TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
9:00 a.m. Special Workshop
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
09:07:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to
09:07:40 We'll stand for the invocation and remain standing for
09:07:42 the pledge of allegiance.
09:07:43 Thank you.
09:07:44 Shall we pray?
09:07:50 We are grateful and thankful for another blessed day
09:07:53 that you have caused us to rise and walk in.
09:07:55 We say thank you today for your grace and your mercy
09:07:58 upon us.
09:07:58 Thank you for our great nation, our great country.
09:08:01 Thank you for the leadership of our nation.
09:08:06 We pray for those who lead us.
09:08:09 We pray for those in Washington.
09:08:11 We pray for those in our state.
09:08:13 We pray today for our mayor, for our City Council.
09:08:16 Give us wisdom to make prudent decisions, in the
09:08:19 interest of our constituents for this community.
09:08:22 Now we pray for those who are fighting for democracy
09:08:24 around the world.
09:08:26 We pray now that you protect them, bring them back
09:08:28 home safely.
09:08:31 Give us a good day as we hear from staff.
09:08:35 It is in your name that we pray.
09:08:39 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:08:40 We'll have roll call.
09:08:58 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:09:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:09:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:09:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:09:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:09:10 Okay, we have a workshop today.
09:09:12 So --
09:09:13 >>CHAIRMAN: Move to open the workshop.
09:09:16 >> Second.
09:09:16 (Motion carried).
09:09:17 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Daignault.
09:09:22 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator for public works and
09:09:24 utility services.
09:09:27 We have provided each council member with a book, a
09:09:31 report, with some information in it, and a proposed
09:09:37 If it would be okay with you, we would use that
09:09:42 If you would like to change that in any way or add
09:09:44 things to it, we'll be glad to do that.
09:09:47 Would it be all right to use this?
09:09:49 The reclaimed issues, they are so vast, I think it's
09:09:52 better if we take little sections at a time and try to
09:09:55 deal with pieces at a time.
09:09:57 And so in our agenda, we listed first the existing
09:10:00 reclaimed water area, and how could we better utilize
09:10:05 the system that's already in place, and perhaps give
09:10:10 folks using it mower -- when we briefed you
09:10:13 individually, we provided a sheet that had a
09:10:16 recommendation for irrigation restrictions within
09:10:18 Tampa's reclaimed water service area, and we listed a
09:10:21 number of items there that we think would be a way to
09:10:27 encourage and require people to use that reclaimed
09:10:30 So again if you would like to discuss that, if you
09:10:35 have any questions on that, again we would suggest we
09:10:39 look at that first.
09:10:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have the agenda.
09:10:46 First, thanks for the book.
09:10:47 Excellent, excellent information in the book here, and
09:10:51 the outline is fine.
09:10:53 If you want to proceed, that's fine.
09:10:54 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Does anybody have any discussion on
09:10:57 that -- there's rules in the reclaimed area.
09:11:01 Do you want me to go through them?
09:11:04 >> Yes.
09:11:05 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Be better to go through them?
09:11:06 All right.
09:11:07 What we would propose -- and we had picked the date of
09:11:10 December 1st, 2009.
09:11:13 That date certainly is flexible.
09:11:14 We can use any date that you prefer.
09:11:17 But by a fixed date or by a certain date, we would
09:11:21 propose that there would be no potable water lawn
09:11:24 irrigation allowed for customers who do have reclaimed
09:11:32 Additionally, by a date certain, that the city would
09:11:37 remove the potable irrigation leader, and remove the
09:11:43 reclaimed water meter if people are not hooked up to
09:11:46 them by that time.
09:11:47 If a customer chooses to connect to reclaimed, we
09:11:51 certainly want to give get them into reclaimed as soon
09:11:53 as possible.
09:11:54 And we would do that.
09:12:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm just wondering why you two have
09:12:03 those big books and we don't have anything.
09:12:05 Is there a big report that we didn't get?
09:12:08 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: That big book would be probably the
09:12:10 printout of this disk, is my guess.
09:12:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, you got the whole report printed
09:12:17 We are saving trees, the rest of us.
09:12:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a pretty important question
09:12:27 about what you just said.
09:12:28 Did you want to wait till we got through the whole
09:12:31 >> Well, I thought maybe he -- for my process, he
09:12:35 makes the presentation and since it's broken out into
09:12:37 sections maybe make a presentation and then raise
09:12:40 Because that way it keeps the process going and keeps
09:12:42 your thought pattern, you know, moving forward.
09:12:45 And we just jot down our questions.
09:12:47 When we get to the first section, then council ask
09:12:52 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I'll just finish the rest of these.
09:12:54 Additionally we would propose that customers residing
09:12:56 within Tampa's reclaimed service area would lose their
09:13:01 sewer max since they would not be using potable waters
09:13:04 for lawn irrigation there would be no sewer max.
09:13:08 And again we are trying to put everything on the
09:13:09 table, making sure it's all visible.
09:13:12 The city would immediately stop issuing permits for
09:13:14 people to have a potable water irrigation, or water --
09:13:20 lawn irrigation system again within the reclaimed
09:13:23 Customers residing within the reclaimed area could
09:13:26 still hand water and use hose end type microirrigation
09:13:31 for any gardens or any sensitive plants, or plants
09:13:36 that they were concerned about.
09:13:38 And then customers residing within Tampa's reclaimed
09:13:41 water service area may hand water their turf.
09:13:45 Basically the same way that they have been doing when
09:13:47 we had the watering restrictions, and that's with
09:13:50 potable water as determined by prevailing potable
09:13:53 water restrictions hand watering means with a hose,
09:13:56 with an automatic shutoff, hose-end sprinklers would
09:13:59 not be a Lloyd.
09:14:00 It's basically saying you need to get onto reclaimed
09:14:03 for lawn irrigation if you have that available.
09:14:09 Again the date we believe would still be flexible.
09:14:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You say in the report December 1st
09:14:17 but you can make that flexible.
09:14:20 >>> Correct.
09:14:20 When we chose that approximate -- put this together we
09:14:25 chose that date.
09:14:26 That's the first section.
09:14:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern, then
09:14:29 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:14:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, I think this might have been
09:14:33 what Linda was asking, so when you talk about
09:14:35 allowing -- may hand water, hose and end type of
09:14:43 microirrigation, so the kind of microirrigation,
09:14:51 you're recommending outlying all microirrigation that
09:14:57 is not hand held?
09:15:00 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Well, if it's your choice to use
09:15:03 microirrigation, potable microirrigation, that's how
09:15:07 you would do it.
09:15:08 You could still use microirrigation from reclaimed
09:15:13 Throughout your yard.
09:15:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
09:15:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, councilman
09:15:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you very much.
09:15:25 There are some folks in the audience who are very
09:15:27 passionate about plants that are not salt tolerant.
09:15:30 So they would have the ability, even if they are in a
09:15:34 reclaimed area, to use microirrigation with potable
09:15:37 Is that true?
09:15:39 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
09:15:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Great.
09:15:41 That's something that was a great concern of mine.
09:15:43 The other issue is, I know that staff is -- it's
09:15:50 always tough to have as much staff as you like.
09:15:53 Why would we go around removing meters?
09:15:55 What does that accomplish?
09:15:57 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Well, the meter that we would
09:16:00 remove would be the potable irrigation meter.
09:16:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We would be replacing it with
09:16:06 reclaimed irrigation.
09:16:07 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
09:16:08 In many cases those are already there.
09:16:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So why would one go around with the
09:16:15 Why not sit them unused?
09:16:20 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: You have to take them out of the
09:16:21 system so the potable is not going into the irrigation
09:16:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Oh, so the meter itself is a device
09:16:29 that stops one -- I thought the meters just kept track
09:16:33 of how much you are using and spending.
09:16:35 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: The potable irrigation meter, when
09:16:40 you have a meter that goes to your house -- and
09:16:42 everything downstream, if you will, from the meter
09:16:44 goes to your house, so it records all of your potable.
09:16:47 Off of that branches a potable irrigation meter.
09:16:52 So you do not pay -- you do not pay sewage on that
09:16:57 amount of your total.
09:17:00 So that would have to come out.
09:17:02 And then this irrigation system would have to be
09:17:04 hooked into a reclaimed system.
09:17:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As now the workshops are just to
09:17:17 throw out some ideas and see which direction we are
09:17:20 heading as a government in total.
09:17:21 I have received some calls, not a reflection on anyone
09:17:25 here, just like what Mrs. Saul-Sena brought up on the
09:17:28 You have a potable meter and you have an irrigation
09:17:32 And if you are within that guideline, luckily in the
09:17:37 reclaimed system.
09:17:38 Now we are saying we are taking the irrigation meter
09:17:40 out in exchange for a reclaimed meter.
09:17:45 But there's costs involved.
09:17:48 I have had various calls.
09:17:50 They say, well, wait a minute.
09:17:52 My irrigation meter is hooked up to my lawn, and to
09:17:55 the pool, because that water doesn't come in through
09:17:59 the potable meter.
09:18:01 And I'm not charged any sewer charge.
09:18:03 So, therefore, what we are doing now is changing the
09:18:07 formula, and not trying to do it in any meanful way,
09:18:15 but we created, for some individuals, a higher water
09:18:19 rate because the charges now that are going to go to
09:18:24 the -- come into the pool will then be charged at the
09:18:31 sewer rate going out.
09:18:32 So, therefore, you are going to have a higher sewer
09:18:35 charge, because the water charge on the input, not on
09:18:39 the output.
09:18:40 So there's some concern there that I have received
09:18:44 from individuals along those areas, and they feel that
09:18:49 why can't they not have three meters?
09:18:52 And they say, you know, meters have different colors,
09:18:54 different piping, and they are they want to hook up to
09:18:59 reclaimed, but they just feel that they paid somebody
09:19:02 to hook up that irrigation meter, and now they are
09:19:07 going to have to, I guess, pay somebody to hook up to
09:19:10 the reclaimed meter.
09:19:14 You see what I'm trying to say?
09:19:16 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: The situation as far as what the
09:19:18 costs will be, if there's already a reclaimed meter
09:19:20 there, it won't be as much cost involved.
09:19:25 I think that there's other ways that we could get
09:19:27 around this sewage, you know, not paying the sewage
09:19:31 charge on the water you use to fill your pool.
09:19:35 I think that it's a very minimal amount, and I think
09:19:38 that we could probably come up with a fixed fee in the
09:19:43 summer months, or during a certain time.
09:19:45 I think we could find an average and give people a
09:19:48 credit on their sewer bill if they have a pool and
09:19:50 they fill it up.
09:19:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The water doesn't go back out.
09:19:55 It evaporates or sinks into the ground itself.
09:19:58 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Certainly.
09:20:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: If a person has a reclaimed water
09:20:08 meter, you lock it or remove it.
09:20:10 Do they pay for the installation of that reclaimed
09:20:12 water meter in the beginning?
09:20:13 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: No, sir.
09:20:17 Of what we are saying there, if someone said they
09:20:19 would hook up to reclaimed and has not, but we put a
09:20:22 meter there when the system was installed originally,
09:20:25 that meter has been sitting there, we have had to read
09:20:28 it and maintain it.
09:20:29 So if they say, I'm still not going to hook up to
09:20:32 reclaimed, we are either going to remove that and use
09:20:35 it someplace else or we'll lock it just to -- it
09:20:37 should be locked now.
09:20:38 >> Did that client pay for that meter?
09:20:42 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: They have paid nothing.
09:20:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Further questions?
09:20:51 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Thank you.
09:20:55 I have one other question.
09:20:56 On a block, where everybody has the same size of land,
09:21:01 why is there such a variation in the sewer max?
09:21:07 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Sewer max is based on the amount of
09:21:09 potable water you use both for your domestic use and
09:21:14 for your lawn.
09:21:16 It's determined based on how much your water use bill
09:21:22 changes in the dry months versus the wet months.
09:21:26 So it really should account for the size and the
09:21:31 amount of lawn that you irrigate.
09:21:33 And everybody's is different.
09:21:34 It's not a fixed fee.
09:21:37 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: But if all the lots are the same,
09:21:39 okay, shouldn't the sewer max be the same?
09:21:43 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: It still will be based on how much
09:21:45 potable waters you use seasonally.
09:21:49 >> But some of these meters are not controlled by the
09:21:51 homeowner, they are controlled by the association that
09:21:54 maintains that particular piece of property.
09:21:57 Okay, they don't have a key to the meter.
09:22:00 The meters were recently reset to run at midnight to
09:22:05 four in the morning.
09:22:07 I don't know how many minutes they are running for
09:22:09 each zone, probably five zones on it.
09:22:12 But yet the cost, the sewer max for each house is
09:22:15 So it shouldn't have any correlation with the amount
09:22:19 of water that's used in the house, because the
09:22:22 sewers -- the grass is all getting the same amount of
09:22:27 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I think I am going to have to
09:22:31 separate the private property from the public, where
09:22:36 you have common area.
09:22:38 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: This is not common area.
09:22:40 In other words, these are maintenance-free homes,
09:22:42 The association, you pay a dues in order to -- for
09:22:46 them to cut your grass and water your lawn.
09:22:49 They take care of the meters.
09:22:50 The homeowner does not have a key for the meter.
09:22:53 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Okay.
09:22:54 We are going to have to discuss that separately.
09:22:56 That's a different situation, and I don't have an
09:23:01 answer for how that happens right now, what the sewer
09:23:05 max or how it's figured on -- do they not pay directly
09:23:11 for their potable use?
09:23:13 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, you get a water bill.
09:23:15 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Okay.
09:23:17 Somehow they have to determine how much is going on
09:23:20 their yard versus domestic use, or else they don't
09:23:24 have a sewer max at all and they just pay the full
09:23:27 amount on their domestic-only use.
09:23:30 Which is the what they use in their house.
09:23:33 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: We'll discuss that.
09:23:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with Mr. Daignault.
09:23:37 I don't know what the agreements are between the
09:23:39 homeowner and the homeowner association, but if you
09:23:42 have four people living in 100 by 100 lot and you have
09:23:46 eight people living in a 100 by 100 lot, then there
09:23:50 should be a variation.
09:23:51 But I don't know what the homeowners agreed to with
09:23:53 the association.
09:23:55 I just don't know that.
09:23:56 I don't know that.
09:23:58 So I think there's where the glitches are.
09:24:01 I don't think this is a city debate.
09:24:03 It's more a debate between the homeowners and the
09:24:05 homeowners association.
09:24:11 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Okay.
09:24:12 From that first section, basically we want to have
09:24:14 some solution on the pools, the refilling of pools,
09:24:18 and then we want to have a little more clarity on the
09:24:21 cost to remove those potable irrigation meters.
09:24:25 And after that would the council entertain again us
09:24:30 bringing something in the way of this recommendation
09:24:32 back to council?
09:24:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
09:24:37 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Very good, thank you.
09:24:39 The second would be the rates for high users.
09:24:41 You will recall when the drought started and the
09:24:46 watering restrictions were in discussion, that
09:24:50 southwest Florida water management Executive Director
09:24:52 Dave Moore came to the council and asked that we
09:24:54 consider some sort of rates for high users.
09:24:58 He actually wanted a drought rate that would be
09:25:03 invoked at certain times.
09:25:06 What we are proposing, or what we are suggesting, is
09:25:09 that we add actually two tiers to our rate structure,
09:25:14 a tier 5 and tier 6.
09:25:17 And you will see, if you have that book, there's a
09:25:20 chart in there that we use to determine where those
09:25:24 breaks would be, and that helped us identify the
09:25:28 rates, or the range, I'm sorry.
09:25:31 And so we would propose a tier 5 that would have the
09:25:34 range going from 735 CCFs to 99, and then to get
09:25:40 that rate, we doubled the $4.06 to $8.12, and then the
09:25:47 tier 6 would be anybody over 100 CCFs and above
09:25:52 would be, again, another 4.06 or total of $12.18.
09:25:58 So that's what we would propose.
09:26:02 There's some other information in here, if that's
09:26:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
09:26:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me just opinionate some of
09:26:14 these things.
09:26:14 If it wasn't for these high water users during
09:26:18 non-drought season, no one hears about them because
09:26:22 everybody is happy.
09:26:23 They are getting a lot of water.
09:26:25 They are using a lot of water for their use.
09:26:29 And the city is happy because they are getting the
09:26:31 revenues to pay off their bonds and operate the
09:26:35 However, when it comes to the drought, they are the
09:26:39 ones that are looked at and saying, hey, you guys are
09:26:44 But I'm not saying that.
09:26:46 What I'm saying is, I think everybody can serve
09:26:49 including these high water users, when the time came.
09:26:53 I know one that I saw, they rented a reclaim truck and
09:27:00 bought the reclaimed water and put it on the lawn two
09:27:02 or three times a week.
09:27:03 What I'm saying is, this is fine, I'm not against
09:27:06 something like this.
09:27:07 But what are we going to do to help alleviate these
09:27:13 problems or these high end water users that by nature
09:27:16 themselves are stuck in their domain of having a
09:27:20 large, lush operation within their confines that they
09:27:26 Meaning when General Motors gave you a rebate for a
09:27:30 hybrid because the price of gas was high, and now
09:27:35 everybody is going to, I don't know, technology, we
09:27:40 are going to have cars running on water.
09:27:42 And it's coming.
09:27:42 It's just five years away or so.
09:27:44 So what are we saying?
09:27:46 What help are we going to give these individuals to
09:27:48 help them help us?
09:27:51 Because we put them in this situation.
09:27:56 We hand fed them during years and years and years of
09:27:59 ample supply of water.
09:28:01 And I'm not opposed to raising the rate.
09:28:04 But, at the same time, I like to have some corrective
09:28:08 measure so they can have some relief.
09:28:10 In fact, one of these high water users was the
09:28:13 original father of reclaimed water, unfortunately they
09:28:21 didn't get to his house.
09:28:22 It stopped short.
09:28:23 So I don't want to punish somebody unjustly -- and I
09:28:27 know this is not your intent, believe me, I know you
09:28:29 better than that -- but, you know, we are talking
09:28:33 about the second expansion.
09:28:35 But we haven't finished the first expansion.
09:28:38 That's my concern.
09:28:39 My concern is what we did, the evaluation of 8,000,
09:28:44 8500, whatever, dwellings and 5600 signed up, I and
09:28:49 everyone else here has not had a concentrated effort
09:28:53 on getting at least 85 to 90% signed up.
09:28:57 And that's my concern with myself.
09:29:01 If I got enough to sell this product to the public so
09:29:05 that all of us can benefit.
09:29:07 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Hopefully the last item we covered
09:29:11 will help us do that.
09:29:15 And just before I leave that, before we leave that
09:29:17 totally, did you all have a date that we could use
09:29:20 that would be better?
09:29:23 I'm sorry I didn't cover that before we finished that.
09:29:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thought the date you suggested
09:29:33 was fine but I have a question about the map.
09:29:38 Do you have a map showing where the most intense water
09:29:40 use is and where the projected next phase of star is,
09:29:43 and the people using this water have the largest
09:29:48 Will those be covered, at what point will they be
09:29:53 covered by expansion of STAR?
09:29:56 Because it seems what Mr. Miranda brought up was
09:29:58 really germane, that obviously if there's this great a
09:30:01 demand, and those are the areas that STAR should be
09:30:04 expanding into.
09:30:05 And then the other point along that way is I know that
09:30:08 we discussed that currently golf courses use well
09:30:12 water, and I know that it would be preferable for them
09:30:15 to use -- because they have so much turf -- to use
09:30:19 reclaimed water.
09:30:20 Obviously it's better for our local aquifer.
09:30:24 Are we ensuring that all of our local golf courses
09:30:27 will have access to reclaimed?
09:30:29 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: There's a number of issues in
09:30:37 This is the sort of map that we look at when we
09:30:40 determine where we should expand reclaimed.
09:30:42 And you may recall when we did the presentation, CDM
09:30:49 explained this is how we determine the areas.
09:30:51 You can see the intensive use down here in the South
09:30:54 Tampa area.
09:30:55 Again this number of dots are people that use more
09:30:58 than 400 gallons per day.
09:31:01 So this is the intensive usage area.
09:31:03 There's some out here.
09:31:04 And then there's the New Tampa area.
09:31:07 The biggest concentration certainly is down here, and
09:31:10 that's where we would propose our next expansion to
09:31:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Good.
09:31:17 The golf course.
09:31:18 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Oh, the golf courses, we are in
09:31:21 discussion with Palma Ceia.
09:31:23 We certainly, as we are building our way out towards
09:31:27 around the airport, we are looking at the golf
09:31:31 courses, Rocky Point, out that way, and I don't know
09:31:37 about the one right there at the water plant.
09:31:41 Not at this time.
09:31:42 So the ones that are close to where we have reclaimed,
09:31:45 we are engaging in trying to get them.
09:31:47 We have talked to the Sports Authority.
09:31:50 They certainly are interested.
09:31:51 We would like to work something out with them.
09:31:53 Of course something everything boils down to the --
09:31:56 the bottom line, the Dolores and how we get it out
09:32:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Will there be specific state money
09:32:03 available for serving golf courses with reclaimed?
09:32:06 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I have not seen other than the
09:32:08 loan, I have not seen available money or grant money
09:32:11 for that purpose.
09:32:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:32:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, I had a question, and it may be
09:32:22 in your report, but I'm having a hard time kind of
09:32:24 finding it.
09:32:27 If you were to break up the usage of potable water,
09:32:35 you know, the amounts per gallon, that's what I'm
09:32:42 trying to ask, is there a way for to us see somewhere
09:32:44 in this report what percentage each of these --
09:32:50 overall, what percentage overall of the water used is
09:32:56 used by these higher tiers or hire users?
09:33:02 Do you follow what I'm saying?
09:33:05 I need a little help.
09:33:07 Reading that.
09:33:09 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I'm not sure that we can break --
09:33:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Occurrences, does that translate
09:33:16 somehow into percentages?
09:33:18 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: No, it doesn't.
09:33:20 We can determine the percentages for you.
09:33:22 I think we determined the average user is somewhere
09:33:27 between the tier -- is it the tier 2 area, the average
09:33:34 water user?
09:33:36 Our average water user is in tier 2.
09:33:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you put this up on the screen
09:33:44 for us?
09:33:46 Sort of explain it?
09:33:59 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We can determine for you the
09:34:00 percentages of our totals customer that is get into
09:34:02 each area, but what this graph is showing is in a
09:34:07 12-month period, how many bills, individual bills, hit
09:34:14 into this higher range.
09:34:17 So an individual might have been high in January and
09:34:21 then not high again until December.
09:34:23 So that would be two occurrences.
09:34:27 So it's not like we have somebody that's out there.
09:34:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Here is what I am trying to
09:34:34 I'm sure that you considered all of this.
09:34:39 But as far as how much it hurts when you do raise
09:34:45 those rates, I mean, I guess I kind of have the
09:34:50 opposite idea to what Mr. Miranda said, that the more
09:34:53 water you use, the more you should pay, which is what
09:34:57 you are doing.
09:34:58 But when is it going to be enough to kind of encourage
09:35:01 these people -- I mean, they can't choose to have
09:35:05 reclaimed water if we don't make that available to
09:35:08 them, but they can choose to change the type of
09:35:11 landscaping that they have, so they don't have that.
09:35:14 So this is a whole other -- we have different things
09:35:18 going on here.
09:35:19 We have the idea that we have got to recycle our
09:35:23 reclaimed water and find a use for that.
09:35:25 But we also have the fact that we need to use less
09:35:27 potable water, and there are a lot of ways to
09:35:30 accomplish that.
09:35:30 So --
09:35:37 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Keep in mind the structure here
09:35:38 would be that up to 74 CCFs, you know, they would
09:35:42 pay for their first five -- everybody pays the same up
09:35:46 to 13, everybody pays the same.
09:35:49 As you use more and more and more and get up to that
09:35:52 higher rate, you get those expensive CCFs.
09:35:56 >> I would like to have a better idea.
09:35:58 And I know this is going to take me doing studying
09:36:01 some of this information, this data you have and
09:36:05 talking to understand how much of an incentive are you
09:36:08 Are you creating it at the right level?
09:36:12 Could it be, you know, is it really divided up in the
09:36:17 best way that we can accomplish what we are trying to
09:36:19 And it may be that we just need to look at other
09:36:24 municipalities that have done this and managed to
09:36:28 reduce their water consumption.
09:36:30 >>> There are certainly various philosophies, and
09:36:34 there was a water summit downtown this year, and there
09:36:39 was an expert there who talked about the various
09:36:43 One of the ones that is significantly different from
09:36:46 ours was to raise all of the rates in every structure
09:36:50 to try to entice everybody to conserve.
09:36:54 What we put together only affects really the people
09:36:57 that use a lot.
09:37:00 And Brad indicated to me that the top users here are
09:37:04 less than 1%.
09:37:05 >> Okay, that's what I was trying to get.
09:37:08 Thank you.
09:37:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So it's not going to matter too much
09:37:12 to those using high uses, and what you have done is
09:37:23 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Somewhere -- you're right.
09:37:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If I'm a high user, you know, and I
09:37:30 have money it's not going to matter what you charge.
09:37:34 They are going to pay it.
09:37:35 I mean, that's been your experience anyway, has it
09:37:38 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
09:37:40 I think Ms. Saul-Sena asked about what are we doing to
09:37:43 help some of the high users, and Brad mentioned --
09:37:48 >>BRAD BAIRD: Water department director.
09:37:49 Councilman Miranda brought that up as well.
09:37:54 We are working with the large commercial users now on
09:38:01 an individual basis to determine what happens, what
09:38:06 they can change, what they can do to change their
09:38:08 irrigation system to low volume methods, and we are
09:38:13 also in the very large users have contacted them and
09:38:18 made the same offer.
09:38:19 So we will work with them to change from pop-up heads,
09:38:23 for instance, for the landscaping, to drip irrigation.
09:38:27 And I think that will go a long way to helping them
09:38:32 reduce their consumption.
09:38:41 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to follow up on what you
09:38:43 said, Mr. Daignault, because I think considering that
09:38:46 only one percent is the high end users, 1% is the high
09:38:54 end user, if 99% is not in that category then it makes
09:38:59 sense what the one expert you were talking about said,
09:39:01 that we really need to share the pain and raise the
09:39:05 rates for everybody, or you are not going to be
09:39:08 creating any kind of disincentive to using.
09:39:11 >> I don't know about that.
09:39:16 >>MARY MULHERN: That doesn't sound popular, but when
09:39:19 you are talking about water shortage, which we are
09:39:22 going to be facing more and more, and, you know, the
09:39:26 climate report that came out last week said we are
09:39:28 going to have more and more drought here.
09:39:31 So we are not talking about, you know, an anomaly that
09:39:35 we have had a three-year drought.
09:39:37 So far it hasn't been raining that much as it should
09:39:40 be in this second half of June.
09:39:42 So I think -- I kind of think we have to really think
09:39:47 about this pretty hard as far as how we are going to
09:39:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:39:53 I sort of agree with what you said.
09:39:56 When the price of gas goes up to $4 like it has, and
09:40:00 I'm not talking here about gas, this is about water.
09:40:02 But when I go to fill up with my Volkswagen or Mrs.
09:40:07 Saul-Sena fills up with her Prius and behind is a
09:40:12 hummer, he doesn't care if the price is $4 or $8.
09:40:16 He's going to buy the gas.
09:40:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Rights.
09:40:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And Mrs. Saul-Sena and I are stuck
09:40:21 in the same price range because in America we talk
09:40:24 about getting 35 miles a gallon.
09:40:28 50 is even better.
09:40:29 What they haven't told you, or told us, I should say,
09:40:33 we have no control of the gas.
09:40:34 Gas could go $9 and you pay $12,000 more for something
09:40:39 that you didn't want.
09:40:40 So what I'm saying is, that's true what you said.
09:40:44 And I agree with that philosophy.
09:40:46 But does it apply to this locale?
09:40:48 Let me say this:
09:40:51 No community that I know of -- and there might be some
09:40:54 that I don't -- has adhered to the reduction of water
09:40:59 consumption greater than the customers of the City of
09:41:03 Tampa's water department when we had the drought.
09:41:07 They did an outstanding job, all of them.
09:41:11 So do we use 40% of water outside the house?
09:41:15 I say no, on the reports that I get from the water
09:41:19 It's never greater than 20.
09:41:23 So it's either one or three or four things going on --
09:41:27 we have leakage in the house, we have people that are
09:41:29 taking hour baths, we have half loaded washing machine
09:41:36 or third-loaded dishwashers, and these are the things
09:41:39 that we haven't addressed, and I think there's where
09:41:42 the difference is in other communities.
09:41:44 I don't believe that we are using anything greater.
09:41:49 But I do believe we are using less than 20% on outdoor
09:41:54 And as you well know, you know more than most of us on
09:41:58 these items, water is a scarce commodity.
09:42:03 When you have a lot of it you have a low need for it.
09:42:05 When you have none of it you have a high need for it.
09:42:08 So the way we got to look at this thing is where do we
09:42:12 store, and how do we prepare for those three and four
09:42:16 months that happen historically all the time in this
09:42:22 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
09:42:23 Again, through this process, we were trying to address
09:42:26 again the request from SWFWMD to put -- again they
09:42:31 want to put on a drought charge.
09:42:34 Again there are various philosophies.
09:42:36 I don't know if the council is interested in doing
09:42:38 this, or any changes at all to our rates at this time,
09:42:43 but we would not recommend a drought charge or
09:42:46 surcharge to be added at certain times.
09:42:49 What we would propose would be again a way to address
09:42:54 the high-end users, and just don't -- I mean, it would
09:42:58 be year-round.
09:42:59 It would not be just during drought times.
09:43:01 This would be a constant.
09:43:03 So that would be our proposal to the council.
09:43:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:43:09 I think your suggestion that this be a year-round
09:43:12 approach is a solid one.
09:43:14 Could you just give me a ballpark?
09:43:16 Mr. Miranda referred to a percentage of indoor use
09:43:19 versus outdoor use.
09:43:20 Do you have a sense of that?
09:43:23 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Based on the information that we
09:43:25 had during the droughts, Brad had data that showed the
09:43:29 spikes on the days that people did irrigate, and it
09:43:33 was, I think, between about 15 and 20% more water use.
09:43:42 >> BRAD BAIRD: Many of you heard 50% outdoor
09:43:46 irrigation accounts for 50% of the use.
09:43:50 Many of those numbers were based on old data, where
09:43:55 you watered three times a week, and now we have been
09:44:01 in one day a week for three years.
09:44:04 So the percent of outdoor use is considerably less
09:44:09 than several years ago.
09:44:13 What we saw during the hand watering only reduction is
09:44:17 from 80 to 85 million gallons a day on a watering day
09:44:22 down to 60 million gallons a day usage.
09:44:26 On a nonwatering day.
09:44:28 So approximately 25%.
09:44:30 A little bit higher than councilman Miranda quoted,
09:44:35 but in that range, much lower, half of what we saw
09:44:39 years ago.
09:44:48 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: So, again, are you wanting us to
09:44:53 bring something back to you in regards to this?
09:44:55 >> Yes.
09:44:56 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you very much.
09:44:58 The next item is how do we fund the reclaimed
09:45:05 We have talked about different ways, the STAR 1 area
09:45:12 was funded with a loan, money being paid back from the
09:45:21 water and wastewater department.
09:45:22 It was funded with some SWFWMD money.
09:45:26 It was not funded with any assessment or with any
09:45:33 readiness to serve basically the customers did not pay
09:45:36 any upfront money to help cover a portion of the cost
09:45:41 of construction.
09:45:42 That capital cost.
09:45:44 As a result, they had to pay a higher rate.
09:45:48 So there was a higher reclaimed rate established right
09:45:52 up front.
09:45:52 It was metered because SWFWMD required that it be
09:45:56 metered, and the rate was intended to try to capture
09:46:02 some of the cost of that capital expansion.
09:46:06 The problem with that, as you all are aware, is that
09:46:10 many people did not hook up.
09:46:12 They said, why should I pay as much for reclaimed as I
09:46:15 can potable if I have to pay an extra charge to do
09:46:18 In an effort to address that problem, when you all
09:46:24 approved the five-year potable rate change, we
09:46:28 suggested, and you approved, dropping the potable --
09:46:31 excuse me, the reclaimed rate, so that there was a
09:46:34 difference in the cost of potable versus reclaimed.
09:46:39 And so that helped a little bit.
09:46:41 And as the potable rates changed, that between the
09:46:48 cost of reclaimed and potable will get bigger.
09:46:52 But if we are going to expand we have to come up with
09:46:54 a way to address that capital cost.
09:46:56 Even southwest Florida water management will pay for a
09:47:00 portion, about half of the cost, we still have to comb
09:47:05 up with a way to come up with the rest of the funds
09:47:08 for that expansion.
09:47:09 And so again the one that we proposed on the table, so
09:47:14 that it wouldn't be such a big cost at any one time
09:47:17 for folks, would be the readiness to serve, which is a
09:47:22 fee they pay monthly and it's similar to what they do
09:47:26 in St. Pete or Pinellas or Clearwater, what they do
09:47:31 currently in Clearwater.
09:47:34 So if we are going to expand, we are going to have to
09:47:38 make a determination, and it's crits Cal.
09:47:40 That's very important, because as the system continues
09:47:43 to expand, you want to have -- people are going to
09:47:48 say, well, that's not what they did before.
09:47:50 You want to have a process that you can follow
09:47:54 And use throughout.
09:48:00 So we are open for discussion or questions.
09:48:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: On that, again, what is full and
09:48:09 what is half full?
09:48:12 Is our glass on reclaimed water and reclaimed 1 half
09:48:17 full or half empty?
09:48:18 What I'm saying is, I'm certainly in favor of
09:48:24 It's certainly one of the components of many that will
09:48:27 become a cooperation to reduce the drought period of
09:48:34 this area.
09:48:35 However, I have some concerns about starting another
09:48:40 reclaimed system with the first -- when the first one
09:48:46 is 60% and we have it attuned to that.
09:48:51 What I would like to see, if possible, on the second
09:48:55 leg of reclaimed, do we have a written commitment from
09:48:59 individuals who want it?
09:49:01 Signed up so that they know and we know what part of
09:49:07 that glass is going to be full?
09:49:09 I would like to see a higher concentrated effort on
09:49:13 I can tell you that I have letters in there from the
09:49:15 4300 block to the 4700 block of Melrose that they all
09:49:21 want to sign up, the ones that received letters.
09:49:24 I haven't knocked on any doors.
09:49:26 But the other day we tore up Melrose.
09:49:31 I got letters again from the same people saying,
09:49:33 listen, you tore up the street, I'm four blocks away
09:49:36 from reclaimed, why didn't you put the reclaimed line
09:49:39 And I don't have an answer.
09:49:41 But what I'm saying is, we can expand both of the
09:49:48 programs, the first one and the second one.
09:49:51 And I hate to call it STAR, because it comes with a
09:49:54 stigma that it's only for certain individuals.
09:49:56 And we discussed that earlier.
09:49:59 But when we reclaimed is hooked up totally in the
09:50:06 city -- and I am not trying to jump locations and
09:50:08 fences -- what percent will be in reclaimed?
09:50:14 What I'm saying is we have to lead up to other things,
09:50:17 and I think you understand that.
09:50:19 But we have to do this first, I agree.
09:50:21 But I want to see a concentrated effort.
09:50:24 I don't care if it's you and I or Ms. Saul-Sena or Mr.
09:50:28 Caetano or Ms. Mulhern knocking on doors, providing
09:50:33 you don't carry no campaign literature.
09:50:35 [ Laughter ]
09:50:40 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Be glad to do both of those.
09:50:43 Not carry any campaign literature.
09:50:50 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: You must have read the paper
09:50:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Who said I can read?
09:50:58 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: The first item we talked about
09:50:59 which is the existing reclaimed water, and the way we
09:51:02 worded this is very critical, again very important,
09:51:05 because as the reclaimed area expands, those same
09:51:08 rules would apply.
09:51:10 So that's again we would like, you know, to encourage
09:51:13 the council think in that regard so as we expand the
09:51:16 reclaimed system, these same rules would apply as far
09:51:19 as people not having a potable irrigation meter,
09:51:24 people not having the sewer max.
09:51:27 So again we are hopeful that that's going to be an
09:51:32 We are also hopeful that something like a readiness to
09:51:35 serve fee would help us cover that cost of the capital
09:51:40 It does improve people's property values, when they
09:51:44 have that additional utility out there.
09:51:46 So that's a way that we are proposing, we look at
09:51:52 expanding this and become the city standard, again not
09:51:56 putting too big of a problem like an assessment.
09:52:01 Some folks might be able to afford it.
09:52:02 Some folks may not.
09:52:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?
09:52:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There's only one thing in my mind,
09:52:14 Mr. Chairman, if I may.
09:52:15 We are thinking in an area, and we are thinking that
09:52:18 everyone has the ability to expand 400, 500, $1,000.
09:52:25 Within that area, certainly most are of the certainly
09:52:27 most are in some greater parts of the city other than
09:52:31 that area.
09:52:32 However, even in those areas, you have individuals
09:52:34 that are living on Social Security checks, that
09:52:37 have -- they are of age, they have a small lot, in
09:52:42 fact they used to call them nice lots.
09:52:44 Now they call them tear-down lots because they wants
09:52:46 to tear down the house and build something else.
09:52:48 And those individuals, in my opinion, may be trapped
09:52:52 in an area where you are going to get assessed, even
09:52:56 if you don't put it in and you can't afford to put it
09:52:58 So I'm trying to formulate in my own mind, how do we
09:53:02 solve a problem of this great magnitude, save the
09:53:08 amount of water that we are using, and also -- and
09:53:11 it's very difficult.
09:53:12 And also to help the people who are in their twilight
09:53:16 and senior years and golden years, and if you believe
09:53:20 all of that, you're wrong.
09:53:23 About the quality of life that they are going to have.
09:53:25 In other words, I don't want to put an undue burden
09:53:28 that I have to do something when those people are
09:53:32 losing their health a little bit, and so forth and so
09:53:35 That's my only concern.
09:53:38 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I understand.
09:53:39 Again, we think an assessment process would be more
09:53:43 onerous than this readiness to serve.
09:53:46 We can certainly look at, you know, what we could do
09:53:48 in the way of a financial hardship, if folks
09:53:51 demonstrated they were in that situation.
09:53:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I think everyone probably got this
09:53:58 e-mail, but the family that won the water wise award
09:54:04 last year, they had tried to -- and they live in Hyde
09:54:08 Park -- they tried to install -- they wanted to
09:54:10 install -- have reclaimed water I am stalled but it
09:54:15 wasn't available to them.
09:54:16 So they put in a low pressure irrigation system, and I
09:54:22 think there are instances like that where people have,
09:54:28 you know, specially put in -- they put in a lot of
09:54:32 money to do that and had that installed.
09:54:36 If people figured out other ways to conserve on the
09:54:39 potable water they are using for irrigation, I don't
09:54:42 think they should be forced to use reclaimed water.
09:54:46 And I think there are going to be cases where we have
09:54:48 to work out --
09:54:56 >>> City of Tampa water manager.
09:54:58 I know hour talking about.
09:54:59 For those people who already have low volume
09:55:01 irrigation, we can work with them, a look them to use
09:55:04 the potable water resources.
09:55:06 It's the pop-ups, inefficient spray heads that use the
09:55:09 most water, and shouldn't use them on a flower bed
09:55:15 So in cases where it's low volume irrigation, that's
09:55:18 exactly what we want, they are conserving water.
09:55:30 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I am pretty much finished with that
09:55:32 Again we did talk about at a presentation to council
09:55:35 on the TMDL, total maximum daily load, the issue
09:55:39 that's going to be impacting the wastewater stream,
09:55:42 and so that's another -- that's a factor we have to
09:55:47 consider here as we try to find other places to put
09:55:49 our reclaimed water.
09:55:53 The next item on here would be the north Tampa
09:56:00 expansion versus indirect potable, which council
09:56:04 member Miranda wanted to discuss a little further.
09:56:08 That's why we provided you with that disk.
09:56:13 That's Southwest Florida Water Management did an
09:56:16 evaluation of could reclaimed be used for recharge?
09:56:20 And the report basically identifies all of the issues
09:56:24 and all of the regulations that would be involved, if
09:56:29 you put this in a rapid infiltration basin versus
09:56:34 direct injection into an aquifer through a well and
09:56:39 again all of the regulation that would be involved in
09:56:41 each of those types of uses, it also indicates that if
09:56:45 you are going to do this that it certainly will be
09:56:48 site specific.
09:56:49 They actually, in that report, had an area that they
09:56:53 looked at.
09:56:54 But if it was in south Pasco or if it was in north
09:56:58 Hillsborough, northeast Hillsborough, again each site
09:57:02 would have to be looked at independently to look at to
09:57:05 determine whether or not this was feasible.
09:57:07 So in our presentation to you on the reclaimed master
09:57:13 plan, we talked about -- here is our first big users
09:57:19 and here is our domestic users.
09:57:22 We talked about a pipe going up to the New Tampa area.
09:57:24 We said that it makes sense from a business sense
09:57:31 anyway to include capacity to bring water up into
09:57:35 south Pasco where Tampa Bay water wanted to inject
09:57:39 water through again RIB system, reclaimed water, it's
09:57:46 2012-ish, 2012 time frame which is the plan in that
09:57:55 presentation, and the cost of that pipe.
09:58:00 So again it looks like something that is feasible, it
09:58:02 is something that Tampa Bay water is looking at doing,
09:58:06 and they would help us with that coast of that pipe
09:58:10 getting water to what would be the next area of high
09:58:14 water use, so that the reclaimed folks, the people
09:58:17 could use reclaimed up there.
09:58:23 I'm sorry, not 2012.
09:58:26 We also provided you in here in the section, or item,
09:58:31 let's see, item 3, information regarding the folks --
09:58:37 this is a groundwater replenishment program in
09:58:42 It explains how they did it.
09:58:45 What's interesting to me in there is the level of
09:58:47 treatment that they go through.
09:58:50 They treated their wastewater three different
09:58:55 processes basically including reverse osmosis to get
09:58:59 to the point where they can then inject it into the
09:59:01 ground, and they use it both as a barrier to salt
09:59:05 water intrusion, and into their flow of aquifer, from
09:59:11 which they draw their drinking water.
09:59:13 So there is again a number of processes that would
09:59:19 still have to be done, if we were to take our
09:59:21 reclaimed water, and use it, get it back in the
09:59:25 potable stream.
09:59:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.
09:59:28 I appreciate you bringing that up.
09:59:30 There is a little difference only between reclaimed
09:59:33 and recharge.
09:59:36 Reclaimed is getting that process at the Howard Curren
09:59:42 plant, two treatments over, during which you just
09:59:44 said, reverse osmosis and so forth on putting it into
09:59:48 the ground, because when that is completed, that water
09:59:51 has no taste.
09:59:55 It is like distilled water.
09:59:57 So you have to mix it with something or the public
10:00:00 won't accept it.
10:00:01 That is one area.
10:00:02 What is recharge?
10:00:04 Recharge is the same thing as reclaimed other than
10:00:07 it's done through nature.
10:00:10 And let's be Frank with each other and sincere and I'm
10:00:14 not talking about you, you have always been Frank and
10:00:18 sincere even though your name is Steve do. We think
10:00:21 the Hillsborough River is clean and pristine and
10:00:24 nothing going on there?
10:00:26 Or do we believe there's bird droppings, carcasses,
10:00:31 not only in our water supply but all over the country?
10:00:34 Do we think that the wellfields are clean, that
10:00:37 there's no cow manure, that there's nothing, that it's
10:00:41 just beautiful green grass and there's nothing going
10:00:44 Absolutely not.
10:00:46 Do we think that any water supply in this country or
10:00:51 in the world comes from an area that has 100 percent
10:01:00 rid of all things that are bad for nature?
10:01:02 Absolutely not.
10:01:02 It is the importance of water supply systems to clean
10:01:07 out all that, to make sure that we have an adequate
10:01:12 I look at water and sewer in much greater words than
10:01:24 anything else, and you can talk about light rail, you
10:01:27 can talk about everything you want to do to make life,
10:01:29 quality of life better, and reduce the pollutants in
10:01:32 the air and so forth and so on of the but guess what
10:01:36 If you don't have water and sewer, you don't have much
10:01:39 at all.
10:01:40 So it's incumbent upon this city and the dwellers to
10:01:45 have this opportunity, and to have this debate.
10:01:48 And I think this is good today we have it.
10:01:53 An audience today that's greater to or equal to a
10:01:57 regular council meeting.
10:01:59 This is the is in the hearts and minds of the public.
10:02:03 Not only council members.
10:02:05 But these are the things that's going to look for the
10:02:07 future of this city for years to come, 50, 60, 100
10:02:10 years from now.
10:02:12 What do you think the astronauts drink?
10:02:15 Do you think they have a straw up in or by the to the
10:02:17 water plant, they suck it in?
10:02:19 That's not going to happen.
10:02:20 What do you think when they go to the moon and all
10:02:23 They are going to take a water department treatment
10:02:25 plant with them?
10:02:25 I don't think so.
10:02:27 So when you look at a river, and you look at things,
10:02:30 and you look at a Wellfield, it's the same thing we
10:02:34 are going to think of doing now, just in a larger
10:02:38 And this water, if it's ever put on the ballot, will
10:02:43 be as greater than or better than the water that we
10:02:46 are drinking today.
10:02:48 And I want to thank you for bringing that up.
10:02:54 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Just again, with any additional
10:02:58 treatment, there is cost.
10:02:59 And just as long as we all understand that, you know,
10:03:02 any of those things are possible, if you start looking
10:03:06 at the possibilities of using reclaimed again in our
10:03:11 potable stream, there's a couple of things, a couple
10:03:14 of issues we have to deal with.
10:03:16 And one of them of course is permitting, and getting
10:03:18 the environmental agency to allow us to do that.
10:03:21 That's been done once before.
10:03:22 And then the second item would be our treatment plant.
10:03:26 Our current water treatment plant and its capacity.
10:03:32 Those things are just things to keep in mind.
10:03:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:03:39 You brought to us some things today that are for the
10:03:43 immediate future, that we can actively do as a city,
10:03:47 to hopefully expand the users of reclaimed, and then
10:03:50 expand the reclaimed system.
10:03:52 And I think that council is as a group very supportive
10:03:57 of that, and encouraging you to do it as quickly as
10:04:00 This other issue that you brought up, much more
10:04:04 complicated, much more expensive, much more long-term.
10:04:06 For me I have some serious environmental questions
10:04:09 about itself.
10:04:09 So I would prefer -- I think it's good to be aware.
10:04:15 I would like to sort of urge to you move ahead on the
10:04:17 things we can do now, that will help address our
10:04:21 drought situation next year, which we all anticipate
10:04:24 will be there.
10:04:25 And then it's like do what we can do now and put that
10:04:29 other stuff on the back burner for later.
10:04:32 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you.
10:04:33 We'll do that.
10:04:34 Again, we'll bring something back to you for the
10:04:38 existing reclaimed area.
10:04:40 I'm still not sure that we have a date.
10:04:43 You indicated that December was an okay date.
10:04:47 I think Mr. Dingfelder, who is not here, was having a
10:04:49 problem with that date, when we discuss it or when we
10:04:52 handed this out before.
10:04:53 So that's still open unless you all want to take some
10:04:58 sort of an action on it.
10:05:00 We'll continue to use that date until the council says
10:05:03 that you would like to use a different date, and we'll
10:05:06 bring that back to you shortly.
10:05:08 We will also bring an issue or an ordinance on the
10:05:11 rates for the high users, and we'll continue to work
10:05:15 on expanding the reclaimed area and looking at the use
10:05:19 of something like the readiness to serve, to help us
10:05:24 capture that capital cost, at least for the
10:05:27 foreseeable future, for the next areas.
10:05:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
10:05:34 Again, reclaimed water in this city does not solve our
10:05:40 drought situation.
10:05:41 It helps out because helps to a limited amount of city
10:05:48 dwellers, less than 20%.
10:05:50 20% I will say for the sake of argument.
10:05:52 What we need to solve drought is three or four things.
10:05:56 You need political will.
10:05:58 You need to have environmental limitations so the
10:06:02 environment is not damaged.
10:06:04 Because you will have continued growth, because of the
10:06:06 area, you have two seasons here in Tampa, summer and
10:06:11 And you need to have -- develop new water sources
10:06:15 which are getting harder and harder.
10:06:18 The easy fruit has been picked.
10:06:20 Everything else is expensive.
10:06:22 To build another desal plant you are going to be
10:06:26 paying twice the amount of what we are talking about
10:06:29 And the least expensive is what we discussed earlier.
10:06:33 I'm not opposed to continue talking that.
10:06:37 It reduces the supply of water.
10:06:40 It helps the environment.
10:06:43 The aquifer to restore itself naturally.
10:06:46 And it saves on a lot of things, disruption in the
10:06:52 city -- "A," massive piping.
10:06:56 The pipes alone to put down reclaimed, if you are
10:06:59 going to do this area, and New Tampa is equal to or
10:07:03 greater than a complete drought tolerant system, and
10:07:08 I'll take that to the bank against anybody, because
10:07:11 those costs are enormous, and the cost to do a
10:07:18 reclaimed system, to potable water, through reverse
10:07:21 osmosis and blending and so forth, the hindsight 200
10:07:27 million, and I'm not an estimator.
10:07:28 I'm not an environmental scientist.
10:07:30 But the cost to do the pipes are three to four hundred
10:07:37 So what do you get on the ratio benefit?
10:07:40 You get a cost of two for 20%, or you get a cost of
10:07:45 one for 100 percent.
10:07:47 And everybody could have their lush lawns, for some
10:07:53 powered of period of time.
10:07:54 This is not going to go on forever.
10:07:56 But it's something that's not new, something that's
10:08:00 done throughout the country and throughout the world.
10:08:03 We are not inventing the wheel.
10:08:05 We are not even fixing -- let me tell you what I think
10:08:08 reclaimed is worth.
10:08:09 And I am going to put it -- if you went out today and
10:08:14 bought four new tires and took the one that was less
10:08:17 bald like my head and put in the there as your tire in
10:08:25 the trunk, if you go out on the road, two weeks after
10:08:27 you bought the tire and those cost ask you 200 each
10:08:30 and the one that you have a spare is $25 tire, that's
10:08:34 a lot of disparity in cost.
10:08:36 So you have a blowout, something on the side of the
10:08:38 road and you have a blowout.
10:08:43 At that point what is that tire worth?
10:08:45 That's what reclaimed is worth.
10:08:46 It's equal to or greater than the product that is it's
10:08:50 replacing, because that's the only low lying fruit
10:08:55 And we are the only community that has it in great
10:09:01 55 million a day.
10:09:03 And as you grow, that becomes larger, and you have the
10:09:05 capacity of that plants to go to 930 million, or maybe
10:09:10 it's 60 million.
10:09:11 The water plant, although you have the 82 MGD average,
10:09:16 you can certainly do a lot more than that because it
10:09:18 was set up through foresight, in the future, to 120
10:09:23 million, and can do 140 for about positive days
10:09:26 without putting it in stress.
10:09:28 So these are the things that you're right that you're
10:09:31 bringing up that should be debated in the public.
10:09:33 These are the things that the public should have a
10:09:35 vote on, because political will is very little.
10:09:43 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: If I could, you brought up a couple
10:09:45 of items there that I really wanted to touch on today.
10:09:51 There's certain things that we can do and certain
10:09:53 things that take a lot longer and are more complicated
10:09:56 before we can put them into effect.
10:09:58 So it's our job, we believe, to try to find ways of
10:10:02 not only finding water for all of our citizens but
10:10:04 also keeping their costs down.
10:10:07 By expanding reclaimed, I realize that that doesn't
10:10:09 get it for everybody, and it doesn't solve all of our
10:10:12 reclaimed, all of our potable water needs issues, but
10:10:16 it does keep everybody's rates down by getting people
10:10:21 off of potable and onto reclaimed, we save potable,
10:10:25 which means he would don't have to buy potable from
10:10:27 Tampa Bay water, which is that more expensive rate.
10:10:30 So again, it does benefit everybody who is a customer
10:10:34 of ours by getting folks off of potable and onto
10:10:40 The same with the TMDLs, are going to be a cost that
10:10:46 are going to affect everybody who is a sewer customer.
10:10:48 One way or the other they are going to be impacted.
10:10:51 So if we again can use that reclaimed elsewhere, and
10:10:55 not put it in the bay, we are helping us, and again it
10:10:59 affects everybody's rate.
10:11:01 The other issue is this concept -- and I have had some
10:11:05 he mails from folks who say the problem is not water
10:11:09 demand, it's water supply, you need to go out and find
10:11:12 other sources of water.
10:11:13 And Mr. Miranda said, we are limited to the amount of
10:11:16 water we can take from the Hillsborough River, that 82
10:11:23 We are fixed not only in our agreement, in our
10:11:26 agreement with Tampa Bay water.
10:11:27 We cannot go out and develop another water source.
10:11:29 If we develop another water source, if the City of
10:11:32 Tampa decided to build its own desal plant, Tampa Bay
10:11:36 water has the first right or has the right to come and
10:11:38 buy that from us, come and take it from us.
10:11:41 So we are limited in there, we are kind of in a little
10:11:44 box here.
10:11:44 We do have some control over our rates, and how we use
10:11:49 our water.
10:11:49 But we can't go out and go to Pasco County and develop
10:11:53 a wellfield and start bringing that water into Tampa.
10:11:56 We cannot do that.
10:11:57 So again people need to -- the water issues are just
10:12:01 really complicated.
10:12:02 There's lots of rules and regulations in there.
10:12:04 And so we have to live within those.
10:12:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
10:12:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I agree with what you said.
10:12:14 Everything you said is correct.
10:12:15 There's something in my mind that tells me that all
10:12:21 waters of the state, but reclaimed water has never
10:12:24 been part of that system.
10:12:26 I know that's a legal issue.
10:12:28 I know we came within a week of losing it all, because
10:12:32 of the hunger of other areas, and I am not going to
10:12:37 name them because I know who they are, outside of the
10:12:39 counties that Tampa Bay water is working with.
10:12:46 So I don't believe -- I'm not an attorney, but I don't
10:12:49 believe that they are entitled to that reclaimed
10:12:53 I believe the City of Tampa has a strong, strong case
10:12:59 that their reclaimed water is not part of the state
10:13:06 waters and lakes and rivers water.
10:13:08 It is a byproduct of something that does not belong to
10:13:12 the state.
10:13:14 That's just me.
10:13:15 And I have had conversations with individuals in the
10:13:17 legal department, and they say they can defend that
10:13:21 stand pretty well.
10:13:25 >>CHAIRMAN: Ms. Saul-Sena.
10:13:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One quick question.
10:13:28 You haven't mentioned, because it's a reclaimed
10:13:31 question but it's germane to our cost.
10:13:33 The total maximum daily loads, TMDLs, is the City of
10:13:40 Tampa still in the posture waiting for the county to
10:13:42 do something?
10:13:44 You know, it's raining, it's the summer season, we
10:13:46 have these allergy blooms, it's a problem.
10:13:50 Council brought it up, and I think previously I heard
10:13:53 we were waiting for the county.
10:13:56 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
10:13:57 Right now, the element -- the element you are talking
10:14:01 about is the fertilizer regulation that the estuary
10:14:04 program has developed and recommended a model
10:14:07 ordinance on that.
10:14:09 At this point the posture is we are looking at
10:14:11 probably the county or EPC to move forward on that, so
10:14:16 we'll have consistent regulation countywide.
10:14:18 If council has a different preference, we could
10:14:23 discuss that.
10:14:23 But that has been the posture both the members of the
10:14:29 committee and EPC's interest as well.
10:14:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We know you but you didn't put your
10:14:34 name on the record.
10:14:35 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.
10:14:38 Thank you for reminding me.
10:14:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I love the idea of everybody
10:14:41 working together and to move ahead.
10:14:43 I don't see the county making much progress on this.
10:14:46 And so I would like to see council do something,
10:14:51 because frankly we are going to have to pay for the
10:14:54 cost of this, and it's the cheapest thing we can do is
10:14:57 to say don't overfertilize this summer, we have
10:15:01 officially hit summer, and itself just makes all the
10:15:03 sense in the world.
10:15:04 So I guess at the end of the workshop and after we
10:15:07 hear from the public I am going to ask that we can --
10:15:10 that you all bring something back to us so we could
10:15:12 move ahead with the estuary suggestions.
10:15:19 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Daignault, anything else?
10:15:21 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: That's all I have.
10:15:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Council members?
10:15:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to hear from the
10:15:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Is anyone in the public wanting to
10:15:27 You can come up and speak now.
10:15:30 Anyone like to speak?
10:15:31 You may come up and speak now.
10:15:33 Come on up, sir.
10:15:36 >>> John Stearns, resident of Sun Bay South.
10:15:41 I don't know how to present you all documents.
10:15:44 I do hand them to somebody?
10:15:46 >> Yes.
10:15:48 >> (Off microphone) As you will see, it is not the
10:15:55 handful of plants listed at the STAR site.
10:15:59 67 trees alone are salt sensitive. If you look at
10:16:02 that list maybe later on, I would like to have you
10:16:05 imagine Tampa ten years from now minus this tree
10:16:08 We are spending a lot of money to and these trees are
10:16:14 sensitive to sodium chlorine.
10:16:17 I remember when Tampa was green and lush and we
10:16:21 basically had too much water.
10:16:23 So I agree, we have to do something to address it.
10:16:27 The e-mail that I sent you over the weekend has a link
10:16:32 to Santa Barbara's site and they hit this crossroad a
10:16:35 very long time ago and interestingly ended up saving
10:16:39 money by producing water which is essentially potable,
10:16:42 and instead of killing plants as this water can do a
10:16:45 great many plants, it's safe for kids to play in,
10:16:48 which our water is not, it's safe for pools, and it's
10:16:52 so pure they are actually using it for commercial
10:16:55 through crop production, and they saved money.
10:16:57 I want you all to check your e-mail boxes.
10:17:00 I sent it to you, I think, Saturday.
10:17:02 Please forgive my misspellings.
10:17:05 So this idea that we have to dispense the water of
10:17:08 sodium and chlorides to save money is not true.
10:17:12 I would like you all to consider maybe as your legacy,
10:17:15 because this is what you all do for a living now and I
10:17:17 would like you to picture yourselves say 10, 20 years
10:17:21 from now, Tampa minus Laurel oaks, minus citrus, minus
10:17:26 all these plants, on these two sheets of paper, and
10:17:31 sodium chlorides.
10:17:32 And I would think that you guys would not want that to
10:17:35 be your legacy.
10:17:37 You have options.
10:17:38 We don't need to build two more plants of the same
10:17:40 flawed design.
10:17:41 We can use this 340 million that's being discussed,
10:17:44 upgrade this plant, and I believe the accommodation
10:17:47 technology would be reverse osmosis and UV, and as I
10:17:51 said in my e-mail, use the other 240 million left over
10:17:55 to go ahead and build a second plants of the same
10:17:58 If you will take the time over the course of this
10:18:01 week, to go to the Santa Barbara Web site that I sent
10:18:04 you the link to, there's a very detailed breakdown of
10:18:07 how they hit this crossroad a long time ago and have
10:18:10 very effectively addressed it.
10:18:12 People like me who are gardeners, it's not like we are
10:18:16 anti-reclaimed water because we like our yards, we
10:18:18 like our plants, and there's a semantic thing, I want
10:18:21 to point out before my time is up, I keep hearing
10:18:23 people saying this is for lawns only.
10:18:25 You have got to remember the root zones of your trees
10:18:29 and shrubs and plants are below that lawn.
10:18:34 When you look at that list, all citrus are sensitive
10:18:38 to this.
10:18:39 Bananas, papa paellas, Mr. Dingfelder did finally
10:18:44 acknowledge Laurel oaks are being killed by this
10:18:46 I want to remind you of the time machine and picture
10:18:49 Tampa ten years from now minus 67 trees.
10:18:52 And they are not off-the-wall trees, Sycamore, long
10:18:58 needle pines, Laurel oaks, citrus.
10:19:00 All we have to do is fix the water and you are going
10:19:02 to have people like me lined up for it instead of
10:19:05 complaining about it.
10:19:06 So that's itself.
10:19:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:19:08 Would anyone else like to speak?
10:19:10 Anyone else like to speak?
10:19:13 Questions from council members?
10:19:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
10:19:17 Mr. Baird.
10:19:19 I know that it sometimes takes awhile to see the
10:19:25 results of tampering with our environment.
10:19:27 And the list that Mr. Stearns just presented us with
10:19:32 these trees, his point is well taken.
10:19:35 If we are using this water for irrigating our lawns,
10:19:44 you have this very skeptical look on your face.
10:19:47 Why are you skeptical about the investment in reverse
10:19:50 Because our spending on chlorine and on these other
10:19:53 things as we know is only going to get continue to
10:19:56 The cost of chemicals is increasing.
10:19:58 And we know that these things aren't really healthy
10:20:01 for our plants.
10:20:02 So what is your concern about the reverse osmosis?
10:20:05 >>BRAD BAIRD: First, I don't have a concern about the
10:20:08 treatment process of reverse osmosis.
10:20:12 It would work.
10:20:12 But it would be an additional cost to what we have
10:20:16 proposed to you.
10:20:17 So additional to the 340 million dollars proposal
10:20:25 would be at least 100 million, in the neighborhood of
10:20:27 probably 140 million based on the California numbers
10:20:30 to build a reverse osmosis plant at the Howard Curren
10:20:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But every year, particularly
10:20:38 recently, we have seen the costs of the chemicals
10:20:41 going up.
10:20:44 The investment in reverse osmosis would be a one-time
10:20:48 hit but then we would not have to spend on an annual
10:20:50 basis millions of dollars on these chemicals.
10:20:54 >>BRAD BAIRD: Actually, the reverse osmosis would be
10:20:57 in addition to the additional chemical costs, and the
10:21:03 operation and maintenance costs associated with
10:21:05 reverse osmosis plant, as we have seen with Tampa Bay
10:21:08 Water's desalination plant, is very high.
10:21:14 And I think that's reflected in your package as well
10:21:17 for the California plant.
10:21:20 The costs are additional.
10:21:21 And they are high.
10:21:24 And that would be the concern as I said, in a previous
10:21:27 e-mail, if you are going to go to that level, at that
10:21:34 point you might as well use your existing potable
10:21:36 water distribution system and build an indirect
10:21:40 potable system.
10:21:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
10:21:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:21:47 I'm not trying to create between reclaimed and potable
10:21:55 What has more chlorine, drinking water or reclaimed
10:21:58 >>BRAD BAIRD: Typically the residuals in potable water
10:22:03 are -- we have higher chlorine in potable versus
10:22:07 But the gentleman is correct, we do have higher salt
10:22:10 content in reclaimed.
10:22:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just pause.
10:22:21 I just received a message that Phyllis Busansky was
10:22:27 just found dead or passed away, deceased.
10:22:31 Let us pause for a moment, a prayer for the family,
10:22:34 for her husband.
10:22:35 (Moment of Silence)
10:22:50 Thank you.
10:22:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, do you still want to
10:23:00 Other questions?
10:23:00 We can close the workshop.
10:23:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close the workshop.
10:23:05 >> Second.
10:23:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:23:10 Anything else that needs to come before council?
10:23:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I don't know if this
10:23:16 is in order this being a workshop.
10:23:18 I don't know if we can make information reports and
10:23:20 new business.
10:23:20 I don't know finance that's appropriate at this time.
10:23:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe it is.
10:23:27 >>GWEN MILLER: It is, Mr. Miranda.
10:23:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to make two, if I may.
10:23:32 One is to a young man in Tampa, Florida, and this is
10:23:38 on the professional side.
10:23:39 He has now is the third leading manager in baseball,
10:23:49 and I had the pleasure at one time being elected bat
10:23:52 boy, because he was much better than I was, and his
10:23:55 name is Tony La Russa, just won his 120th game as
10:23:59 a manager and I would like to have this council send
10:24:01 him a commendation.
10:24:02 He is the only second manager in baseball to win a
10:24:04 world championship in the American league and in the
10:24:07 national league, and the other manager who did that
10:24:10 was sparky Anderson.
10:24:12 I'm sure by the time he retires he will be the second
10:24:15 manager in baseball history with more wins and he is
10:24:19 only like 90 behind.
10:24:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:24:28 All in favor?
10:24:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to say that Tony La Russa was
10:24:35 the White Sox coach when I was in Chicago, and sparky
10:24:38 Anderson won the tigers World Series in '84.
10:24:49 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I was reading in a book our
10:24:51 distinguished member of this board played with Tony
10:24:54 La Russa when he was 12 or 14 years old.
10:25:00 He pitched such a ball they couldn't see it.
10:25:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
10:25:04 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
10:25:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anything else?
10:25:13 Miranda one other thing.
10:25:14 I don't know if it's appropriate at this time, and I
10:25:17 can be corrected but I would like to put this to a
10:25:19 vote to the public, and somewhere when it's
10:25:23 appropriate for the legal department to determine, if
10:25:25 it's in November of 2010, that we put this on the
10:25:30 ballot, and the people decide if they want to go
10:25:33 forward and do this operation where it's done
10:25:40 throughout different parts of the United States and
10:25:42 throughout this world of ours and that we use this
10:25:44 reclaimed water that we have, and use it wisely,
10:25:48 certainly do reclaimed, and certainly save some for
10:25:51 well injection into areas that are having heavy
10:25:56 intrusion to the south of us to help them out, and
10:25:58 also to help us out.
10:25:59 You know, when we buy, for six months, over 20 million
10:26:03 gallons of water from Tampa Bay water that precludes
10:26:07 other areas from having water.
10:26:08 Yes, we are a little different.
10:26:09 We belong to a society of the Hillsborough River.
10:26:11 We are at the mercy of the river.
10:26:13 When there's a lot there's a lot.
10:26:15 When there's not, there's not.
10:26:16 And I would like to put that on the ballot so that the
10:26:19 people have a clear understanding, and there's a
10:26:21 debate in this community, whether we should have
10:26:24 reclaimed to potable water, and they can explain it,
10:26:29 and they can be brought up in a way that they
10:26:31 understand it when they read it on the ballot.
10:26:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I second it but I would like to
10:26:40 speak to that.
10:26:40 About six months ago the New York Times magazine had a
10:26:43 cover story on this issue.
10:26:45 It is national and it is controversial.
10:26:47 And our beloved Mr. River, Alan Wright, made me swear
10:26:53 on his death bed that I would be very concerned about
10:26:56 the chemicals that might be in it and but I think, Mr.
10:27:00 Miranda, I agree with you that it should be -- it's so
10:27:03 significant, it should not be made by a board,
10:27:06 particularly the SWFWMD board is not an elected one.
10:27:09 I think it should be made by the people in our
10:27:12 Because it's a matter of such importance.
10:27:15 I think that 2010 gives plenty of time for those
10:27:18 issues to be aired and for the public to tune in.
10:27:21 So I would support that motion.
10:27:22 I think that it's appropriate for the public to weigh
10:27:25 in on it, because of its gravity.
10:27:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:27:32 All in favor?
10:27:34 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
10:27:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The fertilizer question.
10:27:40 What I would like to do is check and see if the county
10:27:42 and EPC are making any strides.
10:27:45 I haven't heard of anything.
10:27:46 I thought things were kind of stuck over there.
10:27:48 But since we are meeting again on Thursday, that gives
10:27:50 me an opportunity to check.
10:27:51 If they are moving ahead, then we should -- oh.
10:27:56 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I can elaborate.
10:28:02 There is legislation pending that was going to affect
10:28:04 the ability of local governments to adopt fertilizer
10:28:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Unless we prove wee which we have
10:28:11 problems, which we do.
10:28:13 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
10:28:14 But anyway, the governor signed that, I believe,
10:28:17 So EPC, my understanding, was going to then start
10:28:21 moving forward again looking at what when would
10:28:27 noticed to support adoption of such an ordinance, and
10:28:28 then start moving forward.
10:28:31 We can coordinate with them to find out exactly where
10:28:33 we are in that process.
10:28:34 But it was kind of in a holding pattern to see what
10:28:38 happened with the state legislation.
10:28:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What I would like to do then is --
10:28:43 what I would like to do is basically encourage people
10:28:45 in Tampa to not put fertilizer on their lawns until
10:28:48 the rainy season is over.
10:28:50 You know, whether it's law or it's just public
10:28:56 That's a word we need to get out.
10:28:58 But I would love a report under staff reports maybe
10:29:01 the first meeting in July where we are.
10:29:02 So I think a motion for legal to report back to us and
10:29:05 where we stand with the fertilizer.
10:29:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:29:11 All in favor say Aye.
10:29:12 Mr. Fletcher, on the same note do we know whether the
10:29:14 county will adopt such an ordinance?
10:29:16 And will it include the City of Tampa?
10:29:19 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Well, I cannot speak for what
10:29:21 action the EPC board might decide to take on that
10:29:24 What I can tell you is that one of the reasons that
10:29:29 all the folks involved, including the city staff,
10:29:33 Temple Terrace staff, and the county, is that EPC has
10:29:37 the ability under their special act to adopt standards
10:29:40 that applies equally throughout the county and is
10:29:43 enforceable throughout the county by EPC staff, and
10:29:46 that is why the consensus was to move forward with
10:29:49 that process rather than having each jurisdiction move
10:29:52 forward with a separate ordinance.
10:29:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Which makes sense.
10:29:56 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:29:57 I would like to do a commendation for George Franklin
10:30:01 Dukes, a 55-year resident of Davis Island in
10:30:05 celebration of his 100th birthday.
10:30:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Congratulations.
10:30:09 That's wonderful.
10:30:10 It's been moved and seconded.
10:30:11 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:30:14 Anything else need to come before council?
10:30:16 If not we stand adjourned.
10:30:17 Thank you.
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.