Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL – 9 AM
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Workshop Session

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


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.
11:43:09


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