Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Thursday, June 18, 2009
Workshop 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.

09:07:32 >> LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are waiting for one more
09:07:34 council member and then we'll have a quorum.
09:10:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
09:10:51 Although we have an abbreviated staff -- the other
09:10:55 council will be arriving in a minute -- it's my honor
09:10:57 to introduce the gentleman that's going to say the
09:10:59 prayer this morning.
09:11:04 His name is Jim Crews.
09:11:06 He's been with the city clerk's office for awhile.

09:11:09 He's served for 14 years, TPD 11, with the TPD for
09:11:13 three and with the city clerk's office.
09:11:14 He's a member, retired, of the United States Reserve,
09:11:18 23 years, and he's an active member of the River Tampa
09:11:23 Bay Church, a graduate of the River Bible Institute,
09:11:27 and he's a former assistant pastor of Outreach Church
09:11:30 of God in Valrico.
09:11:31 Jim, please stand for the prayer and remain standing
09:11:36 for the pledge of allegiance.
09:11:40 >> Jim Crew: Good morning.
09:11:43 Let us pray.
09:11:44 Lord, we thank you again for this new day, for its a
09:11:46 day that you have made and we will rejoice and be glad
09:11:49 in it.
09:11:49 You are good and your mercy endures forever.
09:11:52 Thank you, Lord, for your two angels named goodness
09:11:55 and mercy who follow us all the days of our lives when
09:11:58 we walk with you.
09:11:59 We ask your grace this day to walk before you while
09:12:02 well pleasing in all things by the power of your Holy
09:12:04 Spirit who dwells within us and is as close as the
09:12:08 mention of his name.

09:12:09 Guide these your servants as we consider matters
09:12:11 important to the community.
09:12:12 Grant them wisdom as we acknowledge you as the source
09:12:16 of all wisdom.
09:12:17 He would ask for Chairman Scott and Chairman Pro Tem
09:12:20 Miller as they travel today they you grant them a safe
09:12:24 return home.
09:12:25 These things we ask in your precious and holy name.
09:12:27 Amen.
09:12:31 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:12:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Now we call Tampa City Council to
09:12:49 order.
09:12:50 Roll call.
09:12:51 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:12:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:12:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:12:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:13:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have two letters of absence from
09:13:03 Chairman Scott and Chairman Pro Tem Miller that I will
09:13:05 give to the clerk.
09:13:06 Mr. Shelby?
09:13:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, it is the contention of the

09:13:16 chair, I believe, you have one item at 9 a.m. after
09:13:19 the commendations with the budget workshop and then
09:13:21 you have something scheduled for 11 a.m.
09:13:24 Without objection, the chair is requesting that if the
09:13:28 workshop on the budget ends early, she would like to
09:13:32 give notice to the public that she would like to begin
09:13:34 the 11:00 workshop at an earlier hour to allow the
09:13:38 opportunity to move ahead with the items and perhaps
09:13:40 end the day earlier if possible.
09:13:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:13:44 Mr. Caetano.
09:13:44 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Madam Chairman, I would like to
09:13:47 move the agenda item for local preference to move it
09:13:52 to another date.
09:13:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, is there a second?
09:14:00 Ms. Mulhern?
09:14:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to talk about that, because
09:14:07 it's highly irregular how -- this is something that I
09:14:11 think I had moved to hold that workshop session
09:14:16 originally.
09:14:19 And I have been talking to Greg Spearman and to our
09:14:23 city attorney Chip Fletcher, not yesterday but on

09:14:28 Tuesday, preparing for the meeting.
09:14:31 I have also been talking to many people in the
09:14:34 business community who were planning to come do this
09:14:36 meeting.
09:14:38 I actually heard at lunch, a lunch yesterday, so that
09:14:43 was around noon, from someone in the business
09:14:45 community that our council workshop had been
09:14:49 continued.
09:14:51 I knew nothing about it.
09:14:53 So as it turns out, city staff had contacted people in
09:14:57 the public and told them that they were going to
09:15:02 postpone or continue the workshop without having
09:15:05 discussed it, as far as I know, with -- and I don't
09:15:09 know if Chairman Scott is out of town, but I heard
09:15:12 nothing about it, and so I was -- before I knew that
09:15:17 the city staff had told people in the public that the
09:15:21 workshop was continued, I was calling them to see --
09:15:28 because I did see a memo from Darrell Smith later in
09:15:30 the day on e-mail, asking us to continue it.
09:15:34 Which I think would be what we need to decide right
09:15:37 now.
09:15:38 So I would like to point out that the city staff

09:15:46 basically canceled or rescheduled our workshop without
09:15:52 a vote approval from council.
09:15:54 And considering that this is a workshop, and that
09:15:57 people from the business community have been working
09:15:59 on this, and were planning to come, I feel that if
09:16:04 anybody -- and I think they were notified that it was
09:16:08 canceled.
09:16:09 But there may be people here, since it was a publicly
09:16:11 noticed agenda item, that want to talk about it.
09:16:14 So what I would like to see is if any shows up we will
09:16:17 take some public comment at that time.
09:16:21 And when we get to this item on the agenda, then we
09:16:25 can discuss continuing it.
09:16:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:16:30 That being said, I believe that there's a rule in the
09:16:35 documents that we have, that those individuals that
09:16:39 speak today, when the actual workshop is held with
09:16:45 members of the full council -- and I think that's what
09:16:47 the intent of the administration is -- to have as much
09:16:50 input from the public and from the council members,
09:16:54 because right now I can only count to four, and we are
09:16:56 at four, meaning that if they speak today, they do not

09:17:01 speak at the next hearing.
09:17:02 Am I correct?
09:17:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That would apply to a public hearing,
09:17:07 councilman Miranda.
09:17:08 This being a workshop the rules are much more
09:17:10 flexible.
09:17:11 There is no rule specifically barring that.
09:17:14 It's council's discretion.
09:17:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Madam Chairman, it's the desire
09:17:21 of the administration to postpone this due to the fact
09:17:22 that two of the proponents are not here today, that's
09:17:25 the chairman and the vice chairman.
09:17:29 With all due respect, Ms. Mulhern, I don't think it
09:17:32 was officially canceled.
09:17:33 That's why I brought it up today.
09:17:35 And maybe the word was out on the street that it was
09:17:38 going to be canceled.
09:17:39 But if the board desires not to change it, we can take
09:17:43 a vote on it.
09:17:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we go to our commendation
09:17:48 for the policeman, and then we'll discuss this more.
09:17:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.

09:18:02 Members, honorable members of Tampa City Council, it's
09:18:11 my honor here to be here today representing our fine
09:18:15 chair of police and fire Gwen Miller, who is out of
09:18:18 the area presently.
09:18:20 I have a commendation presented to detective Kevin
09:18:24 Durkin.
09:18:25 But before I do that I am going to ask Chief Hogue to
09:18:28 come forward and make the statements of the five
09:18:31 gentlemen that we are about to honor.
09:18:34 >>> Thank you very much, councilman.
09:18:37 Once again on behalf of all the police officers, the
09:18:40 Tampa Police Department, we want to thank council for
09:18:43 recognizing the Officer of the Month each month here.
09:18:45 It is a great honor for each one of them.
09:18:48 Today for the month of June, we are recognizing
09:18:51 detective Kevin Durkin who is standing here to
09:18:55 my side, a 27-year veteran of the Tampa Police
09:19:00 Department of which 24 years have been spent as a
09:19:04 detective.
09:19:05 And 12 of those 24 years he's been a detective, he's
09:19:08 been a homicide detective.
09:19:10 And you have heard me say many times in here that

09:19:14 really the best employees that we have are our
09:19:18 homicide detectives.
09:19:19 They are our most competent investigators.
09:19:21 Nobody gets to that level -- we have a lot of
09:19:25 excellent investigators at the police department, and
09:19:27 that doesn't even qualify you to be a homicide
09:19:30 detective.
09:19:31 You have even got to be better than that, because the
09:19:37 meticulous detail they have to remember, that they
09:19:39 have to not miss, scrutinizing the most serious crimes
09:19:44 that we can investigate, and that's the death of
09:19:47 somebody.
09:19:48 And it's a particularly difficult job, not only in the
09:19:52 investigative stage of the job but also when it comes
09:19:54 to the testimony in court, because these detectives
09:19:59 can spend one, two, three days on the stand themselves
09:20:02 being cross-examined about ever minute detail of their
09:20:06 investigation, and you can imagine how much
09:20:07 preparation and work that takes.
09:20:09 So all of these homicides -- and we have most of the
09:20:12 homicide squad sitting here with us today, are
09:20:15 exceptional, exceptional individuals.

09:20:18 But Kevin has done many things in his career that are
09:20:22 deserving of recognition, and in fact he's had a very
09:20:26 illustrious career at the Tampa Police Department.
09:20:29 This is the fourth time in his career that he's being
09:20:31 honored for Officer of the Month.
09:20:33 And I think that's probably a precedent.
09:20:36 I don't think there's anybody else on the police
09:20:38 department that's ever been honored that many times.
09:20:41 It's just because of the work ethic and the quality
09:20:47 job that he does on a daily basis, and he's done just
09:20:52 every high-profile investigation there is, and in fact
09:20:56 he's probably had to do the most difficult
09:20:59 investigations, which he is been an investigator on
09:21:04 four police deaths where they were the result of
09:21:08 felony action of somebody else.
09:21:10 Officer Soto who was shot by a wanted fugitive,
09:21:14 officers Childers and Bell, who were of course killed
09:21:20 by a murder suspect, and officer Marera who was killed
09:21:27 by an armed robber, and he had to investigate all of
09:21:29 those, and particularly Bell and Childers was tough
09:21:33 for all the homicide detectives because they were both
09:21:36 homicide detectives themselves.

09:21:37 So they were investigating the death of their own
09:21:40 squad mates, which is very, very tough.
09:21:44 Like I said, he has had an illustrious career, and
09:21:47 probably there's many more things that occurred that
09:21:50 he's done very well, and deserves recognition for
09:21:53 them, and just kind of gone by the way.
09:21:56 But we are recognizing him in June for a couple of
09:22:00 excellent investigations he did.
09:22:02 We had a U.S. Marshall's task force of which one of
09:22:05 the TPD officers was involved, and one of the U.S.
09:22:07 Marshals got into a shootout with a wanted suspect,
09:22:12 and wounded the suspect, and of course the Marshall
09:22:18 was not hurt, and detective Durkin took the lead on
09:22:21 that investigation, wrote the search warrant for the
09:22:24 residents of the of the apartment that they were in,
09:22:28 and recovered a murder weapon, and kind of coordinated
09:22:33 that investigation, and then we had an ICE agent who
09:22:38 was off duty and identified himself as an IE agent and
09:22:43 was severely beaten with a baseball bat, just about
09:22:46 fatal.
09:22:47 And Kevin took that investigation from its infancy,
09:22:52 complete through to the end, and identified the

09:22:56 suspect of which the gang unit arrested a short time
09:22:59 later.
09:23:00 So he has, like I say, had an illustrious career.
09:23:03 These are two incidents that we recognize him for, for
09:23:06 this month, and you can hear from the bio that I gave
09:23:10 on him he's had quite a career here at the police
09:23:12 department and we want to congratulate him for being
09:23:14 our Officer of the Month.
09:23:16 [ Applause ]
09:23:17 >>
09:23:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Chief Hogue.
09:23:28 It's my pleasure on behalf of police and fire chief,
09:23:35 Councilwoman Gwen Miller, to make this presentation to
09:23:38 you, sir.
09:23:39 We are honored.
09:23:40 Let me read the commendation.
09:23:41 It's short but to the point.
09:23:43 In recognition of detective Kevin Durkin being chosen
09:23:47 as Tampa Police Department's Officer of the Month,
09:23:49 Tampa City Council would like to take this opportunity
09:23:52 to applaud and congratulate you for your years of
09:23:54 dedicated service and for your willingness to go above

09:23:59 the call of duty, and with your job and all the
09:24:03 responsibilities that come with that job; we are very
09:24:07 proud of this, of the member that you are of the
09:24:09 police department, and recognize you as being one of
09:24:11 Tampa's finest.
09:24:13 Thank you very much.
09:24:15 [ Applause ]
09:24:22 >>> The first check for dinner is from a place called
09:24:27 Charlie's but it's not mine.
09:24:29 I don't want to be investigated with false rumors.
09:24:34 Your dinner at Charlie's.
09:24:36 Enjoy yourself there.
09:24:41 >>> Steve Stickley representing Stepps towing service.
09:24:45 I'm pleased on behalf of Stepp's towing service and
09:24:53 Jim and Judy Stepp and Todd Stepp we would like to
09:24:57 present this statue to you for your excellent job.
09:25:01 I guess you can put that with your three other awards
09:25:04 and a gift certificate to Lee Roy Selmons.
09:25:08 Thank you very much.
09:25:11 [ Applause ]
09:25:14 >> Danny Lewis from Bill Currie Ford.
09:25:17 I'm honored to be here.

09:25:18 Kevin, congratulations.
09:25:19 Long overdue recognition.
09:25:22 I know you work holiday and weekends.
09:25:26 Look at this watch and realize that somebody cares
09:25:29 about you and what you do and we appreciate it very
09:25:31 much.
09:25:32 [ Applause ]
09:25:33 >> Representing Tampa Lowry Park Zoo.
09:25:38 On behalf of the zoo we want to thank you for all that
09:25:40 you do for us and want you to come and spend the day
09:25:43 at the zoo on us.
09:25:45 [ Applause ]
09:25:49 >> This isn't really for you, it's for your
09:25:52 significant other.
09:25:56 [ Laughter ]
09:25:59 [ Applause ]
09:26:01 >>STEVE MICHELINI: You know, you are never quite sure
09:26:03 what to think when you find a man handing out red
09:26:07 roses.
09:26:08 But, nevertheless, I'm here on behalf of a couple
09:26:11 different corporate sponsors, and one of them is
09:26:14 Rigatoni's providing you with a gift certificate for

09:26:17 lunch or dinner, your choice, a gift certificate from
09:26:21 Bern's steakhouse so you can go enjoy yourself there
09:26:24 with a $100 gift certificate, a gift certificate from
09:26:27 Bryn Allen's studios, to have your family portraits
09:26:30 done.
09:26:31 On behalf of a couple of other different folks, they
09:26:33 are going to provide you with four tickets to the
09:26:35 Cinemax at Channelside theaters.
09:26:39 So congratulations.
09:26:42 Thanks for all your work.
09:26:43 [ Applause ]
09:26:44 >>> Over the years I have had great pleasure working
09:26:55 with Kevin on many things.
09:26:56 It's an honor long overdue.
09:27:01 It's well deserved.
09:27:02 In conjunction with the law enforcement supply of
09:27:04 Tampa and the TBA we present Kevin $100 certificate.
09:27:13 [ Applause ]
09:27:14 >> Good morning.
09:27:19 Thank you for having me today.
09:27:21 I'm humbled by this recognition.
09:27:25 If you ask me to recite all these tokens of from our

09:27:30 community I don't think I could do it.
09:27:31 I would like to say thanks for the flowers.
09:27:33 I strongly suspect that my brother in the homicide
09:27:38 squad may have had something to do with that.
09:27:41 It wouldn't be the wildest thing he ever pranked me
09:27:45 with.
09:27:46 As the chief said, I've spent a long, long time in the
09:27:50 homicide squad, and we had to respond to things that
09:27:54 are really dark and they are not as frequent as they
09:28:01 used to be back in the old days.
09:28:02 But when those times do come along, I am proud to be
09:28:07 associated with the guyed and girls I work with, when
09:28:11 this came to light.
09:28:14 I look around my squad room, and I know that I have to
09:28:19 take a deep breath every day just to keep up with the
09:28:22 guys in the homicide squad, they are that competent
09:28:27 and that commit, and this community is a better place
09:28:30 for that.
09:28:31 So on behalf of my squad, I thank you, thank all of
09:28:35 the community support.
09:28:41 My family is here.
09:28:45 I would like to thank all of them for having to deal

09:28:50 with all the missed events, and pick any point in the
09:28:53 calendar over the last 24 years, and we have had to
09:28:57 alter our plans.
09:28:59 [ Applause ]
09:29:00 These are my sons Kevin and Kyle.
09:29:10 Kevin just graduated from Police Academy a couple
09:29:13 weeks back.
09:29:14 Kyle just graduated high school, plans to work with
09:29:16 Tampa Police Department.
09:29:26 Uncle Lee, Uncle Joe. If there are any Durkins that I
09:29:26 missed -- (laughter). My brother Patrick.
09:29:31 There's Durkins all over the police department.
09:29:36 And they had to help endure some of the sacrifices we
09:29:41 had to make and I appreciate everything that they
09:29:49 would support me.
09:29:50 So thank you for your time and thanks for the
09:29:53 recognition.
09:29:55 We are able to get our job done because city
09:29:58 government supports us, and from the top down, city
09:30:03 government and the community has our back, and we get
09:30:06 our job done.
09:30:09 And I thank you for that.

09:30:11 [ Applause ]
09:30:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair?
09:30:21 Kevin, a lot of times we have seen you in a different
09:30:24 context with a different hat on, but we are so proud
09:30:28 of what you have accomplished with the police
09:30:29 department and all that you do, and thank you so much.
09:30:33 And thanks to your family for their sacrifice as well.
09:30:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:30:41 And now from recognition to the budget.
09:30:46 Excuse me, I am so sorry.
09:30:52 We need to clarify what we are going to do as far as
09:30:55 discussion.
09:31:03 Where did John go?
09:31:09 Mr. Shelby, could you please clarify what the rules
09:31:12 are in terms -- would you all leave quietly so we are
09:31:17 discussing?
09:31:18 Thanks.
09:31:18 Would you clarify what the rules are in terms of
09:31:21 taking something off our agenda?
09:31:24 It needs to be officially done by council, doesn't it?
09:31:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's true, Madam Chair.
09:31:30 I don't have in front of me the memorandum from the

09:31:35 chief of staff, but my recollection states that it was
09:31:39 a request of his.
09:31:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: From whom?
09:31:45 >>> Obviously council does control its own agenda.
09:31:49 Mr. Caetano handed it to me.
09:31:53 It states presentations for the subject agenda will
09:31:55 include information and discussions pertaining to
09:31:57 complex and important issues, two council members will
09:32:00 not be available to attend the City Council workshop
09:32:02 on Thursday, June 18th due to out-of-town
09:32:07 commitments because of the significance of these
09:32:08 issues to the city administration, because of the
09:32:11 significance of these issues to the city, the
09:32:15 administration requests a continuance of this agenda
09:32:18 item to a date when all council members will be
09:32:20 available to participate in the discussions.
09:32:23 Thank you for your consideration.
09:32:25 And that is from Darrell Smith, the chief of staff,
09:32:28 dated June 17th of 2009.
09:32:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The 17th was yesterday?
09:32:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
09:32:38 Again, council controls its own agenda, obviously.

09:32:40 And its council discretion as to what it wishes to do.
09:32:44 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman -- Madam Chairman,
09:32:49 excuse me.
09:32:50 I also got a call from Mr. Spearman, who is -- it's
09:32:54 his desire to have this postponed to another day.
09:32:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
09:33:00 Ms. Mulhern.
09:33:01 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
09:33:03 I think, you know, Darrell Smith's request is very
09:33:06 reasonable, but it needs to be presented to council.
09:33:11 I only saw that yesterday.
09:33:12 But before that had even been sent out, people in the
09:33:16 community had been notified that the meeting was
09:33:19 canceled.
09:33:19 That's my biggest concern about this.
09:33:23 And I also feel that I don't want our business
09:33:27 community to feel that we care so little about their
09:33:32 time, their schedule, the work they put into helping
09:33:35 us find a way to create better economic development
09:33:39 through supporting local businesses, that we would
09:33:42 just cancel at the last minute a meeting that they had
09:33:47 been preparing for, and that our staff had been asked

09:33:50 to present information.
09:33:54 And I do have a concern that there may be people who
09:33:58 weren't contacted and may show up today.
09:34:01 So my feeling is, when this comes up on the agenda,
09:34:04 that's when we -- I don't think we need to continue
09:34:07 it.
09:34:08 I think we need to open the public hearing, see if
09:34:10 there's anyone here who needs to speak, and at that
09:34:14 point we can schedule another meeting to discuss this.
09:34:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just to clarify, this is a workshop
09:34:24 and not a noticed public hearing, what we call a
09:34:26 public hearing under Florida statutes.
09:34:29 So whatever council's discretion is, whatever
09:34:31 council's decision is, that's fine.
09:34:35 There is no legal requirement as to having to open a
09:34:37 public hearing.
09:34:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, if it's a noticed public meeting
09:34:44 in which we had asked the public to contribute.
09:34:47 So the point is about -- this isn't a legal or rules
09:34:50 point, this is a courtesy point.
09:34:53 And I just want the business community to know that it
09:34:56 was not council -- council was not the body that had

09:35:03 asked to continue this.
09:35:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:35:06 Mr. Dingfelder and then Mr. Caetano.
09:35:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The premise, I guess, of continuing
09:35:16 it according to what I heard or read or was told by
09:35:23 Mr. Smith yesterday that they wanted to give the
09:35:25 courtesy to Ms. Miller and to Chairman Scott to be
09:35:29 here for the discussion.
09:35:33 Well, at any given meeting, like one of us is going to
09:35:36 be out for something, you know, not all the time.
09:35:39 Sometimes we have unanimous -- we are all here but
09:35:42 sometimes we are not.
09:35:43 So I guess the question is, you know, do we want to
09:35:46 try to establish some kind of policy where we are
09:35:48 consistent on this?
09:35:51 If one of us is out, do we continue it?
09:35:54 If two of us is out do we continue it?
09:35:56 Does it depend on which two?
09:35:59 You know, that sort of thing.
09:36:00 Because I don't think there's really been consistency.
09:36:02 I know I have had to miss a workshop in the past, and
09:36:07 the workshop goes on, and you kind of catch up.

09:36:10 Plus the other thing inherent in a workshop is you are
09:36:13 not voting on anything.
09:36:14 You are not passing an ordinance.
09:36:15 You are just discussing it, gathering information for
09:36:17 a future potential action.
09:36:20 So I think in this case we probably could have -- if
09:36:25 that was the only reason the administration wanted to
09:36:27 continue it is because Tom and Gwen weren't here, I
09:36:31 think we actually could have just done it, we could
09:36:34 have watched the tape, we wouldn't have taken any
09:36:37 action, and the community, we would have had that
09:36:40 discussion now.
09:36:42 We are at the point where frankly they have made all
09:36:45 the calls, called it off, and so we really don't have
09:36:48 a whole lot of choice.
09:36:49 I agree with Mary.
09:36:50 If anybody is here and wants to discuss it, we can do
09:36:53 that.
09:36:54 But I don't see much in the way of a crowd to do that
09:36:59 anymore.
09:36:59 But, anyway, those are my two cents.
09:37:01 I think we need to be careful.

09:37:03 I would urge the administration, you know, a lot of
09:37:08 caution, you know, to try not to do this again on the
09:37:11 basis of absence.
09:37:12 Now, if there's another basis for it, if they are not
09:37:15 ready, if they need more time, that's a different
09:37:17 issue.
09:37:17 But if it's just a function of some of our members
09:37:20 being absent, I don't know, that is a little bit of a
09:37:23 stretch.
09:37:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Caetano, then Ms. Mulhern.
09:37:27 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: If we are going to discuss it, if
09:37:30 someone is here from the audience that wants to talk,
09:37:32 are they permitted to come back and talk again?
09:37:34 Because it's -- 123450 yes.
09:37:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, thank you, Mr. Dingfelder.
09:37:41 I think that your point is well taken in the way that
09:37:46 we should be consistent about this is by not accepting
09:37:51 this the way that this was done, and by not continuing
09:37:57 this meeting, or continuing this agenda item.
09:38:03 I think we should have our workshop, however brief it
09:38:06 is.
09:38:10 If the staff isn't going to be here to give the

09:38:12 reports, that's fine.
09:38:15 But that was their decision to do that, without
09:38:18 council rescheduling it.
09:38:20 And then we discuss whether we want to reschedule
09:38:24 another meeting.
09:38:27 My big problem with this is, yes, we can show courtesy
09:38:30 to our colleagues who weren't able to be here today,
09:38:33 but we need to show courtesy to the businesses, that
09:38:37 pay the taxes and create the jobs, for people who live
09:38:40 here.
09:38:41 And to just cancel our meeting -- and I think council
09:38:45 needs to just say right now that we are not going to
09:38:49 allow this to happen again without a decent amount of
09:38:54 notice.
09:38:54 And then we are not going to continue it.
09:38:56 I'm not going to second the motion to continue this.
09:38:58 I think it needs to be -- we need to have the
09:39:01 workshop, however brief it is.
09:39:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
09:39:08 Since I haven't spoken much on this issue, and
09:39:10 everybody has talked about being consistent, if this
09:39:13 is set for 11:30, then it should be heard at 11:30.

09:39:17 That's being consistent.
09:39:18 That way anybody who was planning on coming doesn't
09:39:24 arrive too late, or too early.
09:39:26 And I like your idea.
09:39:28 But since we are debating it, I think we should wait
09:39:32 till 11:30 to discuss this.
09:39:34 This should be a moot question right now.
09:39:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
09:39:37 Let's move ahead with the budget then.
09:39:39 Thank you.
09:39:43 >>BONNIE WISE: Director of revenue and finance.
09:39:46 As I mentioned at the workshop last week, today's
09:39:49 workshop is going to concentrate on wastewater.
09:39:52 And so I'm going to go through a PowerPoint
09:39:54 presentation to discuss the wastewater system.
09:39:58 Of course some of this information will be familiar to
09:40:00 you as we have discussed the situation going on in the
09:40:04 wastewater department during the six-month update and
09:40:07 various other times, but there is some new information
09:40:09 that has come, you know, to our attention, and things
09:40:12 that are happening in the economy, and that are
09:40:15 impacting revenues and the expenses that I wanted to

09:40:19 share with you.
09:40:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I wondered why Ralph graced us
09:40:26 with his presence.
09:40:28 >> If you have specifically questions of course
09:40:30 regarding the operations of the wastewater system,
09:40:32 Ralph is here to answer those for you.
09:40:37 The PowerPoint, please.
09:40:39 As you are aware, this is our wastewater system.
09:40:49 It provides wastewater treatment and sewage collection
09:40:52 network, over 21 separate buildings, over 104,000
09:40:57 accounts, 1800 miles of pipe, and various other
09:41:01 information, 221 pumping stations.
09:41:03 The reason we have this is I really wanted for you to
09:41:06 see that this is a major operation of our city.
09:41:12 We have not only served the City of Tampa but we also
09:41:14 incorporate parts of the city of Temple Terrace and
09:41:18 parts of Hillsborough County, and that is going to be
09:41:21 really important as we go through this presentation.
09:41:24 For bond issuance purposes, however, water and
09:41:27 wastewater are combined in the calculation, and so
09:41:31 that's going to be important as well.
09:41:33 We operate our water system and our weight water

09:41:37 system separately, they have their own revenue,
09:41:40 et cetera.
09:41:40 But for purposes of the bond, they are on a combined
09:41:43 basis.
09:41:44 It is a water -- they are called "water and sewer."
09:41:47 Water and sewer system revenue bonds.
09:41:49 And so all {} associated with the debt service and the
09:41:54 rate covenants are on a combined basis, and so that's
09:41:57 very critical here.
09:42:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why?
09:42:04 No, no, historically why is it like that?
09:42:07 >>BONNIE WISE: Actually, I don't really know why it
09:42:09 was originally like that.
09:42:10 But it has always been so.
09:42:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ralph might help us.
09:42:17 >>BONNIE WISE: Now that the bonds are outstanding, to
09:42:19 change it would mean paying off all the outstanding
09:42:22 bonds, but maybe Ralph can give us some historical
09:42:25 knowledge.
09:42:27 >>RALPH METCALF: Director of Wastewater Department.
09:42:30 Back 100 years ago when I started here, there was sort
09:42:35 of a pattern of various water and sewer would get

09:42:40 three-year or so rates on alternate years every so
09:42:43 often, and the intent of having both together was that
09:42:48 the department who had just got a rate increase had
09:42:51 revenue in excess of their expenditures.
09:42:55 The other department, which is coming to the end of
09:42:57 this rate cycle, would not have enough revenue, and
09:43:02 together they would balance or buffer each other
09:43:04 against those ups and downs.
09:43:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:43:08 >>BONNIE WISE: Many municipalities do actually combine
09:43:11 their systems entirely, not only for bond purposes,
09:43:13 but they are just combined.
09:43:14 We do happen to have separate departments here,
09:43:17 however.
09:43:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But we treat them as separate
09:43:19 enterprise funds --
09:43:21 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes, we do.
09:43:23 >> Except for bonds.
09:43:25 >>BONNIE WISE: Except for bonds, exactly.
09:43:27 What's happening in the wastewater system?
09:43:29 As you have been hearing from time to time, the
09:43:32 wastewater expenses are increasing.

09:43:35 I'm going to talk about some of the things that the
09:43:37 wastewater department has done over time to try to
09:43:40 minimize those increases, and the revenues are
09:43:43 declining.
09:43:43 So if you look at that red line that's coming along
09:43:46 there, you can see that if you go back to 2008, that
09:43:49 there was sufficient revenue to pay the personnel the
09:43:54 operation and maintenance and the debt and even
09:43:57 operating CIPs of the system.
09:44:00 However, what has occurred really over just the past
09:44:03 few years is that red line is now going even below the
09:44:09 debt line.
09:44:10 So not only is there not sufficient money to pay for
09:44:12 the debt, there's not enough to pay for those
09:44:14 operating CIPs.
09:44:17 The purple at the top of the issuance of debt in 2007,
09:44:20 and so the corresponding debt service did increase at
09:44:23 that time, too.
09:44:24 And so that is the money that the wastewater system
09:44:26 used to for some new projects, really just some
09:44:30 minimal projects, actually.
09:44:32 In 2010 at the very end of the chart there you can see

09:44:36 that if we do nothing, if we let everything play out,
09:44:41 the revenue decline, the expense increases occur, that
09:44:44 the revenue would be significantly in that orange
09:44:47 section.
09:44:47 So a major gap.
09:44:49 What did we do in 2009, because we knew that we had
09:44:53 that gap, for example?
09:44:55 In 2009, this was the wastewater budget.
09:44:58 This is the year that we are currently in.
09:45:00 You can see that most over 80% of the revenue comes
09:45:04 from the disposal fees, some from capacity, some from
09:45:08 interest earning, and other, and because there was
09:45:11 insufficient revenue as I showed you on the prior
09:45:13 chart, we actually had to pull from there reserve,
09:45:18 from the genre serve, over $8 million to balance the
09:45:20 budget.
09:45:21 We did have sufficient reserves in 2009 to do that.
09:45:26 However, it is just a short-term solution to this
09:45:29 overall scenario.
09:45:38 What do their expenses look like?
09:45:39 You heard me say from time to time in the general fund
09:45:41 about 70ish percent of the general fund is people.

09:45:46 It's a little different in wastewater.
09:45:48 Actually it's a little bit less.
09:45:50 We are 26% of had are people.
09:45:53 And the other is operation and maintenance, debt
09:45:56 capital, and the green portion is their payment in
09:45:58 lieu of taxes, payment in lieu of franchise fees, the
09:46:01 cost allocation, payment for the accounting division,
09:46:04 things of that nature.
09:46:05 So they really have a very different scenario than in
09:46:09 just the general fund, because it's mostly a poem-type
09:46:13 expense.
09:46:14 So you can see there that the cost of their people is
09:46:20 very important but the cost of maintenance is even
09:46:22 more so, their debt and capital, et cetera.
09:46:26 What has contributed to some revenue decline items
09:46:31 that we need to bring to your attention?
09:46:33 And these are things that we know about at this time.
09:46:37 Hillsborough County expanded their Falkenburg plant
09:46:40 and they are no longer need to send the waste to
09:46:43 Tampa.
09:46:45 They have told us this was going to happen.
09:46:47 We had some effect of this in fiscal year '09 that we

09:46:50 are in, about a million dollars worth of effect on
09:46:53 revenues.
09:46:53 However, going forward, this is going to be about a
09:46:56 2.5 million effect.
09:46:57 So that's 2.5 million in revenue that we have we have
09:47:01 historically collected from Hillsborough County that
09:47:03 we will no longer collect.
09:47:07 I asked Ralph, what does that mean?
09:47:08 Does that mean we are going to have fewer expenses
09:47:11 because we don't have that extra waste?
09:47:12 The actual difference in the expenses is really very
09:47:14 minimal.
09:47:15 It's just a little bit of electricity, maybe some
09:47:18 chemicals, but the fixed costs of operating that
09:47:20 system really will not vary because this waste is no
09:47:23 longer coming to us.
09:47:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Did that waste, though, come to us
09:47:30 sort of on a wholesale level, as one single flow?
09:47:35 Or is that a service area that we have now cut back
09:47:39 on?
09:47:44 >>RALPH METCALF: This was never our service area.
09:47:46 This was something that we had come up with that

09:47:49 Hillsborough County asked us for years ago when they
09:47:51 simply did not have enough capacity in their
09:47:54 Falkenburg plant to treat, and they built a collection
09:47:58 out on Adamo Drive to take their flow because they
09:48:01 didn't have the capacity.
09:48:02 They have now built more plant capacity and they don't
09:48:05 want to sen it to us.
09:48:11 >>BONNIE WISE: You may have heard recently that the
09:48:13 Plant City Smithfield plant is closing, that's the
09:48:17 pork processing plant.
09:48:18 They sent -- and Ralph will have to explain what this
09:48:22 is -- high strength waste to the Howard Curren plant,
09:48:27 and that plant is closing about now.
09:48:30 We have a slight effect in 2009 but the major effects
09:48:33 will be in fiscal year 2010 and on.
09:48:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's kind of early in the morning.
09:48:38 We might not know those details.
09:48:39 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes, we can do without that.
09:48:44 But that impacted about $800,000 a year.
09:48:46 So we are going to really see these revenue declines
09:48:50 in 2010.
09:48:51 The other thing is that the number of our active

09:48:54 accounts, we talked about this before, actually
09:48:57 declined in 2009, about 1.5%.
09:49:01 Historically, I think I mentioned to you Bush Hill,
09:49:06 the manager of utility accounting division, who has
09:49:08 been here for a very long time, every year the number
09:49:08 of accounts have increased until this year.
09:49:11 So this is really something that we haven't seen
09:49:13 before.
09:49:14 The capacity fees.
09:49:16 Capacity fees are for new or expansion, and then they
09:49:21 pay these capacity fees.
09:49:23 You can see they are from 2006.
09:49:25 We were getting about 6.6 million in capacity fees,
09:49:28 now about 1.9.
09:49:30 So the capacity fees is a big portion of how we pay
09:49:33 for the plant expansion in the first place.
09:49:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I just had a question and maybe this
09:49:41 comes up later in your report, but considering that
09:49:43 worry reducing the revenue reduction is due to the
09:49:46 reduction in services and processing treatment that we
09:49:51 are going to be doing, so can you -- is there a place
09:49:57 in here where we see how much less we have to spend

09:50:00 with this reduction in wastewater volume?
09:50:05 >>BONNIE WISE: It is incorporated into our numbers for
09:50:07 the future expenses.
09:50:08 But as I previously mentioned, and if Ralph wants to
09:50:11 expand upon it, I'm told that the difference in the
09:50:15 expense side is quite minimal compared to the
09:50:17 difference in the revenues.
09:50:19 So that there really is an immaterial amount of
09:50:23 savings that he would have on the expense side,
09:50:24 because of the elimination of these.
09:50:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm just wondering if we have actual
09:50:30 numbers to show that.
09:50:34 >>RALPH METCALF: The only two things that are directly
09:50:36 affected by the result of both not treating these
09:50:40 flows would be electricity and chemicals.
09:50:44 And when you are talking about 60 million gallons a
09:50:48 day, we may lose four million gallons a day.
09:50:51 So we will have a 4 or 5% perhaps reduction in our
09:50:57 future electric bills, and a corresponding chemical
09:51:01 bill.
09:51:02 But those -- of these costs that will be way less than
09:51:07 5% of that will be netted so you have about a 95% net

09:51:10 loss of revenue.
09:51:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Only 5% of the loss of revenue is
09:51:16 going to be made up by the savings?
09:51:17 Is that what you are saying?
09:51:19 >>RALPH METCALF: That's correct.
09:51:20 That's correct.
09:51:20 Our fixed costs are huge.
09:51:22 If our flow goes from 60 to 30, and absent a
09:51:32 catastrophe, you have to still pay your debt service,
09:51:35 the people are still there, the pumps still break,
09:51:37 those costs do not depend on flow.
09:51:40 Really the only things that do are chemical and power.
09:51:44 >>MARY MULHERN: It would be nice to see the numbers.
09:51:47 >>RALPH METCALF: Well, at this point those are in our
09:51:50 projected '10 numbers that the power would go down a
09:51:54 little bit.
09:51:54 Of course one TECO increase can make all that moot.
09:51:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Handed in with that question --
09:52:02 this is a good one -- I recall -- maybe I'm wrong --
09:52:06 but I recall a big rainstorm can bump you up
09:52:10 significantly as well, right?
09:52:15 >>RALPH METCALF: Yes.

09:52:16 If our flow goes up at the plant, and if we have a big
09:52:20 El Nino year, for instance, we'll get a lot more water
09:52:23 through there.
09:52:24 It does add more pollutants.
09:52:27 So the chemical bill stays about the same but we have
09:52:30 to pump that water so our power bill would go up as a
09:52:33 result of the rainfall, yes.
09:52:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:52:41 >>BONNIE WISE: Let's talk about some of these
09:52:43 expenses, if we could.
09:52:45 In fiscal year '09 we have seen some electricity
09:52:48 increases.
09:52:50 There we go.
09:52:52 For example, in 3.6 million we spent in 2000, and now
09:52:56 we are up to 35.8 million electricity, and in 2009,
09:53:02 with an estimate of 6.4 million in 2010.
09:53:06 And that is in spite of these items we have
09:53:12 incorporated into the -- into the numbers as well as
09:53:14 other efficiency efforts, that the wastewater
09:53:17 department has embarked on.
09:53:18 Attributable to rate increases and TECO, of course.
09:53:22 So you can see there a material change.

09:53:24 Chemical costs, we talked about this a lot.
09:53:27 Increased demand on chemical costs.
09:53:30 Looking here from 2.4 million in 2000 to 7.2 million
09:53:34 in 2008.
09:53:36 And in 2009 and 2010 the wastewater department, I'll
09:53:42 show you on the next page, has made some efforts to
09:53:44 try to reduce that.
09:53:45 But this is methanol prices.
09:53:49 We talked about it before.
09:53:51 It ranges from 735 cents a gallon to $3.02 per gallon
09:53:56 during this time period.
09:53:57 See you can see that huge volatility, and Ralph
09:54:03 probably knows off the top of his head how much
09:54:06 methanol they used but it is a material part of their
09:54:08 component.
09:54:09 You can see when something is multiplied by five
09:54:12 times, the volatility that that incurs.
09:54:16 Insurance costs.
09:54:17 Insurance has increased for wastewater about $460,000
09:54:21 from '09 to '10.
09:54:24 What is that attributable to?
09:54:26 A lot of the property insurance.

09:54:27 We did recently value all of our property again.
09:54:31 The value of the wastewater system is in excess of $3
09:54:35 billion, and property insurance as you know has
09:54:38 increased in cost, and so now we have good or bad, we
09:54:42 now have an appropriate value of our entire system,
09:54:47 and the pension costs, we talked about general
09:54:49 employees pension costs.
09:54:51 We focused on in my previous presentation the impact
09:54:55 to the general fund and what that means.
09:54:58 We are really going to talk about the impact to all
09:55:00 the enterprise funds that also share in those
09:55:02 additional pension costs.
09:55:03 So this wouldn't be unique just to wastewater.
09:55:07 This would be unique to all the other enterprise funds
09:55:10 we have going.
09:55:12 >> What are some of the things that over time the
09:55:15 wastewater department has done to control their
09:55:17 expenses? They have actually decreased their number
09:55:19 of full time equivalent positions from 411 in 1998 to
09:55:23 359 estimated in 2010 through various optimization and
09:55:29 efficiency efforts.
09:55:30 So you can really see they have made a material change

09:55:32 in their personnel.
09:55:34 They have reduced their overtime by a third, a million
09:55:37 and a half to a million.
09:55:39 And then as we discussed, we were talking about
09:55:41 chemicals.
09:55:42 They had some recent changes in the vigorous
09:55:45 procurement measures on chemicals.
09:55:47 So where in 2009 we were at 6.5 million, and
09:55:52 estimating to actually go down in chemical costs in
09:55:55 2010 to 6 million.
09:55:57 All of which is incorporated already into the numbers.
09:56:00 On the capital side just like everywhere else in the
09:56:03 city, really, maintaining any kind of capital to a
09:56:06 minimum, vehicle replacements, of course they have to
09:56:10 do things that are mandated by other agencies, and not
09:56:15 incorporating any system expansion at this time.
09:56:17 This is really just to maintain our current system.
09:56:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:56:28 Ralph, as you know, because you and I talk about these
09:56:33 chemical issues periodically, the numbers are always
09:56:37 huge; you know, and the increases are out of control
09:56:49 probably related to Hoyer energy costs and other

09:56:51 things going on around the world, around the country.
09:56:54 But all safe to assume to start with?
09:56:59 >>RALPH METCALF: Yes.
09:56:59 In fact in methanol there is a daily news letter with
09:57:04 methanol spot prices and methanol is incredibly
09:57:07 volatile.
09:57:08 Some of it comes from Iran.
09:57:10 Coming from the Middle East.
09:57:13 If the ships get through, if they don't get through of
09:57:16 the we have seen it go way up and down.
09:57:18 And we have an engineer Stephani KOONTZ in the
09:57:27 wastewater department who is absolutely merciless in
09:57:30 working with purchasing and making sure that we are
09:57:32 getting the lowest prices and getting bids from
09:57:34 everybody possible.
09:57:37 We at one point have gone from like 58 cents a gallon
09:57:40 to about $3 a gallon in several years.
09:57:44 Well, worry back down to, I think -- and don't quote
09:57:49 me, but a dollar, and she has really made serious
09:57:52 efforts with Greg in purchasing to make sure we are
09:57:54 getting bids from everybody and leaving no stone
09:57:58 unturned.

09:58:00 Also, we are trying to use as -- well, we use a
09:58:04 million gallons of methanol a year, just part of the
09:58:07 treatment process.
09:58:08 We are looking for ways to use as little as possible
09:58:10 and get the best price we can but it's a big number.
09:58:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ralph, I know that in the past with
09:58:16 your personnel, and the optimization person you
09:58:22 brought in outside folks and we paid them pretty well
09:58:24 to assist us as consultants to as to how we can best
09:58:29 do things better, do things more effectively, and we
09:58:32 cut our workforce by what appears to be 15, 20% or
09:58:35 something like that, in different groups in your
09:58:41 division.
09:58:44 What I'm wondering about is, and I have sort of been
09:58:47 wondering this for awhile, I'm not a big fan of
09:58:51 consultants and stuff, but do we use -- can we use
09:58:55 some outside folks maybe to help us in our procurement
09:58:59 process?
09:59:02 Maybe there's folks out there who might even be
09:59:06 sitting in wherever these decisions are being made
09:59:09 about prices and volatility and stuff, in New York or
09:59:12 Chicago, or Houston, or wherever, you know, that might

09:59:16 be able to assist us on this, just with a different
09:59:19 set of eyes and a different approach?
09:59:21 Because like I said that's what you did on your
09:59:23 employment stuff and you made big progress on it.
09:59:27 >>RALPH METCALF: Actually, I couldn't ask for a
09:59:28 better -- that's a great question.
09:59:32 There's two parts to that.
09:59:33 One, that's what Stephani is doing now.
09:59:36 She has -- she is becoming very schooled and stayed
09:59:40 really focused as opposed to "this is the way we have
09:59:43 always done it, we have these bids."
09:59:46 She is calling all over the country.
09:59:53 >> That's great that she's doing it.
09:59:56 I haven't met her yet.
09:59:57 What I'm thinking about, though, is the possibility
09:59:59 that maybe instead of a year-to-year contract for some
10:00:02 of these products, maybe there's a company out there
10:00:06 that might give us some great deal, you know,
10:00:10 cost-plus, you know, plus some small profit, you know,
10:00:16 where we could partner with them for a five-year
10:00:19 contract or something like that, and long-term that
10:00:22 might help us.

10:00:24 >>RALPH METCALF: We'll certainly look into it.
10:00:26 Our experience has been when we lock in things now, we
10:00:29 lock them in for a certain time, but there will be a
10:00:33 multiplier and adjustment in there.
10:00:36 Nobody is going to lock in if it's at the bottom of
10:00:39 the market right now at an all-time low, you are not
10:00:41 going to get that price locked in for five years.
10:00:44 Now, the other part of that, so there's a combination
10:00:46 of the escalators, there will be like a consumer price
10:00:50 index, there will be an indicator that will do that,
10:00:53 the adjustment of those things, and we are also
10:00:55 looking into, can we buy a whole lot of it while it's
10:00:59 cheap and store it? You are talking about millions of
10:01:02 gallons.
10:01:02 So, you know, that is one of the things we are doing.
10:01:04 We are also going to be talking with some consultants
10:01:07 about our process again.
10:01:09 We have got one coming up this year to say, is there a
10:01:12 way we can change our basic treatment process to use a
10:01:16 little less?
10:01:18 >> Are there futures in these types of things?
10:01:24 I know Hartline, now, we are being a little more

10:01:27 aggressive on our gas purchases by, you know, going
10:01:31 into the futures market and that sort of thing.
10:01:34 >>> We have done that with the natural gas, which we
10:01:36 were using for the generators, dealing with some of
10:01:40 that.
10:01:40 So, yes, I think between purchasing an us, we could be
10:01:45 spending some more time looking at chemicals and
10:01:48 finding out, are we doing these big commodities to
10:01:51 have a semi commodities expert for the city?
10:01:54 Because, you know, we do have some of this and we will
10:01:56 be doing some.
10:01:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
10:02:01 I'm done, Madam Chair.
10:02:05 >>BONNIE WISE: I am going be talking about the -- are
10:02:07 there any other questions specifically on the
10:02:09 wastewater system?
10:02:09 I'll move onto the next phase.
10:02:11 Okay.
10:02:13 There are various items that the rating agencies
10:02:19 consider when they are looking at a credit.
10:02:22 And this is from Fitch ratings, one of the three --
10:02:28 Moody and S&P, and they call their ten Cs of sewer

10:02:32 and water bond analysis. {}
10:02:33 You can go through the list.
10:02:34 Everything from your community to your capacity, your
10:02:37 customers, your capital demands, your charges, crew,
10:02:41 coverage, cash balances, covenants, and each rating
10:02:46 agency has a similar list, they maybe don't call it
10:02:49 something snazzy like the 10 Cs but it is really
10:02:52 looking at the overall health and stability of the
10:02:54 system.
10:02:57 Fitch says in their report if you have to say one
10:03:02 thing about the water sewer system it's stability.
10:03:05 That's what they want to see.
10:03:06 These are all the criteria they look at when they look
10:03:10 at a rating.
10:03:11 So when we did our bond issue in 2007 for our last
10:03:14 water bond issue, our water and wastewater issue in
10:03:20 2007, then this was the analysis that they went
10:03:22 through at this time, and they looked at.
10:03:27 And you don't need to go down each individual ten but
10:03:32 these are the key ratios when they look at those ten
10:03:35 Cs.
10:03:36 These are 2009 median.

10:03:40 And I highlighted that because that AA is the rating
10:03:43 that we currently have.
10:03:44 So these would basically be our peers in the AA rating
10:03:49 category.
10:03:50 So one thing if I could bring to your attention in the
10:03:52 second portion, the three-year historical leave Diggs
10:03:57 additional debt service of three times on average.
10:04:01 Now some of these things interestingly, higher in A
10:04:04 category and lower in the AA, I think that's their
10:04:07 universe, but you can see that it is an overall
10:04:09 comprehensive review of all these various criteria,
10:04:13 and then the rating agencies determine where you fall.
10:04:16 And historically, we have fallen in that AA category,
10:04:21 which, for example, about three times coverage, and I
10:04:27 am going to show you where wastewater is currently,
10:04:32 why that's so important.
10:04:33 And so water is going to probably be going into the
10:04:36 debt market probably in a few months from now, which
10:04:39 is partly why this is being discussed at this time and
10:04:44 why we had to hire independent engineers to analyze
10:04:48 this because as I mentioned water and wastewater are
10:04:51 together for bond purposes.

10:04:52 So we have our disclosure documents, our information
10:04:54 to the potential investors, to the rating agencies.
10:04:57 There is an entire analysis done on both water and
10:05:01 wastewater regardless of whether it's water borrowing
10:05:03 or wastewater borrowing, because they are attached at
10:05:06 the hip for rating purposes.
10:05:10 These are our current ratings.
10:05:12 Fitch, AA, moody AA 2, and S&P AA, they all use
10:05:18 variations of capital letters and small letters, and
10:05:21 for the moody AA-2 that is just a solid AA, so they
10:05:27 are all at equivalent rating.
10:05:30 These are some excerpts from the report in 2007 and
10:05:37 basically from our system a year and a half ago.
10:05:40 Strong financial performance.
10:05:42 Solid debt service coverage.
10:05:44 Solid liquidity.
10:05:45 Rates competitive compared to others even after the
10:05:48 increases because this is what we were embarking on
10:05:50 the water five-year rate increase.
10:05:54 CIP moderate levels with moderate debt.
10:05:57 Satisfactory supply and capacity.
10:05:58 And a healthy economy of the service area extending

10:06:01 beyond the city limits.
10:06:03 So these are things that I pulled frankly from each of
10:06:07 the three reports, but really they were overlapping.
10:06:10 But these things were the components of what went into
10:06:12 our maintaining our AA rating at that time.
10:06:15 Why this is so important?
10:06:20 You heard me talk about this a lot.
10:06:21 Not only because I was an investment banker before I
10:06:24 was here and this is what I used to do in bond issues,
10:06:26 so I happened to find this interesting.
10:06:28 But it's also really important because it means
10:06:32 dollars and it means -- what it means in accessing of
10:06:36 the market.
10:06:37 So as I mentioned, water would be going out into the
10:06:39 market, and a few months from now, there's been
10:06:43 changes in the market, even since November of '07.
10:06:46 Obviously many changes in the economy.
10:06:48 But even in the municipal bond market.
10:06:51 Credit spreads have widened dramatically.
10:06:53 The difference between an "AA" rating and an "A"
10:06:57 rating, there's always been a difference if you are
10:06:58 going out to the market, just as somebody with a

10:07:01 better credit gets better rates when they get a loan.
10:07:04 The same in the municipal bond market.
10:07:07 But that spread has really widened very much in the
10:07:09 past year or so.
10:07:12 There is what we call this flight to quality.
10:07:16 People are investing in treasury bonds because they
10:07:18 just want the safest instrument out there, and that
10:07:22 means that the rate treasury bonds have declined so
10:07:24 much, as we know, and because there's this flight to
10:07:28 quality.
10:07:29 So I wanted to quantify what this would mean, if we
10:07:32 were to drop from AA to A.
10:07:34 And I'm not suggesting at all that we are, going to
10:07:38 drop from AA to A.
10:07:39 This is why it's so important to maintain our AA.
10:07:43 On a $50 million bond issue the difference would be 64
10:07:47 basis points, 6.4%.
10:07:49 That would be the difference in the borrowing costs.
10:07:52 And what that would mean is $320,000 a year difference
10:07:57 in interest costs, for 30 years.
10:08:01 So this is not a one-time thing.
10:08:03 This is an ongoing thing.

10:08:05 So that means that water, for example, when they are
10:08:09 going to go out into the market in just a few months,
10:08:12 if the rating were to drop from AA to A, once again,
10:08:15 not saying that it would, especially if the rating
10:08:18 agencies are watching, that this would be the
10:08:20 financial cost of that.
10:08:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it variable or fixed? In other
10:08:24 words, once you get there, are you stuck with it?
10:08:29 >>> It sticks.
10:08:30 Typically with large capital projects we issue
10:08:32 fixed-rate debt.
10:08:34 We do have some commercial paper outstanding on the
10:08:36 water system, because we have some revenues, and we
10:08:40 have the CIAC program, but predominantly we have done
10:08:46 fix rate debt, and still, even though rates have
10:08:49 changed in the municipal bond market, they are still
10:08:53 relatively low.
10:08:53 But this would be the difference that we would have.
10:08:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I hear what you said, 320 a year
10:09:02 times ten years, you are looking at $10,800,000 in
10:09:06 additional interest costs?
10:09:10 >>> I actually said over 30 years.

10:09:11 >> Looking at 10 point .8 --
10:09:17 >>> Additional.
10:09:17 >> You add on.
10:09:18 >>> I just want to make it really clear that that is
10:09:23 the difference.
10:09:24 And so that would be how much extra debt service that
10:09:27 the system would have to cover.
10:09:29 Exactly.
10:09:32 We have certain rate covenants that exist in our bond
10:09:37 documents at this time.
10:09:39 And our rate covenant says on a combined basis, the
10:09:43 total water, wastewater revenues have to meet these
10:09:46 various tests on an annual basis.
10:09:48 100 percent of the current expenses, 120% of the
10:09:52 current year debt service requirement, 100 percent of
10:09:55 the reserve account requirement, 100 percent of
10:09:57 renewal replacement.
10:09:59 Our credit is so good that AA, that we are not even
10:10:03 required to have a reserve account.
10:10:06 And that is very unusual.
10:10:08 Frankly, I will tell you in my bond experience I have
10:10:11 not really seen that before.

10:10:12 But from times past in our existing bond documents
10:10:18 don't require us to have a reserve account of the
10:10:20 often a reserve account is to cover one year's debt
10:10:23 service on the bond.
10:10:24 And when you don't have one, it means that you can use
10:10:27 all the money from your bond issue other than some,
10:10:30 you know, cost of issuance for your project rather
10:10:33 than having to set aside a year's debt service.
10:10:36 However, if we drop below a certain level, we would be
10:10:39 require to fund this reserve.
10:10:41 So I am not really going to go into that, but just for
10:10:43 right now we don't have a reserve.
10:10:46 And if I can focus on the current debt service
10:10:50 requirement, that 120%.
10:10:52 Remember, back from that prior chart, the average AA
10:10:56 utility in Fitch has three times coverage, 300
10:11:00 percent.
10:11:01 Our documents say that the minimal, before we have to
10:11:04 come in and the bondholders could actually force us to
10:11:07 raise rates, we would use 120.
10:11:11 We could never get an AA with 120.
10:11:15 The average is 3.

10:11:20 So if we were to project where we would be in fiscal
10:11:23 year '10 if we took no action, for wastewater only,
10:11:30 this is what the debt service coverage will look like.
10:11:34 Operating revenues, declining to 76 million, operating
10:11:38 expenses, 66 million, net revenues available for debt
10:11:42 service, 10.4 million.
10:11:45 The debt service is 21 million.
10:11:48 So our debt service requirement is 120%, and we are at
10:11:53 48.
10:11:54 If you were to look at wastewater alone.
10:11:57 So what that means, because it is a combined test,
10:12:03 water coverage must be at least two times 200
10:12:05 percent -- sorry -- 200 percent just to get to the
10:12:11 120, not even to get to the point to maintain our AA
10:12:14 rating.
10:12:16 So this is not, obviously, I mean, obvious here, this
10:12:21 is not the coverage necessary for AA type credit.
10:12:24 This is not one of the characteristics that one would
10:12:27 see when you are looking at an AA credit that we
10:12:31 currently are.
10:12:34 Where do our rates compare to other jurisdictions?
10:12:37 This is an average customer.

10:12:39 And so these are the current rates.
10:12:41 And some of our customers have a bill charge and some
10:12:46 have a facilities-based facilities charge, which is
10:12:52 standard.
10:12:52 We do not. We just have our consumption charge.
10:12:54 When you add those together for the same average
10:12:56 customer, apples and apples, we are at 33.60 for 10
10:13:03 CCI, and you can see there from this peer group that
10:13:08 we are the lowest currently of any of those peers.
10:13:12 And this is where they are currently.
10:13:13 So some of these other jurisdictions may be
10:13:16 contemplating rate increases, but this is where they
10:13:20 are at this time.
10:13:21 So I wanted to show you presently.
10:13:26 >> Is that an average customer?
10:13:28 >>> Average customer.
10:13:29 Residential.
10:13:32 My family, on the other hand, is apparently above
10:13:40 average.
10:13:40 Okay.
10:13:41 What rate increases have we had over the past years?
10:13:45 I went back to 1995.

10:13:46 I wanted to show you in 1995 there was a 21%.
10:13:50 Then in '97 two years later a 22%.
10:13:53 There's a big gap, you might recall this
10:13:57 administration came in, we had a 15% rate increase.
10:14:00 And then in 2006, 5% rate increase.
10:14:03 We do not have the same type of rate increase
10:14:05 structure that we have on water.
10:14:07 But you recently implemented that five-year annual
10:14:11 type rate increase showing that stability that the
10:14:13 rating agencies are looking for.
10:14:15 But this is historically what we have had in
10:14:17 wastewater.
10:14:20 What we have done is hired an independent engineer,
10:14:24 because when you do these bond issues it is imperative
10:14:26 that you have somebody external giving a review of
10:14:29 your system, looking at your capital needs, looking at
10:14:32 your requirements, and really looking to see if your
10:14:35 assumptions are reasonable.
10:14:36 So Greeley & Hanson has done a wastewater support and
10:14:41 we have some excerpts from that report today, this
10:14:43 draft report.
10:14:44 And this report would be required for the issuance of

10:14:47 the debt that is required for the bond.
10:14:51 They worked very closely with my staff and the
10:14:53 wastewater staff in building these assumptions.
10:14:57 And so what we asked them to do was to please look at
10:15:00 three different scenarios.
10:15:01 How can we really make this wastewater system a system
10:15:05 that is worthy of the maintaining this AA rating, and
10:15:09 providing the stability that we need going forward?
10:15:12 We asked them to look at a one-time rate increase to
10:15:15 cover a five-year period.
10:15:17 And the five-year period is because that's what the
10:15:19 bond side wants comes to look at.
10:15:24 They want to see it over a five-year period and will
10:15:27 allow you to incorporate any rates that you have
10:15:29 implemented or to be implemented in that analysis.
10:15:31 So one-time increase.
10:15:33 We also asked them to look at a three-year increase
10:15:36 from fiscal year '10-12 with no increases for '13 and
10:15:42 14 but maintaining the coverage, the cash that's
10:15:45 necessary in that scenario.
10:15:47 Then we asked them to look at a five-year rate
10:15:50 increase which is similar to that which we did for

10:15:52 water.
10:15:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm sorry, thank you very much,
10:15:56 Madam Chair.
10:15:57 On page 7, when I see the 64 bases points based on 50
10:16:03 million, am I assuming that what we are looking for is
10:16:06 50 million?
10:16:07 Or am I assuming that you did that to clarify how the
10:16:10 rate effects the interest, if you go from an AA to an
10:16:16 A, 50 million seems like a lot of money, but sometimes
10:16:20 when you are dealing with an animal this big, I don't
10:16:22 know if 50 million is sufficient.
10:16:27 >>> I did 50 million because it's a round number.
10:16:30 It's typically a wastewater or bond issuance.
10:16:35 However the bond issue that's contemplated is probably
10:16:37 closer to 100 million.
10:16:39 >> So then the rates --
10:16:41 >>> Double.
10:16:42 >> Double that.
10:16:42 So you have to double your 10.8 to 21.6 in interest.
10:16:48 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes.
10:16:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me also say, has any scenario
10:16:53 been done -- and I'm not accusing you or anyone else

10:16:57 of credit card financing.
10:17:00 I know you are much smarter than that.
10:17:01 But a bond in essence is a loan, and you have to pay
10:17:04 it back, just like a loan.
10:17:09 Has there been any comparison of pay as you go with a
10:17:12 rate increase where you would not spend your interest,
10:17:16 and maybe have more for your money in a longer period
10:17:19 of time to get to your ultimate goal?
10:17:22 In other words, if you lived in an apartment, and you
10:17:26 saved a few dollars a month, and after a few years you
10:17:29 had enough for a down payment, and you can buy a
10:17:33 house, and maybe make the same amount of payment that
10:17:37 you were in the apartment to your home.
10:17:39 So I'm thinking, I don't know if you have done this.
10:17:42 I'm sure your individual engineer did, compared how
10:17:47 much would it cost a month to Charlie Miranda and all
10:17:51 of us and all the citizens that we serve to put X to
10:17:56 an account and you draw interest on that account, and
10:17:58 in today's market, hate to admit it's not much
10:18:01 interest, to do what you have to do without going to
10:18:04 the bond market?
10:18:05 Has that ever been explored?

10:18:08 >>BONNIE WISE: What we always do is look at a
10:18:10 combination, really, of pay as you go, and capital
10:18:14 financing.
10:18:15 Some projects are so large, the 12th Street, for
10:18:19 example.
10:18:22 23 million.
10:18:23 So, I mean, some things you can't do pay as you go.
10:18:26 But some smaller capital projects, I believe, it is
10:18:29 appropriate to do pay as you go, and in fact we do
10:18:32 that already.
10:18:34 This analysis really doesn't incorporate much future
10:18:36 debt at all.
10:18:38 It really does do more as a pay as you government but
10:18:42 I think your question is really very good because I
10:18:44 think you always have to look and see what the
10:18:46 interest rates are in the market compared to your
10:18:48 earnings rate, and to see how you can maintain your
10:18:52 most solid beverage coverage, so it really is a
10:18:55 combination of how you described it, both pay as you
10:18:59 go --
10:18:59 >> So what you are saying, as a 70s scenario, when
10:19:04 the interest rates were 18 and 19%, would you

10:19:06 certainly look at pay as you go?
10:19:09 >>> Right.
10:19:10 This scenario, the interest rates are still below 6.
10:19:21 >>RALPH METCALF: Everything in here shown as
10:19:24 wastewater, all the anticipated expenditures, there's
10:19:27 nothing here to be bonded, the capital work is only
10:19:30 patching.
10:19:30 This is not just pay as you go, it's patch-as-you-go.
10:19:36 There's nothing like the 12th Street expenditures.
10:19:38 This does not include any big catastrophes or big
10:19:41 projects.
10:19:41 This is just minimal ongoing maintenance which we
10:19:44 would not bond anyway.
10:19:45 And you are absolutely right, you would never bond
10:19:47 something you have to do every year.
10:19:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT:
10:19:55 >> Thank you.
10:19:56 >>BONNIE WISE: There are certain exceptions we made in
10:20:01 all three scenarios.
10:20:02 As you may recall there is a surcharge that is charged
10:20:05 to the unincorporated areas of Hillsborough County
10:20:07 that the wastewater system serves.

10:20:09 If I can have the PowerPoint back, please.
10:20:13 And that scenario, we are currently charging 18%
10:20:19 surcharge.
10:20:19 The water system by law, you know, is allowed to go up
10:20:23 to 25%.
10:20:25 And we have done that in water.
10:20:27 And so in all these scenarios, we have assumed that we
10:20:30 do increase that 18% to 25% for those that are
10:20:35 affected outside the city limits.
10:20:37 And so those are not City of Tampa, but they are City
10:20:40 of Tampa wastewater customers but they are not City of
10:20:43 Tampa.
10:20:44 So that assumption is in all three scenarios.
10:20:47 And as Ralph mentioned this is really just a minimal
10:20:50 capital program without incurring long-term debt, and
10:20:55 to make it very clear, these capital programs do not
10:20:58 include funds for any reclaimed or TMDL projects that
10:21:04 will probably be coming before you at some time in the
10:21:06 future.
10:21:06 We don't have that information now.
10:21:08 But if you could keep that kind of in the back of your
10:21:10 mind, because this is something to come in the future,

10:21:14 but not the numbers that we know right at this time.
10:21:17 It does incorporate all the assumptions including the
10:21:21 revenue decline that we previously discussed.
10:21:23 It includes the pension increases.
10:21:25 It includes the insurance increases, the other market
10:21:28 factors, interest rates, as Mr. Miranda mentioned, the
10:21:31 customer based changes and just the overall economic
10:21:34 environment.
10:21:35 So those assumptions are all consistent throughout the
10:21:37 three scenarios.
10:21:39 I know this page is quite busy.
10:21:40 But this is part from their engineer's report and
10:21:43 where they tried to summarize the various options,
10:21:47 remembering that option 1 is just a one-time increase.
10:21:50 So if we were to do that, and this would provide the
10:21:54 coverage levels that we need, et cetera, that would
10:21:56 require a 32% rate increase in fiscal year '10.
10:22:02 That would be option 1.
10:22:04 Option 2 would require a 14.5% rate increase in fiscal
10:22:09 year 10.
10:22:10 Then 12%.
10:22:11 Then 8.

10:22:12 Then zero.
10:22:13 And then zero.
10:22:14 And then option 3, the five-year, would be 14.5, 12,
10:22:19 6, 2, 2.
10:22:20 Really very similar to option 3, but for a 2012 there
10:22:25 would be slightly lower, and then you would have those
10:22:27 payments in the fourth and fifth years.
10:22:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask a question?
10:22:36 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes.
10:22:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did you even consider a more
10:22:39 uniform number for each year rather than these more
10:22:42 dramatic increases?
10:22:44 >>BONNIE WISE: They really do try to average out the
10:22:47 increases.
10:22:48 However, fiscal year '10 is going to see such a
10:22:52 dramatic decline in order to get to the coverages that
10:22:55 are necessary.
10:22:58 That is why fiscal year '10 required such a bigger
10:23:02 number.
10:23:02 So, yes, they really do try to do that.
10:23:04 But that's just how the math worked.
10:23:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Dingfelder?

10:23:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I had the same question, Linda.
10:23:12 By spreading it out, option 1 is 32%.
10:23:17 Option 2 is a total of 34.5%.
10:23:20 Option 3 is a total of 36.5%, and I understand why.
10:23:26 But are there any ways that we could defer some of our
10:23:35 capital projects, or even some of the bigger
10:23:43 maintenance projects, you know, to allow -- to allow
10:23:47 us to soften that 2010 or 2011 impacts?
10:23:53 >>> I will tell you that we have done that already.
10:23:56 We are to the point where we cannot defer these
10:23:58 capital projects any more for engineers to give us a
10:24:02 report on an annual basis to say that we are
10:24:04 sufficiently maintaining our system.
10:24:07 So, yes, we did look at that.
10:24:09 We did ask that question.
10:24:11 And, therefore, you don't see major capital projects
10:24:14 here.
10:24:14 It really is what is to keep things going.
10:24:18 If Ralph has a major cave-in of some sort, he will be
10:24:23 able to patch, he does not have room for additional
10:24:26 capacity, anything of that nature.
10:24:28 So we had scrubbed that as much as we can.

10:24:32 And Ralph can speak to the engineering side, but we
10:24:36 had these very long discussion was our engineers about
10:24:39 this.
10:24:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I know we have been very excited
10:24:42 about when we had more money about getting out and
10:24:45 replacing old pipe.
10:24:49 So are we still in that program?
10:24:52 Or have we kind of backed off on that sort of thing a
10:24:56 bit?
10:24:58 >>>
10:24:59 >> The duct tape version.
10:25:04 >>RALPH METCALF: The only old pipes we are replacing
10:25:06 are pipes that fail.
10:25:07 We are not replacing anything before it fails.
10:25:10 There may be a couple of exceptions.
10:25:12 If you have some pipe that will simply inundate you if
10:25:16 it fails, you will have to do that first.
10:25:18 Remember, that's exactly what happened on 12th Street.
10:25:21 That pipe failed twice, and we flooded and we made
10:25:26 some very interesting lakes out there.
10:25:28 We were lucky it wasn't any worse.
10:25:31 And to do that, we were lucky.

10:25:37 If we had a third lake it would be huge.
10:25:40 We are talking about something that has 20 million
10:25:42 gallons a day of sewage.
10:25:43 So that was a $23 million hit.
10:25:46 That's a big pipe.
10:25:47 This doesn't contemplate doing any local system
10:25:51 replacement or anything like that.
10:25:53 That's where you see the trucks where we are patching
10:25:59 and running the liners through.
10:26:00 We are basically patching stuff, and we are patching
10:26:02 it as it fails.
10:26:04 Very few things that we will have to patch before it
10:26:07 fails.
10:26:08 Example, some of our big larger pump stations.
10:26:11 When you get down to where you don't have an extra
10:26:13 pump standing by, and if that one pump fails you are
10:26:16 not going to pump sewage, you must do that.
10:26:18 But those -- and you are saying more emergency --
10:26:22 seeing more emergency affidavits than you have before
10:26:25 from us because we are waiting till the last minute.
10:26:27 When we do it then, we are not kidding.
10:26:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess we all probably feel the

10:26:33 same way, and I know your recommendation is option 2.
10:26:39 I can see that on the next page.
10:26:43 To talk about a 14.5% increase in 2010, you know, it
10:26:54 would be nice to our constituents and to our customers
10:26:58 to be able to spread that out a little bit or defer
10:27:01 that, you know, defer that maybe into 2011.
10:27:11 And I'm sure the mayor feels the same way.
10:27:15 I'm sure you guys had long talks about it.
10:27:17 >>BONNIE WISE: I agree.
10:27:19 This is a horrible time to be presenting a rate
10:27:21 increase.
10:27:22 We know that it's very difficult for everybody at this
10:27:24 time.
10:27:24 And you can be certain that but for the importance we
10:27:29 would not be standing before you asking for this,
10:27:32 because we do recollect nice the very difficult
10:27:34 situation all of our citizens are in.
10:27:39 And with that, yes, we are recommending the three-year
10:27:44 time.
10:27:44 I wanted to show you some charts, though.
10:27:46 This is also from the Greeley and Hanson report, it
10:27:50 does show what the year-end reserves would be under

10:27:55 each of those scenarios, and then what the debt
10:27:57 service coverage would be.
10:27:58 And you can see the debt service coverage even on
10:28:01 option 2, which we are recommending, is still not to
10:28:05 that three level, that is more typical of an AA rated
10:28:12 security.
10:28:12 It is obviously much higher than that which we have
10:28:14 now, but it does not take us to that three level.
10:28:18 And, you know, I'm hopeful that this will be
10:28:21 sufficient to still maintain our AA rating but because
10:28:24 that analysis is so stringent, you know, I'm just
10:28:28 hopeful that we will be able to maintain it.
10:28:31 So, yes, with that, our recommendation is option 2.
10:28:36 And you can see that there really wasn't that much
10:28:38 difference between options 2 and 3 that spread it out
10:28:41 over a five-year period, because the first two years
10:28:44 the rate increase was the same, and so just going to
10:28:47 fiscal year '12 at 6% and then 2 and 2 we didn't think
10:28:52 they gave us the flexibility of these things that can
10:28:55 occur in the future but we know will occur in the
10:28:57 future, so we really felt that option 2 was really the
10:28:59 more prudent decision.

10:29:01 Of course option 1 was completely unacceptable.
10:29:04 And so we really thought option 2 made more sense.
10:29:08 It does provide the sufficient debt service coverage.
10:29:11 The reserve balances that we talked about, it does
10:29:14 align as I might remind you changing that outside the
10:29:17 city rate to be in alignment with the -- going from 18
10:29:23 to 25% once again does not fund TMDL or reclaimed
10:29:29 future issues, but allows it to be incorporated at a
10:29:31 later date then.
10:29:33 And just the minimal capital program and maintenance
10:29:37 of the system, not large capital projects.
10:29:39 So it really is the bare bones capital side that we
10:29:43 were just previously discussing.
10:29:47 How would we compare if we did implement this plan?
10:29:50 The green is the City of Tampa.
10:29:52 So the first green line is the City of Tampa currently
10:29:55 fiscal year '09.
10:29:57 This is that same average customer.
10:29:59 $33.60.
10:30:01 Once again, same numbers from the prior chart in the
10:30:04 blue, where we compare favorably currently to these
10:30:07 other jurisdictions.

10:30:10 Fiscal year '10 we would have an increase to $38.50.
10:30:16 You can see there the difference.
10:30:17 And then where we would fall in comparison, fiscal
10:30:21 year '11 to 43 and fiscal years '10-14 would be about
10:30:30 56 level.
10:30:32 These are where these in the blue are currently.
10:30:34 They too may be considering other rate increases
10:30:37 because they too are facing similar costs on chemicals
10:30:40 and insurance and pension and all those other things.
10:30:42 But this is where they are now.
10:30:44 So I wanted you to see in comparison where that rate
10:30:47 would be.
10:30:49 So even in the last year, in the third year, which is
10:30:52 the same takes fifth year, we would still be below
10:30:56 Hillsborough County, even with these rate increase to
10:30:58 where Hillsborough County is currently.
10:31:02 What does this mean for the average utility bill?
10:31:04 You have already implemented a five-year rate plan for
10:31:08 water.
10:31:09 So I wanted you to see in its entirety what does that
10:31:12 mean really to the customer?
10:31:13 What would this mean in fiscal year '10?

10:31:16 If we did this in fiscal year 10 the wastewater part
10:31:21 would increase 4.90 that we discussed.
10:31:24 You have already approved the water, so this will go
10:31:28 up from 14.62 to 17.25 regardless of this wastewater
10:31:32 scenario. So that will go up to $2.63.
10:31:36 You can see there that 18% that you had approved for
10:31:39 water, it was a five-year plan, and this year's
10:31:43 increase is 18%.
10:31:44 So the wastewater increases slightly less than that.
10:31:49 Total bill going from 73.47 to $81, a $7.53 increase.
10:31:57 A total bill increase of a little over 10%.
10:32:01 Once again we recognize this is a very difficult time,
10:32:04 but this is what we are proposing based on the
10:32:08 circumstances that we have before us.
10:32:10 So what would we do next?
10:32:14 I know this is a lot of information and you need to
10:32:19 really understand it.
10:32:19 We are welcome to have individual council briefings,
10:32:22 other public meetings to discuss this, ask questions,
10:32:24 whatever is necessary.
10:32:26 We would ask you to consider our three-year rate
10:32:28 increase, the increase of the surcharge for water, and

10:32:32 then we would follow the appropriate legal and proper
10:32:36 notification requirements that are always required in
10:32:38 any kind of rate increase.
10:32:40 And really just be there available for really
10:32:43 dissection of all this data and material.
10:32:46 Because I realize it's quite a bit.
10:32:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you very much.
10:32:50 I want to compliment you on taking a complex subject
10:32:54 and really presenting it in a very clear accessible
10:32:57 way.
10:32:57 Did you a great job.
10:32:58 Mr. Dingfelder?
10:32:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:33:04 This is a tough pill to swallow, and I think it's
10:33:08 probably the first that we have heard about it.
10:33:12 So I don't know how I feel about it.
10:33:15 But I'm not sure when you are coming back to us asking
10:33:18 us to formally move forward on this.
10:33:22 That's question number one.
10:33:25 And question number two, since you threw this at us
10:33:29 I'll throw this one back at you, not looking for an
10:33:32 answer necessarily today.

10:33:33 But on some of the bills that we get, I'm thinking
10:33:37 perhaps our TECO bill in our home or what have you, it
10:33:43 seems like sometimes you see these surcharges, like
10:33:47 energy surcharge or something like that, where they
10:33:50 put a different line item on your bill, to sort of --
10:33:55 maybe at then of the day, the bottom line of the bill
10:33:58 is as big as it is anyway, but at least it sort of
10:34:03 explains where some of these charges are and where the
10:34:05 fluctuation is.
10:34:06 I'm just wondering if maybe we shouldn't consider
10:34:09 doing the same thing.
10:34:11 In reality I think as a department, Ralph, I am going
10:34:14 to compliment you so listen up -- as a department, I
10:34:18 think that they are doing a good job, they cut back on
10:34:21 workforce, or they have cut back on the expenses that
10:34:24 they can, but one of the big reasons that this is
10:34:29 hitting us is because of chemicals and energy costs,
10:34:33 as well as a slight decrease in customer base.
10:34:36 But I don't think it's the decrease in customer base
10:34:39 is that massive.
10:34:40 I mean, I've seen it.
10:34:42 We see it on our purchase orders, you know, months

10:34:44 after month where these chemical costs and the energy
10:34:47 costs have gone up the last two years or so, two or
10:34:49 three years.
10:34:50 So what I'm wondering, and you don't have to answer it
10:34:53 today, is maybe we should consider it breaking out the
10:34:56 chemical and the energy costs as a separate line item.
10:34:59 So that way, when we do have to increase it -- and I'm
10:35:03 not just talking about now, I'm talking about for
10:35:05 future councils, because this will obviously continue
10:35:09 happening over the years, that at least the customer
10:35:11 can see that that's what it's really related to.
10:35:17 >>BONNIE WISE: One of the things, if I could bring you
10:35:19 to page 8 of the presentation -- I'm not sure I can
10:35:22 get it on the PowerPoint -- when we compared our
10:35:27 jurisdiction to the others, you will notice that some
10:35:31 of them have a billing charge and some of them have a
10:35:34 base facility charge, because going with that concept,
10:35:38 kind of like a readiness to serve, we still have to
10:35:42 read a water meter, still send out a bill, still have
10:35:44 to do certain things, so some jurisdiction versus
10:35:47 incorporated that type of thing.
10:35:48 What that does do for a very small consumer, if you

10:35:52 add on the $15 or it varies, really, it could really
10:35:57 impact a small customer, but many jurisdictions do
10:36:00 have some type of, you know, fixed charge, and then a
10:36:05 consumption charge on top of that.
10:36:06 So there are variations in doing something like that.
10:36:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I'm not looking to necessarily
10:36:13 charge any particular customer any different.
10:36:16 I'm just saying that if we take the current charge and
10:36:18 break out, so folks can see, now, kind of what's going
10:36:22 on and what percentage of their bill goes to what.
10:36:29 And maybe that would help explain, and perhaps soften
10:36:36 the impact to that customer, so they know that -- a
10:36:40 lot of people just say, oh, government inefficiency.
10:36:43 But I really don't believe that's the case.
10:36:46 >>BONNIE WISE: I would agree in this case there's been
10:36:48 a lot of efficiency, similar to I guess we added the
10:36:50 line for the Tampa Bay water surcharge to make it
10:36:53 really very clear that this is only for this purpose.
10:36:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That is an example I was thinking
10:36:59 of as well.
10:37:00 Because of the Tampa Bay water surcharge it's
10:37:02 something that's out of our control.

10:37:03 >>BONNIE WISE: Right.
10:37:05 And just so that you know, these are the numbers in
10:37:08 total dollars that we need to get to, to make the
10:37:10 system whole, how you break it up.
10:37:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So question one is, when are you
10:37:17 looking for action on this?
10:37:20 I hope when you do, you will come back and consider
10:37:23 the chemical surcharge as a possibility.
10:37:27 >>BONNIE WISE: It would really be up to council when
10:37:29 you would like us to come back.
10:37:31 There are certain notice requirements.
10:37:33 We do have to get the information out to the public on
10:37:35 the -- it takes a month to do a billing cycle to give
10:37:38 them the information.
10:37:39 I believe it is an ordinance change.
10:37:41 So we would have to build in that ample time to have
10:37:45 it effective October 1, if we could.
10:37:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:37:49 Ms. Mulhern asked a question.
10:37:51 Maybe Mr. Fletcher can be thinking of what the timing
10:37:53 would be in terms of getting an ordinance organized.
10:37:57 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to follow up on what you were

10:37:59 talking about the base facility charge.
10:38:02 Were you suggesting that that could be a mechanism to
10:38:09 show that it is this, now, what John was talking about
10:38:13 as opposed to some chemical energy in making the bill
10:38:17 really, I think, kind of confusing.
10:38:20 Plus we don't know what changes in the market are
10:38:24 going to be affecting the rate.
10:38:26 So I think it makes more sense to have a category like
10:38:30 that.
10:38:30 Is that what you were suggesting, that we could maybe
10:38:33 use that?
10:38:35 >>BONNIE WISE: I think it's two different things, if I
10:38:37 am understanding the question.
10:38:38 I think it was more letting the public understand what
10:38:40 are the components of this wastewater charge, because
10:38:46 much of it is fixed charge, and that education.
10:38:48 What I was saying that some jurisdictions actually
10:38:51 charge a minimum, whether you use the wastewater
10:38:55 system or not.
10:38:56 But that's a policy change, and we haven't done that
10:38:59 before, because like I said, it does impact the small
10:39:02 users quite a bit.

10:39:05 >> Is that more of a burden on the smaller users?
10:39:08 >>> Right.
10:39:09 Because it's a fixed amount.
10:39:10 It's that $12 or that $10 so it would impact --
10:39:15 >> Right.
10:39:15 >>> But in the end we need to get the same total
10:39:17 dollars in revenue.
10:39:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
10:39:21 >>BONNIE WISE: Like I said, that's how we got to the
10:39:23 14.5 without incorporating any of these base charges.
10:39:27 But, for example, if we had a base charge, I'll make
10:39:29 it up, it's 3.80 like they charge in hills bow that
10:39:33 could help defray the cost of utility accounting
10:39:36 division, for example, but it would be a fixed amount
10:39:38 for a small user.
10:39:43 >>MARY MULHERN: It seems that could be adjustable so
10:39:45 it would be small enough for the smallest user.
10:39:47 >>> We could have a variable, residential versus
10:39:53 commercial.
10:39:54 >>MARY MULHERN: That's what I was thinking.
10:39:55 I don't really understand how you measure usage so
10:39:59 much, but similar to what we do with water, I don't

10:40:04 know.
10:40:05 Is there any way to measure that, how much product?
10:40:11 >>> I'm sorry, if I can say one other thing regarding
10:40:13 the base charge.
10:40:14 Usually it's a fixed amount.
10:40:16 Would be the facility charge that would be different
10:40:18 because there is still the cost of reading a meter,
10:40:21 sending out a bill, which is the same for everybody.
10:40:29 >>RALPH METCALF: Actually, our calculations are
10:40:31 exactly the same as water, unless you have irrigation,
10:40:36 because we bill off the water meter.
10:40:38 So except for the sewer max, which is -- if you have a
10:40:44 Ph.D. you probably understand it.
10:40:47 Sewer max says you use the same amount of sewer, every
10:40:50 month, whether you irrigate your lawn or not, or if
10:40:53 you have an irrigation meter, you don't get that.
10:40:56 So that's a volume.
10:40:58 So everything we do is proportional to volume.
10:41:02 And any fixed charge, as we said, for instance, the
10:41:08 Hillsborough County flow goes away, we don't save much
10:41:10 money because most of our costs are not proportional
10:41:13 to volume.

10:41:14 In fact the state legislature has said you can charge
10:41:16 up to 50% as a fixed charge.
10:41:20 And that was not real rocket science.
10:41:23 I think you just pick a number.
10:41:25 But it says a significant part of your costs are
10:41:28 fixed.
10:41:29 But when you do that, it does affect the small user
10:41:33 much more than the large user, and so far we have not
10:41:36 elected to do that.
10:41:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Please don't leave.
10:41:40 I'm glad you said what happened on the legislature.
10:41:42 I believe that was in the mid 70s that they passed a
10:41:44 law, that anywhere in the city where your city line
10:41:51 met with another governmental agency, that you had the
10:41:53 capacity at that time, and you had to take them in as
10:41:56 customers.
10:41:57 And in doing so, I believe they gave us a 1.5 ratio
10:42:03 for handing the line and so forth and so on.
10:42:06 >>> That's a similar percentage, but that was
10:42:09 different.
10:42:09 One is the fixed cost.
10:42:10 The other one said if we are going to take you from

10:42:12 outside, we can charge up to 25% surcharge without
10:42:16 doing the math, and up to 50% if we can show between
10:42:21 25 and 50, there is an increased charge.
10:42:23 >> But the legislature did that in the 70s.
10:42:28 For urban sprawl.
10:42:30 And we had to run the line.
10:42:35 I'm glad you're the man with the brain here, because
10:42:38 you're the one that knows it all, I think.
10:42:42 All these numbers that we have seen in gallons and
10:42:50 intensity of hundreds of gallons, it's predicated not
10:42:53 on what goes out but what goes into the house?
10:42:56 >>>
10:42:57 >>RALPH METCALF: That's correct.
10:42:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That being said if you lower your
10:43:01 water consumption in the house, in essence, you lower
10:43:03 your consumption of rate that you pay under any
10:43:05 formula for your department.
10:43:06 >>> Not the rate, the bill.
10:43:09 >> The bill.
10:43:12 So if you conserve water, you conserve money.
10:43:14 You don't like to hear that.
10:43:15 >>RALPH METCALF: Well, that was the classic that

10:43:18 happened in the mid 70s in California, when I was
10:43:21 living out there, that they got so good at conserving
10:43:24 water, that was the old brick and the toilet tanker a
10:43:28 out there, that their usage cut in half, and their
10:43:31 rate had to double because their cost stayed the same.
10:43:34 Now your bill didn't go up, but your rate doubled, and
10:43:38 that is what has to happen to cover those fixed costs.
10:43:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So there's a possibility even
10:43:44 increasing costs but yet some individuals, that's a
10:43:49 small amount of water volume can also get a smaller
10:43:52 amount of charge.
10:43:53 And I remember when you left California is when the
10:43:59 shark ate your surfboard.
10:44:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have one more question.
10:44:03 Is there anything that is being done innovatively in
10:44:08 terms of sustainability that could change the formula,
10:44:14 that we haven't yet explored, that we might explore in
10:44:16 the future, such as generating some of our own power
10:44:25 or generating some of our own methane? I'm not
10:44:26 familiar with this. I'm certainly not an engineer.
10:44:27 I just wonder in other parts of the country where they
10:44:29 are facing similar pressures, have there been any

10:44:32 innovative systems that we haven't yet adopted that we
10:44:37 might consider adopting?
10:44:39 >>RALPH METCALF: Actually, we do a lot of that now, we
10:44:40 do take the methane, and we generate electricity, we
10:44:44 generate over -- almost $800,000 a year, a million
10:44:48 dollars a year of electricity.
10:44:50 There is a cost of doing that.
10:44:51 But we do that.
10:44:52 We do our sludge, it's treated, as he would do with
10:45:00 fertilizer.
10:45:01 There's a lot of recycling kind of green things we do
10:45:04 now.
10:45:04 The things that we would be looking at for the future
10:45:07 would be, are there any ways that we can basically
10:45:09 change our whole basic treatment process to make it
10:45:13 less energy and chemical intensive?
10:45:18 And that's a long process.
10:45:20 There may be some first steps we can take, and that's
10:45:23 why we are getting a consultant this year.
10:45:26 And we are not any happier than you guys are anybody
10:45:30 else that we have to do this.
10:45:32 But the one thing that the charts didn't show is

10:45:34 without the rate increase we will run out of money in
10:45:37 2011.
10:45:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:45:41 Ms. Mulhern.
10:45:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Metcalf, has there been any
10:45:45 research or discussion about composting toilets?
10:45:53 >>RALPH METCALF: There has been quite a bit other
10:45:55 places.
10:45:55 Mostly composting toilets has been used out in
10:45:58 low-density kinds of places.
10:46:01 Of course, if everybody composted toilets would mean
10:46:08 there would be no sewage and I would be out of a job
10:46:11 and --
10:46:13 >>MARY MULHERN: No, you would be a composter.
10:46:17 >>> You have to get the stuff you don't want at your
10:46:19 house down to us, and that's why we use a liquid-base
10:46:23 form of things.
10:46:24 It's the transportation would be just horrendous.
10:46:33 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: How far off would we be to treat
10:46:38 the water that we are throwing into the bay now so it
10:46:41 could be consumable?
10:46:42 What type of expense are we talking about?

10:46:45 Rat than running pipes 14, 15 miles for reclaimed
10:46:50 water, how expensive would it be?
10:46:53 >>RALPH METCALF: Well, there was a project -- and I
10:46:55 won't bore you with too much of this -- back in the
10:46:57 '80s to '90s that we called the TWRRP project,
10:46:59 which is a terrible acronym, Tampa Water Resource
10:47:04 Recovery project.
10:47:05 But what we were looking at was something that's been
10:47:08 done for the last 30 years up in Washington, a place
10:47:11 called Occoquan, and they treat their wastewater.
10:47:23 That water is dumped directly into the Fairfax
10:47:26 reservoir, where Fairfax county treats it through a
10:47:29 water plant, and they drink it.
10:47:32 And as you can imagine like everything else, there was
10:47:34 a lot of uproar over this.
10:47:37 They looked at all sorts of options.
10:47:39 They were meeting for years.
10:47:40 The upshot, I had been to that plant and it is
10:47:43 incredible, the water coming out the end looks just
10:47:45 like one of those mountain stream Coor's beer
10:47:51 commercials.
10:47:52 It works.

10:47:52 But there is what the previous mayor called the YUCK
10:47:58 factor.
10:47:59 I asked, what do you do about the pollutants you don't
10:48:01 know about yet?
10:48:02 And that's not really an answerable question.
10:48:04 But the answer is that when we were looking at it, we
10:48:08 already had a permit with the DEP and everybody to
10:48:10 build this plant.
10:48:11 We were going to build a 35 million gallon a day
10:48:15 plant, treat the water, take it up to the bypass
10:48:17 canal, put it back in the river, Brad Baird's plant
10:48:21 was going to re-treat it and use it for drinking
10:48:25 water.
10:48:25 The big advantage is you don't have to build another
10:48:27 delivery system.
10:48:28 You don't need to build more pipes.
10:48:29 You already have the pipes.
10:48:31 You have one big pipe to get it up there but you don't
10:48:33 have a whole star system.
10:48:35 The cost for that would probably be, and off the top
10:48:38 of my head now, probably in the $150 million range,
10:48:42 which is quite a bit less than a reclaimed water

10:48:46 system to do the same thing.
10:48:49 But there are public issues to be dealt with on that.
10:48:52 And this is something that's going on all over the
10:48:54 country.
10:48:56 >> It's the issue of the future.
10:49:00 I think that I remember reading this a couple years
10:49:03 ago, but it's one of the communities in Pinellas.
10:49:06 I don't know if it was Dunedin or Gulfport or
10:49:09 something.
10:49:09 But the mayor drank their reclaimed water, you know,
10:49:14 had a press conference and showed how clean --
10:49:16 >>> Actually, I drank the water out of the Howard
10:49:19 Curren plant.
10:49:21 >>MARY MULHERN: But I mean I think that they maybe
10:49:29 have arrived at that point.
10:49:30 I don't really know.
10:49:32 >>RALPH METCALF: Oh, yes, we made water with a pilot
10:49:36 plant at the Howard Curren -- we had a pilot system
10:49:39 with a real plant, small plant, 50 million gallons
10:49:44 plant built, and you held it up next to his water, it
10:49:47 looked better.
10:49:48 And we did health effects and the whole thing.

10:49:52 So, yes, the technology is absolutely there.
10:49:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:49:54 Mr. Fletcher, could you come up and tell us about
10:49:57 timing?
10:49:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before you move on, on that issue.
10:50:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
10:50:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: About the potential of drinking
10:50:04 that.
10:50:05 You alluded to it very quickly, Ralph.
10:50:07 But there are things that you not only can't see,
10:50:09 sometimes it's even hard to measure in terms of
10:50:13 hormones and pesticides, and other very, very small
10:50:21 pharmaceuticals and that sort of thing, that we have
10:50:24 all been reading about, you know, that are in your
10:50:27 wastestream, that nobody has figured out -- in the
10:50:34 city's wastestream, I stand corrected, but nobody
10:50:37 figured out how to get out yet.
10:50:41 So I for one would not be keen on heading in that
10:50:43 direction.
10:50:44 I think in a place like Arizona, okay, or other very,
10:50:47 very arid climates where you don't have water, then
10:50:52 those folks can tab that option.

10:50:53 In Florida, there's a huge amount of rain certain
10:50:56 times of year, and other times of year we don't.
10:50:59 So I think catching that rain and doing a better job
10:51:01 of storing it in reservoirs that are built properly,
10:51:06 you know, to store that sort of thing, I think is a
10:51:08 better solution for this area.
10:51:12 I hope in my lifetime we never have to get to the
10:51:15 point where we need to be potentially directing that
10:51:18 into our drinking water.
10:51:20 That's just my opinion.
10:51:25 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say, you must not
10:51:27 have read the climate report that came out yesterday,
10:51:29 because we are facing, you know, drought and all kinds
10:51:35 of -- we are going to have the scarcity of water and
10:51:43 it may not be as bad as it is out west but it's going
10:51:47 to be worse if we don't do something about our
10:51:49 greenhouse gas emission.
10:51:51 So I think we do have water shortage here.
10:51:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: How much water does Hillsborough
10:51:58 County dump that they don't use?
10:52:01 >>RALPH METCALF: They dump almost zero.
10:52:05 They built primary plants, so they couldn't put it in

10:52:08 the bay, and they did reclaim.
10:52:12 I think most of their plants now have come up to AWTS
10:52:15 standards over the years.
10:52:16 They have been doing this since the late '70s and
10:52:20 they have a fairly -- they have a lot of reclaimed
10:52:22 that goes down to Tierra Verde.
10:52:24 They are taking it east to the phosphate.
10:52:28 At the time, they were doing that, it was to get rid
10:52:30 of affluent.
10:52:31 That was the purpose.
10:52:32 So their system has been built that way.
10:52:34 We spent the money up front back in the mid 70s to
10:52:40 build a plant that would build virtually almost
10:52:42 drinking water and it would go into the bay.
10:52:45 And it has done a brilliant job so far of cleaning the
10:52:48 bay up.
10:52:48 But they don't.
10:52:49 And from the get-go their plan was to reuse it and
10:52:54 water lawn was it.
10:52:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:52:56 Mr. Fletcher, could you give us a time frame?
10:52:59 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.

10:53:04 We need to do a notice through the utility billing
10:53:07 process, and probably going through that and providing
10:53:11 sufficient notice, we would be looking at bringing
10:53:13 that back to council in late August, I believe, with a
10:53:18 two-hearing process which would be in August and early
10:53:20 September, which could meet the requested time line of
10:53:24 having to go into effect for the October billing
10:53:26 cycle, if that's council's desire.
10:53:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask under staff
10:53:32 reports next week if you could -- not week but our
10:53:38 next regularly scheduled council meeting give thaws
10:53:41 time frame in writing in a memo form so that we can
10:53:44 consider it.
10:53:44 >>> I'm sorry, the notice process and what meeting
10:53:50 dates it would be and that type of thing?
10:53:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Right.
10:53:55 Do we need to do that in the form of a motion?
10:53:58 >>> No.
10:53:58 I'm happy to do that for you.
10:54:00 I don't have it right in front of me here.
10:54:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there anyone from the public who
10:54:04 would like to speak on this workshop?

10:54:06 Any council members have any additional questions?
10:54:09 Mr. Dingfelder?
10:54:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would just ask Ms. Wise if you
10:54:16 would provide council and the community -- you have
10:54:23 given us option 1, 2 and 3 which I guess came from
10:54:26 your consultant, really, and that's all fine and good.
10:54:29 But I would like to see if this was flattened out over
10:54:33 five years, and what their ramifications of that would
10:54:37 be financially, and to your bond credit rating and all
10:54:42 that type of thing.
10:54:44 I think it's important that we at least see what that
10:54:47 option is and see how those impacts, you know, play.
10:54:52 >>BONNIE WISE: I'll tell you that I will talk to the
10:54:54 engineers about it and work with Ralph with it.
10:54:58 I just don't want to promise you that worry able to
10:55:00 flatten it any further.
10:55:02 But we will look back at it.
10:55:03 >> I'm not saying you can flatten it out and make it
10:55:07 work.
10:55:07 What I'm saying is at least flatten it out and show us
10:55:10 why it's it wouldn't work.
10:55:12 Because the options you have given us, the three

10:55:15 options that work.
10:55:19 That stay at your black line, okay.
10:55:21 But I think I would like to see if you flattened out
10:55:26 and hit that 32% or 34% or whatever percent you want
10:55:29 to hit over five years, but flatten it out at an
10:55:33 average of five or six percent over those five years,
10:55:38 to see, you know, why it wouldn't work.
10:55:41 I mean, I believe you, that we had a good relationship
10:55:44 for six years, I believe you and I'm confident that it
10:55:47 won't work under what you are saying.
10:55:51 But I would just like to see it.
10:55:53 I think it's important that when all see it, because
10:55:55 if we all have our druthers, we would rather see a
10:55:58 five or six percent flat increase over five or six
10:56:02 years.
10:56:03 Obviously you are saying that's not going to work, we
10:56:05 need to have a big spike for the next two years and
10:56:07 then come back done down to something more reasonable.
10:56:10 Well, show us that, and show us why.
10:56:13 Not necessarily in person but at least in writing.
10:56:16 I think you indicate you are going to be having
10:56:18 individual meetings with individual council people so

10:56:21 maybe you can bring those to your individual meetings
10:56:23 with us.
10:56:23 >>> I would be happy to.
10:56:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to take a three-minute
10:56:27 break from council before we begin our next
10:56:30 presentation.
10:56:31 Thank you.
10:56:32 (council recess)
10:56:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Council is called back to order.
11:06:33 Roll call.
11:06:34 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
11:06:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
11:06:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
11:06:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
11:06:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Goers.
11:06:46 >>RANDY GOERS: Land Development Coordination division.
11:06:48 The purpose of this workshop is to give you a briefing
11:06:51 on the collaborative effort with the county on the
11:06:55 redevelopment plan.
11:06:56 I have a brief overview of the efforts so far.
11:06:59 I also have Linda Mandell from the county's hazard
11:07:05 department, will speak to you for a few minutes, and

11:07:07 then open it up for questions.
11:07:09 This workshop is in preparation of a resolution we
11:07:11 will be bringing before you sometime in September that
11:07:13 will authorize us to engineer the effort based on what
11:07:18 we present today.
11:07:18 I want to put in the context.
11:07:20 So if we could get the PowerPoint.
11:07:23 The purpose of the workshop is to provide an update on
11:07:28 the status of providing the countywide post disaster
11:07:31 redevelopment plan.
11:07:32 Why do we need a plan?
11:07:34 Basically because we have concentrated development in
11:07:38 a broader area.
11:07:41 The map that you see is hard to read.
11:07:43 But the main thing that pops out is the dark brown in
11:07:46 the southeast United States, where FEMA is sort of
11:07:50 recorded disasters, and shows the billion dollar
11:07:54 climate and weather disasters in that area.
11:07:56 This is a trend since 1970 of the cost of disasters,
11:08:00 ands you can see they have just gone up over the
11:08:03 years, and it's primarily because of increased
11:08:05 development, increased people moving into the water

11:08:10 areas along the coastline.
11:08:11 The background on developing our post disaster
11:08:14 redevelopment plan in May 2008 Hillsborough County was
11:08:17 selected as a pilot community to develop a long-term
11:08:20 post disaster redevelopment plan.
11:08:22 This was a state department of community affairs, and
11:08:25 the FEMA initiative.
11:08:27 The cities of Tampa, Plant City, Temple Terrace
11:08:30 everybody participating in the project.
11:08:32 Hillsborough County is one of five communities
11:08:34 selected by the state by the project of the DCA will
11:08:38 use these strategies that come outs of this effort to
11:08:40 develop a best practice guide book for the rest of the
11:08:44 state.
11:08:46 This is a picture of Hillsborough County showing in
11:08:48 the dark blue the coastal high hazard area, and in the
11:08:52 red is the floodplain areas, susceptible to flooding.
11:08:57 These are the areas talked about, that are susceptible
11:09:01 to the storm surge, and high winds along the coast and
11:09:04 inland flooding.
11:09:06 The rest of the county is still susceptible to high
11:09:09 winds, hurricanes and so forth during a hurricane

11:09:12 event.
11:09:13 In the coastal high hazard area we have about 100,000
11:09:16 residents, 500 that you residents that are affected in
11:09:19 some of the other areas that are vulnerable.
11:09:21 We have between 100 and 250,000 structures that may be
11:09:25 susceptible to wind, flood damage combined.
11:09:28 Approximately 200,000 employees are in the coastal
11:09:30 high hazard area alone.
11:09:34 Greater than $11 billion worth of annual payroll is
11:09:38 provided in the coastal high hazard area with those
11:09:41 businesses.
11:09:42 And there's more than 25,000 businesses in the coastal
11:09:45 high hazard area and up to 60,000 in the county that
11:09:48 are vulnerable.
11:09:49 This puts a into perspective the potential loss to our
11:09:53 economic sector so should a major storm hit us.
11:09:59 When I talk about a major storm we are not talking
11:10:01 about the storms that we are used to.
11:10:05 We have not seen the storm at a level that this plan
11:10:07 is trying to look at.
11:10:08 We are looking at much larger storms, storms that are
11:10:11 Katrina type, Andrew type, IVAN and so forth.

11:10:16 So the large storms. This is a cycle of the
11:10:18 rebuilding disaster mitigation cycle.
11:10:20 And Florida has really developed this very well.
11:10:23 They are the leaders in working through a storm and
11:10:27 planning for the future.
11:10:28 As you can see really on the upper right side is where
11:10:31 the storm hits, and in the blue area is everything
11:10:33 that a community does to get ready for the storm.
11:10:38 All the warnings, the evacuations, preparedness and so
11:10:41 forth.
11:10:41 The storm hits and then immediately thereafter is the
11:10:45 making sure we get the health and safety issues,
11:10:47 making sure the people are okay and so forth.
11:10:49 Then there's that period that we get the community
11:10:52 back on its feet.
11:10:54 That's usually called the response and recovery phase.
11:10:57 This plan deals with the things that happen much
11:10:59 later.
11:11:00 It's what happens several weeks after to several
11:11:02 months after.
11:11:03 It's when the -- and some of the other major
11:11:07 communities, it's when the wide scale reconstruction

11:11:11 starts, when we start looking at thousands of homes
11:11:14 that have to be replaced, when we start looking at
11:11:17 businesses, which ones have row maned, which ones have
11:11:20 gone and so forth.
11:11:21 So this plan has a time frame of taking effect several
11:11:25 weeks after a storm to several months after a storm.
11:11:32 Identify the policy, the operational strategies, the
11:11:34 roles and responsibilities that will guide the
11:11:36 decisions affecting long-term recovery and
11:11:39 redevelopment after disaster.
11:11:40 Basically, how are we going to rebuild our community
11:11:44 faster?
11:11:45 A storm of this type, FEMA estimates typically affect
11:11:48 the community and results in a long-term recovery of
11:11:51 five to eight years.
11:11:52 That's really what hurricane Katrina is causing in
11:11:56 that part of the country, just taking a long time to
11:11:59 get everything back to normal.
11:12:00 The objective of the plan is to try to shoot for
11:12:04 targets three to five years.
11:12:06 If we were to suffer a disaster that large, we could
11:12:09 get everything back to normal within three to five

11:12:13 years.
11:12:13 And if you go back if it's $11 billion annual payroll
11:12:17 each year, and you are down another two or three
11:12:19 years, that's a lot of income that could be lost in
11:12:22 the community that is needed.
11:12:27 DCA and FEMA are the project sponsor, they are paying
11:12:31 for the project, the local communities are providing
11:12:33 in-kind services to staff contributions.
11:12:36 Hillsborough County is the project manager.
11:12:38 The local governments, the agencies, a lot of members
11:12:42 in the private sector are all team members in this
11:12:45 effort.
11:12:46 There was post disaster redevelopment task force and
11:12:50 acts as the steering committee and there were eight
11:12:51 technical advisory committees formed.
11:12:54 These are the technical advisory committees.
11:12:56 They have different aspects of community rebuilding.
11:12:59 And the accomplishments to date, 68 technical advisory
11:13:06 committees meetings held.
11:13:06 That was an old member.
11:13:07 I was informed today by Linda there were actually 103
11:13:11 technical advisory committee meetings held over the

11:13:13 last year or so.
11:13:14 More than 2,000 hours of community time has been
11:13:16 logged into the effort.
11:13:18 We have a preliminary redevelopment strategy outline,
11:13:21 and I will go over that in the next slide.
11:13:24 The county and the city staffs, all the city staffs,
11:13:27 held five community-wide outreach meetings, earlier in
11:13:32 the year throughout the county.
11:13:36 A draft economic analysis was completed by the
11:13:38 Regional Planning Council.
11:13:39 The technical advisory committees outlined eight or
11:13:43 nine major policy issues that they felt needed to be
11:13:46 explored over the next few years.
11:13:48 And then last week the county held their workshop on
11:13:50 this same process, and directed their staff to begin
11:13:54 preparing a resolution for the next phase.
11:13:57 The redevelopment concept speaks to or identifies the
11:14:01 areas to have the land use, the infrastructure
11:14:03 capacity, in place now, that can absorb changes in
11:14:07 development as the community recovers.
11:14:09 We call these priority recovery areas.
11:14:12 This is a map of those areas.

11:14:14 You will see that the gray areas is the hurricane five
11:14:19 zones, the areas that we think would be mostly
11:14:21 affected during hurricanes.
11:14:23 You will see different types of recovery areas, the
11:14:24 dark brown and the gray, difference being the dark
11:14:27 brown, those that are outside the vulnerable area, and
11:14:30 the ones that are inside the area.
11:14:33 This map -- we looked at the concept of what looked
11:14:39 like the areas that have capacity to redevelop.
11:14:42 When a storm hits we are not going to know what part
11:14:44 of the county is really going to be under duress and
11:14:47 which so this map tries to look at areas throughout
11:14:50 the county that might have the capacity to redevelop.
11:14:53 One of the things that came out of the experience in
11:14:55 Texas -- and we hope would be able to address in this
11:14:58 process -- is that after the hurricane hit, I think it
11:15:01 was Ivan that hit Texas, the areas outside of
11:15:04 Galveston started getting a surge of plan amendments
11:15:08 for multifamily development, primarily for residents
11:15:10 that were seeking temporary housing and also for the
11:15:12 influx of workers coming into the area.
11:15:15 These communities were not prepared for that influx.

11:15:17 Even though they were trying to respond to the
11:15:20 disaster, what they were finding is that there were
11:15:22 major changes in their long-range plan, because people
11:15:25 were coming in seeking plan amendments for a quick
11:15:28 construction project.
11:15:30 One of the communities put a moratorium on that
11:15:32 process so they could reevaluate what that would do.
11:15:35 What we are trying to do, the moratorium was fine for
11:15:39 a new perspective but slowed down their efforts to
11:15:43 respond.
11:15:44 What we are hoping to do by looking at the recovery
11:15:46 efforts, identify the areas that already have that
11:15:48 capacity, areas that are already targeted for
11:15:50 redevelopment, so that after a storm, any of those
11:15:54 kind of questions, we say here's where we think it's
11:15:58 appropriate for shifting businesses or density or so
11:16:00 forth.
11:16:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question?
11:16:08 I know in New Orleans and those areas there's a lot of
11:16:12 controversy about do you rebuild in your low areas and
11:16:19 coastal high hazard areas.
11:16:20 I mean, I don't know how they have resolved that or

11:16:25 not.
11:16:26 It's hard to tell from this far away.
11:16:28 But is there an underlying policy decision that's
11:16:36 being made through this process about -- I mean,
11:16:39 you're looking at this gray area incorporates how many
11:16:46 residences and how many people, you know, how many
11:16:49 people, and how much investment, and does it assume
11:16:54 that you just don't rebuild in those areas?
11:16:57 Or what?
11:17:00 I see on your schedule it says come back in September
11:17:03 and we'll adopt these policies.
11:17:05 But I'm wondering, what policy are we proposing, on
11:17:10 that specific question?
11:17:13 >>> These were the policy areas that we are looking to
11:17:18 move forward in.
11:17:19 When we come back in September worry not necessarily
11:17:21 adopting policies.
11:17:24 The technical advisory committees came up with
11:17:26 several -- I don't know how many initiatives.
11:17:30 They had several initiatives in which they felt were
11:17:32 needed to be further examined.
11:17:34 But they felt far off the scope of what everybody

11:17:37 could look at over the next two years.
11:17:39 What they narrowed down were these were the biggest
11:17:41 questions that when need to have answered, not
11:17:43 necessarily a policy -- these are the questions we
11:17:45 need to have answered over the next two years, we will
11:17:48 come back with a policy formulation on those
11:17:50 questions.
11:17:50 But the first thing to look at are evaluating our
11:17:54 rebuilding standards.
11:17:55 And that question has to do with in the county and the
11:17:59 city we both have plans that call for the county
11:18:04 particularly to have community plans which call for
11:18:05 certain level of building standards in there today.
11:18:09 And one of the questions we know after a disaster,
11:18:12 people want to build quick, fast, and may not
11:18:15 necessarily want to build it with higher level
11:18:17 standards to save money.
11:18:18 We need to answer that question now to make sure that
11:18:21 policy is clear.
11:18:23 Yes?
11:18:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So after your presentation today, I
11:18:28 mean, something like that requires a lot of

11:18:31 conversation.
11:18:31 >>> That's why the next two -- what we are asking for
11:18:37 is not a policy direction.
11:18:38 We are explaining to you what we are going to examine
11:18:40 over the next two years.
11:18:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Gotcha.
11:18:43 So we need no hurricane for the next two years wee
11:18:46 while we have an opportunity to develop.
11:18:47 >>> No major hurricanes.
11:18:49 We can have hurricanes but no major hurricanes.
11:18:50 So we'll look at our existing regulations in the
11:18:53 context of what we would expect to have redevelopment
11:18:56 afterwards.
11:18:58 Thresholds for governing blight after disaster, and
11:19:02 wide scale disaster, we are talking about a very large
11:19:05 hurricane which would leave subdivisions destroyed.
11:19:11 What happens and what is the threshold before the
11:19:14 government has to act in those areas?
11:19:15 Do we let people in one house at a time, while the
11:19:19 rest of it is decaying?
11:19:22 We need a process to talk about how we look at the
11:19:24 quality of life and the health and safety issues in

11:19:26 those areas.
11:19:28 Define priorities for redevelopment and
11:19:30 reconstruction.
11:19:31 This has to do with if a disaster is widespread and
11:19:37 very large, how do we target our resources to be most
11:19:41 effective and first?
11:19:43 Which of the industries, which are needed for the
11:19:45 area, and what structures need to come in place?
11:19:49 So it's again trying to put a little system it I can
11:19:53 review into that.
11:19:55 Resolve conflicting regulations.
11:19:57 This is more or less about the one of the biggest
11:19:59 examples comes up in the temporary housing, some of
11:20:01 the things that FEMA will come in with what they want
11:20:03 to do.
11:20:04 The question is, do our regulations allow that?
11:20:06 Is that what we want before FEMA comes in with their
11:20:09 plan?
11:20:10 So it's really trying to look at what kind of
11:20:11 regulations we have in place that we are going to, A,
11:20:15 some of the structures things that need changing, the
11:20:17 modular housing, the temporary housing type things,

11:20:19 maybe something if not consistent with all four
11:20:21 jurisdictions.
11:20:23 Establish economic recovery.
11:20:25 Oh, excuse me.
11:20:26 Evaluate the potential for is acquiring damage
11:20:28 structures and redeveloping sites.
11:20:32 This goes back to Mr. Dingfelder's question about the
11:20:35 recovery areas and the transfer of development rights.
11:20:40 The current policy is that people have the ability to
11:20:43 use their property with the rights that they have now,
11:20:46 the zoning rights and entitlements.
11:20:48 So if their structure was destroyed and a hurricane
11:20:52 hit a whole coastline area the rights allow them to
11:20:55 rebuild back to where they had previously.
11:21:01 Throughout all the meetings, there's been a lot of
11:21:03 discussion but there's been no direction from any of
11:21:05 the committees to say we want to change that.
11:21:07 Do we want to change that underlying philosophy for
11:21:11 property rights?
11:21:12 The question is, though, is in a disaster, can we
11:21:16 prepare and put some system in place that would allow
11:21:18 someone to encourage rather than to build back after

11:21:21 it's been destroyed, maybe transfer the development
11:21:23 rights to a different area and receive some
11:21:25 compensation for that?
11:21:26 That is what this item has looked at, is that whole
11:21:29 concept of recovery areas, and that issue about where
11:21:34 we want to guide development in the short term or
11:21:36 long-term, and the balancing of existing rights.
11:21:43 The next part about potential of acquiring damaged
11:21:47 structures, redeveloping, wide scale disaster, people
11:21:50 just may decide to leave.
11:21:51 They may not -- they may take too long.
11:21:55 Working with FEMA, there may be an opportunity to come
11:21:57 in and acquire neighborhoods or areas, and then
11:22:01 the local government begin redeveloping those sites.
11:22:07 And the concept from the committee is then you can
11:22:10 offer those homes back to property owners as a first
11:22:12 right, to help them acquire those sites back.
11:22:18 Part of the initiative was to look at it from an
11:22:20 affordable housing standpoint.
11:22:22 If we were to let the private market, buy the land
11:22:28 cheap, build the house and sell it, and put people out
11:22:32 of the market so this is an opportunity to look at

11:22:34 maybe some areas to create some more affordable
11:22:36 housing.
11:22:40 Temporary long-term support.
11:22:42 We have places now that support the recovery of the
11:22:44 area.
11:22:45 This is when you start looking at a storm, the size we
11:22:50 are talking about, everything that happens is bigger.
11:22:52 So it means much more debris, much more transport, or
11:23:00 sites for staging areas.
11:23:02 The question is we just want to make sure before we
11:23:04 arbitrarily select a side the -- site that there's
11:23:08 been a look around and see if it can happen again.
11:23:11 The biggest example is debris clearance.
11:23:13 Making sure that debris sites are taken into
11:23:15 consideration, what's around it, residential,
11:23:17 environmental and so forth, because it may sit there
11:23:19 for awhile.
11:23:20 We want to make sure it's not going to be negative
11:23:22 impact.
11:23:23 Large storms around other cities have shown that when
11:23:26 a port is impacted there are chemical spills, in a
11:23:32 variety of different places.

11:23:34 The initiative is to look at what's happening around
11:23:36 the port and what type of chemicals and what might
11:23:39 happen following a disaster that we have to put in
11:23:41 place.
11:23:42 The last thing we want to do is see a residential
11:23:44 homeowner who has been put hurt by the storm want to
11:23:47 rebuild, start rebuilding only to find out that his
11:23:49 land has been contaminated and then has to go through
11:23:52 a whole different process.
11:23:54 Finally, we established the priorities for economic
11:23:57 assistance and so forth, for the businesses that are
11:24:02 going to be impacted.
11:24:06 Those are the nine policy areas.
11:24:09 And again they are not policy directions but policy
11:24:11 questions.
11:24:16 And the board is expected to approve a resolution
11:24:20 stating these are the areas that they want the staff
11:24:24 to look at over the next two years, and the
11:24:28 redevelopment committee.
11:24:28 We would bring a similar recommendation back to you or
11:24:30 resolution back to you in September.
11:24:32 And then that would form the work program for the next

11:24:35 two years for the post disaster redevelopment plan.
11:24:39 All the information for the effort is on the county's
11:24:43 Web site.
11:24:44 And with that, I will ask Linda Mandell from the
11:24:48 county's hazard mitigation office to come up for
11:24:52 comments and after that I'm available for questions.
11:24:56 >>> Linda Mandell, Hillsborough County Planning and
11:24:59 Growth Management, Hazard Mitigation section.
11:25:04 Thank you very much for this opportunity, and I also
11:25:06 want to thank you for the City of Tampa's employees
11:25:09 and their participation.
11:25:14 This has truly been a collaborative effort, as Randy
11:25:18 was saying, between the different jurisdictions and
11:25:20 public and private agencies and organizations.
11:25:24 And without the input that we had from City of Tampa
11:25:28 and others, the plan or the process we have gone
11:25:33 through over this last year would not be where it is
11:25:36 and it would not be as good as it is.
11:25:38 And I really appreciate that.
11:25:40 And I'm looking forward to working with you over the
11:25:42 next couple of years to really get this going.
11:25:47 Thank you.

11:25:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Council members, any questions?
11:25:52 I have a question.
11:25:57 This is hopefully a completely speculative venture.
11:26:03 But is the basic premise you are coming from be an
11:26:06 idea that we would redevelop the community in a
11:26:09 similar fashion than that it is now, or if we did
11:26:13 suffer from this huge storm, would we use it as an
11:26:17 opportunity to maybe improve some things that had
11:26:22 developed historically in a less good way and make
11:26:25 them better in the future?
11:26:28 >>RANDY GOERS: The latter point you made is one of the
11:26:30 opportunities for the plan, and first of all it will
11:26:33 help us get the community back in its place quicker,
11:26:36 we hope.
11:26:36 Secondly, it will help us put in place the process of
11:26:40 the procedures to build back stronger to withstand a
11:26:45 storm in the future, and thirdly provide an
11:26:47 opportunity to look at areas that may be, for whatever
11:26:49 reason, we haven't been able to address because of the
11:26:53 fill patterns, that if rebuilding was to occur that we
11:26:57 would be able to put in place redevelopment patterns.
11:27:00 >> Are you going to have public meetings on this?

11:27:02 Because certainly the public --
11:27:05 >>> Over the next two years, we have a task force and
11:27:09 all the committees will continue to meet.
11:27:11 I don't know the number.
11:27:12 There's been more than 250 people involved, in all the
11:27:16 committees, and they represent individuals as well as
11:27:19 organizations.
11:27:19 So the counties plan still has those meetings, and at
11:27:24 time public outreach as well.
11:27:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Any other questions by council
11:27:28 members?
11:27:29 Thank you very much.
11:27:31 >>RANDY GOERS: Thank you.
11:27:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I see some audience members here
11:27:37 who are I assume are here for the discussion on local
11:27:39 small businesses.
11:27:41 We received a memo yesterday from the administration
11:27:44 suggesting that we not have this today because two of
11:27:47 the council members aren't here.
11:27:49 We had some conversation about whether it's
11:27:52 appropriate for the administration to try to
11:27:54 reschedule a workshop that was created by council.

11:28:09 We are now going to discuss whether to move ahead or
11:28:12 what.
11:28:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Since this was canceled without our
11:28:15 knowledge and at the last minute I would like to hear
11:28:17 from anyone who has attended this publicly noticed
11:28:20 meeting.
11:28:21 So I would like to move that we allow public comment.
11:28:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's been a motion.
11:28:28 Is there a second?Miranda I'll second it for
11:28:33 discussion, Madam Chair.
11:28:35 I am not opposed to that at all.
11:28:37 Maybe one member is coming back.
11:28:38 But now we have four members instead of five.
11:28:43 I'm not opposed to listening for three minutes each
11:28:45 one like we always do on every workshop.
11:28:50 We got five now.
11:28:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The conversation was that this
11:28:53 would not be continued forever, it would just be
11:28:56 continue to another date.
11:28:57 We also had a brief discussion of creating a policy by
11:29:01 which the administration wouldn't cancel things based
11:29:03 on council members' potential absence. So if the

11:29:07 public would come up, give us your name and address,
11:29:09 you have three minutes to speak.
11:29:10 And you are not precluded from speaking again.
11:29:12 We actually have a presentation.
11:29:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, the motion and second.
11:29:17 Was that by unanimous consent, for the purposes of the
11:29:20 record?
11:29:22 >> Yes.
11:29:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
11:29:23 >>> Ed Dees. I'm a consultant for malls steel.
11:29:32 I don't have a problem.
11:29:33 You know how I feel.
11:29:35 I've talked to everybody I can talk to about this.
11:29:37 I think we ought to do it.
11:29:39 I mean, if you have got to put it off you have to put
11:29:42 it off.
11:29:43 I have no problem with that.
11:29:44 It just would have been nice we had a little more
11:29:46 notice but you can't do that sometimes.
11:29:47 But I understand.
11:29:48 And I'll be back in front of you.
11:29:52 You look at this ol' ugly head again.

11:29:55 I want to thank you all for taking your time.
11:29:57 I understand these problems.
11:29:58 But, you know, I'm promoting it.
11:30:03 >>MARY MULHERN: We are going to reschedule this.
11:30:06 So maybe we can talk about a date, so at least the two
11:30:09 people who are here could tell us of a date that's
11:30:13 convenient for them.
11:30:14 >>> Well, that's fine, if you want to do it.
11:30:18 But if you don't, if I can't be here I can always have
11:30:21 somebody here.
11:30:23 But I understand, if you want to go ahead and put the
11:30:27 date, that's fine with me, too.
11:30:29 But I don't have my calendar with me.
11:30:32 So I wouldn't know.
11:30:34 >>MARY MULHERN: We'll just set it and then you can let
11:30:36 us know.
11:30:38 >>> Yes.
11:30:39 But thank you so much for your attention to this
11:30:42 matter.
11:30:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We'll set the date before we leave
11:30:46 today.
11:30:47 >>> Ellen brown.

11:30:56 I'm co-owners of the old Tampa foot company, used book
11:31:00 store in downtown Tampa and member of the board of the
11:31:02 Tampa independent business alliance.
11:31:04 I had no idea that the workshop was canceled.
11:31:07 And I'm not part of the presentation today.
11:31:10 So I certainly do look forward to you scheduling a
11:31:13 time so people can be here.
11:31:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for coming here.
11:31:20 >>MARY MULHERN: We are really sorry.
11:31:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why doesn't everyone take a look at
11:31:27 their calendars?
11:31:28 What would you all think of July 23rd?
11:31:30 That's when our next workshop schedule session is
11:31:34 scheduled.
11:31:36 If you take a look, it says we have a workshop at
11:31:40 10:30.
11:31:42 And it doesn't seem as if that would be very long.
11:31:46 I think we can schedule this at 11:00.
11:31:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if I can, and Madam Chair,
11:31:53 you were not present when council reorganized, but the
11:31:59 July 23rd date.
11:32:00 The reason that was done is because the CRA is going

11:32:04 to be discussing their budget on that date.
11:32:07 And they were informed that that was going to be a
11:32:10 lengthy discussion, perhaps an hour and a half, and
11:32:13 that's why they wanted it earlier in the day.
11:32:18 That's why the council made a motion to move a lot of
11:32:20 the items that were scheduled for the workshop on July
11:32:23 23rd, and place them on the September workshop
11:32:27 date, which is why you could see September's date is
11:32:29 so loaded with issues, that was a result of council's
11:32:32 motion rescheduling the July 23rd date.
11:32:35 It was a consensus by council at the time that because
11:32:38 there was a night meeting, they would have preferred,
11:32:40 or they did prefer to not come back for the afternoon.
11:32:45 And that's why they had moved it, only one workshop
11:32:48 item ostensibly beginning at 10:30, may begin later,
11:32:53 so they would not have to come back after lunch
11:32:55 because they would be coming back for a night meeting.
11:32:57 That was the reasoning last week when they changed
11:33:00 this.
11:33:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Here is another possibility.
11:33:05 I don't really understand.
11:33:06 But in August, it looks like the cell phone tower

11:33:13 regulation hopefully won't take more than -- okay.
11:33:22 August -- we have a CRA and workshop.
11:33:24 I don't know what -- is that because of --
11:33:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We only have two meetings, three
11:33:31 meetings that month.
11:33:33 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.
11:33:34 I see.
11:33:35 Wait, let me finish.
11:33:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
11:33:37 >>MARY MULHERN: So hopefully that won't take long.
11:33:40 Building elevations, I wouldn't think, would take very
11:33:43 long.
11:33:43 The transfer of development rights ordinance, is that
11:33:46 something -- and escrow account?
11:33:49 I think we put this on here a long time ago.
11:33:52 Didn't we already pass a transfer of development
11:33:54 rights?
11:33:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, but I think all we needed was
11:33:57 for the staff to explain to the community some
11:33:59 questions they had.
11:33:59 I don't think that will take long.
11:34:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, or maybe we could push that.

11:34:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have another's suggestion that's
11:34:06 an idea.
11:34:08 On August 8th at 1:30, we are coming back at 1:30.
11:34:12 We only have one appeal hearing.
11:34:14 Perhaps we could schedule this after that, even though
11:34:17 it's a workshop.
11:34:21 >>MARY MULHERN: What do you all -- that's fine with
11:34:26 me.
11:34:26 But we don't usually meet in the afternoon like that.
11:34:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But we don't have an evening
11:34:35 meeting.
11:34:36 >>MARY MULHERN: We may run into not having a full
11:34:38 council again is what I am going to say.
11:34:39 I don't think that's a reason not to have.
11:34:41 I'm just saying, if that is the case, we still need to
11:34:44 hold a meeting.
11:34:50 I would support that, had Linda, doing it on the
11:34:51 8th.
11:34:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, August 6th.
11:34:59 August.
11:35:01 August 6th.
11:35:02 After the appeal hearing.

11:35:09 Less say -- let's say 2:00.
11:35:11 2:30?
11:35:12 2:30.
11:35:14 Is there an appeal -- is there a motion to continue to
11:35:21 2:30 on the August 26th?
11:35:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about consider doing it before
11:35:27 the appeal hearing?
11:35:28 You could call it 1:25.
11:35:31 And the only reason is, I think at least the
11:35:38 communities have already been bumped one day, would at
11:35:41 least have a time certain, because who knows what that
11:35:44 appeal hearing is.
11:35:45 I don't know if that's a three-hour appeal hearing.
11:35:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And frequently our appeal hearings
11:35:50 are scrapped anyway.
11:35:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sometimes they are scrapped.
11:35:53 So why don't we consider just squeezing it in before
11:35:58 the appeal hearing?
11:36:01 >>MARY MULHERN: Our appeal hearing needs to be at a
11:36:03 time certain, right?
11:36:05 >> It has to be advertised but it doesn't have to be
11:36:07 opened.

11:36:09 It has to start off after --
11:36:12 >>MARY MULHERN: But why don't we move the appeal
11:36:14 hearing to a time certain like three?
11:36:19 >> It might have been might have already been
11:36:20 advertised.
11:36:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I recommend you keep the appeal
11:36:23 hearing, cost anytime after 1:30 p.m.
11:36:25 The question is, out of deference to those people who
11:36:30 come for an appeal hearing, is there going to be a set
11:36:33 amount of time?
11:36:35 If you are going to do something right back from lunch
11:36:36 are you going to set a certain amount of time or would
11:36:39 that be an open he-ended discussion?
11:36:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Of a workshop?
11:36:45 A workshop, we have 30 minutes for public comment.
11:36:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm just saying on top of the 30
11:36:51 minutes you allow for public comment, how much time do
11:36:53 you wish to allow for the workshop if you are going to
11:36:56 put that immediately after lunch and then -- because
11:36:59 right now that's August.
11:37:00 You still could have additional hearings being set
11:37:03 between now and -- you need 30 days notice.

11:37:07 Conceivably up until the beginning of July --
11:37:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
11:37:11 >> You could be setting additional hearings.
11:37:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I know we canceled one night
11:37:19 hearing, I believe in September and October.
11:37:24 Am I remembering right?
11:37:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: As I recall we did.
11:37:30 I don't recall when, sir.
11:37:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We canceled two hearings.
11:37:35 I'm just trying to equalize the time so everybody has
11:37:38 additional time.
11:37:43 >>MARY MULHERN: At nature?
11:37:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What I'm saying is if you have the
11:37:46 two meetings that were canceled we can certainly fill
11:37:48 that slot with something like this.
11:37:49 >>MARY MULHERN: That's a great idea.
11:37:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We usually meet twice at night.
11:38:00 If that's open, I don't know which one.
11:38:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's probably the 13th.
11:38:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We could do it the 6th or the
11:38:17 20th.
11:38:22 >>MARY MULHERN: The 20th, we would have two night

11:38:24 meetings in a row if we do on the 6th we have a
11:38:27 break.
11:38:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What time would you suggest, Mr.
11:38:29 Miranda?
11:38:30 6:00?
11:38:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Whatever is fair.
11:38:32 I think 6:00 would be a good time.
11:38:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion by Mr. Miranda, a
11:38:36 second by Mrs. Mulhern to continue this to 6:00 on
11:38:39 August 6th.
11:38:40 Any discussion on the motion?
11:38:42 All those in favor say Aye.
11:38:44 Opposed, Nay.
11:38:45 Great.
11:38:45 We hope you all will come back.
11:38:47 Thank you.
11:38:48 Okay.
11:38:50 New business, old business.
11:38:52 Mr. Dingfelder.
11:38:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Unless my assistant comes running
11:38:58 out I don't think I have any.
11:39:00 >>MARY MULHERN: I maybe need some advice from our

11:39:04 attorney.
11:39:06 But since this is a workshop meeting I don't know if
11:39:09 we can ask for this, plus our chair isn't here today.
11:39:11 But I would like to ask that the City Council chair
11:39:20 write a letter of concern to the Hillsborough County
11:39:24 commission regarding protecting and preserving cone
11:39:33 ranch as conservation land, and I think that normally
11:39:36 we shouldn't interfere with what they are doing, but
11:39:38 this is a major source of our water for the
11:39:41 Hillsborough River and the city.
11:39:44 So their decision would really affect our water
11:39:48 supply.
11:39:48 So I would like us to write a letter, just a concern
11:39:55 to Hillsborough County commission.
11:39:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:39:59 Motion by Mrs. Mulhern, seconded by Mr. Miranda.
11:40:02 Any more discussion?
11:40:03 Great idea.
11:40:03 All those in favor say Aye.
11:40:05 Opposed, Nay.
11:40:06 Thank you for bringing that up.
11:40:08 >>MARY MULHERN: And --

11:40:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe could you help draft it so
11:40:11 for the chairman.
11:40:12 >>MARY MULHERN: We can do the language.
11:40:14 We'll work on it.
11:40:15 But don't leave.
11:40:16 I wanted to also -- I don't know if this is a motion
11:40:20 or not.
11:40:20 But councilman Miranda remain as a representative on
11:40:27 Tampa Bay water because we need him there.
11:40:31 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: At the same pay.
11:40:33 [ Laughter ]
11:40:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion.
11:40:38 >> Second.
11:40:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: All in favor say Aye.
11:40:42 Thank you.
11:40:44 >>MARY MULHERN: That's it.
11:40:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Caetano.
11:40:51 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I have nothing.
11:40:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to pass this out quickly.
11:40:56 I know we were all very discouraged to hear about two
11:40:58 blows to bricks in Ybor City.
11:41:00 One is the fourth street where they discovered bricks

11:41:04 won't be continued.
11:41:07 The bricks won't be -- the bricks will be paved over
11:41:10 again.
11:41:10 And secondly, that the owner of the Gary school, who
11:41:15 tore it down, despite council's encouragement to
11:41:18 redevelop it, is now selling the bricks.
11:41:21 So this is kind of tongue in cheek but actually quite
11:41:25 serious.
11:41:26 I would like just publicly to ask the owner of JVC
11:41:34 Contracting to donate half the proceeds of the brick
11:41:37 sales to a preservation organization to massage some
11:41:39 of his guilt over destroying this local landmark.
11:41:45 It really isn't for council vote.
11:41:47 I am so appalled that -- I believe part of the
11:41:51 commitment, when the building came down, was that the
11:41:53 bricks be reused on-site for whatever is constructed
11:41:56 there in the future.
11:41:57 And this is a loss of our history and our patrimony
11:42:01 and it's just being sold off literally brick by brick,
11:42:04 and it's heart breaking.
11:42:05 I think if you were to do something like that, it
11:42:08 would be a small step of recompense to the community.

11:42:15 Anything else to come before council?
11:42:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, madam chair. My aide did come
11:42:21 to my rescue and remind me of three worthy eagle
11:42:25 scouts that I would like to present commendations to
11:42:25 as follows:
11:42:26 Daniel Josef Gessman, G-E-S-S-M-A-N.
11:42:30 And Josef is J-O-S-E-F.
11:42:35 And Edward Kelly.
11:42:37 And David Thomas Hankin, H-A-N-K-I-N.
11:42:41 Thank you.
11:42:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:42:43 There's a motion and second to recognize those eagle
11:42:46 scouts.
11:42:46 All in favor say Aye.
11:42:48 Thank you.
11:42:53 Is there a motion to receive and file?
11:42:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
11:42:56 >> Second.
11:42:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:43:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: To be presented at their ceremony
11:43:05 off-site.
11:43:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

11:43:07 We are adjourned.
11:43:08 Until 5:30.

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.