15:41:04 every time we appoint someone?
15:41:07 >> Yes.
15:41:08 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
15:41:10 The only reason, the original resolution names the
15:41:14 people who are pointing so you have to amend the
15:41:17 resolution to appoint new people.
15:41:19 That's the only way you are doing it that way.
15:41:21 The resolution had names in there originally.
15:41:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In the future can we do the resolution
15:41:25 without names so we don't have to pass a resolution
15:41:27 every time we do something?
15:41:30 >>MARY MULHERN: That's great.
15:41:31 Marty, prepare the resolution so that council will

15:41:34 each appoint, an adviser and not name them, that will
15:41:42 be fine:
15:41:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to do that as a motion
15:41:45 for the next regular meeting?
15:41:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
15:41:50 I need a second.
15:41:55 >> Second.
15:41:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:41:58 All in favor?
15:41:59 Opposes?
15:41:59 Okay.
15:42:00 We are under new business now, I believe.
15:42:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It was on your addendum, two things
15:42:08 to take care of.
15:42:09 One of them, you received a letter from the Tampa
15:42:11 Heights civic association time on the agenda at your
15:42:17 meeting on May 21 to do a presentation for elected
15:42:21 officials an their effort to have the church now owned
15:42:24 by FDOT to be converted into a community civic center.
15:42:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
15:42:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: On a regular meeting day, that would
15:42:43 be ceremonial.

15:42:44 How much time oh do you wish to set aside?
15:42:53 They are asking for May 21st if that's council's
15:42:56 pleasure.
15:43:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
15:43:01 A second?
15:43:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
15:43:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:43:04 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:43:07 Opposes?
15:43:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, the other thing that
15:43:10 appears on your agenda a request by Benjamin Buckley
15:43:16 to schedule on City Council agenda for nine minutes to
15:43:18 discuss the reorganization of the Construction
15:43:19 Services Center.
15:43:21 I believe that might have been the gentleman who was
15:43:22 here today.
15:43:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: He's requesting that.
15:43:33 I just think when you start having staff, you want to
15:43:37 be on the schedule for ten minutes, 15 minutes, 20
15:43:43 minutes.
15:43:43 I think anyone who wants to address council through
15:43:46 the public comment section.

15:43:47 That's the place to do it.
15:43:48 And secondly, again you have to keep in mind, we are
15:43:53 limited in what we can do in terms of this particular
15:43:55 issue anyway.
15:43:56 I'm just telling you.
15:43:59 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree.
15:44:01 Also, Cindy Miller said she was talking to employees,
15:44:04 she agreed to look at the list that Mr. Buckley -- is
15:44:09 that his name? -- gave us and she was also going to
15:44:12 look at the complaints -- or comments from the private
15:44:16 sector that we are getting.
15:44:18 So I think that is the way that they are going to have
15:44:22 to go about it.
15:44:26 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Kendrick.
15:44:29 >>MARY MULHERN: No, you are talking about the building
15:44:32 inspector.
15:44:34 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: That spoke this morning.
15:44:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, yeah, that was the second guy.
15:44:38 I was thinking of Buckley.
15:44:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
15:44:45 Council members.
15:44:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: New business?

15:44:48 >> Yes.
15:44:48 Start with Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:44:49 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't have anything unless Kristina
15:44:52 comes running in here.
15:44:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
15:44:54 Can I take your time?
15:44:58 >>: Sure.
15:44:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have three that I would like to
15:45:00 bring up.
15:45:01 One is about water.
15:45:02 And let me say this.
15:45:04 What's the difference between recharged and reclaimed?
15:45:11 Well, let me explain what that is.
15:45:13 You see, when you have the reclaimed, and somebody
15:45:15 uses it, to recharge the aquifer, therefore it's your
15:45:22 water coming back to you in another form.
15:45:25 What does Washington, D.C., El Paso, Texas, and Orange
15:45:30 County, California, have in common?
15:45:35 They are all drinking reclaimed.
15:45:43 Sewer authority, which is Washington, D.C., treats
15:45:46 about 15 million gallons a day, purified sewage,
15:45:52 reclaimed, calm it whatever you want.

15:45:55 They put it in the river two miles from the plant, and
15:45:58 they have been doing that for years.
15:46:01 Orange County, it was put on the ballot and people
15:46:07 voted on it and passed it.
15:46:09 70 million gallons a year.
15:46:10 So let me draw an analogy.
15:46:13 If it is true that we have 55 million gallons -- and
15:46:17 it is that we are putting in the bay which at one time
15:46:20 we cleaned up the bay because it was in terrible
15:46:22 shape, and now because of TMDLs we have a problem,
15:46:27 we are trying to work it out.
15:46:28 It is true we are using 2 million or less gallons a
15:46:31 day in reclaim, and if the whole city that is entitled
15:46:36 to get reclaimed based on the ratio return to money on
15:46:40 the sale of water, I don't think it would hit 20
15:46:44 million gallons a day.
15:46:45 What happens to the difference of that water?
15:46:49 Someone is going to use it for recharge.
15:46:53 And if we don't use it, ware going to lose it.
15:46:56 And what I'm saying is, I think we ought to have, not
15:46:59 today -- and I want all the council members here -- to
15:47:03 review something to put on the ballot, so the citizens

15:47:08 can determine what's best.
15:47:09 Let me tell you why. I'm not afraid to make a
15:47:12 decision because I'm going to support it.
15:47:14 But I really believe that when you look at
15:47:16 infrastructure costs -- Mr. Caetano has spoken about
15:47:19 it earlier today in New Tampa getting reclaimed -- a
15:47:22 pipe along from the Howard Curren plant and Hookers
15:47:26 Point to New Tampa is very, very expensive.
15:47:31 No more than the total cost of putting a Howard Curren
15:47:37 plant and putting up pipe from there to the bypass
15:47:42 canal for already treated 100% clear water to drink.
15:47:49 It is time that we look at solving problems instead of
15:47:56 Band-Aiding problems.
15:47:58 I attended the water summit and I thought it was very
15:48:00 useful, very informative, so forth and so on.
15:48:03 They never talked about solving our water crisis.
15:48:07 Although during the summer months, we put some days
15:48:11 half a billion gallons or 500 million gallons over the
15:48:16 water, that's after Tampa Bay water takes their share,
15:48:19 we take our share that we process and use for
15:48:21 6,406,000 customers, billions of gallons go over the
15:48:25 river on the yearly basis, and it's waste because we

15:48:29 have no storage.
15:48:33 We should continue to work with other agencies to get
15:48:39 more aquifer storage and recovery, not only us, but
15:48:43 other government agencies that could use that water so
15:48:47 that they don't have to go and we don't have to GOP
15:48:49 through this drought every year.
15:48:51 I'm looking to find ways of solving our problems
15:48:56 long-term.
15:48:59 And one region is if we put this on the ballot, let
15:49:03 the public decide, that technology is there now, it's
15:49:06 used all over, in fact, how do you think the
15:49:10 astronauts get water?
15:49:11 Do you think they have a straw and they sip it?
15:49:16 >> They recirculate it.
15:49:18 >> That's exactly right.
15:49:19 So if the astronauts can do it, how come we can't do
15:49:23 it?
15:49:23 So what I am trying to look at is to make a working
15:49:30 plan in the next 90 to 120 days and present it to the
15:49:34 pun for a vote sometime next year, and may have to
15:49:39 wait till 2011.
15:49:41 But there's an urgency in this community.

15:49:44 And it's not by -- they say, well, stop growth.
15:49:48 Listen, it's not about growth.
15:49:49 It's about our own population.
15:49:52 Me and my wife, we have three kids.
15:49:55 We got eight grandkids.
15:49:58 That's no new people coming from out of town.
15:50:01 It's us.
15:50:01 The rest of us are the same way.
15:50:03 So what I'm saying is that it needs to be addressed
15:50:06 and hasn't been addressed because it's a political
15:50:09 hotbed.
15:50:10 I'm not afraid, like I said before, I've never said I
15:50:13 was running for reelection to anything.
15:50:15 I just want to leave something behind that can be for
15:50:22 the benefit of all the citizens for many, many years
15:50:25 to come.
15:50:25 And I really believe that this is the only way of the
15:50:28 City of Tampa to become self-sufficient and not have
15:50:32 to spend more money and buying water and solving our
15:50:38 problems.
15:50:40 The cost of water lines to New Tampa, like I stated
15:50:44 earlier, far exceeds or equal to the cost of

15:50:49 rewrapping the plant, making it drinkable water and
15:50:53 shipping it to the bypass canal to go into that plant
15:50:58 up in what some people call it the middle river.
15:51:01 There's no such thing as a middle river.
15:51:02 There's something called the reservoir in my opinion.
15:51:06 But that's another issue for another debate.
15:51:08 So that's what I want to suggest, that --
15:51:11 Is that a motion?
15:51:13 >> Yes, sir, that within 120 days the administration
15:51:15 appear, and let me say this, we did that.
15:51:19 There's a stack of files that high, where you have
15:51:22 local, state and federal approval of that project 20
15:51:25 years ago.
15:51:26 That is here.
15:51:33 Let met also say that St. Pete did their thing, put in
15:51:36 the infrastructure for reclaimed.
15:51:38 We did our thing. We spent 75% of the grant money
15:51:41 that we got, and built and expanded the Howard Curren
15:51:46 plant so we can have today one of the best plants in
15:51:49 America.
15:51:50 And let me also say that that water today -- and I'm
15:51:53 not suggesting you drink it today -- is equal to or

15:51:57 better than 90% of all the water drank worldwide.
15:52:03 And those are statements of fact.
15:52:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I ask you a question?
15:52:06 What would it cost to put a treatment plant in new
15:52:09 Tampa?
15:52:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Too much.
15:52:13 Politically, they annihilate you.
15:52:16 Let me tell you why. I'm going to speak to you as a
15:52:19 friend.
15:52:19 If you put a plant in New Tampa, it takes five houses
15:52:24 to get reclaimed for one.
15:52:25 So are you going to knock on those other five houses
15:52:29 and say your water is going to your neighbor but you
15:52:31 can't have it?
15:52:32 That's the problem.
15:52:35 The best way of doing that is to underground ton he
15:52:38 willing from Howard Curren to New Tampa.
15:52:42 >> There's a motion on the floor.
15:52:44 Is there a second?
15:52:44 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Second the motion.
15:52:48 I think it deserves a second.
15:52:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion and second.

15:52:51 And you want to come back in 120 days?
15:52:54 >>> 120 days so the administration gets prepared and
15:52:56 make a presentation, and it can be on a workshop day
15:53:00 to discuss this.
15:53:01 Because we are not solving the problem here.
15:53:02 We are Band-Aiding it.
15:53:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, I suggest a workshop to look at
15:53:06 that.
15:53:06 So okay.
15:53:07 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:53:09 Opposes?
15:53:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want to set a date?
15:53:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Workshop six months from now.
15:53:18 >>> I thought he said 120 days.
15:53:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Four months from now.
15:53:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: September workshop day would be the
15:53:28 24th.
15:53:30 You have two commendations at 9:00.
15:53:33 The next thing you have is 10:00.
15:53:36 If you want to say take 9:00 on the 24th.
15:53:40 After commendations.
15:53:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Fine.

15:53:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The second item, I won't tap too
15:53:47 much time, we went over the extension of time on
15:53:49 building permits.
15:53:50 However, and it was presented by the administration
15:53:53 that water and sewer commitments were not included.
15:53:56 So I feel that if you are going to have an extension
15:53:59 of the permit and then you get the permit and then you
15:54:02 don't have enough water and sewer, how can you build
15:54:04 the permit?
15:54:04 I think that water and sewer, the next time we have a
15:54:08 council meeting, we include a separate issue on water
15:54:11 and sewer connections for an extension of time so that
15:54:16 it would run concurrent with the building.
15:54:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So they would have to bring back an
15:54:21 ordinance at our next meeting including water and
15:54:23 sewer, is that right?
15:54:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, I believe so.
15:54:29 I do know that is an issue that we looked at, and I'm
15:54:33 not sure what the decision of the administration was
15:54:35 on that.
15:54:36 But it is certainly an issue.
15:54:38 And if you would like, we can draft something in that

15:54:41 regard.
15:54:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thatch would be fine.
15:54:43 Moved and seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:54:46 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:54:47 Opposes?
15:54:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: When is that coming back?
15:54:53 >> Two weeks.
15:54:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The third one is PPLFJ.
15:54:56 That's going to be my new 501(c)3.
15:55:00 PPLFJ. But I won't tell you what it is.
15:55:02 I'll vote in abeyance.
15:55:04 I'll report back to you in six months so you can know
15:55:06 what it is.
15:55:09 I know what it is now.
15:55:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is that a motion?
15:55:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, not a motion for to you vote
15:55:16 on.
15:55:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We don't have enough information.
15:55:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Want me to tell you now?
15:55:21 I can tell you now.
15:55:22 Do you want me to tell you now? I will.
15:55:24 PPLFJ. Let me tell what you it is.

15:55:28 It means I'm going to start a 501(c)3, means past
15:55:31 politicians looking for a job.
15:55:36 [ Laughter ]
15:55:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I thought I would end with a high
15:55:48 note.
15:55:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Miller?
15:55:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Nothing.
15:55:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I want to have that committee
15:55:54 meeting on the 18th of May.
15:55:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What committee meeting?
15:55:57 >> The building and zoning committee on the 18th
15:55:59 of May.
15:56:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What time?
15:56:03 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: At 10:00.
15:56:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm trying to understand.
15:56:08 I mean, what's the purpose of this now?
15:56:09 What is it?
15:56:10 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Am I entitled to have a building
15:56:14 committee meeting?
15:56:15 And anybody who wants to come, and speak, they could
15:56:19 speak.
15:56:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm just trying to get clarification

15:56:23 as to what it was.
15:56:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I guess would you consider it a
15:56:28 special discussion meeting.
15:56:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Special discussion meeting, yeah.
15:56:31 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: At 10:00.
15:56:32 That's open?
15:56:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Special discussion meeting.
15:56:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Normally, if you want to have staff
15:56:40 present --
15:56:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: -- have four of us if it's special
15:56:46 discussion as I understand, right?
15:56:47 >> Yes.
15:56:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again that's the 18th of May at
15:56:57 10:00.
15:56:58 In the Mascotte room?
15:56:59 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, we can have it down there.
15:57:02 If that room is available.
15:57:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
15:57:06 There's no second.
15:57:15 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I don't think we need to have a
15:57:17 second for the chairman to have a meeting:
15:57:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Caetano as an individual council

15:57:23 member can obviously meet with whoever he wants.
15:57:25 If you want to make -- if council wants to make it an
15:57:29 officially sanctioned meeting of City Council, I
15:57:33 suggest a vote on it.
15:57:34 Otherwise he has the ability as an individual counsel
15:57:36 member to meet with whoever he wants, he can use the
15:57:40 Mascotte room to meet with whoever he wants.
15:57:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: You're invited, Mr. Chairman, if
15:57:45 you want to come.
15:57:49 >> I would vote against it because it violates the --
15:57:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Remember PPLFJ.
15:57:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have two things.
15:57:59 Request commendation for Middleton high school,
15:58:02 75th anniversary celebration to begin council
15:58:05 meeting on June 25th.
15:58:06 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
15:58:09 All in favor say Aye.
15:58:10 Opposed, Nay.
15:58:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Then the other one is that -- this is
15:58:14 from -- I was asked to make a request on the 18th
15:58:21 of June, staff is requesting a transportation impact
15:58:24 fee study workshop.

15:58:28 So the 18th of June is open?
15:58:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The 18th of June.
15:58:39 Has a budget workshop beginning at -- well, 9 a.m. you
15:58:43 have a budget workshop as part of your budget process.
15:58:48 At 11:00 you have a workshop to discuss the transfer
15:58:51 development rights.
15:58:52 At 11:30 you have a continued workshop regarding
15:58:56 contracting issues with local vendor preference.
15:58:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And the request is for June 18.
15:59:03 What about July?
15:59:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: July you have the commendation of
15:59:10 police officer, the firefighter.
15:59:11 Then at 9:30 a workshop.
15:59:14 Regarding the WMBE.
15:59:16 At some point, it has to be set to talk about the
15:59:20 appeals process.
15:59:21 At 10 a.m. discussion the draft transportation
15:59:24 technical manual.
15:59:25 If you want to set it for 10:30 that's a possibility.
15:59:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And this request, councilman
15:59:30 Dingfelder asked me to request it.
15:59:33 This is transportation impact fee study workshop.

15:59:38 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
15:59:39 All in favor say Aye.
15:59:40 Opposed, Nay.
15:59:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other business that needs to come
15:59:44 before council?
15:59:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to receive and file.
15:59:47 >> Second.
15:59:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor say Aye.
15:59:52 Yes, sir.
15:59:54 You stand for public comment?
15:59:55 >>> Yes, sir.
15:59:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other business before council?
15:59:58 Okay.
16:00:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: In July was 10:30.
16:00:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We said 10:30.
16:00:08 10:30.
16:00:09 Okay.
16:00:11 That concludes all our business for the day.
16:00:14 We will now take public comment.
16:00:16 (Tampa City Council adjourned at 4:00 p.m.)
16:01:15



DISCLAIMER:
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this 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.