TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, May 28, 2009
9:00 a.m. session
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
09:08:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to
09:08:23 We will yield now to the honorable Joseph Caetano.
09:08:26 >> Thank you, sir.
09:08:28 Good morning.
09:08:29 This morning, we have Father David from St. Marks
09:08:34 Church on Cross Creek Boulevard in the New Tampa area
09:08:36 who is going to give our prayer this morning.
09:08:39 And then we will stand for the pledge of allegiance.
09:08:42 Father David.
09:08:50 >>> Gracious God, again you are the source of all
09:08:52 goodness, the ground of all being.
09:08:55 We thank you for the much-needed rain especially here
09:08:58 in this parched land.
09:09:01 We ask your continued presence with us.
09:09:06 We thank the spirit for inspiring these men and women
09:09:09 to sacrifice their lives toe benefit our community.
09:09:14 May this spirit continue to grace them with your
09:09:18 We ask this in your holy name.
09:09:23 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:09:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
09:09:46 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:09:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:09:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:09:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:09:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:09:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:09:59 Before we take up the commendation items, presentation
09:10:06 of the police Officer of the Month, we need to take up
09:10:12 this ordinance on the water ordinance, before we -- I
09:10:20 just want to put -- is the city attorney here?
09:10:28 Okay, let me just say this.
09:10:30 And I had a meeting.
09:10:32 We had a meeting with Chip Fletcher, and we asked that
09:10:36 council's attorney be involved in the briefing and on
09:10:39 the change of the ordinance.
09:10:40 It is my understanding that did not happen, that the
09:10:44 council attorney has not seen the ordinance, or
09:10:47 received it this morning, and I'm kind of disappointed
09:10:49 about that.
09:10:50 I thought we had a discussion that in the future that
09:10:52 we would keep our attorney in the loop so that he can
09:10:57 brief us on what is coming down from the
09:10:59 administration, okay?
09:11:05 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: My understanding is we did not
09:11:06 have a draft completed until yesterday afternoon, that
09:11:08 was distributed in the boxes including Mr. Shelby's
09:11:13 boxes yesterday.
09:11:14 For whatever reason, apparently, he was not included,
09:11:18 may or may not have been included on the e-mail
09:11:21 But we, as you might imagine, had to go through a
09:11:25 fairly elaborate process including consulting with
09:11:28 SWFWMD to make sure what we prepared was consistent
09:11:30 with what their view of the requirements of law were,
09:11:34 and we did not complete that until yesterday around
09:11:38 3:30 or 4:00, and it was distributed shortly after
09:11:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The problem we have still is that he
09:11:46 has not seen the ordinance.
09:11:47 I understand that he received it just a few minutes
09:11:50 So I don't feel comfortable in moving forward with
09:11:52 this until he has reviewed that and had an opportunity
09:11:57 to advise council.
09:11:59 So at this point what I would suggest is that we hold
09:12:02 up the ordinance until the last thing for this
09:12:04 I was going to at that time up first thing.
09:12:06 I will hold it till the last item on this morning.
09:12:09 Keep in mind we break today at 11:45.
09:12:15 So that means about 11:00, that will give some time to
09:12:21 review it and hopefully council can feel comfortable
09:12:23 with his having reviewed it.
09:12:28 All of us kind of got it kind of late.
09:12:30 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: And I apologize for that.
09:12:33 But the there are four different water management
09:12:38 district orders that are in place that we needed to
09:12:40 make sure we complied with, and we have had three
09:12:43 prior emergency ordinances from the City Council that
09:12:48 we needed to make sure were fully addressed, and we
09:12:51 did do that, and that just took some time to make sure
09:12:55 it was correct.
09:12:56 As I indicated, we did didn't a copy to Mr. Shelby
09:13:00 yesterday in paper version, but apparently he did not
09:13:03 receive that personally until this morning.
09:13:07 It's my understanding from my staff.
09:13:12 And if you all even wanted to postpone this until this
09:13:14 evening, your evening meeting, I don't think that
09:13:17 would be, from our standpoint, problematic.
09:13:20 But I think there are probably folks here today, and
09:13:23 council members who would prefer to take action this
09:13:25 morning if possible.
09:13:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I would much rather take action
09:13:28 this morning and not this evening.
09:13:30 But just a word to you to the administration again
09:13:36 that we cannot -- that I expect us to do our due
09:13:42 Council deserve it is right and the respect to have
09:13:46 the information before the ninth hour.
09:13:51 I want to make that clear again.
09:13:52 I expect for council and our attorney to have whatever
09:13:56 information, whatever ordinance is coming down, to
09:13:58 have reviewed that, had an opportunity to read it
09:14:01 before we act upon it.
09:14:03 So be clear.
09:14:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I would like to second that, and
09:14:08 also say that I know I haven't talked about this in
09:14:11 awhile but I was surprised when I noticed that the
09:14:13 administration still tends to communicate with us by
09:14:18 snail mail, and the Internet has been around for quite
09:14:20 awhile now.
09:14:21 So I think part of the responsibility of communicating
09:14:26 with each other would be to communicate by e-mail.
09:14:28 I'm not sure, I happened to be working in the office
09:14:32 yesterday so I did get the memo.
09:14:34 I'm not sure if we got it electronically either.
09:14:39 But everyone should be getting important communication
09:14:42 by e-mail.
09:14:43 You know, there's mistakes, but it was a consistent
09:14:48 thing, I have noticed, that we would get oftentimes
09:14:51 right before a meeting, tore day before, so we
09:14:54 wouldn't see it till the morning of the meeting, a
09:14:56 paper memo.
09:14:58 And there is the great speed of the Internet.
09:15:02 >> And if I may, Mr. Chairman, it's my belief that we
09:15:05 did distribute it to council and Mr. Shelby by e-mail
09:15:09 But I'm being informed this morning that that did not
09:15:12 actually happen that way.
09:15:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
09:15:16 Well, just again, just -- and I'm trying to say this
09:15:23 in a very diplomatic way and polite way, and that is
09:15:26 that I expect for council to be treated with respect.
09:15:31 And I we receive information in enough time to do our
09:15:35 due diligence, and to have consulted as well not only
09:15:40 with you, but I know you and I talked yesterday at
09:15:43 But Mr. Shelby has not had an opportunity to review
09:15:46 it, this documentation or consulted with council, or
09:15:50 council to consult with him.
09:15:51 So I would feel better if we get things in a timely
09:15:55 manner so all the council members can meet with
09:15:58 council's attorney, or you, and raise any questions
09:16:01 that they have afforded me and we move our agenda much
09:16:06 faster and more expeditiously.
09:16:08 So we'll take it up --
09:16:11 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chair, how long will it take
09:16:14 for you to look at this letter and tell us if we can
09:16:16 act on it?
09:16:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: this is an ordinance the
09:16:28 administration put on your today's agenda to change
09:16:30 your watering restrictions.
09:16:32 And you have the opportunity to take action today on
09:16:36 It being on the agenda.
09:16:38 My concern is the manner in which it got on the
09:16:40 agenda, and the fact this is a deliberate rah tiff
09:16:45 body and you need the opportunity to be able to --
09:16:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Read it.
09:16:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So we'll try to take it up about
09:16:53 11:00, okay?
09:16:54 Thank you very much.
09:16:56 We'll proceed now with the other items on the agenda.
09:16:59 Our 9:00.
09:17:00 Councilwoman Miller, the chair will yield to you at
09:17:04 this time.
09:17:15 >>GWEN MILLER: It is my pleasure this morning to
09:17:16 present the Officer of the Month, and that is
09:17:18 detective Anthony Tyson.
09:17:20 I'm going to ask Chief Hogue to tell you the good
09:17:24 things that he's done to receive this award.
09:17:28 >>CHIEF HOGUE: Thank you very much.
09:17:32 Good morning, council.
09:17:32 And once again I would like to say thank you for
09:17:35 recognizing our Officer of the Month for the Tampa
09:17:38 Police Department.
09:17:39 We do appreciate that, and particularly the officers,
09:17:42 in addition to the one who gets chosen.
09:17:44 This month, we have chosen Tony Tyson for May 2009 as
09:17:49 our Officer of the Month.
09:17:52 He is an undercover narcotics detective, so he is
09:17:55 standing up against the wall, out of television range,
09:17:58 because he does work undercover assignments that are
09:18:02 very dangerous in nature, but captain Briscoll is here
09:18:06 to represent him and receive, so will make a few
09:18:12 statements on Tony's behalf.
09:18:14 Tony is an accomplished veteran of the police
09:18:18 department, his 24 years with the Tampa Police
09:18:20 Department, the last four of which he has worked
09:18:24 undercover narcotics cases in the city.
09:18:28 We are recognizing him inform a particular case that
09:18:30 he did which we called operation smackdown.
09:18:34 Smack is another term for heroin.
09:18:36 It was a heroin case that he worked.
09:18:38 It was distributing about $100,000 of heroin a week in
09:18:42 the City of Tampa.
09:18:44 He conducted the investigation, developed enough
09:18:50 information to do a wire tap on the organization, and
09:18:55 completely took out the organization, arrested 19
09:18:59 individuals that were distributing heroin in the City
09:19:02 of Tampa, and in fact had such a significant impact
09:19:05 that really after that arrest heroin was very, very
09:19:09 difficult to find in the City of Tampa because it was
09:19:11 the main supplier of that drug at that time.
09:19:16 Tony has many, many accomplishments.
09:19:18 And I think it's appropriate at this time to recognize
09:19:20 some of those, because the last four years -- and I
09:19:25 would like to read you some of the things that he has
09:19:26 done, because as a matter of recognizing him we felt
09:19:32 we would go back because he's done super work his
09:19:35 wholly time here.
09:19:36 He has seized over 20-kilograms of cocaine, over 650
09:19:41 grams of heroin, over 82,000 prescription pills that
09:19:45 he's taken off the streets, 17 pounds of marijuana,
09:19:49 1500 ecstasy pills, over $142,000 he seized for the
09:19:57 City of Tampa, and he's made over 140 narcotic or
09:20:01 traffic arrests during the last years so he is one of
09:20:05 the more stellar detectives in our narcotics division.
09:20:08 That's why we selected him as our Officer of the
09:20:11 [ Applause ]
09:20:14 >>GWEN MILLER: City Council would like to present a
09:20:22 commendation to detective Anthony Tyson.
09:20:26 I will give tout of the and also the private sector
09:20:28 has a gift to give to him and I am going to give you
09:20:30 one from Charlie's steakhouse.
09:20:34 They will come up and present the award.
09:20:39 >> Congratulations, detective Tyson.
09:20:44 For Stepps towing service, we would like to present
09:20:47 this statue to you.
09:20:53 And also a gift card to Lee Roy Selmons.
09:20:57 I spoke to Danny Lewis, and he had something come up
09:21:01 unexpectedly and he will get in touch with you to make
09:21:04 sure you get that watch that all the officers get to
09:21:08 Thank you very much.
09:21:12 [ Applause ]
09:21:14 >>> Good Michelle Patty, medical attorney referral
09:21:21 We would like to present with you a gift certificate
09:21:23 for a job well done.
09:21:24 And in the community a lot of times, police don't get
09:21:32 thanks for the hard work, but we do appreciate it.
09:21:35 [ Applause ]
09:21:38 >>> Jimmy Myer, Tampa PDA.
09:21:43 This is a gift certificate from the law enforcement
09:21:47 supply, and very proud to present this to detective
09:21:50 Tyson for his outstanding work.
09:21:52 [ Applause ]
09:22:15 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I have a couple of things here for
09:22:17 There's two T-shirts so you can keep one of them as
09:22:21 long as you get the give the rest to the officers.
09:22:24 Oh, he needs the watch and the statue.
09:22:28 And the flowers.
09:22:29 On behalf of Bryn Allen studios I would like to
09:22:32 present the office we are a portrait package for him
09:22:35 and his family or significant others with or without
09:22:37 the roses.
09:22:38 On behalf of Rigatoni's we are providing you with the
09:22:41 T-shirts and a gift certificate to enjoy lunch.
09:22:44 On behalf of Bern's steakhouse we are providing him
09:22:47 with a $100 gift certificate to enjoy himself at
09:22:51 And Channelside cinemas is providing him with four
09:22:54 tickets to go and watch the latest star trek movie if
09:22:57 he wishes, or whatever. Anyway, congratulations.
09:23:00 [ Applause ]
09:23:06 >> I know detective Tyson would like to thank council,
09:23:09 all the merchants that provided these gifts and Chief
09:23:12 Hogue and his staff for choosing him as Officer of the
09:23:17 Month and for the opportunity to have conducted a
09:23:20 successful operation and serve the city for 24 years.
09:23:23 So thank you.
09:23:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:23:27 [ Applause ]
09:23:27 Now we have a commendation presented by Councilwoman
09:23:53 >>MARY MULHERN: City Council is going to present a
09:23:57 commendation to the CDC of Tampa on the establishment
09:24:03 of the Chloe coney urban enterprise sent center and I
09:24:12 see we have the celebrity herself here this morning,
09:24:17 miss Chloe coney.
09:24:20 [ Applause ]
09:24:21 This is an honor to present this commendation to this
09:24:27 group of women, and men, who everybody doing this
09:24:32 incredible work since 1992.
09:24:39 Even before I was on council and did such a wonderful
09:24:41 job and opened this beautiful new building where they
09:24:45 are going to be continuing to do their great work,
09:24:47 have a little more room for us, expand what they are
09:24:49 doing, and the opening of this new center is an
09:24:54 amazing thing because it happened just at a time where
09:24:57 we need job training the most, in this economic
09:25:01 I just think it's wonderful, and I'm really glad that
09:25:04 they are going to be one of the people -- one of the
09:25:06 groups that's going to continue to train people in the
09:25:10 most needed community, in jobs, green jobs, which is a
09:25:18 very important new industry for us.
09:25:20 So I am honored to give you this commendation.
09:25:27 [ Applause ]
09:25:28 >> First of all, I would like to thank City Council
09:25:32 for this commendation.
09:25:33 Today I'm glad to be alive to have a building named
09:25:36 after me, but again it took so many people to make
09:25:38 that happen, especially to you City Council that
09:25:42 supported CDC of Tampa for so many years.
09:25:46 And I want to especially thank Tony Wyatt who I am
09:25:50 able to pass the baton to, because I retired in 2006
09:25:53 and all the other board members, and I would like for
09:25:56 Tony to say something because I am going to hand this
09:26:00 plaque over to her.
09:26:01 >>> Good morning, council.
09:26:04 Thank you, Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:26:07 On behalf of the Board of Directors and the staff of
09:26:10 the CDC of Tampa, of course the community residents,
09:26:14 we want to thank you for the recognition to the CDC
09:26:17 and its activities, an organization.
09:26:20 I was fortunate to be hired by the founder, and also
09:26:24 fortunate to be supported by the residents of East
09:26:27 Tampa forever.
09:26:32 I have our founding board members here.
09:26:34 I know you all know the hard work that she does.
09:26:37 And another member that's been with us for many, many
09:26:40 years, Denise McKay James, also working very
09:26:45 diligently in East Tampa today.
09:26:46 And Mr. Irv Johnson who was our second board chair and
09:26:50 named our organization.
09:26:52 It's tremendous work to be able to do in East Tampa,
09:26:57 and for the many thousands and thousands of people
09:26:59 that we serve.
09:27:01 We really appreciate your recognition, especially
09:27:04 right now.
09:27:06 And also, you know, I would like to just say that, you
09:27:11 know, in the leadership that came from the community,
09:27:15 especially at a time when the incomes of the people
09:27:18 were about $5,500, and we have seen tremendous
09:27:22 But we haven't been selfish.
09:27:24 We have taken this model to other communities in
09:27:27 We have been out at Palmetto Beach, the University of
09:27:29 South Florida, over in West Tampa, and helping others
09:27:32 to do the same thing in their communities.
09:27:34 And we just hope to continue to grow.
09:27:38 Jobs are very important.
09:27:39 We are seeing over 3,000 people coming through our
09:27:42 doors just on a community-based level seeking
09:27:46 employment, people with foreclosures.
09:27:49 Now we are going from home opportunities to home
09:27:52 preservation, and it's very important.
09:27:54 So thank you very much for your recognition.
09:28:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before you all go, I just want to
09:28:07 say that as you are going down Hillsborough Avenue, a
09:28:11 lot of Hillsborough Avenue isn't too much to
09:28:13 celebrate, and you get to the Chloe coney center.
09:28:16 It is such a beacon of beauty and hope and positive
09:28:24 And hopefully that kind of energy will spread up and
09:28:27 down Hillsborough Avenue as well as the rest of East
09:28:31 The transformation of that building is really symbolic
09:28:34 of the transformation you are causing in people's
09:28:37 lives and that is huge.
09:28:38 And I want to congratulate you all for being hard
09:28:41 working, good grants writers, clever in getting the
09:28:45 resources that you needed and you match make really
09:28:48 between resources and the community.
09:28:50 And I'm thrilled that Chloe is in her new position,
09:28:55 helping representative castor get some of those
09:28:58 dollars from Washington down to Tampa to give people
09:29:00 the job skills that they need.
09:29:03 So it's really been a very positive evolution for the
09:29:06 organization and for the community.
09:29:07 So congratulations.
09:29:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
09:29:17 The next presentation, Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:29:24 >> On a lighter but very happy note, it is my pleasure
09:29:40 this morning to give a commendation to the Tampa Bay
09:29:45 Derby Darlings.
09:29:55 Tampa City Council recognize it is Tampa Bay Derby
09:29:58 Darlings for their extraordinary effort in becoming a
09:30:01 sustaining members of the first all-female flat track
09:30:04 roller derby league in Tampa.
09:30:09 Roller derby is currently the fastest growing sport
09:30:13 and the Tampa Bay Derby Darlings have in a short time
09:30:17 accomplished their rank of Florida State champions,
09:30:21 three years consecutively.
09:30:22 Your commitment to family, community and environment
09:30:25 is exemplary, volunteering your time, talent and
09:30:30 treasures for the benefit of all.
09:30:33 For those and many other reasons Tampa City Council
09:30:35 commends the Tampa Bay Derby Darlings and wishes you
09:30:38 many more years of success.
09:30:39 I would like them to share some of the community
09:30:41 outreach projects that they have initiated.
09:30:47 >> Cameron: I am the president of the Tampa Bay Derby
09:30:50 Darlings, and we are very proud to represent the City
09:30:53 of Tampa at the February Florida State championship
09:30:57 roller derby tournament.
09:30:59 We beat out ten other leagues from across the state to
09:31:02 become the champions.
09:31:05 And as mentioned on the fact we do give back to the
09:31:08 community and we are concerned about the local
09:31:12 We try to make all of our games as environmentally
09:31:15 friendly as possible, have minimum impact.
09:31:18 We have recycling at all of our games.
09:31:21 Recently, this past weekend, we held a conference
09:31:25 where 250 attendees from across the country and Canada
09:31:29 came to Tampa, and we tracked all of their flights so
09:31:33 that we could work off the carbon emissions from the
09:31:38 flights that they would be participating in some tree
09:31:40 planting to offset, to mitigate the carbon impacts
09:31:43 from that.
09:31:44 We also dedicate a lot of time, and we donate money to
09:31:49 many local charities, Metropolitan Ministries, the
09:31:53 spring, the butterfly challenge.
09:31:56 We recently adopted a flamingo, our mascot, from the
09:32:00 Lowry Park Zoo, and many others.
09:32:03 We try to give back to the community in as many ways
09:32:05 as our time and funds permit.
09:32:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:32:15 Congratulations for all you do.
09:32:17 [ Applause ]
09:32:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you all very much and
09:32:23 congratulations again.
09:32:24 Thank you.
09:32:27 It's 9:30.
09:32:28 Keel take up our first workshop for today.
09:32:31 Bonnie Wise.
09:32:32 >>CHAIRMAN: Move to open the workshops.
09:32:36 >> Second.
09:32:36 (Motion carried).
09:32:41 >>BONNIE WISE: I'm here to give you a brief overview
09:32:44 about the property tax legislation that occurred at
09:32:46 the state level.
09:32:48 And we are handing out a presentation.
09:32:51 We also have a PowerPoint.
09:32:56 I am going to go over some of the bills that passed
09:33:10 during this legislative session and also going to
09:33:12 mention several that did not pass that we may expect
09:33:14 to see it back next year.
09:33:19 The first one is going to be a Constitutional
09:33:26 It's a two-part Constitutional amendment.
09:33:30 And the first part relates to the assessment change
09:33:35 for nonhomestead real property.
09:33:40 As you might recall from amendment one, the amendment
09:33:43 one restricted the amount of assessed value that could
09:33:46 be increased for commercial property.
09:33:49 Last year was 10%.
09:33:55 Therefore the values cannot increase greater than 10%
09:33:58 of the however if this should pass it would limit that
09:34:00 to 5% and that was really promoted very heavily by the
09:34:03 chamber, the Florida chamber.
09:34:06 As you may or may not recall from amendment 1, that
09:34:09 limitation does not apply to school district values
09:34:14 for the taxes associated with school districts
09:34:16 throughout the state.
09:34:17 However, local government is impacted by this
09:34:21 So the house analysis that was in March estimates the
09:34:25 fiscal impact on non-school taxes would be about $100
09:34:29 million in the first year, $185 million statewide the
09:34:33 next year, and $266 million the following year.
09:34:39 The second part of that same amount is related to
09:34:47 first-time home buyers.
09:34:49 First-time home buyers for the purpose of this
09:34:51 analysis is determined as someone who has not owned a
09:34:54 home during an eight-year period and it means that 25%
09:34:57 of the just value of the property would be exempt from
09:35:00 the taxes.
09:35:01 That amount could not exceed $100,000.
09:35:05 And it is for homes that are purchased after January
09:35:08 1, 201010.
09:35:10 And so that it would be impact.
09:35:13 It would be reduced each year, that particular
09:35:18 reduction, by 20% each year.
09:35:20 So in the fifth year it would be basically out so that
09:35:26 does apply to levies and other special districts.
09:35:32 That fiscal impact, like I said, the fiscal impact is
09:35:35 calculated in total because it is a Constitutional
09:35:42 That would go to the general election by 2010.
09:35:44 So this is not being impacted right now.
09:35:47 It would be effective January 1, 2011.
09:35:51 If this should pass by 60% of the voters in that
09:35:54 November 2010 election.
09:35:56 So that is something to be on the next cycle.
09:36:01 The second one is a Constitutional amendment regarding
09:36:05 people who serve in the military and are deployed
09:36:08 outside of the United States.
09:36:10 And this exemption would be formulated depending on
09:36:13 the number of days deployed, and it would impact all
09:36:18 levies to the county school districts.
09:36:22 The impact, however, there, is much smaller statewide.
09:36:25 That too is going to be on the general election in
09:36:29 The impact statewide, however, is only about $13
09:36:32 million for all jurisdictions.
09:36:35 The other item that passed is the millage bill that is
09:36:41 related to just notifying on the trim notice the prior
09:36:46 millage rate as well as the proposed millage rate.
09:36:48 And that is effective January 2010.
09:36:51 That has not as of a few days ago been presented to
09:36:55 the governor.
09:36:59 The next one is regarding spending transparency, and I
09:37:03 do have an update on this because the governor
09:37:05 actually did approve this one just yesterday after I
09:37:07 had this presentation prepared.
09:37:09 But it requires transparency for state budgeting in
09:37:13 spending, and then for local government it is joint
09:37:16 legislative auditing committee is going to come up
09:37:18 with some recommendation for local governments to
09:37:22 To implement.
09:37:23 So these recommendations would be presented to the
09:37:29 legislative session in 2010.
09:37:31 However, as I mentioned, it was presented to the
09:37:34 governor he did not take action.
09:37:41 As of yesterday did he take action.
09:37:43 So therefore the joint legislative auditing committee
09:37:45 will come up with rules for governments to provide
09:37:49 this transparency.
09:37:50 So certain things are going to be required to be
09:37:52 online much of which we do put online already.
09:37:57 Not everything however.
09:37:58 So this is considered by the League of Cities as one
09:38:00 of those unfunded mandates that they are providing.
09:38:05 They are not providing the funds to perform this but
09:38:08 they are going to have to comply.
09:38:12 Regarding the bills that passed, really the state as
09:38:15 you know was really focused so much on their budget
09:38:18 during the legislative session.
09:38:20 Much of what passed really happens within the last few
09:38:22 weeks of session.
09:38:23 But there were several bills that we were talking
09:38:25 about during our process that did not pass and I
09:38:29 really wanted to bring those to your attention because
09:38:31 they would have some serious impacts.
09:38:33 And you heard about this one.
09:38:34 It is limiting the taxation on properties to 1.35% of
09:38:41 the property's taxable value.
09:38:43 So that means that the total millage rate in the
09:38:47 aggregate could not exceed 13.5 mills.
09:38:51 To put this in perspective in Hillsborough County, for
09:38:54 example, depending on where you are if you are in the
09:38:56 city, the City of Tampa, the city of Temple Terrace,
09:38:58 unincorporated, it ranges around 20 mills in total,
09:39:02 school districts, now, SWFWMD, Hart, municipalities.
09:39:06 And so if this Constitutional amendment were to have
09:39:10 passed it would mean an aggregate that could have more
09:39:14 than 13.35 mills in total compared to the 20ish that
09:39:17 we have.
09:39:17 You can see where that would be really problematic,
09:39:22 depending on the various injury jurisdiction that is
09:39:24 would be involved.
09:39:26 Another bill that did not pass which we fully expect
09:39:29 to come back next year is relating to revenue tax, and
09:39:33 that would limit the amount of collection local
09:39:37 government could collect on the various revenues that
09:39:40 they propose.
09:39:41 In fact, it would require certain revenues or certain
09:39:45 increases or certain new revenues to go to referendum.
09:39:49 The Florida League of Cities is really very much
09:39:52 opposed to this because it really takes the control
09:39:53 away from the local government to make a decision that
09:39:58 are best for its own community.
09:39:59 But we do anticipate that a form of this will probably
09:40:03 be back next year.
09:40:12 And then the last one that we really thought actually
09:40:18 might have seen some more attraction this year was
09:40:20 what we call the save our homes recapture, and the
09:40:23 save our homes recapture, you might recall has a save
09:40:26 our homes provision, for homesteaded property, in each
09:40:29 year the value can increase the lesser of the CPI or
09:40:36 And that's been in place for quite some time.
09:40:39 However, the save our homes recapture site, if we were
09:40:42 to take that back, is that in a year where the just
09:40:46 value, where the market value of homes, like a year
09:40:48 like this year where we expect the values to decline
09:40:50 on average about 15%, that that save our homes
09:40:54 increase would not occur.
09:40:56 Now let me give you an example. Let's say you have
09:40:58 been living in your home for quite some time, and you
09:41:01 are being taxed at $200,000.
09:41:04 However, the full value of the home is $300,000.
09:41:08 I'm just trying to keep my math easy.
09:41:10 And in a regular year, because you have been in your
09:41:13 home, you have some increase more than that 3%, and so
09:41:17 in this year, let's say the value of your home would
09:41:20 drop from 300,000 to 280,000, in a normal year, it
09:41:25 would increase from the 200 you are being taxed on,
09:41:28 the extra 3% or the lesser BPI or 3%.
09:41:34 If this were to pass in a year where the market value
09:41:37 declined that increase would not occur.
09:41:39 And so that is up for discussion, and we may see a
09:41:44 form of this occur again.
09:41:48 But that is just a quick summary of those bills that
09:41:52 passed and those that did not pass.
09:41:54 But if you can look out for those in the
09:41:56 Constitutional amendment in November 10 election and
09:42:00 then we'll see what happens from there.
09:42:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:42:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:42:06 Does the administration talk to each of our
09:42:12 legislators from this area in Tallahassee and explain
09:42:15 to them the impact of these bills on the services we
09:42:20 provide on our budget?
09:42:22 Do they understand that they keep passing these
09:42:25 mandates that we have to fulfill and then they keep
09:42:29 limiting the revenues we have to fulfill them?
09:42:32 >>BONNIE WISE: We are very active. In fact I spoke
09:42:35 with our lobbyist this morning just to kind of get a
09:42:38 little flavor of what he expects to come back next
09:42:40 year, in some more discussion.
09:42:43 We are very active talking to them.
09:42:46 We really work through the Florida League of Cities,
09:42:48 very much so.
09:42:50 I belong to the Florida government financiers officers
09:42:53 Very much a resource for trying to educate the
09:42:57 legislature on the impacts.
09:42:58 So at least when they are making these decisions they
09:43:01 have a feel for what financial impact it will have and
09:43:05 what it will do for our community and the services we
09:43:10 However --
09:43:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What I would really hope that we
09:43:13 would do, particularly because we are in such a tough
09:43:15 time, is our lobbyists in is a Tallahassee guy, the
09:43:20 Florida League of Cities is a Tallahassee
09:43:22 organization, our legislators are local people.
09:43:25 Is to come up with very specific local examples, such
09:43:28 as shutting down our swimming pools to lesser hours or
09:43:33 days because we can't afford the recreation department
09:43:36 staff to keep them open, and tie very specific things
09:43:41 that their constituents experience to their actions in
09:43:44 I think the degree to which we can tell it as a local
09:43:48 story is the degree to which they might begin to hear,
09:43:50 because they'll hear the complaints, hopefully they
09:43:54 will recognize the cutbacks in their neighborhood, and
09:43:57 realize that it's tied directly to their actions in
09:44:02 That piece of the story, the real local-local version,
09:44:05 needs to be shared with them by the administration.
09:44:07 I hope you make it as, you know, specific to their
09:44:12 neighborhood and their constituents as possible.
09:44:14 So hopefully they'll start to hear us.
09:44:16 Thank you.
09:44:16 >>BONNIE WISE: The FTFLA, finance officers
09:44:22 association, had a meeting two days ago with Alex Sink
09:44:25 because she specifically asked what impact these
09:44:29 changes have impacted our local government.
09:44:31 So we are trying.
09:44:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you give us a copy, please,
09:44:37 of the information that you share with them, so that
09:44:39 should we have the ability to interact with some of
09:44:41 our legislators, we can share it from our perspective
09:44:45 That would be really helpful and again make it as
09:44:47 local and specific as possible.
09:44:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Other questions?
09:44:54 Thank you.
09:44:57 Thank you very much.
09:44:58 Anyone wish to address council on this workshop?
09:45:05 Anyone wish to address council?
09:45:07 Okay, then we move to our next workshop.
09:45:13 On the reclaimed water.
09:45:19 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator, public works and
09:45:21 utility services.
09:45:23 I appreciate this opportunity to make a presentation
09:45:25 to you on our reclaimed water master plan.
09:45:29 Our consultant CDM would like to make a brief
09:45:34 What I would like to ask you to do, if it's okay with
09:45:36 the council, I would like to let him get through that
09:45:40 We have given you cones, and we prebriefed you so we
09:45:43 have seen it.
09:45:44 If get through there, I think you can ask questions.
09:45:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Generally I always ask that we get
09:45:50 through the PowerPoint, then write our questions down,
09:45:55 not interrupt the presenter.
09:45:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a point of order question.
09:46:01 Point of order.
09:46:02 Just procedurally, and I don't know, our legal eagle
09:46:10 seemed to have stepped out of the room.
09:46:14 Steve, when I look at this, and you all have done a
09:46:17 lot of work on this with the consultant, and that's
09:46:20 all fine and good.
09:46:21 Just procedurally, shouldn't this say draft master
09:46:29 plan in regard to this is the administration's
09:46:32 proposal, that sort of thing?
09:46:34 Because there's ordinances that they are recommending
09:46:37 that we adopt, and there's a lot of that sort of
09:46:39 thing, that ultimately this council would have to do.
09:46:41 So just procedurally, I mean, this is a proposed
09:46:48 master plan?
09:46:49 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: This is the consultant's
09:46:51 recommendations based on what we gave them as defining
09:46:55 And so if the council should adopt this, then it would
09:46:58 be in fact the city's -- you are correct, it's not the
09:47:02 city's adopted report yet.
09:47:04 But it is the consultant's resulting report.
09:47:08 And what they are recommending how we proceed.
09:47:09 >> Okay.
09:47:12 Just because what's in front of us doesn't say that, I
09:47:14 just wanted to clarify for anybody who is watching
09:47:17 that that's where we are procedurally.
09:47:18 >>> Exactly.
09:47:20 And any of the recommendations that would require
09:47:22 council action would obviously need to come back
09:47:24 before you whether they be budgetary or in approval of
09:47:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:47:32 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Just to continue here.
09:47:35 There are two issues that the council asked us to do
09:47:39 address at this time.
09:47:40 One is how to again encourage more connection in the
09:47:45 reclaimed area, and you have a paper on that.
09:47:48 I would like to address that if we could after the
09:47:51 Additionally, the concept or the issue of drought
09:47:56 pricing for some of our water rates.
09:47:58 And again you have a paper and a recommendation on
09:48:01 So again those are there for discussion as well.
09:48:05 It's our goal to have the written report to you in
09:48:11 probably another seven to even the ten days.
09:48:14 Again, I realize we don't have it but this is the
09:48:16 presentation you are seeing today are the results of
09:48:19 that planning effort.
09:48:23 At this time, I would like to introduce Mr. Mike
09:48:26 He's a VP, vice-president with CDM and he's worked
09:48:30 closely with our staff throughout this process.
09:48:34 Here we go.
09:48:35 >>> Good morning.
09:48:37 I'm Mike Smith.
09:48:38 I'm with CDM here in Tampa.
09:48:41 And this is Nick Koomis, and VDM work together on this
09:48:49 project for you.
09:48:50 I'm supposed to have a PowerPoint.
09:48:53 There we go.
09:48:56 Just real quickly, we are going to talk about what the
09:48:58 master plan goals were.
09:49:00 We are going to take a look at how we developed our
09:49:04 recommendations and then talk to you about all of the
09:49:06 recommendations that we make, and then show you what
09:49:08 the benefits to the city will be for that.
09:49:13 If you implement that.
09:49:16 Basically, our first goal was to try to use as much of
09:49:19 the effluent you generate and the reclaimed water as
09:49:24 possible and to use them within the City of Tampa's
09:49:29 Another goal, very important goal was to save as much
09:49:32 drinking water, potable water, or potable, what we
09:49:35 call potable water, saving drinking water for drinking
09:49:40 water purposes.
09:49:41 We were tasked with developing a financially
09:49:44 responsible plan, and that would be important later
09:49:48 As you know, there are many regional agencies that
09:49:52 would like to use the City of Tampa's valuable
09:49:55 resources reclaimed water, and so one of our tasks was
09:49:59 to try to keep that water within the city and allow
09:50:03 the city to maintain control over that resource at all
09:50:11 Another goal was to develop a prioritized plan.
09:50:15 And then the last item on there, you will see nitrogen
09:50:18 removal from the bay.
09:50:19 This is a very important issue, the EPA, Environmental
09:50:24 Protection Agency, is setting limits on the amount of
09:50:28 nutrients that can go into the bay: For the City of
09:50:31 Tampa that would include stormwater run-off, and
09:50:35 effluent from the Howard F. Curren plants.
09:50:40 So it's to limit the amount of effluent discharge into
09:50:44 the bay from Howard F. Curren.
09:50:49 So basically as we get started into the planning
09:50:52 process, it became apparent that there was not enough
09:50:55 water to serve all of the city customers who use
09:51:01 drinking water now for irrigation.
09:51:03 And these next few slides are going to show that.
09:51:06 Just real quickly, what this slide you see here shows,
09:51:10 the green Lite line at the top is a seasonal line
09:51:14 showing how much water is available, reclaimed water
09:51:17 is reliably available for your customers, and this is
09:51:22 projected out to 2030 which was the year of the study
09:51:26 So that's what that groan line shows.
09:51:28 You will notice at the bottom, you will see a red line
09:51:31 called existing demand.
09:51:33 That's how much reclaimed water is currently being
09:51:36 used by your existing star one customers, and you can
09:51:41 see there's obviously a lot of water that we need to
09:51:44 use in order to fully utilize this resource.
09:51:49 So how did we start?
09:51:50 We basically started by taking a look at this chart
09:51:54 And I know it's difficult to see from there.
09:51:56 The important thing to notice, this is the demand
09:52:00 This shows the people who are using drinking water in
09:52:03 the city for irrigation purposes.
09:52:06 And you will notice each one of these little dots
09:52:08 there is a customer who uses drinking water for
09:52:12 You will notice importantly that the south area has
09:52:16 very dense groupings of dots.
09:52:20 The north area has very dense grouping.
09:52:22 And then in the middle, they are very spread out.
09:52:26 If I can come back to the presentation.
09:52:38 I'm not sure how to make that happen.
09:52:40 Thank you.
09:52:40 So we took a look at south projects first because they
09:52:45 were closer to the plant.
09:52:46 And we put their demand on there.
09:52:50 Then we took a look at the north project and added
09:52:52 that on there.
09:52:53 And then we said, what if we served everybody?
09:52:57 And it became clear that for nine months out of the
09:52:59 year you just don't have enough water to serve
09:53:03 That's what's important about these graphics here.
09:53:06 So we said, well, what can we do?
09:53:09 So we decided to say, well, if we served just those
09:53:13 customers that gave us -- you can see where the purple
09:53:16 line touches the green line.
09:53:20 That's how many people you can reliably serve within
09:53:24 the city.
09:53:24 And then we did a cost evaluation and tried to
09:53:27 evaluate the financial feasibility of these projects.
09:53:32 You will see the 219 south projects.
09:53:36 That's the cost per thousand gallons of potable water
09:53:42 That's a peculiar number.
09:53:43 But what that does, that compares against what you
09:53:46 would have to pay Tampa Bay water in order to be able
09:53:51 to irrigate using potable water.
09:53:54 So that was a good comparison to determine financial
09:53:58 You will notice the $5.26 for the north projects is a
09:54:04 good feasible number.
09:54:05 But to serve the central area, the $15.65 is a very
09:54:12 high and unfeasible, we consider to be financially
09:54:16 unfeasible number.
09:54:18 So what we did here, this is a table that shows those
09:54:24 You can see the South Tampa projects total 86 or 87
09:54:28 The north Tampa projects 169 million.
09:54:33 There will have to be some pump station and storage at
09:54:36 Howard F. Curren, the 33 million and then of course to
09:54:40 serve all the rest or all the other Tampa projects
09:54:42 would be roughly 1.2 billion dollars for a total of
09:54:50 1.4 billion to do this.
09:54:56 SWFWMD shares some of these costs, then the city would
09:54:58 have to come up with 1.3 billion to fund this.
09:55:03 We considered this financially unfeasible.
09:55:05 So we took a look at some other alternatives.
09:55:09 If you recall, about six or eight months ago the City
09:55:12 Council asked city staff to investigate what if we put
09:55:15 a wastewater treatment facility up in the north Tampa
09:55:19 The obvious advantage of that or the seemingly obvious
09:55:22 advantage of that is instead of pumping sewage down to
09:55:25 Howard and Curren and then pumping reclaimed water
09:55:29 back up to north Tampa, maybe we could treat it there.
09:55:32 So we evaluated the cost, roughly 34 million to build
09:55:35 a treatment plant up there, but importantly this
09:55:39 graphic shows two things.
09:55:40 One, you can see the $12.10.
09:55:43 It's not financially feasible to do that.
09:55:46 There's a couple of reasons for that.
09:55:48 One is, you will notice that blue line, the north
09:55:51 project line, it's significantly lower than the
09:55:55 previous one that you saw on a previous graphic.
09:55:57 That's because in order to serve one reclaimed water
09:56:04 customer, you have to have four sewer customers.
09:56:08 So since we are not pumping the water from Howard F.
09:56:11 Curren up there in this alternative, the amount of
09:56:14 customers you can serve in north Tampa where the
09:56:17 treatment plants is roughly one fourth as much as you
09:56:20 would if you can pump it from Howard F. Curren up
09:56:23 So the cost is just not financially feasible.
09:56:27 So we looked around and said, well, what else can we
09:56:32 We have talked with other regional entities who are
09:56:34 interested in the city's reclaimed water, in
09:56:39 particular Hillsborough County, SWFWMD and Tampa Bay
09:56:42 And Tampa Bay water currently has a number of projects
09:56:46 in their planning process that they wanted to use City
09:56:50 of Tampa reclaimed water for.
09:56:52 There is one just north of Pasco, Hillsborough County
09:56:56 line, that we thought was complementary to the city's
09:57:06 program so we have shown that on here.
09:57:08 We have -- I'm sorry, it's the rapid infiltration
09:57:13 basis just on the other side of the Pasco County line.
09:57:16 It's the Tampa Bay water project.
09:57:19 That we put on in here.
09:57:20 So if we show them using basically that water there to
09:57:25 get you up to the reliable supply, and then having
09:57:29 them cost share, then the cost of the overall program
09:57:32 for the City of Tampa becomes roughly $3.26 per
09:57:38 thousand gallons for potable water offset, which is
09:57:41 very financially feasible.
09:57:42 So that took us to the point where we recommended the
09:57:50 I am going to spend a few minutes here showing you
09:57:54 graphically what our recommended program of projects
09:57:57 This graphic shows the City of Tampa limit and city of
09:58:02 Temple Terrace.
09:58:03 It also shows the reclaimed water service area for
09:58:05 City of Tampa.
09:58:07 It also shows the existing start area.
09:58:11 You can see that lightly shaded area right in the
09:58:13 middle there.
09:58:16 And then it shows the south projects and north
09:58:18 And the south projects consist of what we call the
09:58:23 large users, the large users are in groupings, A, B,
09:58:28 C, D.
09:58:29 They include Tampa International Airport, the Sports
09:58:35 Authority, Raymond James stadium, Hillsborough
09:58:39 community college, university of Tampa, Performing
09:58:41 Arts Center, Curtis Hixon park, which, by the way, we
09:58:45 just recently put a pipeline over to serve downtown,
09:58:48 riverwalk, et cetera.
09:58:50 Those would be the large users.
09:58:52 It also includes expanding the residential irrigation
09:58:57 south into the residential area south of the existing
09:59:01 star area, and the Bayshore transmission main.
09:59:04 This graphic zooms in on the south area.
09:59:08 You saw the blue line as the existing transmission
09:59:12 main and existing star.
09:59:13 We are also proposing a Bayshore transmission main to
09:59:16 get water down along Bayshore to the south, and
09:59:20 expanding the residential expansion.
09:59:23 That would be for residential irrigation purposes.
09:59:30 This chart zooms back out again to show the north
09:59:34 And the first project that would have to be built
09:59:36 would be the north transmission main, and also
09:59:41 extending that north transmission main all the way up
09:59:43 to the proposed Tampa Bay water project.
09:59:46 As well for the cost share.
09:59:50 This table basically summarizes the capital costs for
09:59:54 these recommended projects.
09:59:57 You will see the South Tampa projects are listed
10:00:00 We have grouped them into three major line items.
10:00:03 Additional star connections, large user expansion,
10:00:08 downtown and cooling towers.
10:00:10 And then the Bayshore residential expansion.
10:00:14 The north projects are broken into two line items, the
10:00:17 residential expansion in north Tampa also includes the
10:00:20 transmission mains so that's why it's the large ticket
10:00:24 Then the two extending to the Tampa Bay water project,
10:00:28 and of course I mentioned that there are some pumping
10:00:30 and storage facilities that need to be built at the
10:00:33 Howard F. Curren plant.
10:00:36 Basically, just to summarize that -- or let me explain
10:00:40 the columns across.
10:00:41 We have the total project cost in the left hand
10:00:45 We have the potential cost sharing with Tampa Bay
10:00:48 We have the potential sharing of costs with SWFWMD.
10:00:51 And then total costs that the City of Tampa would
10:00:55 expect to fund for this project plant.
10:01:01 The summary of costs you can see there, the total
10:01:04 capital costs for the program is roughly $341 million,
10:01:08 significantly less than the 1.4 billion we identified
10:01:11 earlier, and with all the other cost sharing, the city
10:01:16 will have to look to fund roughly $130 million for
10:01:21 this program.
10:01:23 We took a look at phasing the projects.
10:01:29 There were a couple of obvious reasons why we should
10:01:31 phase these projects this way.
10:01:33 We took a look at building the south projects first.
10:01:36 This would maximize your potable water offset, because
10:01:39 you had the most drinking water savings in that area.
10:01:43 It would also save on dollars because that was the
10:01:45 lowest cost per unit to build.
10:01:49 It's closer to the plant and it has the highest
10:01:51 density of customers to serve.
10:01:53 In addition to that, the north projects, if you
10:01:56 remember, I mentioned the Tampa Bay water project.
10:01:59 That project is still in the planning phases, and they
10:02:02 expect to put into their board for approval in either
10:02:05 2012 or 2013.
10:02:07 So we have split this program into basically two
10:02:12 pieces, a south and a north.
10:02:14 And you will see that we have spread the money out
10:02:16 over time so that the city can properly fund or create
10:02:21 a good funding strategy.
10:02:24 So what is our recommendation?
10:02:26 We recommend that you implement this program by first
10:02:30 developing new water -- reclaimed water rates to be
10:02:33 able to fund this, reclaimed water rates and fees, by
10:02:36 doing a rate study.
10:02:37 That's one of the first things that we recommend you
10:02:40 And Nick Koomis is going to come up in a minute to
10:02:46 talk about some specifics to the recommended reclaimed
10:02:48 water rate structure.
10:02:50 We recommend that you begin and continue -- the staff
10:02:55 has already started some of these negotiations of
10:02:58 funding agreement was both SWFWMD, and Tampa Bay
10:03:02 water, and any other entity that wants to participate.
10:03:05 We grouped items 3, 4 and 5 here on this chart into
10:03:08 what we would consider to be a five-year CIP for
10:03:12 budgeting purposes which is requires star connections.
10:03:16 I am going to talk a little more about that in a
10:03:20 And funding for the south projects which includes the
10:03:23 large users.
10:03:24 And begin design and construction of the south
10:03:27 Then of course coordinate with regional projects and
10:03:30 begin design and construction of the north projects.
10:03:33 With that I am going to turn this over to Nick Koomis
10:03:37 to talk about our recommended rate structures.
10:03:41 >>> For the record, I'm Nick Koomis, principal with
10:03:46 the firm of Greeley and Hanson.
10:03:48 I would like to talk a little about the funding
10:03:53 The funding strategies we need to have reclaimed water
10:03:56 rates and fees in place, for those who benefit most
10:03:59 directly from the use of reclaimed water.
10:04:01 We need to recommend some adjustments.
10:04:04 Continue to pursue funding from the water management
10:04:07 They are very interested in potable water aspects and
10:04:10 fund up to 50% grants to help fund those reclaimed
10:04:13 water projects.
10:04:16 In addition you may need to do some borrowing.
10:04:19 State revolving loan funds has gotten some stimulus
10:04:23 funds, or may need to go to the bond market to help
10:04:26 finance some of the capital expenditures to expand the
10:04:29 Again, maybe have some support from the water and
10:04:35 weight water.
10:04:36 We are saving potable water where W this program and
10:04:38 getting nutrients out of the bay.
10:04:40 So some support from weight and wastewater rates may
10:04:45 be appropriate.
10:04:46 Another possibility.
10:04:47 Once we know the results of the study of the bay and
10:04:52 what mandates may be for removing nutrients from the
10:04:55 bay, might consider some enhancement fee to fund
10:05:01 removal of nutrients from the bay.
10:05:08 Recommendations changing the rate structure.
10:05:13 Why rates should remain less than potable water rates
10:05:16 and give some financial incentive for people to hook
10:05:18 up to the system, to have that system available.
10:05:22 But we ought to look at increasing those, as potable
10:05:26 water rates go up, we think we ought to, you know,
10:05:29 actually index the reclaimed water rates to the
10:05:32 potable water rates as they increase.
10:05:35 To help fund the distribution capital costs, the costs
10:05:38 of putting pipes and services right in front of the
10:05:41 potential users, we recommend that the city implement
10:05:46 a readiness to serve charge and that would be a
10:05:48 monthly charge to help recoup the city's portion of
10:05:51 that capital cost and put that system in those
10:05:54 And everyone in that service area would pay those fees
10:05:58 until they hook up to the system.
10:06:00 And then for large users, where cities are in
10:06:05 negotiation with several of those like the airport,
10:06:07 who may want to contribute capital funds, actually
10:06:10 build the pipes to get to their facilities.
10:06:12 If we do that, then the user rates could be negotiated
10:06:15 on a case-by-case basis.
10:06:16 And with that I would like to turn it back over to
10:06:19 Thank you.
10:06:35 >>> Mike: So how does our recommended plan work?
10:06:39 Basically there are some policies and procedures that
10:06:41 we are recommending that the City Council consider to
10:06:43 make changes to.
10:06:44 The first one is to make it mandatory to connect to
10:06:49 the reclaimed water system if the customer is in an
10:06:53 area where the reclaimed water service is available,
10:06:57 and they want to irrigate their lawns, and they do not
10:07:00 have a private well, then it should be mandatory for
10:07:03 them to connect.
10:07:04 This is being done by several municipalities in the
10:07:07 State of Florida.
10:07:08 This would apply to your existing system as well as to
10:07:12 the proposed expansion system.
10:07:15 In addition to that, you have a tree and landscape
10:07:19 ordinance which has -- which is intended to reduce
10:07:25 irrigable area allowed for new development by 2013.
10:07:31 We are recommending that you amend that ordinance so
10:07:36 that so if a person wants to use reclaimed water for
10:07:41 irrigation, they can keep their irrigable area up at
10:07:45 the present levels that they are today.
10:07:47 That would create an incentive for them to hook up to
10:07:50 the reclaimed water system.
10:07:53 The last two are fairly obvious, basically for any new
10:07:56 development, pass an ordinance that would require that
10:07:59 when they install a potable water distribution system,
10:08:02 they also install a reclaimed water distribution
10:08:04 system, so that it's ready to be hooked up when the
10:08:08 city brings reclaimed water into that area.
10:08:11 And then the fourth is to continue implementation of a
10:08:14 cooling tower conversion program, which the city is
10:08:18 currently working on right now.
10:08:22 We were asked to take a look at your existing system
10:08:25 and make some recommendations on some changes in order
10:08:29 to fully implement our recommendations.
10:08:33 And some of these you are already familiar with.
10:08:36 Steve Daignault is going to talk about some of these
10:08:38 in more detail a little bit later.
10:08:40 So I'll just talk about them briefly.
10:08:42 One is, no more drinking water for irrigation after
10:08:47 December 1st of 2009.
10:08:51 We recommend that you apply the recommended rate
10:08:54 structure that Nick Koomis spoke about to your
10:09:01 existing customers as well as your expansion
10:09:03 We recommend that you remove the sewer max in
10:09:07 reclaimed water areas after December.
10:09:08 Of course that can be transitioned in over some period
10:09:11 of time.
10:09:11 And then consider other -- the city has already used
10:09:16 some incentives in the existing system to try to
10:09:19 encourage customers to hook up to the system or
10:09:23 connect to the system.
10:09:24 And those have met mixed results.
10:09:28 But we recommend that they continue to use those on an
10:09:31 ongoing basis because we believe that that will help
10:09:34 to encourage more connections.
10:09:38 So basically, I want to summarize briefly by talking
10:09:40 about what are the benefits to the city?
10:09:43 The City of Tampa is a green city and has a number of
10:09:49 strong greening initiatives.
10:09:51 This program will support that greening initiative.
10:09:54 It will conserve drinking water.
10:09:56 It will reduce the nutrient loads to Hillsborough bay.
10:10:00 It will protect the citizens' investment in their
10:10:04 And it will make the City of Tampa more drought
10:10:08 This graphic right here shows drinking waters offsets
10:10:17 will happen if you implement the program.
10:10:19 The blue bar that is you see there are the projected
10:10:21 drinking water demands through 2030.
10:10:25 The city will be responsible for it per your
10:10:30 The green dash line at the bottom of 82 MGB is how
10:10:34 much you are able to withdraw or permitted to withdraw
10:10:37 from the reservoir.
10:10:38 So any number of above that line would have to be
10:10:41 purchased from Tampa Bay water.
10:10:44 The purple bars represent how much drinking water you
10:10:47 would have to produce if you fully implement this
10:10:51 reclaimed water program per these recommendations.
10:10:54 And you can see in 2030 that you would still have to
10:10:57 buy water from Tampa Bay water, but about half as much
10:11:01 as what is projected if you do not fully implement
10:11:04 this program.
10:11:07 With that I am going to turn it over to Steve
10:11:15 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you, Mike.
10:11:16 Council, if you have any questions on the
10:11:18 presentation, let me suggest we do that now.
10:11:20 And then we'll take up those other issues.
10:11:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: councilman Miranda, councilman Mulhern
10:11:26 and Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
10:11:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What's most interesting to me is to
10:11:30 know out of the total 55 million gallons that we do
10:11:33 daily, and the Howard Curren treatment plant, how much
10:11:37 of that total are we going to use in the whole
10:11:41 reclaimed system of the city?
10:11:45 We, the sentence, are somewhat confused.
10:11:47 They think everybody is going to get reclaimed.
10:11:49 That's impossible.
10:11:50 That's not going to hoop and I'm telling them the
10:11:53 Only about 20% of the population is going to get
10:11:56 reclaimed because it takes five houses to do reclaimed
10:11:59 for one.
10:12:00 You can't expect to put moneys in an area that's not
10:12:04 going to use it like in my own house.
10:12:06 So what I'm saying is that's number one.
10:12:08 How much of the totals water of that 55 million
10:12:12 gallons will increase as time goes on to a higher
10:12:14 number are we going to use?
10:12:17 Secondly, what is the value of reclaimed?
10:12:19 In other words, I have always studied and the math
10:12:22 that I have always studied says that the value of
10:12:25 something is equal to the value that it is replacing.
10:12:28 Am I correct?
10:12:29 >>> That's correct.
10:12:29 >> Okay.
10:12:32 Three, of the cities new area that we are going to do
10:12:35 for reclaimed has, has the city done a survey to
10:12:39 see -- and I'm sure they have to some degree -- how
10:12:43 much of those individuals within that area, geographic
10:12:48 area, are the hard core water users?
10:12:51 I want to make sure that's addressed.
10:12:54 But I'm also very concerned, because everyone in that
10:12:58 geographical area, A, doesn't have the same size house
10:13:04 or lawn or building as the one next door.
10:13:06 So if there's a little old Charlie Miranda living
10:13:09 there with a 50 by 100 lot and he has a 20 by 20 plot
10:13:13 of land, we are going to force that individual to
10:13:17 spend an enormous amount of money when that water bill
10:13:19 is six or seven dollars a month and it does no harm to
10:13:23 no one.
10:13:24 So what I'm saying is, I don't want to be the big
10:13:29 daddy of big government to tell everybody "you shall."
10:13:33 I like compromises.
10:13:35 I like the opportunity to work with people.
10:13:38 And I don't want to hurt somebody that we all think
10:13:45 South Tampa, everybody being a wealth of big houses.
10:13:48 Yes, there's some of that H.but there's some of that
10:13:50 throughout the city.
10:13:51 And there is a lot of people that are going to be hurt
10:13:57 by doing something this way.
10:14:00 And maybe there's some exceptions.
10:14:03 I have read the paper and I read what I see.
10:14:05 I turn the page and I get disgusted because it's like
10:14:08 telling them, you will, or you are on the way out of
10:14:11 here, and that's not the way to do business.
10:14:13 I am not blaming anyone here.
10:14:15 That's just the way I think.
10:14:16 So when we do that, we have a tendency of the people
10:14:22 turning against us while we are trying to do something
10:14:25 for the betterment long-term.
10:14:27 So what I'm saying is, do we have a layaway plan in
10:14:33 When I read we are going to snatch your meter and you
10:14:37 have two meters now, a potable house meter for your
10:14:41 water and irrigation meet theory does the lawn and
10:14:44 pool, because that water doesn't go through a sewer
10:14:46 system back to the Howard Curren plant.
10:14:48 But as I read the city law, and I'm trying to find it
10:14:54 here, it specifically says, it doesn't address it
10:14:57 directly, why can't you not have three meters?
10:15:02 It pays.
10:15:03 Somebody had to pay to get that meter hooked up.
10:15:05 Now we are telling them we are taking a meter, we are
10:15:08 not going to give you credit that I know of and we are
10:15:10 going to change for that meter now for, you know,
10:15:14 reclaimed water.
10:15:16 But you are not going to have the ability.
10:15:17 So then we are going to have a higher sewer charge by
10:15:22 not using a third meter, because that meter that's
10:15:25 potable now for the house has the correct thing going
10:15:28 through the sewer system, and rightly so.
10:15:33 The second meter has no bearing on Howard Curren.
10:15:36 It filters through the sand, the pool evaporates and
10:15:39 has nothing to do with that.
10:15:41 So what's going to happen, the people -- and I'm
10:15:45 thinking both people with high end homes and big pools
10:15:49 and the little person like me, who is going to get
10:15:52 charged for something that never is going to be able
10:15:54 to recoup the costs.
10:15:55 So now we are saying we are going to put this meter
10:15:58 in, yank out the potable meter, and now your pool when
10:16:02 you fill it up, guess what happens.
10:16:06 They charge you with rate going in, not going out, you
10:16:10 are sewer charge will go up.
10:16:14 Has anyone given consideration to this?
10:16:16 >>> The quick answer to that is, yes, sir, we did give
10:16:24 consideration to that.
10:16:25 But let me go back to your first question.
10:16:29 You mentioned about the reclaimed water demand of this
10:16:33 problem is roughly 45 MGB.
10:16:37 That would include Tampa Bay water share, and their
10:16:40 number may vary during their planning process.
10:16:43 But that's roughly 45.
10:16:44 >> Tell me about Tampa Bay's water share.
10:16:49 >>> In the particular project they wanted to use
10:16:51 roughly 20 MGB for the rapid infiltration just north
10:16:56 of the Hillsborough Pasco line.
10:16:58 They had a couple of other projects that have similar
10:17:00 demands that they are also considering.
10:17:02 So if that project didn't work there would be some
10:17:05 contingency, if you will.
10:17:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may, Mr. Chairman.
10:17:10 We are getting way ahead of this.
10:17:12 There is so much technology out there, that does so
10:17:16 many things.
10:17:17 I spoke last night to a large group of about 150.
10:17:20 I have spoken to different groups about things that
10:17:23 people won't dare speak about.
10:17:25 And I tell them, would you be willing to drink sewer
10:17:27 water if I could guarantee you it's cleaner and better
10:17:31 than the water that you have in front of you now?
10:17:33 And you know what the majority answer is?
10:17:40 It is done in Orange County, California, 7 billion
10:17:43 gallons, one DC sewer party does 350 million gallons.
10:17:48 So what I'm saying is that 82 million gallons it's
10:17:52 true, that's what you can draw out of the river.
10:17:54 There's no argument there.
10:17:56 What I'm real concerned about is that we are going to
10:18:01 lose an opportunity here, and our recharge -- excuse
10:18:04 me, our reclaimed is going to be somebody else's
10:18:08 Well, that sounds great.
10:18:10 But when you start log at the numbers, you are going
10:18:12 to buy your own reclaimed water from recharged water
10:18:16 where you don't have water a at three times the rate
10:18:19 you could have gotten for it.
10:18:20 So I'm saying, we should take something to the public
10:18:24 and let them decide, if they want to save 25 to 30
10:18:27 million gallons of that water, and put it to a vote of
10:18:30 the public and the city, and say, do you want this to
10:18:33 be a possibility?
10:18:34 I'm not opposed to some of this stuff.
10:18:36 I'm opposed to saying we are just thinking inside the
10:18:39 box and not outside the box.
10:18:42 And I think the voters should have at least an
10:18:44 opportunity to say, yes, or say no.
10:18:48 And if we say save that water, you see, we are no
10:18:51 longer a supplier.
10:18:52 We used to be a supplier.
10:18:55 Now we are a user.
10:18:56 And I have a saying and it's going to upset some
10:19:00 people, but I say what I think.
10:19:02 And water today today's friends are also your enemies.
10:19:07 Now think about that.
10:19:09 Your friends today that are trying to help you, in
10:19:12 back of their mind, there's that big containment of 55
10:19:16 million gallons of something.
10:19:19 And all the fresh waters in the rivers and lakes
10:19:25 belong to the state.
10:19:25 We came this close last year, and there's still talk
10:19:28 in the legislature, about making reclaimed water of
10:19:32 the state's.
10:19:33 I'm not a lawyer.
10:19:34 But reclaimed water is a byproduct of something.
10:19:38 Therefore it's not water to the state.
10:19:40 So I'm saying, in fact, I thought so far out of the
10:19:43 box that I said, how do I avoid litigation with these
10:19:47 big boys?
10:19:49 I said, take the water department, take it out, and
10:19:51 make the stockholders of that water department the
10:19:54 individual taxpayers of the city.
10:19:56 Now they have got to sue somebody, they have got to
10:19:58 sue a lot of people.
10:20:00 And you have got to start thinking away, I'm thinking
10:20:04 25 years ago from now, because I plan to be around
10:20:08 that long, and I just want to make sure that the
10:20:12 citizens that come way after I do have a water supply.
10:20:17 If you control your own water supply, you control your
10:20:21 If you don't, you are at the mercy of someone else.
10:20:24 And if I'm going to tell that you a lot of people are
10:20:29 jealous of the City of Tampa because of its water
10:20:33 Nothing else to do with that because it makes them
10:20:35 look bad.
10:20:36 And I'm not trying to make anybody look bad.
10:20:38 We have a resource.
10:20:40 We made the agreements, we kept the river.
10:20:42 We give away the Wellfield.
10:20:45 The Morris bridge.
10:20:46 We didn't I have away, we sold it.
10:20:48 But at that point in time -- Mr. Chairman, I am going
10:20:52 to quit.
10:20:52 I know you are looking at me and you are burning my
10:20:57 two cells in my brain so I am going stop.
10:20:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a five minute rule and I'm
10:21:03 trying to enforce it.
10:21:08 I don't know if all your questions got answered but
10:21:10 we'll come back to that.
10:21:11 >>MARY MULHERN: Since Charlie said so much I don't
10:21:13 have to say so much.
10:21:14 But actually, to start with I have some questions.
10:21:18 Do you have the numbers for, say, St. Pete or Pinellas
10:21:21 County for how much reclaimed water that they are
10:21:27 How much of their -- how much of their water is being
10:21:31 recycled into reclaimed and how much they are using?
10:21:36 >>> I don't have the specific numbers exactly.
10:21:38 But we did actually work with the city of
10:21:40 St. Petersburg as well.
10:21:42 And they are using approximately 50 to 60% of what
10:21:47 effluent they generate which is fairly typical for a
10:21:52 Florida community, because of the wet season, dry
10:21:55 season, the seasonality of both the effluent and the
10:21:59 reclaimed water.
10:22:00 >>MARY MULHERN: And their system was mandatory when
10:22:03 they put it in, wasn't it?
10:22:05 It was mandatory at this point if you have the access
10:22:07 to it, you have to use it?
10:22:10 >>> Mike: I don't believe -- I could be wrong.
10:22:13 I don't believe it was mandatory for the city of
10:22:15 St. Petersburg.
10:22:16 I do remember that those recommendations had been made
10:22:20 If you recall, city of St. Petersburg is one of first
10:22:22 to have it to implement the reclaimed water system.
10:22:26 The intent was to get rid of their effluent.
10:22:29 I also had the alternate that they can discharge to
10:22:32 deep wells rather than surface waters discharge.
10:22:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Are there other cities in the area or
10:22:36 in Florida that have made what you are proposing to
10:22:39 make it mandatory?
10:22:41 >>> Yes, ma'am.
10:22:42 I believe Altamonte Springs makes it mandatory.
10:22:47 City of Clearwater makes it mandatory.
10:22:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Clearwater, that's the one I was
10:22:51 thinking about.
10:22:51 My thought is I agree with councilman Miranda that
10:22:55 this is a big, big question, and I think this is a
10:22:58 proposal, and we are going to work on it.
10:23:00 But I think that we are probably going to -- going to
10:23:05 go in this direction.
10:23:06 I think we need to look at some communities that have
10:23:08 done it and some people, now, this is what other
10:23:11 people are doing, this is what the results are.
10:23:13 So I think it's a good direction to take.
10:23:18 But I think -- some other things that I think probably
10:23:21 what we should have is maybe a set of special
10:23:25 discussion meetings for all of these topics about
10:23:28 And Mr. Miranda can share it hopefully.
10:23:31 But maybe he could schedule the meeting.
10:23:37 He went and talked to WMNF viewers like this so we
10:23:45 know he's getting on the cutting edge of this.
10:23:48 But I think the problem with reclaimed water right now
10:23:50 in this South Tampa and the stars section write live,
10:23:53 where I am not hooked up, Mr. Miranda kind of brought
10:23:56 them up, the cost if you don't necessarily have the
10:24:01 ability to do it.
10:24:02 I'm going to find a way to get hooked up.
10:24:05 You know, we'll be able to do it.
10:24:06 But there are a lot of smaller homes and people with
10:24:09 less means to do that.
10:24:10 So I think we need to build in some kind of rebate, or
10:24:15 exemption or something to help people do it.
10:24:17 And I'm -- I'm sure we'll be working on that.
10:24:22 The other thing I think -- and this is one of the
10:24:25 things I think we can talk about when we have more
10:24:26 time, is having -- a lot of people are looking into
10:24:31 collecting rain water.
10:24:32 With rain barrels, whatever means they can do.
10:24:35 And for people who are growing especially gardens with
10:24:39 edible plants, they are not going to use reclaimed
10:24:42 There are a number of plants which I think are even on
10:24:44 our Web site which are not really tolerant of the
10:24:49 salinity of that reclaimed water.
10:24:50 So I think the people who have those now also it would
10:24:53 be tough to require them to have reclaimed water
10:24:57 that's going to kill their plants, without having at
10:25:01 least some kind of giving them the ability possibility
10:25:04 of an exemption, or working with them to so that they
10:25:08 can afford to buy new plants if that's what they have
10:25:11 to do.
10:25:11 But I got an e-mail from someone who mentioned three
10:25:16 of the landscape shrubs, Azaleas, ligustrum and Laurel
10:25:22 oak all of which I have in my yard.
10:25:24 So this is giving me pause, too.
10:25:26 So I think we need either education, or we need
10:25:29 greater treatment of this water.
10:25:33 And that's the other thing that Mr. Miranda was
10:25:35 Things are changing really quickly.
10:25:37 And hopefully we'll get to that points where the
10:25:40 refinement of that water is good enough that it won't
10:25:42 kill the plants and we'll be able to drink it.
10:25:45 And I agree with him it's not pleasant to talk about
10:25:47 but it is what's happening all over the world, and we
10:25:49 are taking the long view, and I'm totally in support
10:25:52 of what you are doing with minor tweaks.
10:25:56 But thanks.
10:26:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, councilman
10:26:05 Dingfelder, councilman Caetano.
10:26:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:26:08 I really appreciate this overview of what we can do
10:26:11 with reclaimed water.
10:26:12 And I am eager to see us get on it.
10:26:16 And I was a little concerned when I saw the chart of
10:26:18 how long these various projects would take.
10:26:22 Can we go back to that?
10:26:26 I remember that the South Tampa projects weren't
10:26:29 completed until like 2014.
10:26:31 >>> We can get to them.
10:26:36 There we go.
10:26:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: A horizontal chart, a spreadsheet
10:26:40 of when the projects would happen.
10:26:41 There you go, thank you.
10:26:42 If we look at this, it shows the South Tampa projects
10:26:45 going in by the end of 2015 and the north Tampa
10:26:50 projects not even getting going until around 2014.
10:26:54 It just seems to me, I know that funding is a
10:26:57 But with bonding we can accelerate projects.
10:27:00 And given that we have identified that the real
10:27:03 solution to our water problems is expanding the
10:27:07 availability, and given, as Mr. Miranda pointed out,
10:27:11 that we have this gift of reclaimed, we need to see
10:27:14 how we can do this expeditiously.
10:27:18 We recognize our droughts are cyclical every year.
10:27:20 We have them.
10:27:21 We need to really accelerate these time lines.
10:27:25 If we can go back to the tight picture of South Tampa,
10:27:29 there's a big hole in the middle.
10:27:31 And that is Palma Ceia golf course.
10:27:34 It's a picture prior to this.
10:27:40 >>> I believe it's this one here.
10:27:42 And I apologize for this.
10:27:45 Inadvertent, for some reason the aerial under the
10:27:48 graphic, I tried to change it last night but the area
10:27:51 under the graphic has a lighter color.
10:27:53 I guess the white of the roof.
10:27:55 And so it just appears like there's a hole there but
10:27:58 there's not intended to be a hole there.
10:28:00 It's supposed to be all still there.
10:28:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It seems what we should do is first
10:28:07 off recognize public users like the city parks and rec
10:28:11 and try to meet those needs as quickly as we can.
10:28:14 Secondly, I know that the Sports Authority maintains a
10:28:18 the different golf courses but those I believe are on
10:28:21 wells which ultimately are using subsurface water that
10:28:25 we really need to protect.
10:28:26 And we should look at how quickly we can get golf
10:28:30 courses off of wells.
10:28:32 And I know we didn't include Temple Terrace.
10:28:35 Temple Terrace has a bunch of big golf courses.
10:28:38 And again, holistically we are trying to have the
10:28:45 least impact, use potable -- use reclaimed water as
10:28:51 broadly as we can for the largest users to have the
10:28:55 least impact on our limited water system.
10:28:57 I think strategically, did you think of that?
10:29:01 >>> We did think of that, as a matter of fact, in the
10:29:03 large users, in the interest of time I couldn't name
10:29:06 everybody but the city's golf courses are included in
10:29:09 the large user categories.
10:29:10 So we have got those included in that fix -- mix, and
10:29:15 we have talked with the city of Temple Terrace.
10:29:18 They are in the process, at this point in time, they
10:29:21 are planning their reclaimed water system, and what
10:29:23 they want to do with their wastewater and reclaimed
10:29:26 So we are in discussions with them, and how best to
10:29:29 use that, since we do we are planning that north
10:29:32 transmission line to run right by the city of Temple
10:29:36 So, yes, they are very interested and we are very
10:29:38 interested in working with them on that.
10:29:40 >> Lastly, the Tampa Bay -- estuary came up with a
10:29:45 plan on using nitrogen.
10:29:47 Are you aware of this?
10:29:48 >>> We are also aware and in discussions related to
10:29:50 that for the use of the reclaimed.
10:29:52 >> Will public works be coming to Tampa with something
10:29:55 on that?
10:29:59 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Public works coming to Tampa?
10:30:02 >> To City Council.
10:30:03 Since we are obviously entering --
10:30:06 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We are going to have to approve an
10:30:08 agreement before too long.
10:30:09 Yes, we will be coming to you addressing the TML
10:30:12 >> Good.
10:30:13 Because at the beginning of the rainy season now is
10:30:15 the time we need to do something.
10:30:16 >>> DEP still needs to finish their study before
10:30:21 anything can happen.
10:30:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:30:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:30:27 Just for future reference, maybe in workshops we
10:30:29 should go to ten minutes instead of five since we are
10:30:32 having longer deliberation.
10:30:33 And I mean that sincerely.
10:30:38 A couple of things.
10:30:40 Start with an easy one, Mike.
10:30:44 On one of the first graphs you put up you had a green
10:30:47 line which is what you said was the amount of
10:30:49 reclaimed water supply, and it was pretty much static.
10:30:54 It went up to 70 MGD.
10:30:57 It dropped down to 60 in later years.
10:31:00 Why that drop?
10:31:02 >>> Actually the graphic, if we can get it back up
10:31:04 there, I can show you, what that graphic was, was a
10:31:07 seasonal variation, and get to it here real briefly.
10:31:11 It didn't show -- that was a snapshot in time of the
10:31:15 year 2030, the projection of 2030.
10:31:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: All right.
10:31:20 >>> I can use this one.
10:31:21 If you notice down along the time line at the bottom
10:31:24 you see January through December.
10:31:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm good now.
10:31:29 I didn't realize that was seasonal.
10:31:31 I thought that was a period of time.
10:31:33 Confirming what some of my fellow council members
10:31:38 said, I think we are looking overall at a good plan.
10:31:40 I think the city needs to increase distribution of
10:31:45 reclaimed water.
10:31:46 For the reasons that you stated.
10:31:48 Conserve drinking water, improve the bay, that sort of
10:31:54 But I do have some concerns.
10:31:59 Let's talk about the Tampa Bay water plan.
10:32:03 And you use the big word "rapid infiltration program"
10:32:07 or something like that.
10:32:08 But I think that what we really all need to focus on
10:32:11 is what that is.
10:32:12 And basically, from what I can see and read, that's
10:32:16 basically taking our reclaimed water, perhaps putting
10:32:19 it through an additional step, and then injecting that
10:32:22 reclaimed water into the aquifer, perhaps up in Pasco
10:32:27 Is that what I am reading and seeing?
10:32:29 >>> Basically, yes.
10:32:33 I wouldn't use the term inject because they would be
10:32:35 putting it on the surface and letting it infiltrate
10:32:39 >> So it's a percolation instead of injection but at
10:32:43 the end of the day the goal is to try to flood a
10:32:46 certain area and get that -- use that reclaimed water
10:32:49 to for the aquifer, to recharge the aquifer.
10:32:54 >>> Right.
10:32:54 >> Basically the to limb mimic the natural system.
10:32:57 >>> That's correct.
10:32:58 >> The concern that I have -- and I just asked my aide
10:33:02 to, you know, pull some, you know, Google that up, is,
10:33:06 you know, people are talking about this all around the
10:33:08 world, how safe is it?
10:33:10 >>> Right.
10:33:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I don't have any doubts, Steve
10:33:15 Daignault is here, our staff, that provide us
10:33:17 wonderful drinking water day in and day out, is not
10:33:20 going to intentionally endanger us.
10:33:22 But my concern is -- and it's not just my concern --
10:33:26 is that when you read these reports and when you read
10:33:28 this stuff, there are still international concerns
10:33:32 about hormones that are in our reclaimed water, that
10:33:37 we haven't figured out how to get them out yet, and
10:33:40 there are hormones there because we take medicine, I
10:33:43 And those medicines end up in our reclaimed water.
10:33:48 They end up in our sewage and they go to our reclaimed
10:33:50 water and we haven't figured out how to get them out
10:33:53 Another thing mentioned antibiotics are in our
10:33:56 reclaimed water.
10:33:57 And pesticides to a certain degree might be.
10:34:00 And they refer it to these generally as endocrine
10:34:05 >>> Right.
10:34:06 >> And I know there's a lot of studies on this.
10:34:08 And I'm sure there's probably some EPA regs that are
10:34:13 either generated or being generated as well as the DEP
10:34:17 I'm sure we have to abide by those.
10:34:19 >>> Absolutely.
10:34:20 >> I just want that all to be discussed -- I want it
10:34:25 to be discussed today.
10:34:26 And I want it to continue to be discussed.
10:34:28 Because you have made a lot of good recommendations
10:34:32 And five of the six of them I can go for.
10:34:36 But that sixth one, I would put a big caveat on it and
10:34:40 say, I can't go for it today.
10:34:43 I might be able to, you know, allow it to continue to
10:34:47 be studied and that sort of thing.
10:34:49 But I don't know that City Council is in a position to
10:34:52 just give it the green light and say, TBW, Tampa Bay
10:34:56 water, we are on board with this, we want to take our
10:34:58 reclaimed water, now, dump it out there, and encourage
10:35:01 to the go into the aquifer for the reasons that I've
10:35:04 So I would say we need to be very cautious on this.
10:35:11 And I would like to hear what you guys have to say
10:35:13 because I know you fought long and hard -- thought
10:35:17 long and hard before you brought it up to the public
10:35:19 this way.
10:35:26 >>> What I suggest we do -- and again this is a
10:35:28 presentation based on what we asked CDS to do which is
10:35:32 to look out 30 years, 20 years, tell us, what do you
10:35:35 see in the future?
10:35:37 We are going to have to eat this elephant one step at
10:35:40 a time.
10:35:40 I would suggest that we would want to look at the
10:35:43 earlier items.
10:35:45 Do we want to expand reclaimed to the residential area
10:35:49 and the big users?
10:35:50 To me that's the first question and the first step.
10:35:53 Do we want to move in that direction?
10:35:56 What some of the council members are talking about
10:35:58 ends up being cutting edge technology stuff.
10:36:02 And I don't know that we are there today or we need to
10:36:05 make you to make that decision today.
10:36:08 I would suggest again we take some small steps.
10:36:11 I think the worst thing that can happen is we not do
10:36:14 anything, that we disagree so badly that we don't do
10:36:17 anything and we find ourselves here next year with
10:36:19 another severe drought and we made no decision to
10:36:23 expand or do anything with reclaimed water.
10:36:25 So, again, I think that you all have some great novel
10:36:28 questions, and I'm not sure that we can answer them
10:36:32 all to your satisfaction today.
10:36:33 They are there to be Delta dealt with in the future.
10:36:36 But this is the best we can do in looking at this plan
10:36:41 going into the future.
10:36:41 >> I understand, Steve, and I agree with you, and I'll
10:36:45 be glad to make three or four motions to move the good
10:36:49 parts of this, the really good parts of this forward.
10:36:51 Expand residential distribution of the fantastic.
10:36:55 Long overdue in this city.
10:36:58 To make it available to wholesale users up and down
10:37:01 Westshore, the airport, downtown, et cetera.
10:37:05 We need to do it.
10:37:06 Long overdue.
10:37:07 But some of these other things that are part of the
10:37:09 same packet, also part of the financial analysis.
10:37:15 And that's where I want to pull back a little bit and
10:37:18 say, even though that, you know, Tampa Bay water is
10:37:23 $60 million offset is very appealing, okay,
10:37:26 financially, it might not be appealing on a community
10:37:30 And that's a community discussion that we need to
10:37:32 And, Charlie, I agree with you, when you get to the
10:37:35 point of that issue, that's the kind of issue that you
10:37:39 might need to take to the community.
10:37:41 The last thing I wanted to say in and this tagged into
10:37:44 something that Ms. Mulhern said.
10:37:48 I think if we do the mandatory reclaimed hookups --
10:37:51 and I have been advocating that for more than a year,
10:37:54 okay -- if you have or will have reclaimed water at
10:37:59 your curb, at some point I think we need to mandate
10:38:02 that you use it.
10:38:03 If you are an irrigator.
10:38:05 If you are not an irrigator, fine.
10:38:07 But if you are an irrigator and you have a large
10:38:09 sprinkler system I think ultimately we need to mandate
10:38:12 that but with a few caveats.
10:38:14 One, I agree with Mrs. Mulhern.
10:38:16 I think there needs to be some variance or some
10:38:18 exception program in place for people who have a bona
10:38:21 fide landscaping concern.
10:38:23 In other words, people who have established Azaleas,
10:38:27 established privets, whatever that is, but they have
10:38:34 been e-mailing me about them, and if they have
10:38:37 established landscape concerns, I think they have a
10:38:39 right to come in, explain those, show pictures, have
10:38:42 staff come out and have a variance process.
10:38:45 I would be able to support this if we included a
10:38:47 variance or an exception for those type of people.
10:38:50 Number two is we need financial hardship program.
10:38:54 Brad and I have talked about this.
10:38:59 We can sort that out, see what it is.
10:39:00 But if there is a 400 or 500 charge to hook up to our
10:39:04 reclaimed system, our existing system, and we are
10:39:08 going to mandate it, then maybe we can spread that out
10:39:11 over a year's time or something like that.
10:39:13 And the last thing is, I think what we need to do is
10:39:16 do this now, but I think there needs to be a longer
10:39:20 grace period, so the community can be on notice
10:39:24 perhaps for a year or two.
10:39:26 I mean, we need to make it finite, 12 months or 24
10:39:31 months, after this date in 2011 or whatever, that's
10:39:35 But I don't think December of '09 is enough time.
10:39:42 I think from what the e-mails and phone calls that I
10:39:45 have been getting, I think we will freak people out
10:39:47 too much.
10:39:48 I think we need to give them a little more time to
10:39:51 address, to do whatever they need to do, and go from
10:39:59 One other question.
10:40:01 Nutrient load.
10:40:04 I've read -- and I have seen SWFWMD video that talks
10:40:08 about their concern about nutrient load going into the
10:40:11 I have seen this beautiful video and it says that it's
10:40:14 messing up our springs and our lakes because when it
10:40:16 goes into the aquifer, goes back out of the aquifer
10:40:19 into the springs and lakes and you end up with algae
10:40:21 blooms in the springs lakes from the nutrients, that
10:40:27 are going from our yard back to the aquifer, so my
10:40:31 concern is, and we don't want to dump the nutrients in
10:40:36 the bay, which we don't.
10:40:37 We are going to take them up to that Pasco
10:40:40 infiltration system, let them go there.
10:40:42 Isn't there still annuity rent load concern?
10:40:44 >>> Yes, there is a concern.
10:40:50 Basically, when you apply reclaimed water to a lawn
10:40:54 for irrigation, there are application rates that
10:40:57 SWFWMD has, standard application rates, to help ensure
10:41:01 that basically those nutrients are taken up by the
10:41:03 plants rather than infiltrating down into the
10:41:06 That's the quick answer to your question.
10:41:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So you are saying you will have
10:41:13 enough plant matter where you are applying this, that
10:41:15 had you think that will satisfy that?
10:41:17 >>> Yes, I believe so.
10:41:19 Most people who irrigate are irrigating for their
10:41:21 plants and lawns and things like that.
10:41:24 >> But aren't you talking about when you are talking
10:41:28 about Tampa Bay water, project up there, aren't you
10:41:30 also talking about just a large area where you are
10:41:34 just going to be dumping this water?
10:41:36 >>> I was not addressing Tampa Bay water's program.
10:41:38 I'm sorry, I was talking about residential.
10:41:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, answer my concern about the
10:41:45 Tampa Bay water part of it.
10:41:46 >>> I don't know enough about their project or what
10:41:48 their plans are to deal with that.
10:41:50 But clearly those technical features will be dealt
10:41:55 >>BRAD BAIRD: Tampa water department.
10:41:57 SWFWMD just completed a full study on recharge.
10:42:04 About five inches thick on whether or not it's
10:42:06 feasible, nutrient uptake.
10:42:12 But what they will follow and do is a study on
10:42:15 recharge associated with a specific site.
10:42:19 So what happens is you do need to find the right site
10:42:23 to where those nutrient loads would not be a problem
10:42:28 in the aquifer which is several hundred feet down
10:42:31 below where you are applying that water.
10:42:37 >> So it is a carse -- I would think you would want it
10:42:44 so it would get down.
10:42:51 >> It's a very sandy condition, so it acts like a
10:42:53 >> Thank you.
10:42:53 That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
10:42:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano.
10:42:58 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: What did the study cost the city,
10:43:00 Mr. Daignault?
10:43:04 >>> About $135,000.
10:43:08 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.
10:43:11 In part of my district we get a credit on our sewer
10:43:14 charge if you are irrigating your lawn, but we pay the
10:43:18 regular price for that water, so we don't have the
10:43:21 opportunity to have reclaimed water there.
10:43:25 Should there be a discount on that water that's given
10:43:28 credit on the sewer charge to that client or that
10:43:36 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I'm not sure that I see the credit
10:43:38 in there.
10:43:40 Again the folks in the New Tampa part of town do
10:43:44 receive a sewer max.
10:43:46 >> Sewer max credit.
10:43:48 >>> Which limits the amount of charge for sewage off
10:43:51 of their potable.
10:43:53 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: But they are paying the regular
10:43:55 price for the water.
10:43:55 They are not getting a reduced rate as for reclaimed
10:44:00 >>> No one gets a reduce rate for potable water.
10:44:03 Everybody pay it is same rate except for the folks
10:44:05 outside of the city boundaries.
10:44:09 Everybody payings the same rate for water.
10:44:10 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I particularly don't think that's
10:44:14 If John can water his lawn down in South Tampa and I
10:44:17 have to water my lawn with potable water, okay?
10:44:21 Because privets don't grow down in South Tampa.
10:44:26 But, anyway, are we making any provisions in the study
10:44:30 on Cross Creek for implementation of reclaimed water
10:44:35 pipes for future use?
10:44:39 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Are you talking about for crossing
10:44:41 the road?
10:44:42 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Right.
10:44:43 Whatever you need to do to get that water to the
10:44:45 residents once you have water, reclaimed water, in
10:44:48 about 2030?
10:44:50 >>> One of the recommendations would be any new
10:44:52 developments would also put in what they call dual
10:44:54 pipes or dual systems so there would be a reclaimed
10:44:57 system installed at the time that they developed,
10:45:01 sewage that there was agreement that the reclaim was
10:45:03 going to be brought into that area.
10:45:09 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: And is that happening also with
10:45:11 Bruce B. Downs and the widening and the remodeling of
10:45:14 Bruce B. Downs?
10:45:14 >>> Yes, sir.
10:45:16 We are going to put sleeves in the Bruce B. Downs
10:45:17 project to be able to cross the street with reclaimed
10:45:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Is there going to be a main trunk
10:45:24 line going up Bruce B. Downs?
10:45:25 Where are these sleeves going to be installed?
10:45:28 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: The design has not been done.
10:45:30 More than likely it would be in oar around the Bruce
10:45:32 B. Downs corridor.
10:45:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Second meter for irrigation for
10:45:43 I did have one home in New Tampa that had a second
10:45:48 meter for sewer, okay?
10:45:50 In other words, for your irrigation.
10:45:52 They would take two readings when they came to the
10:45:55 But if you put your water in your swimming pool, if
10:46:00 your swimming pool is in the sun all day, it's going
10:46:02 to evaporate an awful lot.
10:46:05 And I know I had my pool checked a couple times
10:46:08 because I was always putting water in it and it
10:46:13 doesn't operate properly if it doesn't have the right
10:46:15 level of water.
10:46:19 But that weight doesn't get any credit either because
10:46:22 it's going into the swimming pool, and it doesn't go
10:46:25 into the sewer system.
10:46:26 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: The people that do have a potable
10:46:31 irrigation meter do have the benefit of not paying
10:46:34 sewage for water that they put in their pools.
10:46:38 >> What's the average credit they get on a home in
10:46:41 that area for not paying the sewer charge?
10:46:44 Do you have any idea?
10:46:46 >>> I couldn't tell you that off to the top of my
10:46:49 head, the average sewer max, I don't know.
10:46:51 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Thank you.
10:46:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just make a few comments.
10:46:56 Mr. Miranda, it's very clear that Mr. Miranda has a
10:47:01 lot of knowledge and wisdom with regards to water.
10:47:07 And I was just saying to him I'm in support of him
10:47:09 being secretary of water conservation, U.S. secretary,
10:47:13 he has so much knowledge and information he can share
10:47:15 with us on this particular issue.
10:47:19 Given the report that we have before us today, I
10:47:23 didn't realize about the whole city, this not being
10:47:30 able available to the whole city.
10:47:31 I don't think you all spoke to that issue.
10:47:33 I think you spent a minute or so talking about that,
10:47:37 and East Tampa and West Tampa why it's not recommended
10:47:39 in the study.
10:47:40 I had the briefing.
10:47:42 Brad briefed me on it.
10:47:44 I think it's important for the community to hear it so
10:47:46 that no one feels that you are excluding some parts of
10:47:49 the certain or certain parts of the city.
10:47:50 I think it's very important that you explain that.
10:47:54 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I appreciate that.
10:47:56 >> MIKE: We did look at serving all of the citizens
10:47:59 within the city.
10:48:00 And if you recall on this, way call the dot chart, we
10:48:07 took a look at the south area, the north area and
10:48:09 everywhere else, all remaining or all other.
10:48:13 So we did take a look at providing the service there.
10:48:16 Basically, the cost was about five to eight teems
10:48:21 times higher per unit because it's so spread out that
10:48:26 to get the pipes everywhere it was just not cost
10:48:28 feasible to do that.
10:48:44 It's assumed to be being used for irrigation.
10:48:54 So you can see that people who irrigate are pretty
10:48:56 well focused in this area and this area.
10:48:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Primarily focus in South Tampa and
10:49:03 north Tampa, what you are saying, the rest is spread
10:49:05 out in terms of East Tampa, West Tampa.
10:49:07 >>> Exactly.
10:49:09 And so because they are so tightly packed there, it's
10:49:12 more cost effective to get that water to them.
10:49:17 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Perhaps another very significant
10:49:18 point for us all to think about here is when we are
10:49:21 looking at these projects and the feasibility, we are
10:49:24 looking at getting SWFWMD to fund a path of it, the
10:49:30 potable offset, because the people in the east and
10:49:32 West Tampa parts of the city don't use as much water
10:49:35 as other parts.
10:49:37 The potable water offset would not be sufficient
10:49:40 enough for us to get the matching funds from SWFWMD.
10:49:44 And that's a significant piece of our --
10:49:48 And I think you need to explain that so people will
10:49:51 understand that.
10:49:51 And Brad did a good job, we went over that Tuesday,
10:49:54 Wednesday in the briefing explaining that.
10:49:56 But when you are doing this, I think the public needs
10:49:58 to know that they are aware why it's not cost feasible
10:50:04 to put in the West Tampa or in East Tampa, you know,
10:50:07 because I not cost effective.
10:50:09 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
10:50:11 >>CHAIRMAN: Plus you have to have five people that
10:50:14 would be willing to hook up to, so let them know that,
10:50:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just follow up here.
10:50:20 Also, I would suggest -- oh, yeah, the other question
10:50:22 I had was the mandatory water hookups are mandated now
10:50:27 throughout certain parts of the state.
10:50:28 I need you to identify for me what municipalities
10:50:31 where this is mandated now, mandatory hookups.
10:50:39 That is not clear, not only in the State of Florida
10:50:42 but other areas, and I think Mr. Miranda talked about
10:50:45 Orange County, California.
10:50:46 So those kinds of examples, it will be very helpful
10:50:50 for to us know that kind of information, and as well,
10:50:53 council, maybe call or visitation to see what they are
10:50:57 doing in regards to the same issues that we have here.
10:51:01 So that's important.
10:51:03 The other thing that I would recommend to us, council,
10:51:07 is -- and I agree pretty much with what councilman
10:51:11 Miranda and Mulhern and Dingfelder said, and that is,
10:51:16 we have to look at some of these areas where there may
10:51:20 be special conditions, or what was that, John,
10:51:23 terminology you used, variance process, for those who
10:51:29 may not be able to afford the 800 or $900 hookup or
10:51:33 whatever the total cost will be.
10:51:34 So you may have to implement that or put something in
10:51:38 place for that.
10:51:38 That's very good.
10:51:39 I really agree with that.
10:51:43 A person that's retired, on fixed income, lives in the
10:51:47 area but cannot afford the hookup or would not use the
10:51:52 reclaimed water.
10:51:53 So I would wholeheartedly agree with that.
10:51:58 The other thing I would say to council is, as opposed
10:52:01 to a special discussion meeting, I would support --
10:52:06 what I would support is there's two pressing issues
10:52:09 right now, I think.
10:52:11 That's the budget, and this whole water, reclaimed
10:52:14 water, that maybe we should spend time having
10:52:19 workshops especially on the recommendation.
10:52:21 We are not ready to move forward on some of these
10:52:24 Maybe what he would want to do is come back, have
10:52:26 another workshop on just on the recommendation, and
10:52:29 vote on that item, item by item, to move the project
10:52:34 forward, might be the way to go versus trying to vote
10:52:39 on the whole package because we are not there yet.
10:52:43 I think we have some concerns, we have some questions,
10:52:45 and that may be the way to go that we come back and
10:52:49 set up another workshop, or we look at just the
10:52:52 recommendations and go down each one, and then the
10:52:57 opportunity to go back and look at also some of the
10:53:01 suggestions made today by council.
10:53:02 I think I saw a hand here.
10:53:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to say something real quick.
10:53:06 I know you haven't spoken yet.
10:53:07 I think that's a great idea.
10:53:09 I think we need public input, and maybe a chance to
10:53:12 invite some, and our public is very expert, but maybe
10:53:16 to invite some outside people to come and talk about
10:53:18 some of these issues.
10:53:19 Maybe some who knows about the landscape plan, and
10:53:22 that sort of thing.
10:53:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:53:26 I think that's an excellent suggestion.
10:53:28 I think we should do it in a timely way.
10:53:30 And one of the proposals that I hope will be
10:53:33 forthcoming from the administration will be a way
10:53:35 to -- the entire hookup, getting the permitting,
10:53:41 getting the plumber out to do the hookup, is $1,000,
10:53:44 and that's a big chunk for people to bite off at once.
10:53:47 If there would be a way to break it down and have
10:53:50 people pay for it over several years, just as an
10:53:52 add-on to their water fee, so that we as a city have
10:53:56 the advantage of the customers going on reclaimed, but
10:53:59 it isn't such a financial hit all at once.
10:54:01 When we have this workshop, if you could come back to
10:54:03 us with some way to do that by breaking down the costs
10:54:10 and adding it onto people's water bill that would be a
10:54:12 big help or maybe some sort of microloans for people
10:54:15 to be able to absorb that cost readily.
10:54:18 Finally, there were some newspapers in the paper today
10:54:23 about the number of reclaimed users, and I don't think
10:54:26 that they are correct.
10:54:28 I believe, Mr. Daignault, how many reclaimed users do
10:54:30 we currently have?
10:54:31 Around 3500?
10:54:34 >>> 34, 3500.
10:54:37 >> Out of a potential maybe 8,000?
10:54:39 >>> Out of the total of 8,000 in that area.
10:54:41 >> Right.
10:54:41 So we have a ways to go with the investment we have
10:54:45 already made in terms of getting people hooked up.
10:54:48 I think if we break down the costs for reusers, and do
10:54:52 that in conjunction with saying that you have to do
10:54:54 it, and address the swimming pool questions, as well
10:54:57 as the community questions, that would be really
10:55:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda, councilman Miller.
10:55:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with the design of certain
10:55:06 areas of the city having reclaimed.
10:55:09 Let me say this.
10:55:11 Does the total City of Tampa get fire protection?
10:55:14 The answer is yes.
10:55:15 Does the total City of Tampa get fire protection?
10:55:19 Does City of Tampa get water?
10:55:23 Does the entire City of Tampa get sewer department?
10:55:26 Road department?
10:55:27 Traffic department?
10:55:28 On and on and on.
10:55:29 But when it comes to reclaimed, 80% will be left out,
10:55:35 and I understand that because it's cost prohibitive to
10:55:38 put it all over the city.
10:55:39 So you have to go to the high end users, in theory,
10:55:42 those high end users pay doing time the cost of
10:55:47 putting in the lines and repaying for the system.
10:55:50 Those that don't get it do not.
10:55:52 However, there is so much resentment in government,
10:55:56 there's so much that we need to think outside the box.
10:55:59 We need nothing to say wrong, but three of the seven
10:56:04 council members that sit here will never ever get
10:56:08 reclaimed water.
10:56:10 And I'm not opposed to that.
10:56:11 What I'm opposed to is that we don't think outside the
10:56:17 square box and say, now what?
10:56:19 Maybe somebody in Thom Scott or Charlie Miranda or
10:56:23 Drew Park or Sulphur Springs or Forest Hills or East
10:56:27 Tampa or West Tampa that is not going to get reclaimed
10:56:30 water, the extreme South Tampa that is not going to
10:56:33 get reclaimed, they should have the availability to
10:56:36 say, I want to be involved in the city reclaimed
10:56:41 system and I'm willing to have the city service me
10:56:44 every two weeks with so much water from a reclaimed
10:56:48 And I know that sounds goof goofy, I know that sounds
10:56:53 antiquish, but the people aren't left out.
10:56:58 They are given at least an opportunity to participate
10:57:00 in something that the rest are getting that they
10:57:02 themselves are not going to get.
10:57:03 And I think when you do something in that nature, I
10:57:07 think it's going to be a win-win for you.
10:57:09 I think that the people will accept this.
10:57:13 And that's just my feeling on that part.
10:57:15 And it hasn't been done that I know of anywhere.
10:57:19 But it's time to do something like that to help the
10:57:21 other people, just because you live in our area
10:57:23 doesn't mean that you don't have a lawn.
10:57:25 It doesn't mean you don't have a big house.
10:57:27 It doesn't mean you don't pay big taxes because you
10:57:30 So let's give them the affordability if they want to
10:57:33 spend that money to have the same system somebody has,
10:57:36 but delivered deliver it on a weekly or biweekly
10:57:41 That's all I am going to say.
10:57:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Daignault, maybe you can meet with
10:57:45 citizens to find out just why and listen to councilmen
10:57:49 coming up with great ideas about a rebate maybe added
10:57:52 to the water bill or something, and explain to them
10:57:54 that this can be done and maybe they would change
10:57:57 their minds and say, yes, I will go with it if you are
10:58:00 going to give me this type of service.
10:58:02 A lot of people can't afford it all at once but they
10:58:05 can do it in installment payments so maybe you meet
10:58:07 with the citizens and find out just tell them what we
10:58:12 are going to do to help them, and get a lot of people
10:58:15 to hook up that way.
10:58:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So I know councilman Dingfelder had in
10:58:20 mind several motions.
10:58:22 Councilman, did you understand what I was saying in
10:58:25 terms of recommendation? I don't know how you want to
10:58:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, that's fine, Mr. Chairman, as
10:58:30 long as we do it soon, because time is of the essence.
10:58:34 And I think there are some parts of these programs
10:58:38 that are no-brainers, expand the residential system,
10:58:41 expand the wholesale use system, we should as soon as
10:58:43 possible give the administration our blessing on that
10:58:47 to move forward.
10:58:51 So a little bit of time is fine.
10:58:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I don't have a problem with that.
10:58:54 I think in terms of mandatory hookup, 12-1-09, you
10:59:02 know, that's right around the corner.
10:59:05 So I think that needs a little more time on some of
10:59:08 these recommendations that we have here.
10:59:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't I suggest this?
10:59:16 Just as a loose motion, why don't he would say that
10:59:27 council gives its blessing to move forward on the
10:59:29 residential expansion part of the program?
10:59:31 And the wholesale part of the program?
10:59:33 And just make that as a motion?
10:59:38 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.
10:59:40 The someone referred to them as ticklish issues that
10:59:46 we had.
10:59:48 All of those things would need to come back to you in
10:59:50 the form of an ordinance.
10:59:52 And what I would suggest is that when this comes back
10:59:55 to you all, we focus with you all on what would be in
10:59:58 that ordinance, and how the mandatory connection would
11:00:04 be structured, how these different things would be
11:00:05 addressed, and that you are focused beyond how we in
11:00:10 an ordinance structure this program.
11:00:11 I think that would be the most productive thing.
11:00:15 I would caution against approving the plan or not
11:00:19 approving the plan in for a variety of reasons,
11:00:23 whether the administration is not asking for that,
11:00:27 whether you want to voice your support or blessing as
11:00:30 it was described.
11:00:32 I think that's fine.
11:00:33 But for a variety of reasons, I don't know that we
11:00:36 want an approved plan at this stage.
11:00:38 I would prefer to have council action be in the form
11:00:41 of an ordinance.
11:00:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So then what we need to do, what you
11:00:45 are saying we need to comb back with a certain date
11:00:47 and then go step by step, is that right?
11:00:50 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: That's correct.
11:00:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think that's consistent with my
11:00:55 My motion was generically that council has heard this
11:00:58 report and we give our blessings, and encourage
11:01:00 administration to move forward, with the expansion of
11:01:02 the residential system, distribution system, as well
11:01:06 as the wholesale commercial uses along Westshore, and
11:01:14 And I don't think council had any problem with that,
11:01:16 did you?
11:01:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, the question becomes the
11:01:22 ordinance, that need to be in the form of an
11:01:24 What I'm hearing could counsel, Mr. Fletcher say.
11:01:28 >> Let me clarify.
11:01:31 We have no concern about the motion.
11:01:35 What I want to be sure is there wasn't an action
11:01:38 approving this plan.
11:01:40 >> No.
11:01:41 >>> And we were going to come back for formal council
11:01:44 action, an ordinance that would put in place the
11:01:46 development of a reclaimed water program as the type
11:01:49 that we have been discussing here with obviously a lot
11:01:51 of work on the details.
11:01:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And my motion would be that it's
11:01:56 the sense of council that we want to move forward with
11:01:58 those two large programs.
11:02:00 Residential expansion and the wholesale use.
11:02:04 >> I'll second that.
11:02:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
11:02:13 All in favor?
11:02:15 Now, we need to identify a day to come back in another
11:02:19 workshop format like this, and so that we can go step
11:02:23 by step, the process, the recommendations, that we
11:02:26 understand, and we have clarified them.
11:02:30 And with the recommendation that comes forth from
11:02:33 council today.
11:02:33 So what does that look like, the next available?
11:02:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't have the full calendar that
11:02:44 we usually have.
11:02:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We don't have that before us?
11:02:52 We can bring that up tonight.
11:02:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we ask the clerk with a
11:03:01 full calendar to come to us.
11:03:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That would be tonight because we have
11:03:04 to take up the water issue and then we have another
11:03:07 Why don't we take that up tonight at 5:30, look at our
11:03:10 calendar, see when we can come up with another
11:03:14 workshop and move through the process with the
11:03:15 ordinance, Mr. Fletcher, and a step-by-step process.
11:03:20 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: The one other item we didn't touch
11:03:22 on much today but I hope we can take it up in that
11:03:24 workshop as well is this idea of drought pricing for
11:03:28 some of our high-end users.
11:03:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's fine, yes.
11:03:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The other thing that I really want
11:03:35 the administration to bring to us as soon as possible
11:03:37 is the total daily minimum -- max load so that we can
11:03:41 get something in place even though the rainy season is
11:03:45 upon us.
11:03:45 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We are still wrestling with that.
11:03:51 Maybe Mr. Fletch worry like to Mike a comment.
11:03:53 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I'm not sure what the connection
11:03:55 is with the rainy season.
11:03:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We get nitrogen in the water and it
11:04:00 makes algae blooms.
11:04:02 >>> Yes, ma'am, that's absolutely correct.
11:04:04 But the process that is in place is something that's
11:04:07 very long-term process.
11:04:09 There's a discussion of setting a total cap on
11:04:13 nitrogen going into the bay.
11:04:15 But current activities presently meet that cap.
11:04:18 So it's not presently urgent situation, and there are
11:04:26 a number of issues related to how the total maximum
11:04:29 daily load will affect the City of Tampa's stormwater
11:04:32 program as well as the discharge from the current
11:04:36 wastewater plant.
11:04:38 That we are working through.
11:04:39 There's also been filed litigation in the northern
11:04:42 district of Florida challenging this approach that we
11:04:44 are using in the Tampa Bay area.
11:04:45 So there are a variety of issues that we would be
11:04:49 happy to brief you on at some point.
11:04:50 But I don't think it's seasonally time sensitive at
11:04:54 this point.
11:05:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll take public comment now on the
11:05:10 workshop for reclaimed water.
11:05:11 Public comment.
11:05:12 You have three minutes if you want to speak to us on
11:05:14 reclaimed water, you have three minutes of the
11:05:18 Come forward, please, state your name and address.
11:05:22 >>> Ron Rotella, Westshore alliance.
11:05:28 Great presentation.
11:05:29 Very graphic.
11:05:30 To the point.
11:05:31 And when you schedule future workshops between the
11:05:34 administration and council, I would suggest that you
11:05:37 also schedule a workshop, for example, as I saw the
11:05:41 presentation, some immediate actions that should be
11:05:44 taken, the existing customers along the reclaimed
11:05:48 line, your large users, expanding the South Tampa star
11:05:53 But you should also schedule some workshops for the
11:05:56 people that are going to be affected by that decision.
11:05:58 I know more about reclaimed water than most citizens
11:06:01 because of my longevity with this.
11:06:03 And there was a lot of information that was presented
11:06:06 to you today that generates questions.
11:06:08 So consider workshops for the public that will be
11:06:13 affected as well, not just the residential but the
11:06:15 commercial users.
11:06:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
11:06:20 >>> Donald Phillips, 122 West Platt street.
11:06:26 Since I came down and railed on you a couple of weeks
11:06:28 ago I want to sincerely help find a solution to this.
11:06:31 I would like to echo the sentiments that we have.
11:06:33 There are so many creative solutions, and so careful I
11:06:38 don't want to step on anybody's toes because I want
11:06:41 for us to come together and help fix this problem once
11:06:43 and for all because it's just getting everybody spun
11:06:47 To the issue of nitrogen, I come from North Carolina.
11:06:49 We know a lot about nitrogen.
11:06:51 There are huge mechanisms in play there.
11:06:54 We don't need a pioneer on this issue.
11:06:56 Let's fix the issue.
11:06:57 Let's fix in the a fair and reasonable way.
11:07:01 On the issue of water, which is ironic, we live in the
11:07:05 tropics and run out of water, but I have 401 units in
11:07:09 I just drilled a well into the aquifer.
11:07:13 Because it was so insanely difficult to get a solution
11:07:16 that we proposed.
11:07:17 I am sitting on millions of gallons of stormwater.
11:07:22 My entire 8.5-acre site is nothing but a vault.
11:07:26 And we have so many regulation that is prevent us from
11:07:29 taking what God gives us an putting it back on our own
11:07:32 plants, and I have to go drill a well to fix the
11:07:37 Number two, we are covered up with water retention
11:07:41 Maybe there are some other creative solutions on a
11:07:45 topical bases to drawing out of this to irrigate.
11:07:48 Number three, my industry, the multifamily rental,
11:07:51 high density residential.
11:07:53 We lose money on irrigating plants.
11:07:55 We have to fertilize them, we have to cut them.
11:07:58 It's a huge cost.
11:07:58 We are going and using more indigenous plants on those
11:08:03 We would love to get involved and help bring about
11:08:05 some common sense solutions to these things.
11:08:08 Also, please, we have so many talented people of means
11:08:13 in this community that will help us resolve a problem
11:08:16 that's been building for decades.
11:08:19 Not asking to delay.
11:08:22 But what I am asking is if we can create some
11:08:26 workshops with folks that are within the industry and
11:08:29 within the business community that will actually help
11:08:32 resolve these things.
11:08:34 The pool issue is solvable.
11:08:36 There are also programs, too, that if we can induce
11:08:40 people to use reclaimed water, we pay huge impact fees
11:08:44 for water on our commercial projects.
11:08:46 We would love to offset that.
11:08:48 We would love to come to the table with some he
11:08:50 collective solutions.
11:08:52 If I could follow Ron, I would love to bring a lot of
11:08:56 help to that issue, just from the standpoint of
11:08:59 someone that's involved in the community, and having a
11:09:03 practical knowledge on a very large scale about how
11:09:05 these things impact.
11:09:07 We would love to help with you that issue.
11:09:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:09:10 Next speaker.
11:09:16 >> John Miller -- irrigation.
11:09:17 Just a couple comments on the workshop.
11:09:19 First and foremost, the reclaimed water being used in
11:09:23 Pinellas County, they have a system that seems to work
11:09:27 so I think if we look over to Pinellas County, see how
11:09:30 their system works, I'm sure they have had the same
11:09:32 issues with people that can't afford to hook up, they
11:09:36 come up with some answers to do that.
11:09:38 Secondly, you know, out of 9,000 potential hookups, we
11:09:42 are at 3500.
11:09:44 That's still really pretty sad.
11:09:47 It's not helping much.
11:09:50 And there are answers.
11:09:52 And I imagine it's related to cost.
11:09:55 So I think we researched that in Hillsborough County,
11:09:59 Pinellas, I think we'll find the answers we are
11:10:01 looking for, trying to find an answer where we can
11:10:04 afford to hook up to it.
11:10:06 As far as we are going to be out of water.
11:10:10 We are going to run out of water again.
11:10:11 So not to step on anybody's toes, but the aquifer for
11:10:17 the rest of our 9,000 customers to hook up to
11:10:20 reclaimed water and we give them the next two years to
11:10:22 do it, by next season, I think every ounce we can use
11:10:27 to irrigate the yards which is not part of the water
11:10:30 hookup definitely helps.
11:10:32 So to do it sooner, I think we need to look at that
11:10:36 Thank you.
11:10:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:10:38 Next speaker.
11:10:46 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 2902 East Ellicott
11:10:49 street three nights a week.
11:10:51 And then I just thank God to be here.
11:10:54 And, you know, I'm kind of like I'm on cloud nine.
11:10:58 I was sitting in the back.
11:10:59 I'm the only black man on this side of the podium, you
11:11:02 And I think about how blessed I am to come from this,
11:11:08 you know, great leaders.
11:11:10 But, you know, I look at the picture different from
11:11:13 you all.
11:11:18 I was sitting back there listening to you all talking.
11:11:20 And this morning again, I told you all, that water
11:11:25 belongs to God.
11:11:27 You talk about Hillsborough County water, county
11:11:28 water, and I was sitting back there this morning, and
11:11:34 what really got me, you all bringing these lawyers in
11:11:36 front of you all, when is it going to rain again, how
11:11:41 much is it going to rain?
11:11:43 Ain't no college in the world teach a man that.
11:11:48 I can go to the scripture and tell but that.
11:11:52 $175,000, talk about when it's going to rain, when
11:11:58 it's going to rain.
11:11:59 And let me tell you all something.
11:12:06 The man came this morning said thank God for this
11:12:09 But I want to tell you all something.
11:12:12 It is very dangerous.
11:12:14 The man this morning said that.
11:12:20 Because we got this water and everything.
11:12:23 You know, working on this Tampa General Hospital over
11:12:26 there, they come in front of you all, coming in here,
11:12:31 take out that bridge, that hospital, everything.
11:12:38 I said one day the sun was shining and water in their
11:12:46 yards everywhere.
11:12:47 That is very dangerous.
11:12:51 And let me tell you something in my part of town over
11:12:53 We got too much rain.
11:12:54 You talk about Hillsborough this morning.
11:12:58 If you go past that building going east, and go
11:13:00 through 22nd street, 92, which is Hillsborough, three
11:13:07 foot of water in the middle of the road.
11:13:10 Those people come up and say, my God, what did we run
11:13:14 into it?
11:13:15 You all need to recycle that water.
11:13:17 Way want to say, though, this town could be washed
11:13:26 And I told you about Katrina.
11:13:37 I told you all if you want water you got to pray for
11:13:40 And you aren't going to get it by paying these lawyers
11:13:44 $135,000 of tax money to tell you all when it going to
11:13:47 rain or what they do about the water.
11:13:51 The whole town could be flooded.
11:13:54 Like Katrina.
11:13:55 They say it couldn't happen.
11:13:58 I mean, these people sin and voodoo and everything,
11:14:04 racketeers, gambling, everything was going on.
11:14:10 I predicted that months before it happened.
11:14:14 Thank you.
11:14:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right, thank you.
11:14:17 Next speaker.
11:14:21 >>> John Stein, I live in sun bay south.
11:14:24 I'm a garden consultant.
11:14:29 Grow most of my food, most of my social circle is
11:14:33 gardening related.
11:14:34 I'm pretty much an original environmental ist 1970
11:14:38 Robinson high, recycling aluminum cans when we were
11:14:43 considered weird.
11:14:44 So I appreciate the spirit of this project.
11:14:45 The problem is the quality of the water that comes
11:14:47 out, damages a great many plants.
11:14:49 It's not just privets, ligustrums.
11:14:55 It's a great many plants.
11:14:56 I have gotten e-mails from ag agents who are weary
11:15:01 about talking on the phone with homeowners, wondering
11:15:04 why their guard yards are sick, Donna had to leave
11:15:12 because of a medical emergency.
11:15:13 Her property -- and I'm not bragging but I her place
11:15:17 for is it years was a showcase.
11:15:20 We had on average 5-foot by 5-foot antique roses, lush
11:15:24 lawn, organic within six months of her going on
11:15:27 There was a decline, which is initially why I started
11:15:30 looking into this, is why could something so
11:15:32 dramatically decline so quickly?
11:15:34 The problem is, sodium chloride is added to the water.
11:15:41 It's cumulative.
11:15:43 Even if the amount is cut in half it's going to
11:15:45 accumulate in the soil.
11:15:46 I have done consultations here in Pinellas County
11:15:51 where every plant had buildups from.
11:15:58 Like Mr. Miranda said, I guess it was about five years
11:16:01 ago, watching the science challenge, and San Diego
11:16:03 uses water hyacinths and their plant director went to
11:16:08 a spigot on the main tank and drank the water directly
11:16:11 from it because they found that the water hyacinths
11:16:14 were filled with viruses so I would say that those, to
11:16:19 try to force people to use it as it is, you are going
11:16:21 to have civil disobedience on your hands.
11:16:24 My friends are already talking about how we are not
11:16:26 going to have our yards killed especially if we grow
11:16:28 our own food.
11:16:30 Some cities will bubble ozone gas, gas through the
11:16:37 water to recover it.
11:16:41 San Diego simply uses water hyacinths.
11:16:44 But to mandate the use of water irrigation --
11:16:47 irrigation that kills, a very lengthy list of plants,
11:16:50 it's against the spirit of the program.
11:16:52 It's well intended but we need to use a different
11:16:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I answer your question?
11:17:03 I thought he was done.
11:17:04 >>> I'm all.
11:17:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ding thank you, Mr. Chair.
11:17:08 John, way mentioned during this discussion, partially
11:17:11 in response to your e-mails and some other e-mails I
11:17:14 received, that expressed these concerns, was the
11:17:16 possibility of a variance or an exception for folks
11:17:21 who could legitimately say I have these established
11:17:25 They are on the list.
11:17:31 I have got an expert here that would testify that this
11:17:33 would create a problem for me and if we created a
11:17:35 variance or an exception program, that would seem
11:17:39 to -- that would waive that you and your fellow
11:17:45 gardeners, master gardeners with these types of
11:17:48 plants, because I would guess if we went out there and
11:17:51 we load around, okay, more and more people are
11:17:54 getting -- are going into native plants, other plants,
11:17:58 that might not be as sensitive to this as compared to
11:18:01 the old southern, you know, beautiful plants, Azaleas,
11:18:05 ligustrums, so on.
11:18:07 So give me your input on the possibilities of that.
11:18:10 >>> That's very much --
11:18:14 We can do that later.
11:18:15 Right now we are press Ford time.
11:18:16 We have to move on.
11:18:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Send me an e-mail.
11:18:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have the water issue.
11:18:21 We have a whole other workshop.
11:18:22 How are we going to do that we still have three people
11:18:25 in line.
11:18:29 >>> Al Steenson, west LEILA and I will be brief as
11:18:35 I am hoping each of you received a letter from Mr.
11:18:38 William Hart.
11:18:38 He sent an e-mail regarding some of the issues
11:18:41 regarding the cost of hookups, and the quality of the
11:18:43 water, and maintain some of the systems.
11:18:47 Because I suggested to Mr. Hart, who happens to be a
11:18:52 cigar smoker with me upon occasion, that some of his
11:18:57 comments might relate and give you some insight into
11:19:00 some of the issues.
11:19:01 He goes back to his customers almost on a weekly basis
11:19:05 who have reclaimed water to clean out their filters
11:19:07 because it starts clogging up the whole system.
11:19:10 And you are absolutely right, Mrs. Saul-Sena, the
11:19:12 paper was wrong.
11:19:13 They said 8700.
11:19:14 To answer your question, Ms. Mulhern, about Pinellas
11:19:17 County, my stepdaughter-in-law, and her husband, live
11:19:25 in Pinellas Park.
11:19:26 They have reclaimed water.
11:19:28 They pay $14 bimonthly.
11:19:35 If they don't use it they still pay the $14.
11:19:38 I think we really, if we are going to embark on this
11:19:41 reclaimed -- and I'm not saying we shouldn't -- but we
11:19:44 are going to have to do a whole lot better public
11:19:46 education program that we did when we started the star
11:19:54 If we are going to get the public to accept this, as
11:19:58 John mentioned, there are some problems, and this all
11:20:01 needs to be brought up.
11:20:03 I'll give you a quick example and I'll be quick.
11:20:06 Years ago when I was still in the construction
11:20:08 business, we built a reclaimed water plant in the city
11:20:11 of Largo.
11:20:14 When the plant was made operational, they had a ribbon
11:20:19 cutting, and just as John mentioned we went over to
11:20:21 the spigot with a cup and drank the byproduct.
11:20:25 I drank it.
11:20:26 I'm still here.
11:20:27 I'm alive today.
11:20:28 So I really think additional workshops are needed.
11:20:30 But we have got to get the public education, and we
11:20:37 have got to clean this water up.
11:20:39 We have a drought every year.
11:20:41 But in the past, and some now, I think we have another
11:20:47 drought and that's a leadership drought.
11:20:49 And maybe we are making the right step forward to
11:20:51 correct that second part of the drought.
11:20:54 Thank you very much.
11:20:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:20:59 Next speaker.
11:21:01 >> Mary Hoppe, editor of bay sounding, enjoyed the
11:21:05 discussion this morning.
11:21:06 I will be brief.
11:21:07 I had hoped that the topic of drought surcharges and
11:21:11 water rates would be discussed this morning and it
11:21:13 will certainly at some point soon.
11:21:15 I hope that you all will take a chance to read the
11:21:18 editorial in bay sounding quarterly environmental
11:21:21 journal, news journal, focusing on water rates, in the
11:21:25 region, and in particular the City of Tampa, which has
11:21:28 the lowest rates of both extremes, the low-end users
11:21:33 and high-end water abusers, and that's reflected in
11:21:36 per capita consumption.
11:21:38 So I look forward to talking to you about that at that
11:21:42 point, and will provide some copies for you.
11:21:44 Thank you.
11:21:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you thank you.
11:21:47 Next speaker.
11:21:52 >>> Roy Balladsman, a consultant --
11:21:58 Just one second.
11:21:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I had a question for you S.that
11:22:02 online, bay sounding?
11:22:04 >> It is.
11:22:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Great.
11:22:06 Thank you.
11:22:07 >>> Roy Balladsman, I'm a consultant from
11:22:12 St. Petersburg.
11:22:13 I understand the importance of reclaimed.
11:22:15 We have it over there now.
11:22:17 The other thing, though, is it's important to look at
11:22:22 what Mr. Miranda talked about, and that is the
11:22:25 recycling of your water back to potable water.
11:22:31 It's quite doable.
11:22:39 It's hormone safe.
11:22:41 And I think you should give some consideration to
11:22:47 As a solution to your drought problems.
11:22:50 That's all I have to say.
11:22:51 Thank you.
11:22:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much, sir.
11:22:54 Then that will conclude our workshop on reclaimed
11:22:59 Council, I look for the attorneys on this next issue.
11:23:05 And also we are going to run out of time for the other
11:23:07 workshop on the chapter 27.
11:23:12 So we probably want to reschedule that, because we are
11:23:15 scheduled to adjourn at 11:45 and come back this
11:23:23 evening at 5:30 and still address this issue of water.
11:23:29 Let me just take up the water issue.
11:23:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Just that we take up chapter 27
11:23:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I don't know when that's going
11:23:40 to be.
11:23:40 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
11:23:42 I have a community workshop tonight so I won't be able
11:23:44 to stay and do it.
11:23:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What's your recommendation?
11:23:49 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We can move it to June.
11:23:51 I just found out that the Planning Commission canceled
11:23:53 their July cycle so I have to send it out to August
11:23:56 anyway so the June workshop is fine.
11:23:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So June workshop.
11:24:00 Well, we need to look at our workshop for the June.
11:24:12 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There's just two issues that need
11:24:13 to be focused on.
11:24:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, council, the June workshop,
11:24:25 and Ms. Mulhern, that's how long the budget workshop
11:24:30 should take but it's scheduled from nine to eleven
11:24:34 That's the budget workshop.
11:24:37 At 11:00 you have the transfer of development rights.
11:24:39 At 11:30 the livable wage.
11:24:42 >>MARY MULHERN: That's too much.
11:24:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Too much for a workshop.
11:24:47 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree with Chairman Scott that water
11:24:50 is the big priority.
11:24:50 So some of these other issues, I think we are just
11:24:53 going to have to push them forward, so we can we do
11:25:00 need to get this passed.
11:25:07 >> The other option that we have -- and even with the
11:25:11 water, we need to dot on a Tuesday.
11:25:14 It will be before you take it up so you want to look
11:25:20 at it on a Tuesday or not.
11:25:21 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that's not a bad idea and I
11:25:24 think this is obviously such an important thing for
11:25:25 everyone that maybe we need to have a large venue,
11:25:31 public workshop, on water, because we have got the
11:25:34 questions of -- we have water.
11:25:37 We have the questions of the irrigation.
11:25:39 And I think that it might be that workshop that we are
11:25:43 talking about scheduling next should be maybe at a
11:25:46 bigger venue.
11:25:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My issue is we spend the morning on
11:25:51 the workshop, on this whole reclaimed water plan, and
11:25:55 go through the recommendation, we don't schedule
11:25:58 nothing else but that.
11:25:59 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree with you.
11:26:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: With all of the other items and the
11:26:03 only time we have is like a Tuesday.
11:26:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If you need me here at 5:00, if
11:26:09 council can come back at five I can send someone tolls
11:26:11 my workshop at five tonight.
11:26:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The other alternative is that
11:26:15 according to my calendar, I guess this one is dated
11:26:19 for May 19th.
11:26:20 It look looks like you only have four staff reports,
11:26:24 unfinished on the 4th of June.
11:26:27 I don't know if that's accurate.
11:26:30 It depends how long it takes.
11:26:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: But my experience every time it looks
11:26:33 like we don't have anything, we end up having a whole
11:26:36 I mean, we just eat up time.
11:26:38 We look at our agenda and looks like we don't have
11:26:41 Boy, we just talk, talk, talk, talk, talk.
11:26:46 That's a concern I have.
11:26:51 Do we agree we are going to keep it to a minimum, and
11:26:53 nobody get upset when you say your time is up, and do
11:26:56 I don't have a problem.
11:26:57 But every time we look at the agenda and it's short we
11:27:00 find a way how to expand the time.
11:27:06 >> The easy one is chapter 27 and I suggest take it up
11:27:08 at 5:00 tonight and it should be pretty short.
11:27:11 That would be my motion.
11:27:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, the question becomes, is this
11:27:15 No, that's a workshop.
11:27:16 So you want to take it up at five?
11:27:20 >>GWEN MILLER: I would say 5:01.
11:27:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The motion that we at that time up at
11:27:26 Moved and seconded.
11:27:27 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
11:27:30 Tonight, 5:01.
11:27:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mrs. Marshall brought me the updated
11:27:41 agenda which shows eleven items.
11:27:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right, thank you.
11:27:45 So chapter 27 we'll take up tonight at 5:01.
11:27:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
11:27:54 I just want to share with you that I heard that there
11:27:57 were people present here who were prepared to talk at
11:27:59 the workshop today.
11:28:01 And whether or not they can speak today or they should
11:28:04 come back at 5:00.
11:28:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, 5:01.
11:28:09 We only have 15 minutes to take up the water issue.
11:28:17 Mr. Fletcher, who is going to introduce the item?
11:28:26 >>JAN MCLEAN: City attorney's office.
11:28:28 As you received a memo from Mayor Iorio has indicated,
11:28:32 last week when we were here in front of you
11:28:35 considering whether to revise the emergency ordinance
11:28:37 or not, you had approved two benchmarks as indicators
11:28:44 as to when you would then consider revisions.
11:28:47 Both of those benchmarks were achieved over the
11:28:49 weekend for the rain, and hence you have received a
11:28:53 memo from your consideration of whether to revise the
11:28:56 ordinance or not.
11:28:57 What you have in front of you, albeit late as I worked
11:29:00 on it yesterday, is a proposal for you, which was
11:29:08 amend the current water restrictions, to conform with
11:29:12 those that have been adopted and are being implemented
11:29:15 by other members of the Tampa Bay water through the
11:29:18 Southwest Florida Water Management District.
11:29:21 The ordinance, the only thing that would be different
11:29:27 rather than taking the recommended offensive days for
11:29:29 your address, we would go back to our normal address
11:29:33 either on a Sunday or a Tuesday.
11:29:34 So one day to water.
11:29:37 It would be on the city's two days.
11:29:40 So the remainder of the ordinance that you have in
11:29:42 front of you just indicates the restrictions that we
11:29:48 would be conforming to, identifies some variances.
11:29:51 You would only be issuing variances to the two days a
11:29:55 All other variances would now go to the water
11:29:57 management district.
11:29:59 So and Marty properly identified there's a report that
11:30:04 was in the current ordinance is no longer in there
11:30:07 because we would only be doing a variance as to a
11:30:10 person, say, that came before you and said, my
11:30:12 watering day is Tuesday, I can't do it, can I could
11:30:15 the -- do the same thing on a Wednesday?
11:30:17 We would consider that variance and that would be the
11:30:19 only type of variance that we would be issuing.
11:30:22 Everything else would go to the water management
11:30:24 You have the definitions that remain the same, the
11:30:27 review process for the variances remain the same.
11:30:31 The enforcement and the penalties remain the same.
11:30:34 The only other things thing that is departure from the
11:30:38 current is in section 7, and I know Marty wanted to
11:30:43 speak to this so I'm sure he will be right back in.
11:30:45 What this does is it ties the duration of this amended
11:30:51 emergency ordinance to the implementation of the water
11:30:55 management district, water shortage orders.
11:30:58 There's no date certain as in your current ordinance,
11:31:02 has October 31st, or if conditions warranted and
11:31:08 we would repeal or revise.
11:31:10 This one ties it so we would be in the water
11:31:12 management district restrictions for the duration of
11:31:14 their water shortages ordinances, and once they revoke
11:31:19 or repeal those we would go to the restrictions that
11:31:22 are imposed in the year round water conservation rule.
11:31:25 They are the authority for these restrictions unless
11:31:27 we have a local situation which we have to this point.
11:31:33 So that in a very, very brief overview is what you
11:31:36 have in front of you.
11:31:37 I would be glad to answer any questions.
11:31:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I know Mr. Shelby has some concerns so
11:31:44 I will wait to come back to him but councilman
11:31:48 Dingfelder and Mr. Miranda.
11:31:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Jan, for your hard work
11:31:51 on this.
11:31:51 One of the problems with not sharing this with Mr.
11:31:53 Shelby, I think a mistake can arrive.
11:31:58 On the bottom of the first page it says, whereas
11:32:00 council determines determined at its regularly
11:32:03 scheduled meeting last week, when we reach certain
11:32:06 levels, we would consider revising our irrigation.
11:32:09 We didn't take a vote on that.
11:32:13 There wasn't discussion about that.
11:32:15 It might have been a general consensus.
11:32:17 But there was no determination.
11:32:19 So, you know, legally, we want to get right and I just
11:32:26 want to make sure that doesn't concern you, but there
11:32:29 was no vote -- there were two votes taken last week
11:32:32 but none of them passed and none of them specifically
11:32:35 had to do with that.
11:32:36 I just wanted to point that out, that you want to
11:32:40 strike that paragraph or you want to modify it?
11:32:42 You can say we discussed it or something like that.
11:32:45 Because that would be true.
11:32:46 But a determination I would say is we didn't take one.
11:32:51 >>JAN MCLEAN: I will be glad to amend that language.
11:32:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
11:32:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11:32:59 I would like to have Mr. Daignault come here because I
11:33:02 know he knows a lot more about water than I do.
11:33:05 Let me say this as he's coming up.
11:33:08 Let me tell you what government has not told you.
11:33:12 Incorrectly, Mr. Daignault, interrupt me at any time
11:33:15 you wish.
11:33:16 That doesn't bother me one bit.
11:33:20 Are we big water today from Tampa Bay water?
11:33:23 Yes or no?
11:33:25 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We are.
11:33:26 >> For how many days consecutive days have we bait
11:33:28 water from Tampa Bay water?
11:33:31 Let me answer that for you.
11:33:35 Let me also ask you, how many millions of gallons have
11:33:39 we purchased from Tampa Bay water since October of
11:33:42 I'll tell you the answer, 467 million gallons point
11:33:49 What's the average water that we bought from Tampa Bay
11:33:51 water on a daily basis? Let me answer that for you.
11:33:54 21 million gallons a day average.
11:33:59 Let me say that be the water does their rating and
11:34:03 their payments at the end of the year, they come with
11:34:05 a calculation, and they say, you owe us so much.
11:34:08 How much is that going to be?
11:34:10 In the millions of dollars of the
11:34:12 And I'm not here to try to embarrass you or anything
11:34:16 But you are the man in charge, in a way.
11:34:20 Let me ask you this.
11:34:23 There's two plants.
11:34:24 City of Tampa water surface plant, and Tampa Bay water
11:34:27 surface plant, within five or six miles or so of our
11:34:33 How many drops of water -- notice I said drops of
11:34:36 water -- has that plant produced in the last two or
11:34:39 three months?
11:34:43 Let me answer that question.
11:34:47 Although the river is presumed healthy -- and it is if
11:34:51 you look at it real narrowly, it is -- how much water
11:34:56 has Tampa Bay water taken from the Alafia and
11:34:59 Hillsborough River on a daily basis?
11:35:02 Let me answer that.
11:35:08 So this is a superficial, in my judgment -- I'm not
11:35:17 opposed to lifting the ordinance of the not at all.
11:35:19 I've said this publicly, on the radio this morning, I
11:35:22 said it the other day.
11:35:24 What I'm opposed is that we are losing credibility
11:35:26 from the same people who came across to us like no law
11:35:33 has ever been accepted by the general public.
11:35:36 We have gone down to as low as 59 million gallons a
11:35:39 day on water nonwatering days and as low as 60 --
11:35:44 sixty million or a million more on watering days on
11:35:47 Tuesdays and Saturdays.
11:35:50 Let me also say that already our usage on watering
11:35:55 days has gone up, and our consumption on nonwatering
11:35:59 days has gone up.
11:36:01 The public is starting to lose its credibility in what
11:36:04 we said.
11:36:06 First of all, I think that when a week on a 4-3 vote,
11:36:11 and now today I think it's going to pass, I am not
11:36:13 going to -- this is how I see it.
11:36:21 If this ever happens again, the public is not going to
11:36:23 give us the support they have given us now.
11:36:27 Because they think that we are not truthful.
11:36:32 And I'm not blaming you.
11:36:33 Please don't take that that way at all.
11:36:37 The public is going to think that the laws of the City
11:36:40 of Tampa are not actually correct.
11:36:43 And they are not going to give us that 100 percent.
11:36:48 No law is a law unless the public accepts it.
11:36:51 And they have accepted this 110%.
11:36:55 Let me also say this.
11:36:56 This is the first time that we are going to divide
11:36:59 water between those that have and those that don't
11:37:05 Let me explain that.
11:37:07 Those that have a sprinkler system can adjust their
11:37:11 sprinkling system to go from 12:01 a.m. to 4:00 in the
11:37:17 That's an assumption that everybody has a sprinkler
11:37:23 I disagree with that assumption.
11:37:26 So are -- are we saying that the majority of the
11:37:30 city -- that's way think it is -- that people are
11:37:32 going to have to wake up at 12:01 to turn on their
11:37:35 sprinkler system that's not electronically working on
11:37:39 a device?
11:37:42 They are going to have to hook up the hose, set the
11:37:45 alarm for 4:00, and go out and stop the system at
11:37:49 4:00, or be getting ready to get a fine?
11:37:52 That's the majority of the people.
11:37:57 I like to see something across the board, something
11:38:00 that's fair and equitable to all the citizens, not
11:38:02 just to say, well, this part has a sprinkler system,
11:38:07 and they are entitled to water.
11:38:09 I'm not against that.
11:38:11 But what are we doing for the rest of the people that
11:38:12 don't have a sprinkler system?
11:38:15 People who are hard working, barely making enough to
11:38:18 live -- and they want to have green grass, too.
11:38:21 Are we saying, a $100 ticket the first time at 4:02 in
11:38:27 the morning?
11:38:28 Those are the problems that I'm having with the
11:38:32 If we just waited another ten days or 15 days to see
11:38:37 if in June it's really going to rain and those
11:38:39 upstairs much greater than us gave us -- they gave us
11:38:42 an opportunity that most areas don't have.
11:38:46 We were in drought, the lowest water flow in the
11:38:50 river, over a month and a half straight.
11:38:56 But the powers to be let it rain and the areas that
11:38:59 needed it for over two weeks -- and thank God they
11:39:04 What would have happened if it hadn't rained?
11:39:07 What would happen when Tampa Bay water and the other
11:39:11 authorities gave us a handout to help us out to buy
11:39:18 one million gallons average a day?
11:39:20 Now we are saying, hey, forget what you did for us,
11:39:24 your plant is not working, that's not our problem,
11:39:27 that's yours.
11:39:28 So now we are still hitting the aquifer, still hitting
11:39:32 nature, and there's not a drop of water being produced
11:39:34 that I know of out of their water plant because they
11:39:37 can't draw the surface water from the excessive water
11:39:40 of the Hillsborough River and the Alafia river.
11:39:44 We were very much appreciative for southwest water
11:39:49 management district to reduce their levels and the
11:39:58 bypass canals to give us an additional millions of
11:40:01 gallons on a daily basis.
11:40:03 We reduced it to more like the lowest in history.
11:40:08 So that we can do that and have water diverted to us.
11:40:15 And I want to thank them for that.
11:40:17 I want to thank his staff that have done that, Mr.
11:40:21 Seibert and his staff.
11:40:22 I think if I -- I always think of what happens to the
11:40:25 other side when and I'm not going to tell you I'm
11:40:30 always right, but that other side is going to say, oh,
11:40:33 we helped you, Tampa, so now forget about my water
11:40:39 plant that I can't produce anything, forget that I am
11:40:41 breaking the 90 million gallons a day, but I got what
11:40:44 I want.
11:40:46 I don't deal that way.
11:40:49 The citizens of Tampa don't deal that way.
11:40:53 We want to see a fair and equitable solution to the
11:40:56 water crisis.
11:40:57 It's not going to happen between one week and the next
11:41:01 Long-term we must have storage, when we have ample
11:41:04 supply, we can store that either underground or in
11:41:11 their own reservoir.
11:41:12 Sooner or later, and I hope it's later than sooner,
11:41:16 things are going to change, and I want to make sure
11:41:21 that we are not held to anything, because now we have
11:41:26 segregated from everybody being in the plant told me
11:41:31 no matter who you are, what you have, in an equitable
11:41:36 Those that have can dot, those who can't, can't.
11:41:39 You still can't wash your car.
11:41:41 You still can't pressure wash your house unless it's
11:41:44 done by a professional.
11:41:46 This change does very little to help the citizens of
11:41:50 the city.
11:41:51 It only helps those that have an automatic watering
11:41:55 sprinkling system.
11:41:57 The rest are forgotten.
11:41:58 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11:42:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I am going to try to be brief.
11:42:04 I agree with Mr. Miranda, and I would like to thank
11:42:07 him and the water department and all the citizens that
11:42:10 have educated us about water in our area, because I
11:42:15 have learned a lot in the last month or so.
11:42:18 I think that a three-year drought is not solved by two
11:42:22 weeks of rain.
11:42:23 I just don't understand why we would lift these
11:42:26 restrictions just because it rained for two weeks.
11:42:29 I think that we have not solved the drought that we
11:42:33 have had, the creeks aren't swelling, the pond are
11:42:37 near empty, it's still dry out there, the land soaked
11:42:42 up every bit of water.
11:42:44 We are not there yet.
11:42:45 And the fact that we are only two weeks away from the
11:42:48 normal point where we have a rainy season makes it
11:42:51 seem silly to me, too.
11:42:53 And the reason, I totally agree with Mr. Miranda, and
11:42:56 I think research backs this up, if we are not going to
11:42:59 be consistent and strong when we ask for water
11:43:01 regulations, no one is going to trust us.
11:43:04 No one is going to understand why we are doing it.
11:43:07 If every week -- I mean, it's been week after week we
11:43:10 have been coming back here and changing, you know,
11:43:12 discussing changing the regulations.
11:43:14 So I just don't see a pressing need for this.
11:43:17 I think it will cause more damage.
11:43:19 We are sending a message to the public that we don't
11:43:22 have a long-term problem, that if it rains for two
11:43:25 weeks, we can let them water all the time.
11:43:27 The reality is, we do have a long-term problem and
11:43:32 it's not just the drought.
11:43:34 It's how our water supply is used and distributed.
11:43:38 And I think that we need to solve those problems and
11:43:40 what we discussed earlier today is a really good
11:43:42 start, expanding the but allowing people to water for
11:43:50 a couple weeks.
11:43:51 I had neighbors stopping me and saying, don't lift
11:43:53 those watering restrictions.
11:43:54 I had somebody say to me, I think you should copy
11:43:57 those restrictions in place through the rainy season.
11:44:02 It's going to be raining and we don't need to water.
11:44:05 I think this has been a really inspiring experience
11:44:09 because this community has totally taken the long
11:44:12 view, who cared about the bigger picture, cared about
11:44:15 the community, not just about their lawns, and said,
11:44:18 look, it's more important for us to conserve our
11:44:21 drinking water than it is to have a green lawn.
11:44:23 And I think that for us to change our mind today makes
11:44:32 their sacrifice not really valued.
11:44:35 So I agree with Mr. Miranda.
11:44:36 It's an unusual thing for a whole city to come
11:44:39 together and just say, yes, we are going to follow
11:44:41 those restrictions.
11:44:45 It might not be great for my little lawn or pretty
11:44:48 garden but I think we should do it for the betterment
11:44:51 of the community so I can't support the ordinance.
11:44:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Miller, Dingfelder,
11:45:01 Anything you want to say?
11:45:02 Then councilman Scott.
11:45:03 Then we need to do this.
11:45:05 Councilman Dingfelder --
11:45:10 >>GWEN MILLER: You might not be able to answer my
11:45:12 question because it's probably upstairs, but now that
11:45:16 the reservoir is 21.8, right?
11:45:19 If we lift the ban and it does not rain how long would
11:45:22 it take for that reservoir to go back down?
11:45:30 >>> That's a question that puts me right on the spot.
11:45:33 >>CHAIRMAN: I said you might not be able to answer.
11:45:35 >>> We set the levels of 21 and 06 million gallons a
11:45:39 day, considering that we are at the tail end of the
11:45:42 typical dry season.
11:45:44 So with those threshold that we set, once those were
11:45:50 exceeded, we were comfortable.
11:45:53 And I am comfortable that we will make it to -- if the
11:45:59 rainy season doesn't start until July 1, with enough
11:46:05 >>GWEN MILLER: So if people overwater and lift the ban
11:46:08 and don't do the 12 to 4 a.m. in the mornings, just
11:46:10 continue to water, will that take it down?
11:46:15 >>BRAD BAIRD: It would take it down some, because as
11:46:17 many of you said before, we had much less water used
11:46:21 during watering days with the sprinkler ban in place
11:46:26 than before the sprinkler ban, saving up to 20 and 25
11:46:30 million gallons a day.
11:46:34 I would hate to take a guess, you know, based on that,
11:46:37 on top of my head.
11:46:38 But it would level out and probably dip down some, but
11:46:45 not come anywhere near that blue line that I showed
11:46:48 you of the last couple of months.
11:46:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder, then
11:46:53 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
11:46:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Don't go far, Brad.
11:46:59 Mr. Miranda indicated, and properly so, we have been
11:47:01 buying Tampa Bay water for 200 days, and I think part
11:47:07 of that, I recall, might have related to the
11:47:13 settlement agreement, perhaps are or to other issues
11:47:17 that we have addressed over the last couple of years.
11:47:19 But how much longer are we going to be buying Tampa
11:47:23 Bay water?
11:47:25 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Council members, I have some
11:47:29 comments I would like to have an opportunity to
11:47:31 respond to some of Mr. Miranda's comments.
11:47:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I will give you the opportunity
11:47:35 but right now I want council to raise whatever
11:47:37 questions they have and then I will give you the
11:47:38 opportunity to address some questions.
11:47:39 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I will be glad to address them.
11:47:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And we already passed the time,
11:47:46 We were supposed to have left at 11:45.
11:47:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have two questions.
11:47:51 Brad, how much longer are we going to continue to
11:47:54 purchase Tampa Bay water?
11:47:56 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Council.
11:47:57 MEMBER, the answer is this.
11:47:59 Over a year ago we came to the council and said we
11:48:01 need to implement a Tampa Bay water pass-through.
11:48:07 And the reason for that was because we are fixed at 82
11:48:11 million gallons a day of water that we can pull out of
11:48:14 the river on our permit, and we were exceeding that at
11:48:17 that time.
11:48:19 You should not think that we are not going to buy
11:48:22 Tampa Bay water monthly, daily, weekly, into the
11:48:26 future, because the growth in the city and the demand
11:48:28 on water is requiring that.
11:48:30 So we are going to buy Tampa Bay -- you are looking
11:48:34 for a date.
11:48:34 You want us to say September.
11:48:36 But you know the answer is we are going to be buying
11:48:38 Tampa Bay water on and off continuously as we move
11:48:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I understand the big picture.
11:48:48 We are not talking about the big picture today. We
11:48:50 are talking about an emergency ordinance that was
11:48:52 enacted allegedly because of emergency conditions.
11:48:56 You are now coming to us saying that those emergency
11:49:00 conditions are no longer in existence, and therefore
11:49:03 we should eliminate the emergency ordinance and go
11:49:05 back to SWFWMD rules.
11:49:07 Mr. Miranda says we shouldn't do that because as long
11:49:10 as we are buying Tampa Bay water we shouldn't do that.
11:49:13 I don't necessarily agree with that, but it does raise
11:49:16 the question that I asked a minute ago, that I'm
11:49:19 curious to ask it in front of everybody, which is, are
11:49:22 we going to continue to buy Tampa Bay water this
11:49:25 month, in this emergency, at the rate we have been
11:49:29 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Again I'm trying to give you the
11:49:33 answer, and the answer is going to be, if I tell you
11:49:35 today we are buying 10 million gallons a day of water
11:49:37 from Tampa Bay water, and we are, and it is because we
11:49:42 are doing some work at the Tippin plant working on the
11:49:46 clear wells, and so we may not need it in two or three
11:49:51 Next week I may have to buy Tampa Bay water again.
11:49:54 So I don't know if that answers your question.
11:49:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, you sort of did in a
11:49:58 roundabout way because that's the same thing Brad told
11:50:00 me ten minutes ago, that we expect as of tomorrow that
11:50:02 project that you just mentioned that I don't even
11:50:04 understand, okay, the clear wells, will be completed,
11:50:08 all right, and then we anticipate that as of tomorrow
11:50:11 we are not going to buy any more Tampa Bay water for
11:50:14 the short term.
11:50:16 And part of that relates to the flow in the river.
11:50:18 Brad, what is the flow in the river today?
11:50:20 >>BRAD BAIRD: 213 million gallons a day coming as
11:50:26 measured as Morris bridge.
11:50:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What was it before all these rains
11:50:31 >>BRAD BAIRD: It dropped below 20 million gallons a
11:50:33 day for several weeks in a row, and broke records as I
11:50:38 said before for 54 days straight.
11:50:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the bottom line is we have gone
11:50:44 from 20 million gallons a day flow down the river
11:50:48 which is extremely low, and now we are we were at ten
11:50:52 fold of that because of the rains in the upper part of
11:50:54 the Hillsborough River and the green swamp, it's
11:50:57 coming down the river, and we are in and out at 213
11:50:59 million gallons a day.
11:51:01 Emergency is over.
11:51:02 Let's get rid of this and go to the SWFWMD regulations
11:51:05 which are still pretty stringent.
11:51:07 They are still pretty stringent.
11:51:09 It's once a week watering, like we had been doing for
11:51:12 a long period of time.
11:51:13 It's rational.
11:51:18 It's reasonable.
11:51:19 >> Briefly, it is raining right now.
11:51:21 I just want to share that news with everyone.
11:51:24 What we have to do is work on our expanding reclaimed
11:51:29 conservation by encouraging Florida friendly yard.
11:51:32 I personally have reclaimed water, and it's great.
11:51:35 You can water with without guilt.
11:51:37 And he would just need to make that available to so
11:51:39 many more of our citizens.
11:51:40 So I'm ready to vote on this.
11:51:42 I think it's great that it's raining.
11:51:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say that I have always
11:51:49 been a pragmatic kind of person, and try to look at
11:51:53 things from a practical point of view.
11:51:55 First of all, first of all it came to us based on two
11:52:01 threshold, as I understand.
11:52:02 One was that the reservoir was below the 21 feet.
11:52:08 I think about 16.
11:52:09 Somewhere along in there. And the river was at 21 --
11:52:14 20 million gallons a day.
11:52:15 That was the reason we implemented the emergency.
11:52:19 Now, keep in mind that this council took a bold step,
11:52:23 went way beyond what the administration asked for.
11:52:26 We took a bold step, put in some of the strictest
11:52:31 regulations in the State of Florida.
11:52:33 Based on the information that we had before us.
11:52:39 I will tell you this.
11:52:45 On county commission and here at City Council, there
11:52:50 has not been a time we have not imposed some kind of
11:52:54 We imposed some kind almost every year except for the
11:52:56 year when we had El Nino.
11:52:59 There's been some restriction that we placed on the
11:53:01 citizens of Hillsborough County Hillsborough County
11:53:03 and the City of Tampa.
11:53:08 None of us know -- not any of us knows when it's going
11:53:13 to rain, when it's not goings to rain.
11:53:15 It's based on assumptions, it's based on conditions,
11:53:17 based on the weather patterns.
11:53:21 Historically we have not experienced any rain in May.
11:53:24 It rained in May.
11:53:27 Thank God it rained in May.
11:53:33 But we don't know everything.
11:53:36 All this is based on assumptions, it's based on
11:53:39 certain weather patterns and all of that.
11:53:42 And so when I looked at the report this morning, this
11:53:46 said that we are going to be buying Tampa Bay water
11:53:48 even 2030, even after we implement this particular
11:53:52 reclaimed water plan.
11:53:55 So we don't have all the answers.
11:53:56 But I do know this, that the emergency order was
11:54:00 implemented based on the fact of two thresholds
11:54:06 One was that we were below the 21, right?
11:54:10 21 feet.
11:54:11 And then we were below the 60 million gallons.
11:54:17 We are now at that.
11:54:18 And I think yesterday our report was 52 million
11:54:21 gallons a day.
11:54:21 Now you are telling me 200?
11:54:25 150, and now it's 213.
11:54:30 And it's projected to rain the rest of the week.
11:54:32 I think at least to Saturday.
11:54:37 So I am going to support the motion on the day
11:54:40 because, one, it has -- we are back to -- we have met
11:54:44 the condition of the thresholds that were originally
11:54:48 put in, in terms of the emergency order.
11:54:51 Two, we are moving it back, not completely where it
11:54:56 was but we are moving it to meet the Tampa Bay water
11:55:00 provision, what is it?
11:55:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: SWFWMD.
11:55:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: SWFWMD for conditions.
11:55:09 So we are not going all the way back to where we were.
11:55:12 Thirdly, I think the public respects honesty.
11:55:18 I think this public respects when you say, okay, these
11:55:20 are the conditions that you said you are going to put
11:55:22 the emergency order on, based on these two items here.
11:55:25 We did that.
11:55:25 We kept our word.
11:55:27 And I think that's important for the public to know
11:55:29 We kept our word as elected officials.
11:55:32 We said we need to put into effect this emergency
11:55:35 order based on these two conditions.
11:55:37 Wife met them.
11:55:38 And that's why I am going to support the motion on the
11:55:41 Is there a motion?
11:55:42 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Want to speak on the motion.
11:55:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: When you talk about honesty, I have
11:55:53 never said anything but the truth.
11:55:56 But let me tell you what's going on.
11:56:00 I would support this if it wasn't that you could only
11:56:02 water from 12:01 to 4:00 in the mornings.
11:56:06 Why do we do that?
11:56:08 Why do we leave out a great majority of the citizens?
11:56:11 Who in the world is going to wake up in their pajamas,
11:56:14 go outside to turn on their hand watering sprinkling
11:56:18 system at 12:00 and put the alarm at four to get up?
11:56:22 That's crazy.
11:56:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I address that, sir?
11:56:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, you can, but I have the floor
11:56:29 I think my time is five minutes.
11:56:30 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We handed out a cheat sheet that
11:56:36 looks a little like this of the details of the phase 4
11:56:36 restrictions, which is the SWFWMD restrictions.
11:56:38 Included under there under lawn watering schedule on
11:56:40 the first page it says different hours.
11:56:43 The hours of six to eight a.m. and six to ten p.m. for
11:56:48 properties of any size using sprinkling cans, hand
11:56:52 held hose equipment with automatic shutoff nozzle or
11:56:55 using a hose equipped with a portable sprinkler.
11:57:01 So that's six to eight a.m., and six to ten p.m. on
11:57:03 their watering day.
11:57:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I appreciate that and that wasn't
11:57:09 fairly explained in the beginning.
11:57:10 And things were handed out today in a rapid fashion.
11:57:13 It looked like Tommy gun Jones was in here the way
11:57:19 things were passed out but restrictions were changed,
11:57:22 ordinances changed in a very rapid manner.
11:57:24 Usually you have three or four working days to digest
11:57:28 these things.
11:57:28 If we are going to give the individuals -- so now we
11:57:35 are having two ordinances or one?
11:57:38 What about those who have sprinkle sprinkler systems?
11:57:41 They can only sprinkle am from 12:01 to four?
11:57:47 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: That's correct.
11:57:48 This is all delineate in the SWFWMD phase four water
11:57:52 management rules.
11:57:53 That's what everybody else in the region are dealing
11:57:56 >> Met let me make sure again to my own conscience.
11:57:59 Those who do not have a sprinkling system can water
11:58:02 and use it from 12:00 to 8:00 and from 6:00 to 10 or
11:58:11 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: 6:00 to 12:00.
11:58:13 It is now from 6 to 8 a.m. and from 6 to 10 o'clock
11:58:17 So it's a shorter time, but it is also shorter for
11:58:21 those who have an irrigation system.
11:58:25 >> Let me for the record say this is the first time I
11:58:27 have seen this, right now, that the chairman handed it
11:58:29 to me.
11:58:30 So we have a little miscommunication somewhere.
11:58:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
11:58:40 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't mean to take another byte of
11:58:42 the apple but I just had an e-mail from someone who
11:58:45 was watching.
11:58:46 Dear council members, I just returned from a bicycle
11:58:49 ride to roll lands park and back.
11:58:51 Although the river is at its highest level there is
11:58:54 still no natural flow over the dam.
11:58:56 The level of the reservoir is below the top of the dam
11:58:59 Therefore I strongly recommend you do not approve any
11:59:01 changes or relaxation of existing water use
11:59:05 restrictions and adds, while the rainfall this month
11:59:08 has been above average it is still unprecedented.
11:59:10 There is no guarantee that we will have a normal rainy
11:59:13 We need to see a constant normal daily rainfall
11:59:16 pattern with natural flows over the dam before any
11:59:19 thought should be given to the using of-he -- easing
11:59:23 of water use restrictions.
11:59:24 >>GWEN MILLER: My question is, if we lift the ban, and
11:59:30 then nothing happens, we don't get the rain, are you
11:59:33 coming back and are we going to put a ban back on it?
11:59:36 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Council members, my recommendation
11:59:38 would be, no.
11:59:41 You recall that we have been in a watering restriction
11:59:44 since May of 2006.
11:59:47 Prior to that people could water twice a week.
11:59:50 Since 2006 the City of Tampa has been more aggressive
11:59:53 than the region.
11:59:54 It has been where you can only water once a week.
11:59:57 What we are proposing here, what we did propose was
12:00:02 the most aggressive restrictions in the state and it
12:00:04 was for a very good reason, and you all took a lot of
12:00:07 courage to do that.
12:00:08 But what we are going back to is not releasing the ban
12:00:12 and let anybody water anytime they want.
12:00:15 The fallback be position is still less than where we
12:00:19 were when we went into this restriction.
12:00:22 It is less time.
12:00:24 And it is again with the entire region, and southwest
12:00:29 flow has imposed.
12:00:30 They are the law.
12:00:31 We can be more aggressive but we can't be less
12:00:33 aggressive than that.
12:00:34 It will be June 23rd, if I am not mistaken, before
12:00:39 their next board meeting where they can even consider
12:00:42 leaving re-- even relaxing that level of restriction.
12:00:45 So it's not like we are releasing everything,
12:00:48 everybody can go water.
12:00:49 And in fact I would certainly encourage people not to
12:00:56 If you don't have to.
12:00:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's raining.
12:00:58 >>> Especially when it's raining.
12:01:00 But we are taking a little step back.
12:01:02 We are not releasing all the restrictions. It is a
12:01:05 small step back, because he would want to keep that
12:01:08 credibility with the public, too.
12:01:09 We do appreciate what they have done under this
12:01:12 drought condition.
12:01:12 >>GWEN MILLER: I was saying if the reservoir goes back
12:01:15 down below 21, will we put the ban back on again?
12:01:18 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: No.
12:01:21 Not under that condition.
12:01:23 >> If it goes below 21, we just water once a week --
12:01:29 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Could we see it for just a second?
12:01:33 You see where this -- this is the bad line and the
12:01:40 You can see early on we were tracking along it.
12:01:43 And then you invoked the restriction that is we moved
12:01:46 away from it.
12:01:49 We are going to have to come back down onto this line
12:01:52 before we would do that.
12:01:54 So it's a significant variance from where we are.
12:01:57 >> Watering one day a week?
12:02:01 >> Under the SWFWMD times, yes, ma'am.
12:02:03 >> Regardless of what happened.
12:02:04 The reservoir goes down, whatever.
12:02:06 >>> Unless it goes below that blue line and you can see
12:02:10 the distance.
12:02:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:02:12 We need to leave, you all.
12:02:14 Mr. Shelby, it's 2 after 12, Mr. Shelby.
12:02:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Wait a second, I just got a call
12:02:21 from a constituent.
12:02:23 Evidently this person knows about the pressure washing.
12:02:26 You have to call a professional pressure washer to come
12:02:29 in, if you are going to paint your house yourself.
12:02:32 Is that so?
12:02:33 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I believe that is correct.
12:02:35 And that is again the state requirements.
12:02:37 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Cannot be modified be if the
12:02:41 person wants to do it themselves?
12:02:44 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We do not have that luxury.
12:02:46 We can be more aggressive but not less aggressive than
12:02:50 the state requirement.
12:02:50 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Daignault, you can go down to
12:02:54 the county clerks office for $22 and get a permit to be
12:02:57 a pressure washer.
12:02:58 So I don't understand why we need that in there.
12:03:01 If a homeowner can't afford to do the pressure washing
12:03:04 with a professional company, why can't they do it
12:03:07 themselves? It's not fair.
12:03:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, we are late.
12:03:12 We are 18 minutes late.
12:03:15 Past adjournment.
12:03:16 Mr. Shelby, then we need to vote on the motion.
12:03:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I have not been in this
12:03:22 position where I have said this publicly but I just
12:03:24 want to share with you, express concern to you, that
12:03:27 the manner in which this council is deciding this today
12:03:32 is not the optimum way to do it.
12:03:36 Frankly, it concerns me that council members are
12:03:38 getting e-mails or phone calls on the issue.
12:03:41 The purpose of having an agenda, an item coming before
12:03:45 council, is to have people have a notice and an
12:03:47 opportunity to be heard, to have -- to have council
12:03:52 before it so it could be informed, reflect upon it, it
12:03:55 can inquire if it needs to, it can refer back to its
12:04:00 constituents, and I understand why the administration
12:04:02 would want to bring this as soon as possible to
12:04:05 council, but I have to share with you, council, that an
12:04:09 alternative could have been to put it on the regular
12:04:12 agenda for June 4th, let's say, and make it
12:04:15 effective immediately, and only be three days from
12:04:19 where it is.
12:04:19 I understand -- and let me just say that I feel very
12:04:23 uncomfortable saying this because I understand the
12:04:25 politics of this and I also understand it's a health,
12:04:28 safety and welfare issue, but I also understand that it
12:04:33 puts council in a very difficult position, and it puts
12:04:37 me in a difficult position advising you.
12:04:39 So that being said, the only other thing that I am
12:04:41 concerned about, and I raised this with the city
12:04:44 attorney, and he tells me other jurisdiction does this,
12:04:47 and of course I haven't had the chance to research it.
12:04:50 But, for instance, this would be dependent, would be
12:04:56 considered repealed if the district, SWFWMD, changes
12:04:59 its order, and I am concerned that that might be an
12:05:02 improper delegation of legislative authority because
12:05:04 this would remain on the books and somebody would have
12:05:06 to go to SWFWMD to refer to their orders to see if this
12:05:10 item was superseded.
12:05:11 I don't know whether it can be cured but it's just a
12:05:13 concern that I have and a concern that may not be
12:05:15 able -- may have been able to be addressed had I had
12:05:18 the opportunity to do some research on the issue.
12:05:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Fletcher, do you want to respond to
12:05:23 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: In reverse order.
12:05:25 The issue of referencing the water management district
12:05:29 As Mr. Daignault indicated earlier we have the
12:05:31 authority to be more specific and more restrictive.
12:05:35 We do not have the authority to be less restrictive.
12:05:38 One of the reasons that we have periodically been
12:05:41 having to Russia round and come back to you all with
12:05:45 rather complex ordinances is because in 2006, when the
12:05:49 city first adopted restrictions in this regard, the
12:05:53 drafters of the ordinance took the standards that the
12:05:55 water management district had in place at that time and
12:05:58 reduced them to code provisions.
12:06:02 That certainly is an option.
12:06:04 And we can continue to do that.
12:06:06 However, we thought the more prudent approach was to,
12:06:09 at this point, reference our ability to enforce the
12:06:13 state requirements under our ordinances under state
12:06:16 law, and reference those in the ordinance.
12:06:20 That way, if on the 23rd water management district
12:06:24 changes those standards, if you all decide to act on
12:06:28 this ordinance and adopt it, we won't be back to you
12:06:31 trying to get an ordinance change before the state
12:06:36 standards go into effect.
12:06:38 That's the purpose of having that, the way many other
12:06:43 jurisdictions operate.
12:06:44 But if council's pleasure is to specifically call out
12:06:47 the restrictions and have those done directly in city
12:06:51 code, that certainly would be permissibly a way to do
12:06:57 However we would come back to you periodically as the
12:06:59 state changes, unless council wanted to continue to be
12:07:02 more restrictive.
12:07:03 Regarding the notice, part of the reason it took so
12:07:08 long to get to you all an ordinance from when the
12:07:12 administration directed us, directed that the
12:07:17 conditions were met and they were going to recommend
12:07:20 going back to the water management district rules, is
12:07:22 because of what I just described.
12:07:25 We have a variety of emergency ordinances in place that
12:07:29 set standards.
12:07:30 The water management district has actually four
12:07:32 different orders that set up standards.
12:07:34 So we had to go through and try to reconcile those, and
12:07:37 came up with what we have for you today.
12:07:42 Legally you can act on this today.
12:07:43 There is no impediment to doing that.
12:07:46 But, at the same time, if council prefers to act in a
12:07:50 future date, that would be an option as well.
12:07:53 It would have been preferable to get you all this
12:07:57 information earlier.
12:07:58 But we did the best we could under the circumstances
12:08:02 that we have.
12:08:02 So it's your decision whether to move forward today or
12:08:05 to schedule it for this evening or for next week.
12:08:09 It's your pleasure.
12:08:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm going to move to continue, but this
12:08:15 is not an emergency.
12:08:16 And that's what is interesting to me, is this started
12:08:20 out as an emergency because the water was so low.
12:08:23 And people accepted that, that we didn't have a lot of
12:08:26 time for public notice, there wasn't a lot of time for
12:08:29 discussion, and council, I wasn't even here that day,
12:08:32 but council passed it, and the next week we discuss it
12:08:37 and didn't pass it but kept holding it.
12:08:42 So I think this is kind of a bad precedent.
12:08:44 It is a bad precedent.
12:08:46 And for us to say, okay, well, in this particular case,
12:08:50 we can rush in with an ordinance that our own council
12:08:53 attorney hasn't had time to look at.
12:08:55 I certainly haven't had time to read it.
12:08:57 And I just continue don't see any reason why we need to
12:09:00 pass this today.
12:09:02 I would like to either -- I would like your advice and
12:09:08 then make a motion.
12:09:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have had the opportunity the
12:09:11 chairman has given me this morning to look over the
12:09:13 I have had an opportunity to discuss it with Ms. McLean
12:09:18 and I discussed it with Mr. Fletcher.
12:09:20 I will tell you that the initial ordinance was pretty
12:09:23 much the same format, didn't have much of an
12:09:27 opportunity but I understand it's a health, safety,
12:09:29 welfare issue.
12:09:30 I also understand this is also an economic issue.
12:09:32 This is also a health safety welfare issue and also a
12:09:35 political issue.
12:09:36 It's not my place to tell to you continue this or not.
12:09:39 It's purely council's decision.
12:09:43 In the same context that I -- I did not inject myself
12:09:48 in the initial emergency ordinance, I will not inject
12:09:50 myself in this ordinance.
12:09:51 This is purely a council decision of the and hopefully
12:09:53 this dialogue will be helpful in the future.
12:09:56 But what you have before you is purely within your
12:09:59 Mr. Fletcher is absolutely right.
12:10:01 You legally there is no impediment for you taking
12:10:04 action on this item now, if council chooses.
12:10:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did you finish?
12:10:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I call the question on the motion.
12:10:17 >> What's the motion?
12:10:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To adopt the ordinance.
12:10:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: She didn't make a motion, no.
12:10:24 She didn't make a motion.
12:10:28 The motion was made by councilman Caetano that we adopt
12:10:31 an ordinance that was brought by Mr. Fletcher.
12:10:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And that requires a reading of the
12:10:38 title pursuant to --
12:10:40 >> We do have a revised draft based on councilman
12:10:49 Dingfelder's request.
12:10:50 We are distributing that now.
12:10:52 And at the clerk's request we have also included a
12:10:55 cross reference to require emergency ordinance that was
12:11:00 adopted previously so we will have a clear record.
12:11:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Fletcher, I will say again in the
12:11:10 future that I want to stress again that we have this
12:11:13 kind of thing in a timely manner.
12:11:18 Mr. Miranda made it clear that he did not see a lot of
12:11:23 And if you do a hard copy, it goes in our box.
12:11:26 If you e-mail it to the city, then we have to go around
12:11:29 and unfortunately he doesn't go online, you know.
12:11:33 But for it to us through our e-mails and so forth so it
12:11:39 creates a problem for us.
12:11:40 Again I want to stress the importance in the future,
12:11:43 keeping the City Council attorney in the loop on these
12:11:46 kind of issues and making sure that we get these in a
12:11:48 timely manner.
12:11:50 I do want to thank Mrs. McLean for everything a
12:11:54 discussion with me and I do appreciate that.
12:11:59 We are going to get through that.
12:12:00 The important thing to me is we are on the same team.
12:12:02 On the same team.
12:12:03 And we are trying to do what's in the best interest of
12:12:04 the public.
12:12:05 And do the public business.
12:12:07 I do not like coming to a public forum where it seems
12:12:11 like we don't have a clue or we are not informed.
12:12:15 I detest that.
12:12:16 So I just want to make sure in the future we are all on
12:12:18 the same page, and the same information, so we can
12:12:23 fairly understand the issues that's before us.
12:12:26 Now, with that being said --
12:12:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, one thing before
12:12:31 F.this motion passes, I'm sure the citizens of this
12:12:33 city are not going to be abusing the water in the next
12:12:37 If we did put it off for a week.
12:12:40 So can I read the motion?
12:12:43 >> Yes.
12:12:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Second amended emergency ordinance
12:12:47 of the city of Tampa, Florida providing for revised
12:12:49 emergency measures and restricting water use and
12:12:53 curtailing non-essential water -- uses of water,
12:12:56 superseding amended emergency ordinance 2009-57 and
12:13:02 2009-48 providing for enforcement and penalties
12:13:06 suspending any provisions of the City of Tampa code
12:13:08 including sections 26-97 in conflict with the
12:13:13 provisions herein during the effective period of this
12:13:16 ordinance, providing for severability, providing an
12:13:19 effective date.
12:13:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And Mr. Caetano, that is a motion to
12:13:24 adopt the ordinance?
12:13:26 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, adopt the ordinance.
12:13:28 As amended.
12:13:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Effective June 1st.
12:13:31 Is that accurate?
12:13:33 >> That's what the ordinance states?
12:13:35 This being an amend amended emergency ordinance it will
12:13:38 require a super majority vote and only today's reading.
12:13:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It requires a super majority vote?
12:13:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why?
12:13:50 >> It requires a super majority?
12:13:53 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: The first one never got enacted.
12:13:59 >> Four votes.
12:14:02 >> I'm sorry.
12:14:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Majority?
12:14:06 Majority vote?
12:14:12 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: The first one never got read.
12:14:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can I confer with --
12:14:29 >>JAN MCLEAN: I don't have the statute with me.
12:14:32 But my recollection is the majority vote, but that's
12:14:37 what we have been acting upon.
12:14:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:14:42 We will go ahead and carry the motion and then you all
12:14:44 can bring it back tonight if there's an issue or if
12:14:47 there's a problem.
12:14:48 All in favor of the motion, moved and seconded?
12:14:51 Do you want to speak on it?
12:14:52 Okay, go ahead.
12:14:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say many times we say we are
12:14:58 not going to hear this because it's just been brought
12:15:00 to us.
12:15:00 And today we are going to do just the opposite.
12:15:02 I said many times that I am not opposed to lifting the
12:15:05 requirements providing we have everything in place.
12:15:07 We don't.
12:15:10 Since this thing was rushed I am not going to support
12:15:12 it and I am going to drop another thing on you.
12:15:15 I will be resigning from Tampa Bay water.
12:15:20 Some other council member or the mayor can be the
12:15:25 appointed person.
12:15:26 Thank you very much.
12:15:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
12:15:36 And let me say from my standpoint I was briefed on this
12:15:42 I was briefed on it.
12:15:43 I also met with chief of staff on it.
12:15:45 And also Brad and I talked about it as well.
12:15:49 So and Chip and I talked about it yesterday at length.
12:15:56 Maybe because I was the chairman I had more input or
12:15:58 more discussion, I don't know.
12:16:00 Okay, all in favor of the motion signify by saying Aye.
12:16:03 >>THE CLERK: I need to do a roll call vote.
12:16:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Roll call.
12:16:08 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
12:16:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
12:16:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
12:16:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
12:16:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
12:16:17 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
12:16:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:
12:16:21 >>THE CLERK: Vote carried with Miranda and Mulhern
12:16:27 voting no.
12:16:42 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: We did double check the statute.
12:16:44 It would require five votes.
12:16:45 We have five votes so it's an appropriate action of
12:16:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So five votes.
12:16:50 And we have five.
12:16:54 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Just wanted to clarify that for the
12:16:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Chip.
12:16:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just before we leave, and this is
12:17:00 very, very germane.
12:17:02 I am going make a motion that we amend Tampa City
12:17:05 Council rules, okay, to say no more walk-ons and no
12:17:09 more emergency ordinances or resolutions unless there's
12:17:12 timely notice to at a minimum our City Council
12:17:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
12:17:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What is it?
12:17:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That we amend our rules so the
12:17:23 administration cannot come to us with a walk-on or
12:17:27 emergency ordinance unless at a minimum, okay, they
12:17:30 should bring it to us, obviously, in advance, but
12:17:33 sometimes they might not be able to, but at a minimum,
12:17:35 these things should be shared or good faith effort to
12:17:38 be shared with our City Council attorney.
12:17:41 And that's a motion to direct Mr. Shelby to work on an
12:17:45 amendment to our City Council rules.
12:17:49 To work on it.
12:17:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Not going to be in effect yet.
12:17:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Not going to be in effect.
12:17:53 It takes lot of effort to change --
12:17:55 Moved and seconded.
12:17:56 All in favor?
12:18:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Are we adjourned?
12:18:02 >> Receive and file?
12:18:03 >> So moved.
12:18:04 >> Second.
12:18:04 (Motion carried).
12:18:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anything else?
12:18:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 5:01?
12:18:08 >> We stand in recess till 5:01.
12:18:11 Recess till 5:01.
12:18:12 Thank you.
12:18:13 (The City Council meeting recessed at 12:19 p.m.)
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.