Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Workshop session

Thursday, April 22, 2010

9:00 a.m. session


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

09:03:26 >> THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to

09:03:28 order.

09:03:29 I will yield to the honorable Joseph Caetano.

09:03:31 >> Reverend Scott will give the invocation.

09:03:36 After the invocation please stand for the pledge of

09:03:38 allegiance.

09:03:40 Reverend Scott.

09:03:40 >> We are grateful to you, acknowledge you as your word

09:03:50 has instructed us to do, and to give thanks, thanks for

09:03:54 this day and your blessings upon us.

09:03:58 Thank you for the rising of the sun and life and

09:04:01 strength.

09:04:03 We are grateful for our country and our nation.

09:04:06 Thank you for those that are in leadership in

09:04:07 Washington.

09:04:08 We pray for them.

09:04:09 We pray for giving wisdom and their protection.

09:04:13 Thank you for this great nation, this great country,

09:04:17 nation of opportunity, a nation of equality, a nation

09:04:22 that faces challenges but yet you have given us the

09:04:25 strength to rise over every one of them.

09:04:28 Dab we thank you for the City of Tampa, its leadership,

09:04:31 the mayor, and the City Council.

09:04:34 We pray that you give us wisdom and knowledge and

09:04:37 direction.

09:04:39 Help us to be fair in our decisions as we make the best

09:04:43 decision for this community.

09:04:45 Thank you now for our men and women who are fighting

09:04:48 around the world for democracy and freedom.

09:04:51 Protect them and bring them home safely to their

09:04:54 families.

09:04:56 Amen.

09:04:57 (Pledge of Allegiance).

09:05:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Roll call.

09:05:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.

09:05:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.

09:05:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

09:05:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

09:05:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

09:05:29 The chair will now yield to the honorable Gwen Miller.

09:05:36 Recognizing the officer and firefighter of the month.

09:05:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Good morning, council.

09:05:53 It's always an honor to honor our Officer of the Month.

09:05:57 It's my pleasure to have this opportunity.

09:05:58 And I would like to recognize officer Jerry Wyche.

09:06:02 I am going to turn it over to the Chief Castor who is

09:06:05 going to tell you the good things begun him, Chief

09:06:08 Castor.

09:06:09 >> Chief Castor: It is my honor to present to you

09:06:13 again our Officer of the Month, the highlight of my

09:06:14 month.

09:06:16 Jerry does an outstanding job.

09:06:17 I first met him when he was security with parks and

09:06:20 recreation when he came into my office as a major in

09:06:23 district 2, and talked about a plan whereby the

09:06:27 security, park security and the police department could

09:06:29 work together.

09:06:31 I don't want to say that we stole him away from parks

09:06:33 and recreation, but I encouraged him to become a police

09:06:38 officer because he said he had a great deal of ninth

09:06:40 that.

09:06:41 He worked for the Tampa Police Department as a public

09:06:42 service officer out on the street.

09:06:44 He worked as a reserve.

09:06:46 And then he became a police officer about two years

09:06:49 ago.

09:06:49 And he has done an outstanding job.

09:06:52 I will give you just a few of the statistics, yearly

09:06:56 statistics that he has put together here.

09:06:59 He handled over 1,000 assigned calls for service, but

09:07:03 he had 2,385 self-initiated calls in one year.

09:07:09 Those amounted to 465 arrests for a myriad of offenses.

09:07:15 He's a model team player who never hesitates to get

09:07:18 involved in anything.

09:07:19 He knows everything that's going on in his area of

09:07:21 responsibility.

09:07:22 He's assigned to one of the tougher areas in town, the

09:07:25 Sulphur Springs area, and he does an outstanding job

09:07:28 there.

09:07:29 Everyone knows him.

09:07:29 Everyone knows Jerry.

09:07:31 He made 1,299 traffic stops over the last few months,

09:07:37 and during those stops resulted in the seizure of 1,423

09:07:41 grams of narcotics, $36,000 in currency, nine vehicles,

09:07:47 and eight firearms.

09:07:50 He also had during just ten incidents, he made 13

09:07:56 felony arrests for over 50 felony charges in just ten

09:08:00 of those particular traffic stops.

09:08:02 So as you can see Jerry is an outstanding police

09:08:05 officer.

09:08:05 But he goes above and beyond.

09:08:07 He serves his community when officer Andrea law was

09:08:11 involved in a nearly fatal accident while vacationing

09:08:14 in Mexico.

09:08:14 He was at the hospital every single day just as a

09:08:18 friend on his days off.

09:08:20 He also represents the Tampa Police Department on honor

09:08:25 guard, in a very exemplary fashion, and he was able to

09:08:29 perform in that function during the services and the

09:08:35 honoring of corporal Mike Roberts, even though he was

09:08:38 an squad mate of his and actually worked with him on a

09:08:41 day-to-day basis, so the loss for Jerry was maybe

09:08:45 possibly more profound than some of the other people.

09:08:47 But he represented himself very well during that and

09:08:51 every other function that the honor guard does.

09:08:54 For these reasons and many, many more, what Jerry does

09:08:57 out there every day on the street, he is going to be

09:09:01 recognized as our Officer of the Month.

09:09:03 And I can tell you that Jerry is going to go places in

09:09:06 the police department.

09:09:07 He just has an outstanding ability to work with the

09:09:10 community, and he's a great police officer by

09:09:13 everybody's regards.

09:09:15 So I'm very grateful that he's our Officer of the

09:09:18 Month.

09:09:19 Congratulations.

09:09:25 [ Applause ]

09:09:26 >>GWEN MILLER: On behalf of the Tampa City Council I

09:09:29 would like to present you a commendation.

09:09:31 I am not going to say anything that she just said.

09:09:35 It's going to be right here on this plaque.

09:09:37 I am going to present it to you.

09:09:39 And the public would like to give you some gifts.

09:09:41 Charlie's steakhouse.

09:09:45 Stay right there.

09:09:45 >> Steve Stickley representing Stepp's towing service.

09:09:49 By the way, semper fi.

09:09:52 On behalf of Jim and Judy and Todd Stepp we would like

09:09:57 to present this statute to you for a job well done, for

09:10:00 being aggressive and doing I guess what you are

09:10:03 supposed to be doing.

09:10:04 But also on behalf of Stepps towing we would like to

09:10:08 give you this gift card to Lee Roy Selmon's.

09:10:13 Thank you very much.

09:10:13 >> Good morning.

09:10:18 DeSoto, representing Bill Currie Ford, Lincoln-Mercury

09:10:22 and the Curry family, would like to present you with a

09:10:24 job well done, present you with this watch as a token

09:10:27 of our appreciation.

09:10:28 >> These flowers aren't for you but your significant

09:10:44 other.

09:10:45 Here you go.

09:10:45 >> Rick Hartley, vice-president of Tampa police

09:10:49 benevolent association.

09:10:50 Want to if congratulate you and give you a $100 gift

09:10:53 card.

09:10:58 Four tickets to our production of Godspell.

09:11:03 >> Tampa Lowry Park Zoo.

09:11:07 >> Thank you to City Council.

09:11:15 I'm not much of a talker.

09:11:21 Thank you for everyone coming here today and the

09:11:24 community.

09:11:25 Thank you.

09:11:27 [ Applause ]

09:11:37 >>GWEN MILLER: It's my honor again to ask someone to

09:11:41 represent the fire department of the quarter of the

09:11:44 year -- of the month.

09:11:45 And at this time, Chief Jones, you're here.

09:11:56 I would like to present to captain Ken Licata.

09:12:08 And Chief Jones will tell everything good about you.

09:12:11 >> Chief Jones: Members of City Council and public

09:12:16 safety chair Miller, it really is our honor to be here

09:12:19 before you to recognize the firefighter of the quarter.

09:12:23 And captain Ken Licata is joined by his wife Sharon,

09:12:27 his son Reilly, his daughter Chelsea and his

09:12:31 granddaughter Ava.

09:12:33 And we are recognizing Captain Licata.

09:12:38 He's located at a station out of Gandy at station 15 on

09:12:44 the C shift and during his 27 years with the department

09:12:47 he served as a paramedic, a hazardous materials

09:12:49 technician, he also served as a department's quality

09:12:52 management officer in the rescue division to document

09:12:55 the level of the EMS care provided to our citizens.

09:12:58 And to further round out his career, he was also the

09:13:02 union vice-president.

09:13:03 Captain Licata has gone above and beyond his required

09:13:07 duties by developing and maintaining a computer program

09:13:10 that helps us account for our employees during their

09:13:13 duty shift.

09:13:15 And as you can well imagine his doing so has been very

09:13:19 beneficial to us during these austere financial times.

09:13:23 Continuing in his efforts to help improve the

09:13:25 department, captain Licata is working to develop a

09:13:31 program that allows fire officers to input building

09:13:34 information into our computer-aided dispatch system and

09:13:36 that allows them then at a later time when an emergency

09:13:40 scene to pull up information on specific buildings that

09:13:43 might be experiencing an emergency.

09:13:45 And according to supervisor of captain Licata his

09:13:50 continuing contributions to the department is

09:13:52 benefiting the emergency responders and residents of

09:13:54 Tampa now and into the future.

09:13:57 And I can say as a captain, when I was a captain at

09:14:00 station one, Ken Lakota was a firefighter on my crew

09:14:05 and he was one of those rare individuals that even as a

09:14:07 firefighter he could recognize the leadership skills

09:14:09 and you knew this individual was going to go far with

09:14:13 the department.

09:14:13 I'm proud to recognize him as firefighter of the

09:14:16 quarter, and more importantly as a personal friend.

09:14:19 Congratulations, captain Licata.

09:14:24 [ Applause ]

09:14:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT:

09:14:28 >>GWEN MILLER: On behalf of the Tampa City Council I

09:14:30 would like to present you this commendation.

09:14:32 I am not going to read all the good things he just

09:14:34 said.

09:14:35 I am going to present it to you.

09:14:36 And now the private sector has some things for you

09:14:42 starting with Charlie's steakhouse.

09:14:43 >> Thank you very much.

09:14:44 >> This isn't for you again.

09:14:45 >> We have two tickets for you to come out.

09:15:07 >> Steve Stickley representing Stepps towing on behalf

09:15:12 of Jim and Judy Stepp, would like to present you that

09:15:16 firefighter statute and also a gift certificate to Lee

09:15:19 Roy Selmon's.

09:15:20 >> Thank you very much.

09:15:21 >> DeSoto from Bill Currie Ford Lincoln-Mercury.

09:15:32 Thank you for the job you have done from the Bill

09:15:33 Currie family.

09:15:35 We present you this watch.

09:15:36 >> Thank you for everything you do.

09:15:45 And we have for you four tickets to our production of

09:15:48 Godspell.

09:15:50 >>STEVE MICHELINI: How long ago was that when he was a

09:15:53 captain?

09:15:54 [ Laughter ]

09:15:57 On behalf of Bern's steakhouse, we have a $100 gift

09:16:01 certificate for you and your wife.

09:16:03 On behalf of Bryn Allen studios we are presenting with

09:16:06 you a photographic package for you and your family.

09:16:08 On behalf of rigatoni's we are going to provide you

09:16:11 with a gift certificate for lunch or dinner, your

09:16:14 choice.

09:16:14 Congratulations.

09:16:15 The chief says he wants to go to one of those.

09:16:17 >> I'm overwhelmed for being recognized.

09:16:25 I'm very thankful for the support from council, the

09:16:32 mayor, staff, I'm so thankful for my career and being

09:16:36 able to be able to provide service to the citizens of

09:16:40 Tampa and to be recognized is pretty overwhelming, and

09:16:46 I hope I can keep going till I retire and provide a

09:16:50 little bit more for you guys.

09:16:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Congratulations.

09:16:55 [ Applause ]

09:17:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

09:17:27 We have two reports.

09:17:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With regard to the committee reports

09:17:30 which have been added to this workshop agenda, on

09:17:32 number 4, assistant city attorney Justin Vaske is here

09:17:38 with a substitution on number 4 and we ask that you

09:17:40 move the substitution when you move that resolution.

09:17:42 And before you take action on these, I ask that you

09:17:45 open the floor for public comment, please.

09:17:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: A motion?

09:17:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

09:17:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

09:17:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:17:56 Opposes?

09:17:59 Anyone from the public wish to address these two items?

09:18:04 Okay.

09:18:04 >> I move resolution number 3.

09:18:11 Oh, I'm sorry, it's Ms. Miller's committee.

09:18:14 I'm so sorry.

09:18:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Go ahead.

09:18:18 >>GWEN MILLER: I move resolution number 3.

09:18:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

09:18:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:18:24 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

09:18:26 Opposes?

09:18:27 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and

09:18:33 Dingfelder being absent.

09:18:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Number 4, councilman Miranda.

09:18:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move the substitute resolution on

09:18:43 the floor.

09:18:44 >> Second.

09:18:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:18:47 Opposes?

09:18:48 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being

09:18:49 absent.

09:18:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

09:18:52 Thank you very much.

09:18:56 We will now move to the first workshop of the day.

09:18:59 And that is the SBLE workshop.

09:19:09 >> Good motorcycle.

09:19:11 Gregory Hart, manager of the small business and

09:19:14 minority business development office.

09:19:16 I'm here this morning, pleased to present our second

09:19:22 year report on contracting activity for our small local

09:19:26 business enterprises and our women and minority

09:19:29 business enterprises under the new ordinance, and the

09:19:31 new methodology and business processes.

09:19:35 But before I begin, if I may, I would like to

09:19:38 acknowledge the presence of members from our equal

09:19:41 business opportunity advisory committee which you as

09:19:46 council an and the mayor appointed this past year, and

09:19:50 in that regard, Mike Suarez and Jose Morales are here

09:19:56 as spokespersons and they can acknowledge some of the

09:19:58 other members who were able to attend.

09:19:59 >> Good morning, council.

09:20:05 Also here with us, as Greg mentioned, is Jose Morales,

09:20:10 and we have Juan Davis also on our committee, Ernest

09:20:16 comby.

09:20:16 I don't think we have any other members here.

09:20:18 I would like to thank you for appointing us to this

09:20:20 very important committee.

09:20:21 What you will find in the report is, for obvious

09:20:24 reasons last year, contracting business was quite

09:20:29 light, and it's obviously a reflection of the economy

09:20:33 as a whole, but this is an ongoing process, and we

09:20:37 think we have a lot of good information.

09:20:39 You will find it interesting.

09:20:41 So thank you very much again.

09:20:42 >> I just want to say a couple words.

09:20:46 Thank you for the honor to be on the committee.

09:20:48 And we are going out to our third meeting.

09:20:50 We are trying to get our arms around this thing.

09:20:52 So hopefully we'll provide a lot of feedback for you

09:20:55 guys that you can use.

09:21:01 >> Ernest comby.

09:21:03 I want to say thank you for allowing us this

09:21:06 opportunities to get input from the businesses in the

09:21:08 area to try Tocchet create some efficiencies and

09:21:13 efficaciousness from a business standpoint.

09:21:16 Thank you.

09:21:17 >> I'm Juan Davis from fast lane clothing company.

09:21:25 And I look forward to the opportunity to have some kind

09:21:30 of say in the way that the city does business locally

09:21:34 and with other businesses.

09:21:35 Thank you.

09:21:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Do you have any women on your

09:21:43 committee?

09:21:44 >> Yes.

09:21:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Do you need some more?

09:21:49 We can recruit some.

09:21:51 We'll work on that.

09:21:51 Thank you.

09:21:53 Thanks for volunteering.

09:21:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

09:21:56 >> Thank you, members of the committee.

09:22:00 I do appreciate their input.

09:22:02 We have had some very productive meetings.

09:22:04 We do have a PowerPoint presentation to summarize, if

09:22:10 we could bring that up.

09:22:16 Just a matter of background.

09:22:18 The ordinance that was approved is the driving

09:22:23 instrument behind the report process and the

09:22:28 requirements for collecting data and evaluating data

09:22:31 under new methodology and legal guidelines.

09:22:36 But what I wanted to do this morning is to provide you

09:22:38 with a snapshot of the 2009 fiscal year contract

09:22:44 results, just a summary.

09:22:47 More importantly, I am going to go over in some detail

09:22:50 analysis of our 2008-2009 multi-year contract activity

09:22:57 results.

09:23:02 The data which we are going to provide you this morning

09:23:06 comes from our data management information tracking

09:23:10 process.

09:23:11 We pull from a number of different business systems

09:23:14 like Active, PeopleSoft and other business service

09:23:20 systems under the city to gather the information on

09:23:24 contracts awarded, that determine solicitations and

09:23:29 awards of payments.

09:23:30 We then filter all of that information into the five

09:23:33 barrels which represent our industry categories of

09:23:38 construction related professional services, et cetera.

09:23:41 The data from those barrels is further filtered, using

09:23:45 our information, our pool of available fronts including

09:23:52 our ten ethnic classifications and gender

09:23:57 classifications, and this is going to be the basis upon

09:24:00 which we summarize the data and provide you with the

09:24:04 information.

09:24:05 We generate over 180 reports from this tracking process

09:24:10 that we evaluate and condense into the following

09:24:13 information.

09:24:16 So the report that we are about to leave you is going

09:24:19 to focus on prime contract activity by our small local

09:24:24 business enterprises, as well as subcontracting by our

09:24:31 small local business enterprises, as well as prime

09:24:34 contract and subcontract participation payment results

09:24:38 by our women and minority enterprise funds.

09:24:43 That information as I mentioned will be filtered

09:24:45 through the various procurement categories --

09:24:49 construction, professional services, goods, et cetera.

09:24:56 The analysis that we emphasize to determine

09:25:02 overutilization or underutilization, i.e., disparity,

09:25:07 is going to be determined by two thresholds as well as

09:25:11 subcontracting.

09:25:12 Now, the importance of these two dollar thresholds is

09:25:15 that contracts under 500,000 or below is a focus area,

09:25:23 because the analysis of formal contracts must be kept

09:25:28 at 500,000 to ensure that the contract in the disparate

09:25:33 under underutilization analysis are within the capacity

09:25:37 level of our available women and minority firms.

09:25:45 Also it's important to note that the majority of city

09:25:47 contracts are small, with 95% falling under $500,000.

09:25:55 And of that number, 93% of our contracts are actually

09:25:59 under $25,000.

09:26:03 So this is the area upon which we have been guide to

09:26:07 examine our utilization.

09:26:15 So looking at 2009 contract activity, just as a

09:26:19 snapshot, just as a summary, all of the data which I am

09:26:22 going to go through is actually incorporated into the

09:26:25 two-year analysis.

09:26:28 I want to direct your attention to the lower right-hand

09:26:31 corner where the summary results of 2009 are.

09:26:35 Total payments to our small local business enterprises,

09:26:39 prime contract utilization, was $1.2 million.

09:26:44 Of that our women and minority business enterprise

09:26:49 firms represent 73% or nearly 1 million dollars of that

09:26:54 total.

09:26:54 Keep in mind that the SLBE program has some very

09:26:58 specific guidelines and criteria.

09:27:02 One of which is these are for the most part contracts

09:27:06 that are awarded under our sheltered market program, or

09:27:12 shelter market determined process.

09:27:14 The shelter market process entails contracts that have

09:27:17 a value of $200,000 or less, and where we have three

09:27:21 certified, three or more certified small local business

09:27:24 enterprises that have the disciplines and the capacity

09:27:28 to bid.

09:27:29 So essentially they are bidding among their peer

09:27:32 groups.

09:27:33 So this SLBE program prime utilization is reflective of

09:27:39 sheltered market procurement for the most part.

09:27:42 And as you can see, the WMBEser receiving the lions

09:27:50 share of prime contracting under this initiative.

09:27:53 And this initiative was designed to do just that, which

09:27:56 is to increase the opportunity and the availability of

09:28:01 prime contracting for our WMBE firms.

09:28:05 Next slide.

09:28:07 The small local business enterprise subcontract

09:28:10 utilization results for just 2009 alone reveals that

09:28:15 the city paid out $2.5 million and our WMBEs represent

09:28:23 79% or $2 million of those payouts.

09:28:27 This is where we are setting our subcontracting goals,

09:28:31 not setting goals for WMBEs but we are setting goals

09:28:35 for SLBEs.

09:28:40 So based on those two slides, contracting and

09:28:43 subcontracting through our SLBE program initiatives

09:28:46 indicates that the objective of our SLBE policy is very

09:28:50 successful.

09:28:52 We have migrated our WMBEs into the SLBE program.

09:28:58 Those that are eligible, we have moved them into the

09:29:01 program.

09:29:01 They represent the majority of certified firms, and in

09:29:04 effect they are benefiting from that certification and

09:29:09 participation under shelter marketing and also under

09:29:13 our SLBE subcontracting initiatives.

09:29:18 Now, for 2009, our overall WMBE prime participation,

09:29:26 again, the lower right-hand corner, $67 million was

09:29:31 paid out by the city.

09:29:33 Of that total, WMBE received 2% for nearly

09:29:38 $1.45 million.

09:29:40 That's all dollars of all five industry categories.

09:29:46 Looking at our threshold of $500,000 and below, the

09:29:53 city made payments of $10 million, over $10 million,

09:29:58 and our WMBEs received 12% or nearly 6.6 million.

09:30:11 Looking at that analysis, using our $25,000 or less

09:30:17 threshold, the city made payments totaling $3.5

09:30:25 million.

09:30:25 Our WMBE firms received 13%.

09:30:30 Or nearly a half million dollars.

09:30:36 Now let's look at the subcontracting activity for just

09:30:43 2009. Total payments made by the city $57 million of

09:30:48 which WMBE received 13% or 7.5 million.

09:30:55 Again, the contracting activity results from 2009 has

09:31:01 been incorporated into our two-year analysis.

09:31:04 And I might just stop a moment and highlight a couple

09:31:08 of things that was very evident, and I think people in

09:31:14 the committee made reference to it, and that has to do

09:31:16 with what occurred be in fiscal year 2009.

09:31:19 The depressed economy is without a doubt reflective in

09:31:24 the results of our single-year analysis, and certainly

09:31:29 had an impact on our two-year cumulative results.

09:31:34 In 2009 alone, we saw a 34% drop in the total number of

09:31:39 contracts that the city awarded during that fiscal

09:31:43 year.

09:31:44 Additionally, we experienced a 52% drop in the sheer

09:31:51 value of contracts that the city awarded in 2009, and

09:31:56 as a result, when we are going to look at the two-year

09:32:00 cumulative analysis, you are going to notice the drag

09:32:03 that 2009 has had on the two-year cumulative review.

09:32:11 2008 was a robust year.

09:32:14 But 2009 is dragging that.

09:32:16 I like to use the analogy of one of our assistant city

09:32:21 attorneys Toyin had used, it's similar to when we were

09:32:26 in high school or college and our freshman year we had

09:32:29 a very good G.P.A., 4.0, and then our sophomore year

09:32:34 maybe we weren't as attentive or didn't do our work as

09:32:37 well or didn't have the requisite number of credits or

09:32:43 what have you and our G.P.A. fell off to a 2-point.

09:32:47 It dragged down our freshman year G.P.A.

09:32:50 That's essentially what's happening here.

09:32:51 So let's look at the two-year analysis.

09:32:54 Under our SLBE, prime payments, total payments $10

09:33:02 million, WMEE represented 6.9 million.

09:33:07 Under the SLBE subcontract utilization total payments

09:33:12 nearly $5 million.

09:33:13 Our WMBE firms represented 83%.

09:33:18 Of that amount -- or $4 million.

09:33:21 Here again, one constant that we are seeing here even

09:33:26 in the two-year analysis, although it dropped off, is

09:33:29 that the SLBE program initiatives, the sheltered

09:33:33 marketing, the SLBE subcontracting is working.

09:33:36 Within the context of that single initiative, there's

09:33:41 consistency.

09:33:44 Looking at all dollars, WMBE prime utilization across

09:33:48 all five industry categories, the city made payments

09:33:51 totaling $264 million for the two-year period.

09:34:05 Next slide.

09:34:07 Looking at our $500,000 threshold, the city made

09:34:11 payments totaling 53 million, nearly 54, of which

09:34:15 WMBEs represented 12% or 6.6 million.

09:34:21 At the $25,000 threshold the city payments equaled 11

09:34:28 million, and WMBEs received 11%.

09:34:38 In terms of all subcontracting activity for the

09:34:41 two-year period, the city, through its prime

09:34:44 contractors, made payments of $109 million of which our

09:34:49 WMBE firms received 17% or 19.5 million for the

09:34:54 two-year period.

09:34:57 This slide, I'm trying to depict that given that

09:35:02 information I just went over, we are now going to do

09:35:05 our disparity analysis or utilization analysis.

09:35:10 And when you look at the WMBE for our participation as

09:35:14 a group from a bird's eye view, we can often come to

09:35:20 the generalizations or make generalizations or

09:35:23 assumptions that aren't necessarily correct, and that's

09:35:28 why the law, the new methodology, guides us and

09:35:32 instructs us to look at things in a narrowly focused

09:35:35 manner.

09:35:37 So let's do that.

09:35:38 Let's not just look at WMBE utilization in total, but

09:35:42 let's drill down and determine what the parts of the

09:35:45 sum are doing in terms of the various ethnic and gender

09:35:48 categories.

09:35:51 So in our $500,000 threshold, we can see that actually

09:35:55 over the two-year period Asian Americans have met or

09:36:00 exceeded their level of participation payment in the

09:36:03 construction category.

09:36:06 Hispanic American firms have met or exceeded in the

09:36:10 nonprofessional services.

09:36:13 This does not suggest that there's no activity at all

09:36:17 on behalf of the other ethnic groups, but that these in

09:36:21 particular over the two-year period have met or

09:36:24 exceeded.

09:36:27 Looking at our $25,000 threshold and below, here again,

09:36:32 when you look at it from a bird's eye view, in total,

09:36:36 you can make generalizations and assumptions that

09:36:40 aren't necessarily correct.

09:36:43 We have got to look at things in a much more narrowly

09:36:45 focused manner as directed by law and methodology.

09:36:50 In doing so we can see, for example, that

09:36:54 African-American firms have met or exceeded our target

09:36:58 participation threshold under construction.

09:37:01 Hispanic, native and Caucasian female businesses have

09:37:06 fared extremely well under the construction-related

09:37:08 category, and under goods, Hispanic firms have done

09:37:16 well, they have met or exceeded our target thresholds.

09:37:21 The same type of analysis on subcontracting has

09:37:26 revealed, if you are looking at the bird's eye view

09:37:30 under nonprofessional services as a group, it reveals

09:37:33 that WMBEs are 46% of their target participation

09:37:38 compared to the threshold of 11%.

09:37:42 But let's look at it in a narrowly focused manner.

09:37:48 Under construction Asian firms and Caucasian female

09:37:52 firms have met or exceeded participation myotomy levels

09:37:54 under construction.

09:37:56 Under nonprofessional services, it's African-American

09:37:59 firms, Hispanic, and Caucasian female firms that have

09:38:03 met or exceeded.

09:38:05 Under goods our Hispanic firms have met or exceeded the

09:38:10 threshold target under goods.

09:38:12 Again, the hash marks do not indicate that there's been

09:38:16 no participation payment.

09:38:19 It simply reflects that in those categories the ethnic

09:38:23 groups or gender groups did not meet or exceed.

09:38:26 And I believe you have some detail if you care to look

09:38:30 at specifically what occurred in the various categories

09:38:34 in your supplemental data report.

09:38:38 This slide is depicting what we just walked through.

09:38:40 We went through our entire business process of

09:38:44 collecting data, funnelling it through our data

09:38:47 management system for analysis.

09:38:50 We do the utilization, underutilization, disparity

09:38:56 analysis, and then we determine if there's disparity

09:38:59 what kind of processes need to take place, and if

09:39:01 there's no disparity we continue our SLBE program.

09:39:06 We now have two years of data, and towards our

09:39:11 multi-year target of three to five years of data, and

09:39:17 so we continue to do what is necessary to have

09:39:22 sufficient information upon which to evaluate and

09:39:25 determine what kind of initiatives, if any, we may need

09:39:29 to consider in the future.

09:39:33 Next slide.

09:39:34 So in conclusion, what have the two years said to us?

09:39:40 Well, the transition of our women and minority business

09:39:43 enterprise firms into the small local business

09:39:46 enterprise program is working.

09:39:49 It's increased to the number of WMBE firms who are

09:39:53 eligible to be certified as SLBEs.

09:39:56 They represent the majority of firms under that

09:39:58 program, and therefore are taking full advantage of the

09:40:02 opportunities of our sheltered market initiatives as

09:40:04 well as our SLBE subcontracting participation.

09:40:09 They have directly benefited.

09:40:11 That's apparent and evident in the data that we went

09:40:14 over with regard to our SLBE prime and subcontract

09:40:19 utilization.

09:40:20 One thing that is apparent, we are aware of this, and

09:40:24 that is that WMBE prime utilization overall is

09:40:28 stagnant.

09:40:29 The disparity is unchanged.

09:40:31 However, the SLBE program is one of the initiatives

09:40:34 that is working to help resolve that underutilization

09:40:41 in overall WMBE prime contracting.

09:40:44 The other thing is very apparent given what's happened

09:40:47 in 2009, and I don't suspect there will be much change

09:40:50 in 2010 when we look at those numbers, and that is that

09:40:53 subcontracting year to year in the general data varied

09:40:59 greatly due to the number of contracts, and available

09:41:02 opportunities for our WMBEs.

09:41:05 We saw a 34% drop in the number of contracts the city

09:41:08 awarded in 2009.

09:41:09 I don't expect that to change much in 2010.

09:41:12 We also saw a 51, 52% drop in the sheer value of those

09:41:17 contracts in 2009.

09:41:19 Don't expect to see much of a difference in 2010.

09:41:22 And we realize those kinds of impacts do adversely

09:41:28 affect cumulative numbers over time.

09:41:31 So we have completed two years of diversity management

09:41:35 data DMI data collection to fulfill our three to

09:41:41 five-year methodology.

09:41:42 And so at some point we'll have sufficient information

09:41:44 upon which to evaluate what kind, if any, new or

09:41:48 tweaked initiatives we might consider to ensure that we

09:41:52 maintain open access and a opportunity for our small

09:41:57 local businesses and our women minority business

09:42:00 enterprises in city contracting.

09:42:03 We hope to be before you again in the fall around

09:42:08 October to provide you with another semiannual report

09:42:13 and let you know how things are working up to that

09:42:16 point.

09:42:17 I'll be happy to address any questions or comments

09:42:22 should you have any.

09:42:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I just had a couple questions.

09:42:28 I guess overall, and I think you tried to address some

09:42:35 of this, but what do you propose?

09:42:37 I know we talked about this, and a lot of it does have

09:42:40 to do with the economy being stagnant, but what do you

09:42:45 propose to do to improve the numbers going forward?

09:42:49 What can you do to increase the numbers of

09:42:52 participation in WMBE program?

09:42:59 >> Well, I think our initiatives are working.

09:43:01 A lot of the opportunities for increased participation

09:43:07 is going to have to do with the type of contracts that

09:43:11 the city lets in future years, and knowing that in the

09:43:17 scope, we will continue to put our best effort in

09:43:23 breaking those contracts down, identifying --

09:43:29 necessary, setting contract goals to maximize the

09:43:31 opportunities for our subs.

09:43:33 On the prime level, we'll continue to thoroughly

09:43:38 evaluate which contracts will be eligible for

09:43:42 sheltering so that we can increase prime participation

09:43:46 by our SLBEs and WMBEs.

09:43:50 >> What are some examples of that?

09:43:54 What are some examples of that, the types of contracts

09:43:58 that you could maybe increase --

09:44:06 >>> Well, again it really comes down to the value of

09:44:08 that contract being estimated at $200,000 or less, and

09:44:13 whether we have the requisite three SLBE certified

09:44:17 firms that will allow us to put that --

09:44:22 >> Right.

09:44:22 >> So we need to get more firms into the SLBE program.

09:44:25 >> My question is how are you going to do that?

09:44:28 >> Well, we have done that through our outreach and

09:44:30 done that through our uniform certification process,

09:44:32 which is reflected in the numbers that I shared with

09:44:36 you at the beginning of the Power Point.

09:44:39 We have migrated our WMBEs into the SLBE program.

09:44:44 We will continue to do that.

09:44:45 We'll continue to reach out into the community and be

09:44:47 sure that those WMBEs were eligible, those women and

09:44:51 minority firms, say, look, you are eligible for SLBE

09:44:54 program.

09:44:55 Let's get certified that way, you will be able to

09:44:59 compete for those sheltered market projects.

09:45:01 I would like to footnote that again a lot does have to

09:45:05 do with the type of contracts the city lends.

09:45:08 The City of Tampa presently has more what I refer to as

09:45:14 horizonal type contracts, where we are doing utility

09:45:19 work, we are doing surface patching and those kinds of

09:45:23 things, sidewalks.

09:45:24 From one year to the next the city does very few brick

09:45:27 and mortar types of projects, the vertical construction

09:45:30 where you are going to need painters, you are going to

09:45:32 need your drywall, you are going to need your masons,

09:45:36 your masonry-type trades.

09:45:40 In many of our women and minority firms are in those

09:45:42 traditional disciplines -- electrical and so forth.

09:45:47 So from one year to the next, unlike some of our

09:45:51 counterparts, be it the surrounding counties or the

09:45:55 school system, we don't do from year to year a lot of

09:45:59 vertical type of contracting.

09:46:01 That's just in part one of the effects of the city

09:46:08 contracting and it has in our WMBE community, if that

09:46:12 makes the understanding.

09:46:15 There are a number of factors.

09:46:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

09:46:20 This is what seems to me to be maybe an obvious thing

09:46:27 of that you could do through outreach is the

09:46:29 professional services, because I think that's a level

09:46:32 where there's a lot more diversity, and there's a lot

09:46:35 more equality because of the education involved, so

09:46:38 there's a lot more women, there's a lot more Hispanics,

09:46:41 there's a lot more African-Americans.

09:46:43 Getting those kinds of jobs.

09:46:45 So maybe if that was sort of a targeted area that you

09:46:49 tried to increase participation in, engineers,

09:46:52 architects, all of those things, I think that would be

09:46:57 good.

09:46:58 Then I just had one other question.

09:46:59 And I think I might have figured it out and you might

09:47:02 have alluded to it.

09:47:04 But we have a category for Caucasian women.

09:47:09 Why just mention women?

09:47:12 >> Well, in recent years, the courts have said that we

09:47:17 have Caucasian females are not a protected group, a

09:47:24 minority group.

09:47:26 They are a protected group, not an ethnic minority

09:47:29 group.

09:47:30 So we have to now look at females who are ethnic

09:47:35 minorities in the ethnic group.

09:47:43 So Caucasian women are not considered ethnic

09:47:45 minorities.

09:47:46 They are protected, and that's why you are segregated

09:47:50 from the general grouping of, say, females.

09:47:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thanks.

09:47:58 That helps.

09:47:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

09:48:01 Just a couple of items.

09:48:05 Greg, I was talking to a gentleman yesterday who could

09:48:08 goes around the country pricing big projects like

09:48:11 museums and -- that's his specialty.

09:48:14 I think he hags an architectural background or

09:48:17 something like that.

09:48:18 And he was saying that it's been his experience that

09:48:21 the surety bond requirements of governments, especially

09:48:27 governments in Florida, tend to inhibit small business

09:48:31 and WMBE participation, and I wondered your opinion on

09:48:39 that.

09:48:40 I know some of that is controlled by state legislation,

09:48:43 but, you know, when you have bad state legislation that

09:48:48 causes problems like this, then maybe you need to look

09:48:51 to change it.

09:48:52 So I'm just wondering, your feelings on that as well as

09:48:58 the opportunities, or any opportunity perhaps to reduce

09:49:01 the surety bond requirements for the sheltered projects

09:49:08 to again loosen things up a little bit to encourage

09:49:11 minority and small business participation.

09:49:13 >>> Councilman Dingfelder, we are doing just that.

09:49:17 We recognize that the surety bond requirements are a

09:49:21 problem nationwide.

09:49:22 We understand the limitations which state statute lay

09:49:26 out for us.

09:49:27 And with those limitations, we have, for example, as

09:49:31 you mentioned, under the sheltered program, we have the

09:49:35 ability, and have waived the surety bond depending on

09:49:41 the complexity and nature of the project.

09:49:44 We also do the same for some of the informal contracts

09:49:48 that are awarded.

09:49:50 $25,000 or below.

09:49:51 In many cases there's no bond at all required.

09:49:55 We are using what little flexibility that we have.

09:49:59 >> Have we been burned yet?

09:50:01 >> No, sir.

09:50:01 >> Good.

09:50:02 And have we looked to maybe go to the state to loosen

09:50:06 up some of that?

09:50:07 You know, on this argument, that maybe the state can

09:50:10 specifically, you know, identify the WMBE and SLBE is a

09:50:16 laudable goal, and that maybe they can tweak up the

09:50:18 surety bond issue for local government.

09:50:21 >> To my knowledge, the City of Tampa has not lobbied

09:50:25 or taken that step for any legislative changes.

09:50:30 However, we have benefited and continue to benefit from

09:50:34 the efforts that Hillsborough County took a couple of

09:50:36 years ago when they went to the legislature and got

09:50:40 some waivers to increase bond waivers up to, I think,

09:50:47 $300,000 or $500,000.

09:50:50 They were able to do that because they have a training

09:50:53 program which the surety industry agreed to, where our

09:51:00 WMBEs and SLBEs go through about a nine or

09:51:05 ten-month process, and after which when they bid on

09:51:08 projects, they are then looked upon as qualified to

09:51:12 consider bond waivers.

09:51:13 So what we have done, we have said any of our WMBEs

09:51:18 or SLBEs that complete that program, we are going to

09:51:22 also qualify them for bond waiver efforts that we might

09:51:28 take on the city side.

09:51:29 We can't go up to 300,000, 500,000 like Hillsborough

09:51:32 County.

09:51:33 But it gives us a lot more comfort to say you have gone

09:51:36 through the county program, then we can waive, if it's

09:51:41 appropriate, the bond on our project up to the $200,000

09:51:46 level.

09:51:47 So we are maximizing all those option that's we have.

09:51:50 >> Good.

09:51:51 Two other quick questions.

09:51:54 The first question, how do our numbers compare to other

09:51:58 major cities in the south and major cities across the

09:52:02 country?

09:52:02 Do we track that?

09:52:04 That's question number one.

09:52:05 Then question number two is we have been having a

09:52:10 tendency over the last couple of years to award some

09:52:13 really massive contracts, prime contracts like, I don't

09:52:18 know, like you said, the horizontal contracts, 50 or

09:52:22 $100 million for a lot of pipe work, that sort of

09:52:26 thing, 30 to $40 million for the museum/curtis Hixon

09:52:32 park projects.

09:52:33 Those are all under one big prime.

09:52:39 Are the big primes -- is that helping our efforts,

09:52:44 WMBE, SLBE, or are there numbers coming in lower than

09:52:49 the rest of the city's efforts?

09:52:51 Are they pushing us up?

09:52:52 Are they pushing us down?

09:52:54 >> Let me answer your questions in reverse beginning

09:52:56 with the latter.

09:53:00 Those big projects like Tampa Museum of Art have been

09:53:05 the saving grace.

09:53:07 We have had good success at subcontracting.

09:53:13 As you may recall the Skanska partnership, hill, has

09:53:18 been very committed, and has followed through on the

09:53:21 subcontracting participation.

09:53:22 >> So apparently it hurts our prime a little bit but

09:53:28 helps our subs inherently.

09:53:30 Because if you are big money is going to a white prime

09:53:37 then inherently it's going to hurt your percentage on

09:53:40 prime but you say they make up for it on the subs.

09:53:43 >> Well, that is some degree true, particularly the

09:53:47 subcontract participation.

09:53:48 It's been very helpful and very successful.

09:53:52 Quite frankly, even if he at the prime level, a lot

09:53:55 more of what we are doing is encouraging partnerships.

09:53:59 As you saw with the Skanska-Horris which is a WMBE

09:54:08 certified minority firm, so we are making some headway

09:54:10 in that effort, in the prime participation effort.

09:54:13 >> And the first question was how do we compare to

09:54:16 other big cities in the south and big cities across the

09:54:18 country?

09:54:18 >> We haven't on a regular basis benchmarked or did a

09:54:22 comparison with other major cities.

09:54:25 So I can't emphatically say how we stack up.

09:54:30 But I would have to conclude based on just general

09:54:34 conversation with colleagues, particularly in Florida,

09:54:40 due to some of our industry associations that they are

09:54:43 experiencing the same kind of results as we are in

09:54:47 participation.

09:54:49 >> I think maybe to do this every six months with us,

09:54:52 in your next update, maybe show us some comparisons

09:54:57 across the state and across the south perhaps.

09:54:59 Thank you.

09:54:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

09:55:04 Along those same lines, if I remember, when you looked

09:55:09 at the study, there was very few that were over

09:55:14 $500,000.

09:55:15 I think 2%.

09:55:16 Am I correct?

09:55:17 >>> Yes, sir, somewhere in that neighborhood.

09:55:19 >> And if you look at the rest it means 98 felt within

09:55:22 the 25%.

09:55:23 So then I would assume mathematically that the sums of

09:55:26 the numbers of those 98% or 25% of something is greater

09:55:30 than the sums of the numbers of 2% of 500,000, even

09:55:34 though when you look at it out side of a window, it

09:55:37 would look like full 500,000, only got 2% of that.

09:55:41 Is that about right?

09:55:42 >> I think you hit the nail on the head on that.

09:55:45 >> Then saying that, every contract that council

09:55:48 approves that comes to us of these large prime

09:55:53 contractors, in the back pages, it has a study, I

09:55:56 believe, that your office does, puts 1% of minority

09:56:01 contracting is in that contract that we let.

09:56:05 Is that correct?

09:56:06 >>> That's correct.

09:56:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So we know then that what you are

09:56:11 doing now is having a compilation of all those figures

09:56:15 before us this morning that your office was so kind to

09:56:17 put together and show what we have done.

09:56:20 Also using a year of '08 as a benchmark.

09:56:24 From '08 you had a decline, so next year you come

09:56:29 before us and you use '09 compared to '10. There might

09:56:33 be a decline but it would not be significate because

09:56:33 you are hitting an area that is not moving down too

09:56:41 much, but not going up in construction, so forth and so

09:56:46 on.

09:56:46 Am I correct?

09:56:47 >> When we look at '09 and '10 that's likely to show

09:56:54 but we'll be coming to you with a three-year analysis.

09:56:58 '08-09.

09:56:59 >> And then dropped and then you are going to see a

09:57:02 leveling off period just like my bank account.

09:57:04 So when you look at those things, then you can get a

09:57:08 truer picture of reality in today's marketplace, within

09:57:12 the city.

09:57:14 So I think that that's fine.

09:57:18 And I'm not against you comparing this city with any

09:57:20 other city, as long as the city that you make

09:57:25 comparisons with have the same makeup in population.

09:57:29 You may hit a city that's all Hispanic or mostly

09:57:34 Hispanic and they are going to show real high in that

09:57:37 sector.

09:57:38 >> That's a very, very good point.

09:57:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So if you look at the population of

09:57:42 the makeup of this city, and you compare it with

09:57:45 Hialeah, let's say, Hialeah is going to show that we

09:57:49 are way down in the Hispanic factor when you compare us

09:57:52 to Hialeah.

09:57:53 But that's not a true picture.

09:57:55 So what I'm asking -- I'm not saying that Mr.

09:57:58 Dingfelder is incorrect.

09:57:59 He's correct.

09:58:00 But what I'm saying is I want to see somewhat of a

09:58:05 metropolitan, Cosmopolitan vegetable soup area where

09:58:09 all the vegetables are counted, and that we can say

09:58:12 that this reflects a more clear picture of the

09:58:16 presentation.

09:58:17 That's all that I'm saying.

09:58:19 And I appreciate it.

09:58:20 I think you have done a good job.

09:58:22 I think we are heading in the right direction.

09:58:24 And those contracts that come through especially in the

09:58:27 public works sector all have the minority

09:58:31 participation.

09:58:32 So I applaud you and your staff for doing so.

09:58:34 >>> Councilman Miranda, if I might just ditto what you

09:58:38 said.

09:58:38 The demographics in each area of jurisdiction is

09:58:42 different.

09:58:42 And we are not allowed any longer to benchmark

09:58:46 ourselves against another community because of the

09:58:49 facts that you just stated.

09:58:50 So any kind of comparison would be for informational

09:58:53 purposes only.

09:58:54 >> I understand.

09:58:56 Thank you very much.

09:58:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?

09:59:00 I have a few questions.

09:59:09 Mr. Hart, thank you for the analysis and the briefing

09:59:11 the other day.

09:59:12 A couple things.

09:59:15 Questions have been raised already and I don't want to

09:59:17 be too redundant.

09:59:20 Do these numbers include the Museum of Art?

09:59:25 >>> The two-year cumulative, yes, it does.

09:59:29 The 2008 year, you may remember that we stated that the

09:59:34 Museum of Art and UCAP were not in those numbers.

09:59:40 That's a true statement.

09:59:41 But in the context of how we evaluate and analyze

09:59:46 payment activity, the reason we stated that is that in

09:59:51 2008, there weren't any payment activity occurring with

09:59:57 our subs.

09:59:58 So, in fact, what's carried us for the most part in

10:00:03 2009 are the payment activities that occurred as a

10:00:07 result of the Museum of Art and UCAP that hit our

10:00:13 system in 2009.

10:00:16 If I can say that differently.

10:00:20 Yes, sir, go ahead.

10:00:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the answer is yes, they do include

10:00:23 the Museum of Art.

10:00:24 >> Yes.

10:00:26 >> What percentage of the project is in that?

10:00:28 >> I would say in subcontracting, it's about 10 or $11

10:00:34 million is now showing up in 2009 that did not in '08

10:00:39 because there were no final payment activity recorded.

10:00:43 >> So about 10% is showing up then in this report?

10:00:47 >> Again '08 is carrying us.

10:00:54 If that helps.

10:00:55 >> Okay.

10:00:57 And in my viewing of the documents -- and I shared with

10:01:01 you in our briefing, there still is a disparity and I

10:01:08 understand all about the economy, but the economy

10:01:09 should affect everybody, regarding of their ethnicity.

10:01:13 Would you agree with that?

10:01:14 >> I agree.

10:01:15 And it has.

10:01:16 >> So I think we need to understand that.

10:01:17 The numbers are still low, we still have a disparity.

10:01:24 In particular, all the ethnics down at the very bottom

10:01:28 not the -- not reaching the level that we said.

10:01:32 >> For that reason that's why we have to narrowly focus

10:01:35 our analysis and really address those groups that are

10:01:39 being impacted the most.

10:01:40 >> And going back to the question that Councilwoman

10:01:43 Mulhern raised, and that is, what remedy or what

10:01:46 technical assistance are you providing to help bring

10:01:50 those numbers up?

10:01:52 That's the question I'm just asking in a different way.

10:01:57 Because again, the economy effects everybody.

10:01:59 So the question becomes, how is administration, or what

10:02:05 remedies or what technical assistance are you providing

10:02:08 so that we can help bring those numbers up?

10:02:10 That's the question.

10:02:13 So that's something you have to think about, and

10:02:15 something that you need to look at.

10:02:16 I'm not just talking about, well, we look at this or

10:02:23 that, and you have got to provide some kind of

10:02:25 technical assistance, you have got to be out there

10:02:27 reaching those persons and trying to get them on board.

10:02:34 So that's something you have to really look at.

10:02:39 So I think overall based on your last report we do see

10:02:42 where the Hispanic, white females have come up pretty

10:02:46 good.

10:02:46 Still, there can be some other pools, because if you

10:02:49 look on page 10 of your report on page 10, all of the

10:02:53 five industry categories were $67 million.

10:02:59 Right?

10:03:00 Of that, the minorities only got 2.1%.

10:03:10 And that showed what's occurring in 2009.

10:03:13 >> I understand that.

10:03:15 But I'm still saying, we paid out $67 million.

10:03:20 Is that right?

10:03:20 >> That's correct.

10:03:21 >> Based on your report.

10:03:22 Of that, 2% went to minority, or should I say 1.4

10:03:27 million of the $67 million?

10:03:30 Is that right?

10:03:31 >>> Yes, sir.

10:03:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm looking at your numbers now.

10:03:35 I didn't create these numbers.

10:03:37 Okay?

10:03:37 Let me go to page 13.

10:03:41 Page 13 of in all five categories, sub contract we paid

10:03:49 out $57 million, right?

10:03:52 >> That's correct.

10:03:52 >> Of that 57 million, WMBE, SBE, has got 13% of 7.5

10:04:05 million of $57 million.

10:04:09 So, you know, I'm just pointing out the numbers from

10:04:12 your report.

10:04:15 Do you understand what I'm saying?

10:04:17 >>> Yes, sir.

10:04:17 >> That's an improvement.

10:04:19 But I'm still pointing out your numbers that we still

10:04:23 can make other improvements.

10:04:25 The last thing I will say is in terms of -- and that's

10:04:30 in terms of special services, the numbers are extremely

10:04:36 low.

10:04:39 Then as Councilwoman said, the architects, right?

10:04:43 Engineers.

10:04:45 That group, that category.

10:04:47 You have got to have a strategy or remedy of how you

10:04:52 are going to attract those persons to do business with

10:04:55 the City of Tampa.

10:04:57 Now, I want to pick up on what councilman Dingfelder

10:05:02 said about the bond.

10:05:03 As I recall, we have put in our recommendation, and I

10:05:07 thought that was supposed to have been for bond

10:05:09 waivers.

10:05:10 That's my recollection, that we said that we want to

10:05:14 waive those bonds.

10:05:15 That was a big issue with me.

10:05:17 And I thought the administration agreed to that, and I

10:05:20 have to go back and check that.

10:05:22 >> We did.

10:05:23 We subscribe to that.

10:05:24 >> Okay.

10:05:26 I was the chairman of the county commission where we

10:05:29 went to the state legislature and got them to change

10:05:33 that whole process the way we do bonds for WMBE

10:05:41 participants.

10:05:42 And so we can do, the city can do likewise.

10:05:46 And I hear what you said, that we relied on the county

10:05:49 up to a certain point, but the county is up to 500,000.

10:05:54 >> I think it is.

10:05:54 >> In terms of the bond waiver.

10:05:57 And I think you say you are up to 200,000.

10:06:01 >> That's correct.

10:06:01 >> So I need to check that.

10:06:04 Mr. Shelby, we need to go back and look at that because

10:06:07 I thought that was part of the ordinance.

10:06:08 I thought that's what we agreed to, was to look at

10:06:11 waiving the bonds up to $500,000.

10:06:15 I could be wrong but I think that was a part of it.

10:06:18 We need to check that.

10:06:18 >> Sir, I think it was -- we did include in the

10:06:21 ordinance, and we do subscribe to that.

10:06:24 But our limit is $200,000 by state statute.

10:06:28 We would have to seek legislative approval to do

10:06:31 anything different.

10:06:32 >> I thought we discussed that.

10:06:33 But I'll take a look at it.

10:06:36 We'll check the numbers.

10:06:37 I know that was a big issue with me.

10:06:39 The last thing I will say is, thank you for your

10:06:42 report.

10:06:43 Thank you for your time and for coming and briefing us.

10:06:46 Very helpful.

10:06:48 The last thing I will say is every contract -- you're

10:06:52 right, councilman Miranda, every contract that comes

10:06:54 through, except for we don't see all the contracts.

10:06:59 Is that right?

10:06:59 >>> That's correct.

10:07:00 >> Now is it 25 --

10:07:03 >> 25,000.

10:07:05 >> They don't come to us.

10:07:07 Every contract, we go through them, and mark down what

10:07:16 ethnic group, what the percentage is, every meeting

10:07:18 when I come, that's in my documents that I have.

10:07:23 But you're right.

10:07:24 They are there.

10:07:25 >> And if I may respond to a couple of points that were

10:07:29 made, Chairman Scott and council -- and you're right on

10:07:32 the money.

10:07:33 First beginning with the subcontracting that you

10:07:35 referred to on page 13 for 2009, again the numbers do

10:07:43 speak for themselves.

10:07:48 Although we are exercising to the fullest the

10:07:51 initiatives and the abilities at our disposal, the

10:07:53 tools, the fact of the matter remains that the type of

10:07:56 contracts that the city let in 2009 did not lend

10:08:01 themselves to a lot of subcontracting activity.

10:08:06 The legal office sits on our goal setting committee and

10:08:10 they can attest that there are a number of projects

10:08:12 under which we weren't able to establish a

10:08:16 subcontracting goal simply because of a couple of

10:08:18 reasons.

10:08:20 One, the trades in that particular project weren't

10:08:24 trades that we had an abundance of certified firms with

10:08:29 the disciplines to perform.

10:08:34 And in many cases we didn't have the requisite minimum

10:08:39 two subcontractors on which to base a goal.

10:08:42 I'm simply stating here that the type of contracting --

10:08:46 first of all, the number of contracts was down, and the

10:08:51 scope of the contracts that were let by the city did

10:08:54 not fully lend themselves to the type of disciplines

10:08:58 and trades in our database and our certification.

10:09:01 So there are a lot of factors.

10:09:02 And on the surface, things appear one way, that when

10:09:06 you really analyze the realities do reveal themselves.

10:09:11 And I'm just citing that as one of many factors, sir.

10:09:17 We will continue to extend ourselves into the

10:09:20 community, get people certified, identify those trade

10:09:22 areas where there's unrepresentation and encourage

10:09:26 people to expand their particular business services so

10:09:28 that they can take more advantage of our opportunities.

10:09:34 And that's just one example to cite for you.

10:09:39 And we do subscribe to the bond waiver policy.

10:09:45 It's in the ordinance.

10:09:45 It's in our procedures so that projects that can be and

10:09:50 meet the criteria for waiving, we do.

10:09:53 I can't say that there have been a lot.

10:09:55 Particularly out of the sheltered market program,

10:09:58 that's one of the conditions.

10:10:01 Whenever possible, those waivers in effect apply.

10:10:05 But we'll continue to work hard.

10:10:07 >> And I think we all recognize that you are doing a

10:10:12 good job, but also we want to see where there's

10:10:17 opportunities, what we can do better.

10:10:19 We recognize the economy is not the best, all those

10:10:22 issues.

10:10:23 As I said earlier,.

10:10:32 Councilwoman Mulhern.

10:10:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you for bringing that up about

10:10:36 the under 25,000 contracts, because when we spoke, you

10:10:39 pointed out to me that that is the 90%, more than 90%

10:10:45 of our contracts are under 25,000, right?

10:10:47 But you are recording that.

10:10:50 So when I look at it from that perspective, I want to

10:10:53 add another suggestion, to outreach to professionals,

10:10:58 and that would be in just the smaller businesses, you

10:11:03 just need to do some kind of outreach.

10:11:05 The problem is we don't have enough certified companies

10:11:08 to include in our process, then we have got to do the

10:11:14 outreach for that.

10:11:15 I think one of the things that -- and I have heard this

10:11:21 from professionals, too -- that it is -- and I know you

10:11:25 run into this.

10:11:26 It's hard to find people, qualified, small, local women

10:11:29 minority businesses to become certified, and really

10:11:35 what we need is mentoring and education.

10:11:38 So, you know, it might be worth reaching out to the

10:11:41 chambers of commerce, the professional associations,

10:11:44 there's all kinds of women in business.

10:11:46 I'm sure there's African-American businesses.

10:11:48 I know there's Hispanic businesses.

10:11:50 But to try to encourage that they do some mentoring and

10:11:57 to the trade unions, too, because I don't think that's

10:11:59 something that's really happening.

10:12:01 And if we as the city are telling them, look, we have

10:12:05 got jobs that we can get to people, we just need the

10:12:09 talent to do it.

10:12:10 And encourage them to do that.

10:12:12 >>> There's a lot of technical assistance, outreach and

10:12:16 training going on, than I would imagine people would

10:12:20 realize.

10:12:20 We partner with a number of agencies in the bay area.

10:12:24 We leverage our various resources.

10:12:26 You may recall that we have a task force.

10:12:29 It's called the multi-jurisdictional small minority

10:12:34 women business task force.

10:12:35 The City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Pinellas, the

10:12:40 school board, et cetera, we serve on this regional task

10:12:43 force so that we can assess the needs, and we draw on

10:12:48 each other's respective strengths and resources to

10:12:52 serve the community in that way.

10:12:53 The technical assistance, the small business

10:12:56 information center, for example, the Hispanic business

10:12:59 initiative fund.

10:13:01 We all sit and pool our resources to better serve the

10:13:04 small business community.

10:13:06 And we'll continue to do that and we'll make

10:13:09 improvements as necessary.

10:13:10 I also would like to bring to your attention, when you

10:13:14 have time, the supplemental report, which is a

10:13:17 collection of various tables, more towards the rear.

10:13:21 We are showing you the activity occurring at the

10:13:25 $25,000 and below level.

10:13:30 The informal contracts.

10:13:31 And because of new policy directives and particularly

10:13:34 the electronic notifications, we are capturing the bulk

10:13:42 of that procurement and sheltering and getting our

10:13:47 WMBEs as well as our SBLEs in that process where

10:13:52 they are benefiting through the award of contracts.

10:13:54 You will see a three-year analysis where as a result of

10:13:59 those initiatives we have increased two-fold the number

10:14:02 of contracts going out to our SLBEs and WMBEs

10:14:07 through that $25,000 and less procurement process.

10:14:12 That's where much of our --

10:14:14 >>MARY MULHERN: That's great.

10:14:16 We are looking forward to that.

10:14:17 >>> I would like to recommend that you look at that

10:14:23 report.

10:14:23 It's very impressive in terms of what we are doing.

10:14:26 Again, we June earth 1808-plus reports.

10:14:29 We can't possibly give you all of that in this

10:14:32 PowerPoint presentation.

10:14:33 But you do have some of the key report data of in that

10:14:37 supplemental.

10:14:38 You may have 25 or 30.

10:14:40 Anything you would like to know, we can certainly go

10:14:42 back and pull for you.

10:14:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda, then councilman

10:14:47 Miller.

10:14:48 We need to hear from the public so we can move to our

10:14:50 next.

10:14:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Talking about bond waivers I am not

10:14:53 against them but I need to nobody one thing or two or

10:14:56 three or four things.

10:14:57 What's the exposure to the city under those bond

10:14:59 waivers?

10:15:00 That's number one.

10:15:01 Number two, what would be the estimated cost on some

10:15:06 projects in case -- and I have said this years ago to

10:15:10 this council, that what the city should do is they

10:15:13 should buy the bond, and on paying it back, whatever

10:15:18 the bond cost is, that it's deducted from that

10:15:22 contractor's cost, that everything is leveled.

10:15:24 I can tell you a failure that we had, and maybe it

10:15:30 wasn't some of us being here, but we had some large

10:15:35 amount of money on some toilets for Ybor City.

10:15:38 And guess what happened.

10:15:41 Better do them twice.

10:15:43 There was no bond.

10:15:44 The taxpayers of the city paid for it.

10:15:47 And that's way want to protect.

10:15:49 I want to protect the minorities, the minority

10:15:51 contractors, the total population, because if I do what

10:15:54 I hear what I want to do, then I leave myself open for

10:15:59 reaction from the action that's well intended.

10:16:02 In other words, if I don't have a bond and something

10:16:05 goes bad, well, the city pays for it.

10:16:09 The city is all the population that lives at the city.

10:16:13 Why should they be in any way responsible for something

10:16:18 they have no action to do with?

10:16:20 So I like the bond waiver.

10:16:21 I want the city to buy the bond.

10:16:23 And I want them to get paid back from the

10:16:25 subcontractors, so that everybody is covered, all the

10:16:29 taxpayers are covered, and there is no ramification of

10:16:34 default, and the money will be collected from some

10:16:37 company who is doing the bond writing, to sell to an

10:16:41 insurance company or whatever they are doing through a

10:16:44 brokerage of insurance and so forth.

10:16:46 That's the only item that I say let's cover them all,

10:16:50 so that there will be no chance for something

10:16:54 happening.

10:16:54 And that's all I have to say on that.

10:16:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Hart, all I want to say is thank

10:17:01 you for such a good report, showing us that you are

10:17:04 reaching out, trying to reach everybody, and your

10:17:06 report shows that you have been reaching out.

10:17:08 I know you are going to continue to do this.

10:17:10 It's a hard job, and you are really showing that you

10:17:13 can do it.

10:17:14 And I know you are going to continue to do them, and

10:17:20 you are going to make it great the next six months are

10:17:23 going to be better because you know what to do, how to

10:17:25 go out and contact the people to get these things done.

10:17:28 So I will say congratulations to you, and just continue

10:17:30 to do the hard work that you are doing.

10:17:31 I appreciate everything that you are doing.

10:17:33 >>> You're welcome.

10:17:35 I thank you and the rest of council for your support.

10:17:37 I appreciate that.

10:17:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I appreciated the briefing that you

10:17:41 gave me earlier, and I very much was cheered to hear

10:17:46 that you research the companies carefully to make sure

10:17:49 that there are no misrepresentations in order to

10:17:55 receive these contracts, because substantive companies

10:17:58 is what we want to make the availability of these

10:18:01 contracts for.

10:18:03 And I am really -- I really appreciate the

10:18:07 thoughtfulness you put into researching the validity of

10:18:10 the companies.

10:18:11 Thank you.

10:18:12 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to sigh thank you, too,

10:18:15 and also for the fact that you are being so upfront

10:18:19 with us and giving us those numbers that aren't

10:18:22 necessarily going to make us happy and right up front.

10:18:24 You gave us the bad news.

10:18:26 And I appreciate that and I know how much work has gone

10:18:29 into these years of trying to get automated and up to

10:18:33 speed on this.

10:18:34 So thank you for all your hard work.

10:18:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll take comments from the public at

10:18:40 this time.

10:18:41 Those from the public that wish to address council may

10:18:43 come forward.

10:18:45 State your name and address for the record.

10:18:46 Anyone from the public?

10:18:47 >> Joe Robinson, 2330 Palmetto street.

10:18:52 I guess I am going to wear two or three hats.

10:18:54 NAACP economic development chair and also a certified

10:18:58 minority small business and SLBE business, and it's not

10:19:03 professional services miss Mary Mulhern, it's

10:19:06 construction and related services for architect and

10:19:09 engineers.

10:19:10 That's the misnomer.

10:19:11 Professional services only for accounting and lawyers,

10:19:14 not engineers and architects.

10:19:16 Let's get that straight because that's deceiving to say

10:19:19 professional services is architectural engineers,

10:19:22 although we are professionals, but the way in the study

10:19:27 it's called construction related services.

10:19:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:19:30 That means more work to do.

10:19:31 >> Yes, but let me say this.

10:19:34 First of all, the NAACP wants to make sure that the

10:19:38 funding that we have been getting with the City Center

10:19:43 stays in place through this hard economic run and the

10:19:45 stimulus watch we got going on.

10:19:47 But I'll bet these numbers would have been less, okay?

10:19:52 The relationship between the city and the NAACP, these

10:19:56 numbers would be even farther less and you can see that

10:19:59 African-Americans are still at the end of the road.

10:20:02 We still are at the bottom, okay?

10:20:06 Wii way at the bottom.

10:20:07 Now, granted we can't do anything till we get to that

10:20:12 three to five-year period.

10:20:13 And we are going to be going at the same rate or worse

10:20:16 and we are going to have to have a race conscious

10:20:20 program five years from now.

10:20:22 Just look at the trend.

10:20:23 There's some trend graphics they got at the end of the

10:20:27 report.

10:20:27 We are going to have to have -- that's the way you are

10:20:30 going to stop this pro problem with African-Americans

10:20:33 not getting any work especially in my area which is

10:20:35 engineering construction related services.

10:20:38 Now, what can you do?

10:20:39 And I'll give an example.

10:20:43 When you get to vote on something, I'll give -- I want

10:20:48 to keep this a positive thing today but let me give you

10:20:50 an example where the boat was missed.

10:20:53 Spring Hill community, my firm designed the mechanical

10:20:58 electrical, went to permitting, and that is an

10:21:05 opportunity.

10:21:06 That is the largest construction related

10:21:07 African-American contract you got, engineering.

10:21:10 That was it.

10:21:10 I'm the one that made the numbers there, okay?

10:21:13 The problem is, the city had a 30% goal.

10:21:17 Now what the goal was and you guys passed it?

10:21:22 Three tenths of a percent.

10:21:24 Three tenths of a percent on a $3 million construction

10:21:28 project that came in below the 3.5 million and saved

10:21:33 money, but what happened?

10:21:35 Three tenths of ooh percent went to minorities, and you

10:21:38 got a goal of 30%?

10:21:40 Spring Hill community center, that you really wanted to

10:21:43 believe but didn't want to pay -- but we did the best

10:21:47 we could with everything you can get.

10:21:49 That's a problem.

10:21:50 And the guy was from out of town.

10:21:56 Out of town.

10:21:57 Spring Hill community center.

10:21:58 That's the one that just went passed you.

10:22:01 Society I don't know what happened there.

10:22:02 So once again, it's a wake-up call.

10:22:05 You have got to keep the empowerment center with the

10:22:08 NAACP involved or the city is going to go backwards.

10:22:13 I predict in two years we are going to have been race

10:22:16 conscious when it comes to construction related

10:22:18 services.

10:22:19 How do you change it?

10:22:20 Real easy.

10:22:21 You tell staff to start awarding contracts to prime.

10:22:26 Staff has not been told that.

10:22:27 (Bell sounds)

10:22:28 And that's the way you do it.

10:22:29 You have got to tell staff.

10:22:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's only one problem, Mr. Robinson.

10:22:38 Thank you very much.

10:22:38 And that's exactly right.

10:22:39 We have a strong mayor form of government so we can't

10:22:42 direct staff to do anything.

10:22:43 So you're right.

10:22:47 Thank you very much.

10:22:48 Anyone else from the public?

10:22:49 Thanks very much.

10:22:50 That concludes.

10:22:51 Thanks again, Mr. Hart.

10:22:55 We'll move now to the text amendment.

10:23:07 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

10:23:14 Staff held a public information workshop other 12th of

10:23:17 April last week.

10:23:19 Just a couple of participants came from the public.

10:23:22 And I do have some notes that were taken from that.

10:23:29 The amendments that are before you, several of them are

10:23:32 continued from previous cycles which I'll go through

10:23:35 briefly.

10:23:36 There are essentially two new ones that are brought

10:23:40 forward.

10:23:40 The first one on pages 2 to 4 dated March 19th are

10:23:49 the creation of the animal rescue facilities and the

10:23:53 residential animal rescue facilities.

10:23:57 Council made a motion last year, part of the cycle to

10:24:01 direct land development to allow animal rescue

10:24:06 facilities within any district by registered animal

10:24:09 rescue groups.

10:24:12 We split them into two different categories, animal and

10:24:15 residential animal, rescue facilities, based on how our

10:24:18 zoning regulations throughout the city are divided,

10:24:22 residentially off of commercial districts.

10:24:26 I was given a copy of the county animal ordinance by

10:24:29 Mr. Shelby that was adopted I believe within the last

10:24:37 two years, the amendments to it.

10:24:40 There's a permit application process for not for profit

10:24:43 or non-profit animal rescue facilities.

10:24:46 These facilities in the county and in the city, they

10:24:49 partner with the Hillsborough County animal services to

10:24:52 provide temporary shelters for animals that would

10:24:56 normally otherwise be in the animal services facility,

10:25:01 and they provide those temporary shelters so that

10:25:04 animals are euthanized less and to give opportunity for

10:25:08 fostering.

10:25:10 We created the first supplemental regulation 27-151,

10:25:16 animal rescue facilities, as the permitted use in the

10:25:19 OP, OP-1, CN, CG, CI.

10:25:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Excuse me.

10:25:24 We don't have that.

10:25:25 >> Could you make copies for us?

10:25:32 >> We didn't get that.

10:25:34 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I apologize.

10:25:37 I thought it was transmitted last week.

10:25:40 Okay.

10:25:40 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to make sure the first

10:25:48 thing you are starting with.

10:25:49 Do we have everything else?

10:26:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I have been on vacation.

10:26:03 I'm sorry, I thought I transmitted it.

10:26:05 >> I just wonder if there are other changes.

10:26:08 Our backup had pretty old stuff in it.

10:26:11 December 7th, 2009.

10:26:13 >> Yes.

10:26:13 >> That's what I have.

10:26:15 >> Just as a reminder, the continued items with the

10:26:19 Channel District, it was an updates to that.

10:26:22 The Channel District is in the -- right in here.

10:26:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have that.

10:26:36 Yes.

10:26:37 We have that.

10:26:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We are asking that you transmit

10:26:39 that to the Planning Commission.

10:26:46 There is the security area.

10:26:49 I believe Julia -- Nicole is asking to continues that

10:26:52 to the July cycle.

10:26:53 There's an inherent conflict in the process.

10:26:56 And she needs to fix it.

10:26:57 And she needs time to fix it, apparently.

10:27:01 So we are asking to continue that one to July.

10:27:03 I guess you could consider that one.

10:27:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So continue that.

10:27:13 >> Electric fence.

10:27:14 That's the one that would be continued.

10:27:16 >> So make a motion.

10:27:17 Yes?

10:27:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just had a yes.

10:27:20 The Garrison district, could you go into that a little

10:27:23 bit?

10:27:24 >> Before you do that, let's deal with all the

10:27:26 continuances, deal with that.

10:27:29 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That is the only one that we are

10:27:30 requesting a continuance.

10:27:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Can I get a motion?

10:27:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.

10:27:34 >>MARY MULHERN: So the community gardens, I have a lot

10:27:36 of changes and questions and everything.

10:27:39 Is that continued?

10:27:44 We need to continue that, too.

10:27:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Continuance being continued --

10:27:53 >>> To the next cycle.

10:27:54 July.

10:27:54 Right around the corner.

10:27:55 >>MARY MULHERN: I just am not ready to pass it as it

10:27:58 is.

10:27:58 >> This isn't the adoption.

10:28:01 This is just the transmission.

10:28:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I make a suggestion?

10:28:05 Because I know there are a number of communities that

10:28:07 are eager to get this going and right now these things

10:28:09 aren't technically legal.

10:28:11 Can we make suggestions?

10:28:15 >>CATHERINE COYLE: This is your opportunity to direct

10:28:16 how the language is transmitted.

10:28:17 >> Oh, can we discuss that today?

10:28:20 >>MARY MULHERN: It's a lot of changes.

10:28:22 We'll get there when we do that.

10:28:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Before we do that, let's take one at a

10:28:27 time.

10:28:27 We are jumping all around here.

10:28:29 >> The barbed wire fence.

10:28:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a motion by councilman

10:28:32 Dingfelder.

10:28:32 Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

10:28:36 Is this on the same thing?

10:28:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, it is.

10:28:39 I want to share that I understand at least one person

10:28:41 Mr. Johnson did want to speak to fencing.

10:28:45 He's come down today to discuss that with council.

10:28:47 And I don't know whether you want to hear the

10:28:50 continuance or what he might have to say substantively

10:28:53 about it.

10:28:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's going to come back.

10:28:58 The motion is to continue.

10:29:00 Because we are not going to at that time up.

10:29:01 So it's coming back in July.

10:29:03 So he needs to speak to the continuance, I would think.

10:29:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We normally do that with regard to

10:29:08 public hearings but this being a workshop, if there's

10:29:10 something, if it's council's decision, there's really

10:29:13 no rule about that.

10:29:14 Normally we do it with regard to public hearings

10:29:16 because those are quasi-judicial.

10:29:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Dinghy think at this time same

10:29:22 effect or otherwise we get into the meat of the whole

10:29:24 thing in the continuance.

10:29:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's fine.

10:29:27 I did want to share he did say that to me.

10:29:30 >>MARY MULHERN: With regard to this entire workshop

10:29:32 item.

10:29:33 I came here thinking it was a workshop, not that we

10:29:36 were going to be passing any transmittals or anything.

10:29:43 So had I known that, I would have --

10:29:47 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The workshops are text amendments.

10:29:48 We have historically come before you to ask you to

10:29:51 transmit it.

10:29:52 This is your opportunity to make changes to the

10:29:54 regulation, or continue them, cut them out completely.

10:29:57 >>MARY MULHERN: If we make changes, we can --

10:30:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There's no first and second reading

10:30:03 for approval and adoption later on after the planning

10:30:05 commission.

10:30:08 Two public hearings.

10:30:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

10:30:13 A motion for a continuance?

10:30:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to hear from Mr.

10:30:16 Johnson.

10:30:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are going to give him an

10:30:18 opportunity to speak to the continuance.

10:30:20 Mr. Johnson, do you want to come forward?

10:30:22 >> Pete Johnson, 301 Druid hills road.

10:30:27 As far as the continuance, I can understand why we need

10:30:29 a continuance.

10:30:30 But in four months we'll have another two pieces of

10:30:34 property with electrical fencing up, and there's

10:30:37 nothing that the VRB can do about it.

10:30:40 So I understand the backlog.

10:30:42 I understand what needs to be done.

10:30:44 But I want to impress upon you that every single time

10:30:47 we push this on another four months, another piece of

10:30:50 electrical fencing or barbed wire goes up, and we come

10:30:55 up with the same problem that we had here.

10:30:59 Okay.

10:31:00 This property was found guilty earlier this month, yet

10:31:05 they had refused to do anything as far as coming into

10:31:10 compliance.

10:31:11 Strictly into compliance, not take it down, but

10:31:14 compliance.

10:31:15 And I think it's ridiculous.

10:31:17 We go another four months.

10:31:20 We go as far as electrified fencing.

10:31:26 In this weekend paper, under $300, you can get a

10:31:30 surveillance system.

10:31:32 Now that's cheap.

10:31:33 I bought one for my house.

10:31:35 It's wonderful.

10:31:36 It's fabulous.

10:31:37 Everything is on tape.

10:31:40 That's a lot cheaper than electrified fencing plus that

10:31:44 gives you proof of who did the break-in, what they look

10:31:47 like, what kind of cars.

10:31:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Johnson, get into the substance of

10:31:50 the conversation.

10:31:51 We want you to speak to the continuance.

10:31:53 >> Okay.

10:31:54 The continuance is, I understand the legalities of it

10:31:57 and what it's going to take.

10:31:58 But in another four months, we are going to be right

10:32:01 back here possibly.

10:32:03 I have all the respect in the world for Julia.

10:32:05 But, I mean, this is just dragging on too long just

10:32:09 like the sign codes.

10:32:11 Dragging on way too long.

10:32:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for legal.

10:32:15 You know how we have something called the pending

10:32:18 ordinance doctrine?

10:32:20 Would that be applicable with the electric fences so

10:32:23 that people, while we are in the midst of perfecting

10:32:26 our ordinance, that people -- assuming they pull a

10:32:30 permit, to put up additional electric fences?

10:32:34 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

10:32:37 Yes, that exists but here we are really talking about a

10:32:40 procedural changes.

10:32:40 You already have something in the code that does

10:32:43 require you to go to the Variance Review Board, so

10:32:45 there is already a process in place.

10:32:46 My concern and what we were the trying to do was that

10:32:50 process really has some issues, the process that we set

10:32:53 up, it really doesn't have standards associated with

10:32:55 it.

10:32:56 I was attempting to make it a variance process, upon

10:33:00 really researching that and looking at it after it was

10:33:02 drafted realize in essence it was a problem to be

10:33:05 create a variance for those, because as we all know you

10:33:08 can't create use variances.

10:33:10 I was trying to create a use variance and I was

10:33:13 concerned that that would be a problem, so I really

10:33:16 believe now that I have analyzed and talked to some of

10:33:19 the other attorneys it needs to be a special using

10:33:20 permit.

10:33:21 The thing you have in place today that allows people to

10:33:23 move forward, so unless you have a moratorium, all of

10:33:27 the permitting processes that wouldn't get you there.

10:33:29 The pending ordinance wouldn't be applicable for a

10:33:32 procedural change.

10:33:32 >> Is there a mechanism that we can institute today so

10:33:36 that people are not using a loop hole which currently

10:33:39 exists to do things that we don't want them to do?

10:33:43 >> Well, there is a process in place today, that if

10:33:46 somebody wants to have an electric fence, they actually

10:33:48 have to go through a public hearing process.

10:33:50 >> But it's obviously -- it's not effective.

10:33:55 >>JULIA COLE: Saying what we are doing --

10:34:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If we do a moratorium specifically

10:34:05 dealing with electric fences --

10:34:08 >>JULIA COLE: You can't do that today.

10:34:09 >>Le.

10:34:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Listen, the motion on the floor is a

10:34:12 continuance to July.

10:34:13 We need to speak to the motion.

10:34:14 Councilman Dingfelder.

10:34:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Speaking to the motion and to

10:34:18 elaborate on Ms. Saul-Sena's comment.

10:34:21 I recall that we are not just -- we were about to

10:34:26 change some of the standards and the criteria that was

10:34:30 part of what we were doing, as I recall, and then

10:34:35 recently you figured out we have got this little snafu

10:34:39 that mandates that you need to create a different

10:34:42 process.

10:34:43 So --

10:34:44 >> Originally what was being done --

10:34:47 >> I think there is some substantive change.

10:34:50 Then that's when Ms. Saul-Sena was concerned about.

10:34:52 >> Well, the original amendment was just to define

10:34:57 security needs.

10:34:57 So it was a very narrow change.

10:34:59 But the problem was, it was my concern overusing the

10:35:03 process that we had.

10:35:05 The definition of security need, if that is something

10:35:08 that City Council wants to come back to with that

10:35:11 simple definition, I can bring that back and that was

10:35:13 originally what was in front of you and it was a simple

10:35:16 definitional change.

10:35:17 I can tell you I had concerns about that process for a

10:35:20 period of time.

10:35:20 It is a very difficult thing to characterize because of

10:35:23 what it is you are requesting.

10:35:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think the simple definition was

10:35:29 kind of important to the community that had expressed a

10:35:32 concern about this electrical fence.

10:35:34 And because we were tightening up the standards.

10:35:37 At least that was the intents of council.

10:35:39 So maybe it would be better to just go ahead and kick

10:35:42 that out and then you can change the process in the

10:35:45 time you need to do.

10:35:46 >> We can go ahead and resurrect that original but I

10:35:50 want to be clear to everybody I still need to change

10:35:52 what this process is, because the process is a problem.

10:35:56 With that in mind what I can go ahead and do is

10:36:01 continue to move forward with the remainder of the

10:36:03 amendment, I can bring that back to at least transmit,

10:36:06 and in the meantime, if anybody has any comments on the

10:36:10 definitional question we can deal with that in the

10:36:13 process.

10:36:23 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Procedurally the issue -- Steve

10:36:25 Michelini.

10:36:26 The issue is not defining exactly what the security

10:36:31 issues are.

10:36:33 What happened was when we started reviewing the process

10:36:38 in terms of VRB versus some other process --

10:36:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Steve, we don't even have the

10:36:43 document in front of us.

10:36:44 So if you are talking to the continuance --

10:36:46 >>STEVE MICHELINI: That's fine.

10:36:47 I'm in favor of the continuance.

10:36:49 It should be continued.

10:36:50 There is a lot more work that has to be done.

10:36:53 It's not a simple language change.

10:36:55 The language change doesn't help anybody.

10:36:56 It doesn't help the businesses that use them, and it

10:36:59 doesn't help anyone else that has a concern with it.

10:37:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion to continue to

10:37:06 continue to the July cycle.

10:37:07 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

10:37:11 Opposes?

10:37:11 Okay.

10:37:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like Ms. Cole as she state

10:37:19 add minute ago to bring back just that small language

10:37:22 change and put it back into this text amendment cycle,

10:37:27 and then we can discuss the merits of that small little

10:37:29 change.

10:37:32 That's my motion.

10:37:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

10:37:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

10:37:35 All in favor?

10:37:37 Opposes?

10:37:37 Thank you, Ms. Cole, Cathy Coyle, please move forward.

10:37:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have two young ladies here that

10:37:45 are daughters of city employees on your work day and

10:37:49 they are beautiful young ladies.

10:37:50 They are in the sixth grade at one of the best middle

10:37:53 schools in Tampa, Coleman, and this young lady is Maddy

10:37:58 Thomas right here, and this young lady is -- Maddy

10:38:04 Thomas, and this young lady is Natalie Huey.

10:38:07 So they are both outstanding citizens at Coleman.

10:38:11 And I'm sure one day they will go much beyond being a

10:38:13 council member.

10:38:19 Because they are learning much more today on civic

10:38:22 questions and how government is run, and they are not

10:38:29 teaching that at Coleman, but they are learning on hand

10:38:32 of what it is to be a city employee and a council

10:38:35 member.

10:38:35 So we are real happy to have both of you here.

10:38:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, councilman.

10:38:45 Cathy, do you want to continue?

10:38:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Back to the copy that you have now,

10:38:50 looking at pages 2, 3 and 4, the top of page 2, just

10:38:55 top reiterate the motion was from council to direct

10:38:59 land development to allow animal activities within any

10:39:05 district by registered animal rescue group.

10:39:07 And just to recap, Mr. Shelby gave me a copy of the

10:39:11 county animal ordinance, which does require a certain

10:39:13 type of licensing or permitting process through the

10:39:17 county.

10:39:18 And as was stated in this ordinance, generally, what it

10:39:21 is it allows these not for profits or non-profit

10:39:25 organizations to partner with the animal services

10:39:27 department of the county so that so many animals aren't

10:39:31 euthanized annually, there are safe places for them to

10:39:34 go for temporary shelter and then fostering.

10:39:38 Looking through the Euclidean districts that we have

10:39:40 throughout the city, we broke it into two different

10:39:43 categories.

10:39:44 Knowing right now that the only definition we have for

10:39:46 animal type uses for cats is a kennel in the zoning

10:39:52 code, and a kennel is a commercial kennel.

10:39:55 It's only allowed in a CI, IG and IH zoning

10:39:58 classification.

10:39:59 Kennels are for commercial purposes.

10:40:01 They are for housing, grooming, breeding, boarding

10:40:05 large amounts of animals.

10:40:08 Animal rescue facilities, the first category created,

10:40:12 it is located within a supplemental regulation, 27-151.

10:40:16 It's shown in the table above as a permitted use.

10:40:20 This is where it is typically in an office or

10:40:23 commercial district, nonresidential.

10:40:25 They do come through and receive an annual permit from

10:40:30 the city, from the land development office.

10:40:33 They coordinate that through us.

10:40:35 We put on the same calendar cycle as sidewalk cafe

10:40:39 permits, as other types of annual permits that we have

10:40:42 in the city, just to try to keep deadlines consistent

10:40:45 through different types of permit applications.

10:40:49 They will have to provide a copy of their county

10:40:51 permits or license to us to show that they actually are

10:40:54 licensed the same way.

10:40:57 They do need to be -- if they are added to any other

10:41:01 type of facility or any other use it has to be a

10:41:03 conforming use within the city, within that district.

10:41:06 We do have a provision in the nonconforming section of

10:41:09 the code that says you can't expand or add any new use.

10:41:12 So we clarified that in this regulation.

10:41:14 They do have to comply with buffering and screening

10:41:17 just in case they are adjacent to residential

10:41:19 facilities.

10:41:21 Domesticated dogs and cats are the only animals that

10:41:24 are allowed.

10:41:24 That is generally consistent with the county ordinance.

10:41:29 In the OP, OP-1, CN, CG districts, the size limitation

10:41:34 is one animal per 500 square feet of land.

10:41:38 And this is only for animals over four months of age.

10:41:41 Under four months are considered the infant dogs and

10:41:45 puppies and kitties, generally housed with their

10:41:48 mothers.

10:41:49 They don't actually count in the county ordinance.

10:41:52 And then parking shall be required at the rate of a

10:41:55 kennel which is one per ten holding pen and one per

10:41:59 employee space.

10:42:02 The next is the special use 1, and that is in all the

10:42:06 districts, up to RO-1 which is residential office 1,

10:42:11 and this is the special use permit.

10:42:13 Some.

10:42:14 Same criteria, they get an annual permit.

10:42:17 It does coincide with the June 30 to July 1st.

10:42:22 Domesticated dogs and cats are the only ones that are

10:42:25 allowed in these residential facilities.

10:42:27 They do have to provide the copy of their county

10:42:29 permit.

10:42:31 All outdoor areas shall be used with screen, six foot

10:42:36 high solid fence.

10:42:37 I do want to clarify because it came up at the public

10:42:40 information workshop, clarify those outdoor areas are

10:42:43 only in rear yards and I was going to add that to the

10:42:46 provision.

10:42:46 That was my intent, that they are in the rear yards,

10:42:48 that you don't have the holding pens out in front of

10:42:51 your house.

10:42:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Describe a solid fence.

10:42:58 Is a PVC fence solid fence?

10:43:00 Is a cypress fence a solid fence?

10:43:04 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.

10:43:04 >> You are just saying not chain link.

10:43:06 >> Correct.

10:43:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One other question.

10:43:10 I know what a dog is as far as breed but can you define

10:43:14 cats?

10:43:14 What does that mean?

10:43:15 >> A feline?

10:43:20 Domesticated or not.

10:43:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, not a Lyon.

10:43:28 It's anything?

10:43:29 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I brought this section just to

10:43:31 remind myself.

10:43:31 Chapter 19, which is the code enforcement chapter, they

10:43:35 actually define and enforce the provisions on animals

10:43:39 throughout the city.

10:43:40 Animals in general.

10:43:41 A domesticated pet or companion animal is an animal of

10:43:48 a species that has been bred and raised to live in or

10:43:51 about the habitation of humans and is dependents upon

10:43:54 people for food and shelter, any animal not deemed wild

10:43:58 or exotic according to the game and Florida fresh water

10:44:01 commission.

10:44:02 Those large cats, minks, other things that are wild or

10:44:06 exotic, it's a difference different definition.

10:44:11 I don't know how to say it.

10:44:13 It's covered at the state level.

10:44:14 >> You can still breed a lion at your house.

10:44:18 >> I guess that would be your risk.

10:44:24 As I wanted to say in paragraph D, I am going clarify

10:44:27 that that is in the rear yard is where those outdoor

10:44:30 areas are to be located.

10:44:33 Animal rescue facilities in paragraph E, it should be

10:44:37 E, shall comply with the following: No waivers shall

10:44:40 be given in these provisions.

10:44:43 Facilities are only permitted on lands where the

10:44:46 principal use of the property is and remains a single

10:44:48 family detached use.

10:44:49 We wanted to make sure that you didn't wind up having

10:44:53 these types of facilities and apartment complexes,

10:44:56 where lands are common as opposed to individually

10:44:58 owned.

10:45:00 Residential unit shall be owner occupied.

10:45:03 Residents, owner rescue facilities shall not be to any

10:45:09 nonconforming use.

10:45:09 The second number three which I corrected to number

10:45:11 four, dogs, cats or any combination thereof, it's one

10:45:15 animal per thousand square feet of land.

10:45:17 Again with the four-month of age provision.

10:45:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman?

10:45:26 Cathy, owner occupied.

10:45:29 An interesting caveat.

10:45:38 Pet lover who is in a single-family home but they

10:45:43 happen to have been renting it for 20 years and they

10:45:47 are foster animal people and they are good people and

10:45:50 they are stable and everything else, but they don't own

10:45:52 that house.

10:45:58 I don't know.

10:45:59 >> You have the ability to change it.

10:46:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just was wondering where it came

10:46:04 from and what the thought process is.

10:46:06 >> We have found typically, and it's been shown through

10:46:10 different approvals of council under the years as well,

10:46:13 that owner occupied establishments, that there is more

10:46:21 awareness of how to treat the property.

10:46:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, I don't want to go into that

10:46:29 discussion necessarily.

10:46:30 It would take another hour.

10:46:31 But this is a permit process.

10:46:34 It's an annual permit process.

10:46:36 I think if somebody is going to go to the trouble

10:46:39 coming down, complying, getting a permit and doing

10:46:41 everything, putting up the appropriate fencing and

10:46:44 everything else that's needed under this program and

10:46:47 they have to be recognized by the county as legitimate

10:46:50 foster animal care groove, I don't know that we want to

10:46:56 be prejudicial against, you know, non-homeowners.

10:47:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I will mark that one and --

10:47:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

10:47:12 >>MARY MULHERN: I had a question with regard to --

10:47:14 this is really going to fall into the community garden

10:47:16 area and fencing.

10:47:17 But I'll bring it up then.

10:47:19 But maybe you can think about this.

10:47:22 Chain link fences aren't allowed in a lot of the

10:47:25 overlay districts, East Tampa.

10:47:29 All of them, right.

10:47:30 But if you have a community garden use, security is

10:47:34 really required.

10:47:36 So I'm wondering if we can think about a way that we

10:47:38 could allow those sort of similar regulations just as

10:47:44 far as the chain link fence.

10:47:48 For community gardens.

10:47:55 You can think about it when we get to that.

10:47:57 >> I have a response for that, and then we can discuss

10:48:00 it.

10:48:02 And then the definitions on page 4, the animal rescue

10:48:05 facility is a not-for-profit facility for housing and

10:48:11 fostering, in a humane and safe manner of animals.

10:48:15 The residential animal rescue facility is similar in

10:48:18 definition but very specifically stated that it's a

10:48:21 single-family detached residential dwelling unit that

10:48:23 remains principally residential in use and character

10:48:26 and is operated by a not-for-profit organization, and

10:48:30 then it's the same regulation.

10:48:33 We did the best that we could.

10:48:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm sorry to interrupt, but is the

10:48:38 county going to enforce this or are we going to enforce

10:48:41 this?

10:48:41 >> This is a use regulation, city regulation.

10:48:43 >> And what department is going to enforce this?

10:48:46 >> It would be code enforcement.

10:48:58 As a remind they are is directed by City Council.

10:49:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm saying we are cutting jobs, and

10:49:05 we are going to create more work for the code

10:49:07 enforcement officers if that's what I hear.

10:49:18 All right, thank you.

10:49:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's finish on this.

10:49:22 >> Would you like to tab each section at a time?

10:49:27 Because I think there are individual comments.

10:49:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That makes sense.

10:49:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just make the motion to strike-2

10:49:33 that it has to be owner occupied.

10:49:40 Strike 27-D-2 that it has to be owner occupied.

10:49:45 I don't think that's really fair.

10:49:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second on that?

10:49:48 >> Second.

10:49:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

10:49:52 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

10:49:55 Opposes?

10:49:56 Okay.

10:49:56 >> I guess you can hear from the public on the

10:50:03 additional comments.

10:50:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, let's go through again.

10:50:07 We'll go through each one.

10:50:09 We'll allocate 30 minutes for this section of the

10:50:11 workshop.

10:50:12 We are running out of time.

10:50:14 >> The next is the continued update to the Garrison

10:50:18 Channel district, as I mentioned before.

10:50:21 This is updating the existing Channel District,

10:50:29 downtown CBD, extending into the Channel District.

10:50:33 The Channel District proper area.

10:50:40 Basically one of as its expanded and grown over the

10:50:49 years with the introduction of the arena, the shops,

10:50:52 the movie theater, all the restaurants, the convention

10:50:54 center.

10:50:55 It's one big area.

10:50:57 But this is the very first baby step in updating these

10:51:01 districts.

10:51:02 And over the next year or so, you are going to see the

10:51:05 additional updates for the entire downtown plan.

10:51:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have two questions.

10:51:12 First of all, this is good.

10:51:15 I wish that all the updates, all the improvements were

10:51:17 before us now.

10:51:18 But how come it stops there?

10:51:20 Why is does it not continue all the way up?

10:51:24 >> ?

10:51:26 Because it appears that it stopped kind of in the

10:51:27 middle of the parking of the surface parking lot that's

10:51:30 adjacent to the aquarium.

10:51:31 And it would make sense to me if we were looking at

10:51:40 thinking in terms of good design and continuity that

10:51:44 you would just continue it on up.

10:51:48 So how come it doesn't keep going up?

10:51:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I believe it's different ownership.

10:52:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's exactly my point.

10:52:03 I think we are supposed to be thinking as policymakers,

10:52:07 as planners in this role as City Council members, and

10:52:10 as a planner, you don't just cut something off halfway,

10:52:13 particularly when it's open-ended as a surface parking

10:52:17 locality which obviously will not be the future use.

10:52:19 So my thought on this is that we should just expand the

10:52:25 boundary the rest of the way up.

10:52:29 Now, to the Adamo.

10:52:31 >> All the way to Adamo?

10:52:34 >>

10:52:35 >>: Because what's there now is not going to be there

10:52:37 in the future, it's kind of funky, rusty folk kind of

10:52:42 activity, but we at council maybe two years ago

10:52:45 approved a very intense mixed use immediately south of

10:52:49 Adamo, at the top of the channel there.

10:52:52 If you are looking at this as an urban planter logical

10:52:55 thing to do is to expand this Garrison -- all the

10:52:59 things you said to me which make sense, expanded all

10:53:02 the way up, because we know for a fact that the surface

10:53:04 parking lot are not going to remain, and we should have

10:53:08 the kinds of activities that you describe in your

10:53:11 Garrison district plan.

10:53:12 Also, what I would say has just expand it all the way

10:53:17 up to Adamo.

10:53:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: My only counter to that would be

10:53:21 just north of this particular area there is surface

10:53:23 parking.

10:53:25 It's in front of the USF education center and the Port

10:53:28 Authority administration.

10:53:29 >> But I'll belt it would be included.

10:53:31 We are talking about the future.

10:53:32 This is supposed to be a plan, right?

10:53:35 The future, we are supposed to be thinking ahead.

10:53:37 So logically it would continue on the way up.

10:53:40 The other question is, have you discussed this with Tom

10:53:43 stork and the aquarium board?

10:53:44 >> Personally, no.

10:53:48 This is brought forth by the administration.

10:53:51 >> Well, that's fine, but we have plenty of time

10:53:54 because this is going to go to the Planning Commission,

10:53:56 going to come back here.

10:53:57 So as we bring this forward I think we should continue

10:53:59 it all the way up to Adamo and we should make sure that

10:54:02 the Port Authority and the aquariums are impacted by

10:54:06 this are aware that this is going on and they might

10:54:08 have some input.

10:54:10 >>CATHERINE COYLE: What this is is a description of the

10:54:12 district.

10:54:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know.

10:54:13 >> There is no follow-up regulation mandating that they

10:54:15 do anything.

10:54:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Exactly.

10:54:17 But I'm saying as a planner, if you are going to be

10:54:19 rational about this you don't end it at the end of a

10:54:22 parking lot.

10:54:22 You continue it up.

10:54:24 So the continuity of uses.

10:54:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask a question?

10:54:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sure.

10:54:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman?

10:54:31 I think it's very germane to what you are suggesting

10:54:33 but this is my question.

10:54:35 This describes the boundaries of the Garrison Channel

10:54:37 district.

10:54:38 But then if you do what you are suggesting, which we

10:54:42 haven't talked about so I don't know if it's a good or

10:54:44 bad idea.

10:54:45 Right now the area you are suggesting falls into the

10:54:47 Channel District guidelines.

10:54:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Correct.

10:54:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Which we put a lot of time and

10:54:53 effort into in regard to our zoning code.

10:54:58 Right?

10:54:59 >> Correct.

10:55:00 >> And so I don't know that we have that kind of detail

10:55:04 in our Garrison district.

10:55:06 >> You're right.

10:55:07 You're right, Mr. Dingfelder.

10:55:09 You're right.

10:55:09 The Channel District guidelines are more -- are less

10:55:14 detailed.

10:55:15 Although neither of them preclude surface parking lots.

10:55:18 >> But I'm saying the Channel District, we put a lot of

10:55:20 effort into the Channel District plan.

10:55:24 >> Did we tell the aquarium people that this is being

10:55:27 expanded upon them?

10:55:30 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I don't know.

10:55:31 I believe so.

10:55:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This will come back to us.

10:55:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

10:55:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I think our questions, because there's

10:55:39 no context for this.

10:55:41 The administration is proposing that -- I would like to

10:55:44 know why, and what are the practical effects of this

10:55:48 going to be?

10:55:55 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Is that a direct question or is it

10:55:56 rhetorical?

10:55:58 >>MARY MULHERN: It's a serious question.

10:56:00 I mean it.

10:56:03 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The purpose of amending this

10:56:04 district, but it is already an existing district, is to

10:56:07 recognize what has occurred out there.

10:56:09 It is to recognize that this old Garrison Channel

10:56:12 district that is already in the code, which is only in

10:56:15 the CBD, is actually the southern portion of the

10:56:20 peninsula.

10:56:20 It is actually all the way across to the other end.

10:56:22 It just happens to cross into another very well

10:56:25 established district.

10:56:27 It's to carve out the subdistrict, to clarify that it

10:56:30 is all of these tourist-related activities.

10:56:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So why not -- logically, why not

10:56:38 take the Channel District and --

10:56:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Excuse me.

10:56:48 I think you and I have different questions here.

10:56:52 So essentially, I do agree with Councilwoman Saul-Sena

10:56:56 that it seems arbitrary where you are cutting off.

10:57:04 But I also have questions about this kind of expansion

10:57:09 and increasing what can happen there is kind of what we

10:57:14 did incrementally over and over and over in the last --

10:57:19 not me so much but the former council, increasing the

10:57:25 density and all of those things for the Channel

10:57:27 District.

10:57:29 And I think we need to learn from our mistakes and see

10:57:34 that maybe we went a little too far, got a lot of tall

10:57:38 buildings.

10:57:38 >> It does not expand floor area ratio.

10:57:43 It does not expand densities.

10:57:45 It does not expand any of those entitlements.

10:57:48 It's a description.

10:57:49 It is a capture what actually has occurred out there.

10:57:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, what is that that has occurred?

10:57:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It's actually in the description.

10:57:58 It's the recognition that this particular district will

10:58:01 develop into strong oriented center and the cruise ship

10:58:09 terminal, Harbor Island.

10:58:13 Expand the central business district.

10:58:14 We have the trolley, which is a public infrastructure

10:58:18 that has been placed and the riverwalk which is the

10:58:19 second piece of the public infrastructure.

10:58:22 It is located in proximity to the southern waterfront

10:58:24 of both district and supports the two districts by

10:58:28 containing large venues for public assemblies, tourist

10:58:31 related and entertainment facilities such as an arena,

10:58:34 aquarium, convention center, museum, hotel, parks,

10:58:38 supporting commercial uses and cruise ship terminals,

10:58:41 associated shopping centers, offices.

10:58:43 It's recognizing what over time we have created.

10:58:47 It's a clarification.

10:58:49 It's because when you look at the code purely -- if you

10:58:55 come off the street and look at our code and say where

10:58:57 is the Garrison Channel district you are going to see

10:58:59 this piece.

10:59:00 You are going see just this piece.

10:59:03 On the left-hand side.

10:59:04 There is no recognition of this guide which is called

10:59:07 the Garrison Channel area.

10:59:10 It can be very confusing to people that are trying to

10:59:13 understand what this area is, maybe want to develop in

10:59:16 this area, maybe just want to be able to go there.

10:59:21 We are trying to clarify what has historically occurred

10:59:24 and link it together appropriately.

10:59:26 But it doesn't call out any additional floor area

10:59:29 ratio, any additional density entitlements.

10:59:32 All of that is controlled in the underlying zoning

10:59:34 regulations, the underlying district, the Channel

10:59:37 District and the CBD.

10:59:39 We are not changing those at all.

10:59:43 Maybe it's such a simple amendment that it seems

10:59:48 complex, that it's really a simple amendment.

10:59:50 >>MARY MULHERN: And it's all on the same side of the

10:59:55 Channelside Drive basically?

11:00:00 It's on the side where the Port Authority is?

11:00:03 And the aquarium?

11:00:04 >> That's correct.

11:00:05 It's on essentially the south and east side.

11:00:07 >> Here is my question.

11:00:09 So you just listed all those things that could be --

11:00:14 could happen.

11:00:14 They can't happen now?

11:00:19 >>CATHERINE COYLE: They have.

11:00:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.

11:00:24 I just, you know, I want to know what is driving this,

11:00:28 and, you know.

11:00:31 >> It's an update to the regulation that describes the

11:00:35 district.

11:00:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess what will it change as far as

11:00:40 what can be developed there?

11:00:44 >> The underlying zoning categories tell you what can

11:00:47 result there and to what extent that can be developed.

11:00:50 This is the description.

11:00:51 The overall description of that particular area, and

11:00:54 what the idea of that area is.

11:00:56 But it doesn't spell out you are at a 7.0 F.A.R.

11:01:02 >> Then why Don we need to even do this?

11:01:06 There has to be a reason why we are doing this.

11:01:08 >>> Over time we continuously go back and look at the

11:01:15 regulations and update the descriptions that we have.

11:01:17 But the purpose and intent, be it a description of an

11:01:21 area, the overlay district, I mean, everything evolves.

11:01:26 As things develop and are built in the and the city

11:01:29 grows and evolves, and we have to update the plan every

11:01:31 seven years to recognize what has occurred and what we

11:01:34 think will occur.

11:01:35 >> All right.

11:01:38 I appreciate you explaining that to me.

11:01:40 I'm sure there's something driving it.

11:01:41 But we'll figure it out.

11:01:43 And it's probably something really good.

11:01:46 So that's fine.

11:01:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Miranda.

11:01:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Wait, wait, I did have one more

11:01:51 question.

11:01:51 The area that you are changing the description of, how

11:01:54 big is that?

11:01:54 How many acres?

11:01:55 >> I would have to go back and calculate it.

11:02:00 >> Do you have a general idea?

11:02:02 >> No, I don't.

11:02:03 >> I would like to know, though, get your calculator

11:02:07 out.

11:02:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:02:11 I believe this is the area south of the Lee Roy Selmon

11:02:13 Expressway, and two years ago all the changes that were

11:02:20 met were done by this council, all the rezonings that

11:02:24 were done were done, if I remember the attorney who

11:02:26 represented the client was Dave Mechanik, and we did

11:02:30 add, I think, on one side, I'm not sure if it got all

11:02:34 the way to the Lee Roy Selmon, and we did the other

11:02:37 side of the channel, to the east.

11:02:40 Am I correct?

11:02:43 Nobody knows.

11:02:46 Yeah, you remember.

11:02:47 So what I'm saying is like a census.

11:02:50 You don't have three kids.

11:02:51 It says they are all mirror Rand as, and then you have

11:02:55 two more, I don't know the last name, it's expanding

11:02:58 this area, not changing any zoning by your statements

11:03:04 that it is an expanded district, so that when you say

11:03:06 the Channelside, it really includes the properties that

11:03:10 are touching the channel.

11:03:11 >> That's pretty much it.

11:03:14 >> I mean, water and water.

11:03:16 So if you are going to expand it and call it

11:03:18 Channelside, I would imagine you are talking about the

11:03:21 expansion of the current district, where Coca-Cola used

11:03:28 to be, the parking lot to Coca-Cola, the aquarium, and

11:03:31 the World Trade Center is, and the Port Authority

11:03:35 building.

11:03:36 Is that what I am talking about?

11:03:38 >> The Port Authority building is just north.

11:03:41 >> Just north.

11:03:42 So that stops right there around Kennedy.

11:03:44 >> It's in the Ybor channel.

11:03:46 Garrison --

11:03:48 >> You are talking about Kennedy Boulevard?

11:03:50 >> Kennedy is too far north.

11:03:53 >> But south of Kennedy is what we are talking about.

11:03:56 >> Yes.

11:03:56 >> Okay.

11:03:57 I understand that.

11:03:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The area where the expanded

11:04:03 Garrison district is proposed is currently Channel

11:04:06 District.

11:04:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.

11:04:15 >> It seems to me that there are tremendous

11:04:18 similarities and I just don't see why you feel

11:04:20 compelled to change it from Channel District to

11:04:25 Garrison.

11:04:26 >> It is still the Channel District.

11:04:28 We are not changing the district itself.

11:04:30 We are recognizing the expanded area of the Garrison

11:04:33 Channel.

11:04:34 We are recognizing that it's one overall linked area.

11:04:38 It's linked by other things besides regulation.

11:04:41 >> Okay.

11:04:42 I just hope that you all work quickly to bring us the

11:04:46 design standards for this area, because I think that's

11:04:49 what we feel we have the greatest need for.

11:04:51 >> The Channel District has design standards, very

11:04:54 clearly.

11:04:54 >> Is this included?

11:04:57 >> Absolutely not.

11:04:58 All of the regulations forts Channel District stand as

11:05:00 far as how you develop property.

11:05:01 This is literally just a description of how these two

11:05:04 particular areas are linked together by function and

11:05:08 operation, socially how they are linked together in the

11:05:13 built environment, not necessarily how you build for

11:05:15 the future.

11:05:19 It's more conceptual than literal.

11:05:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Apparently this is taking longer than

11:05:25 I anticipated.

11:05:26 I don't know, council.

11:05:27 I'm concerned now about the time.

11:05:30 We still have another workshop, and then --

11:05:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's 11:00, not 12:00.

11:05:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I know, it's 11:00.

11:05:40 And my concern -- my suggestion is that we might need

11:05:43 to this up later and move to the billboard, and I

11:05:48 assume that's why most of the people are here, the

11:05:52 digital billboard, because right now, we spent 30

11:05:54 minutes on the Channelside.

11:06:01 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I can come back.

11:06:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I need to hear from the public.

11:06:05 Are you all comfortable with that?

11:06:12 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 south Sherill.

11:06:14 Here to speak on these issues at the code changes.

11:06:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: On the code changes?

11:06:21 >> Yes.

11:06:22 I could quickly give to you some things we haven't

11:06:27 covered already, so put notice on the concerns.

11:06:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's hear from you all on the code

11:06:35 changes, then move to the digital workshop.

11:06:39 We took action on the first item, councilman

11:06:42 Dingfelder, and that broke protocol, said we are not

11:06:46 taking action.

11:06:47 I just want to go back to that.

11:06:49 So why don't we hear from the community on what you

11:06:51 have to say, okay?

11:06:53 >> Do you want me to go ahead then?

11:06:55 >> Yes.

11:06:56 >>MARGARET VIZZI: The first issue was the dog rescue.

11:07:04 There's concern that in a neighborhood that this is

11:07:07 going into, that there would be no notice to the

11:07:13 neighborhood association or the immediate neighbor.

11:07:15 T.H.A.N. has not taken a position on these because we

11:07:18 only got them on the Monday before our meeting on

11:07:20 Wednesday.

11:07:21 We brought it to the attention of our members.

11:07:24 And we won't ask for their input and vote till our next

11:07:28 meeting.

11:07:28 So we don't have -- but these are concerns that have

11:07:33 been expressed, that of course she did clarify about

11:07:38 the fence, it can only be in the back.

11:07:40 The issue of how many animals, when you have, if you

11:07:45 have four animals with puppies, or kittens or whatever,

11:07:48 that can be quite a lot of animals right next door.

11:07:52 We don't know what all the conditions of the county

11:07:55 has.

11:07:56 They are only referred to.

11:07:57 And so we don't know.

11:07:59 Basically, I will get down to the fact that we would

11:08:02 like to see it either as an S-2 or if it's done

11:08:06 administratively that the neighborhood and the

11:08:09 immediate neighbors have input into it.

11:08:13 So those are the two issues.

11:08:17 On that.

11:08:18 On the gardens, it's kind of the same thing, that if

11:08:21 this is a community garden, it should be a neighborhood

11:08:26 knows about it and therefore the neighborhood has input

11:08:30 into where these can be, and if they can be in the

11:08:33 neighborhood, because most of the neighborhoods

11:08:36 consider themselves urban rather than where you

11:08:40 ordinarily have huge gardens, where you grow for the

11:08:45 community.

11:08:46 We understand the backyard gardens.

11:08:48 That's not the problem.

11:08:49 But where you are going to have these community

11:08:51 gardens, it should be -- I know Seminole Heights, they

11:08:56 have the neighborhood's input.

11:08:58 They wanted it.

11:08:59 But every neighborhood should be given that opportunity

11:09:01 to decide.

11:09:04 As far as when things go to the Planning Commission and

11:09:08 they are not really your last decision, Planning

11:09:10 Commission also decides that what is there is what you

11:09:15 want, and when we are there, expressing our opinion,

11:09:19 that we haven't come to you yet to comment on.

11:09:25 We then do have a problem when it comes back to you

11:09:27 with their approval, and really it's because they got

11:09:31 something that you really didn't give full approval to.

11:09:37 So that's only a side comment.

11:09:40 The other two mainly have to do with neighborhood

11:09:43 input.

11:09:45 And in the case of the dogs, at least -- I mean the

11:09:49 animals, notifying the immediate neighbors.

11:10:00 As far as whether it should be a rental I would say

11:10:02 that Cathy's issues on the upkeep of the property is

11:10:07 better by someone who owns the properties.

11:10:08 We wouldn't want someone who has these licenses just to

11:10:12 go out and find empty houses.

11:10:14 So that's something that needs workup.

11:10:19 Thank you.

11:10:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

11:10:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Spoken like a smart landlord.

11:10:23 >> Randy Baron, west Comanche Avenue.

11:10:29 I want to touch specifically on the motion that was

11:10:32 passed regarding the owner occupied.

11:10:34 And I just want to make sure that the concerns that

11:10:39 Margaret had, that it's not just some absentee landlord

11:10:43 who has a license and uses that property.

11:10:46 You know, at the very least it should be the person who

11:10:49 holds the license needs to be living at the property,

11:10:52 whether its owner occupied or not.

11:10:54 However, owner occupied does in most situations,

11:10:59 Cathy's comments are correct, it seems to be the

11:11:01 general trend.

11:11:06 Thank you.

11:11:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the public?

11:11:08 Mr. Johnson is coming up.

11:11:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I just clarify something?

11:11:14 This is about animal rescue.

11:11:15 This is about volunteers.

11:11:17 I mean, this isn't like people making money off of --

11:11:22 this is not kennel operations.

11:11:26 So if we need to tighten that up to make sure that we

11:11:28 are clear on that, that was the intent of this.

11:11:30 It started out with a little Dachshund rescue guy who

11:11:36 had five or ten little Dachshunds in his house and was

11:11:40 being shut down by code enforcement.

11:11:42 So we all need to be on the same page about what the

11:11:46 intents of this is.

11:11:47 And if the intent isn't clear in the language, then we

11:11:49 need to tighten up the language.

11:11:51 >> Councilman, I would agree with that and what we are

11:11:54 trying to do avoid is the unintended consequences.

11:11:59 So let's make sure that it's a tightly defined --

11:12:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm trying to be as fair as I can.

11:12:06 I understand and appreciate everything, when you look

11:12:08 at an urban area and suburban area there's a vast

11:12:11 amount of who is your neighbor.

11:12:12 The neighbor may be half a block away.

11:12:15 When you look at 1,000 square feet, that sounds real

11:12:18 large.

11:12:19 When you look at the number of 1,000.

11:12:21 But when you look at what makes up that 1,000, and the

11:12:24 average lot size of the city, I don't know if it's 60

11:12:28 or 70 feet that means the width of the lot in the block

11:12:33 plus 150 feet back equals one thousand square foot, or

11:12:36 60 feet and 18 feet back equals approximately 1,000

11:12:41 square foot.

11:12:42 Am I against this?

11:12:43 No.

11:12:43 But I think protection has to be put in so that the

11:12:46 surrounding neighbors know what's going on.

11:12:48 And I certainly appreciate what's happening.

11:12:52 When you are trying to do something for humanity and to

11:12:55 save animals and so forth, then you have a one-sided

11:12:59 government hitting you over the head with a sledge

11:13:02 hammer, how do you solve that problem?

11:13:04 The only way to solve is it to come to some amenable

11:13:07 activity here, and work these things out where at least

11:13:11 your surrounding neighbors has knowledge of what's

11:13:15 going on, and, you know, I live in a neighborhood where

11:13:18 people talk to each other, I'm sure most of us do

11:13:20 thatch, and it's unfortunate if you don't have

11:13:25 neighborhoods, they don't talk to each other.

11:13:26 That's not the case here in Tampa.

11:13:28 But I think this would be helpful providing that the

11:13:31 neighborhood is notified, providing that they are doing

11:13:35 it now, code enforcement is out there giving violations

11:13:38 because there's no law to protect what they want to do

11:13:42 is to help the animal.

11:13:43 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:13:44 >> Wofford Johnson, Longfellow Avenue.

11:13:50 Speaking to that or of that, of course I'm an animal

11:13:54 lover, I have two dogs, three cats, so I am an animal

11:13:57 lover.

11:13:58 My concern is similar to what Margaret and Randy

11:14:03 brought up from the standpoint of the owner occupied.

11:14:06 If it's rental occupied, maybe it just needs to be

11:14:10 clarified.

11:14:10 If there is a deficiency there whether it be the

11:14:15 barriers or whatever type, then who will be -- honor

11:14:24 will you go after, from the standpoint, who is

11:14:27 responsible?

11:14:27 The property owner or is it going to be the renter in

11:14:29 that house?

11:14:30 So I think that needs to be clarified in some way as to

11:14:33 who has the responsibility and who can be penalized for

11:14:39 that?

11:14:40 Can I speak briefly, since I can't come back this

11:14:43 afternoon, on the variance power and the changing of

11:14:48 the time or the term of -- our variance was granted.

11:14:56 The proposal to change that to five years rather than

11:15:00 one year, I really question whether five years is too

11:15:04 long.

11:15:04 I think in some instances, a next door neighbor might

11:15:08 be happy, hope that it never happens, but we don't know

11:15:12 it's going to take place, and we know driving this is

11:15:15 probably the economy from the standpoint of somebody

11:15:17 gets a variance but they would not be able to do in the

11:15:20 a year.

11:15:21 But I really wonder if you should hang on for five

11:15:23 years because things change.

11:15:25 Neighbors change.

11:15:26 The community changes.

11:15:27 The neighborhood.

11:15:27 Everything.

11:15:28 So I really think that should be a lesson for us to

11:15:30 remember, in maybe two years rather than one year,

11:15:33 something of that nature.

11:15:34 Thank you.

11:15:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

11:15:36 Next speaker.

11:15:36 >> Susan Rosetti, 5115 West Cleveland street.

11:15:44 And I would like to make a suggestion regarding renter

11:15:49 versus owner occupied.

11:15:51 The tenant could be granted a permit providing they

11:15:55 show evidence that the property owner agrees.

11:15:59 Thank you.

11:15:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

11:16:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Are we going to go back to speaking to

11:16:05 all these changes?

11:16:06 I don't want to slow down the process.

11:16:08 Or is this it?

11:16:11 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I haven't even finished presenting

11:16:14 them.

11:16:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The problem is -- we are going to go

11:16:19 to the sign ordinance now.

11:16:21 The question is, when does council wants to come back

11:16:23 to this?

11:16:23 >>GWEN MILLER: When is the next workshop?

11:16:29 >> That's too long, right?

11:16:31 My suggestion we come back for one hour this afternoon,

11:16:38 from 1:30 to 2:30 but I can't go longer than that.

11:16:42 Is that good for everybody?

11:16:47 Are you the only one?

11:16:48 So everybody else will be here then.

11:16:52 Okay.

11:16:53 So we are looking at 1:30.

11:16:55 Can you come back?

11:16:56 For one hour.

11:16:56 Let's take up the sign -- workshop, sign workshop.

11:17:05 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:17:07 I have submitted a recommend to City Council that I

11:17:09 will be discussing, but as you may recall, we had

11:17:13 previously discussed the electronic billboard issue at

11:17:17 your workshop meeting on December 3rd, 2009, and at

11:17:21 that time we had discussed a proposed ordinance and

11:17:26 discussed a variety of alternatives.

11:17:28 There was a decision tree that was produced, et cetera.

11:17:32 My memory of the record of that proceeding is that

11:17:35 really came out with two issues.

11:17:37 The first issue, what we requested the legal department

11:17:42 to bring back at this point in time the results of what

11:17:44 we believed to be the federal study that was going

11:17:46 to -- that was supposed to come out in April.

11:17:49 I in my review am trying to figure out what the status

11:17:53 of that is.

11:17:53 It is now looking the soonest you will receive any

11:17:56 results from any kind of federal studies relating to

11:17:58 electronic billboards is this summer.

11:18:01 There's no date given, and I wouldn't anticipate that

11:18:05 would occur even in the summer given some of the time

11:18:07 constraints that I have seen in looking, checking Web

11:18:11 sites, looking around.

11:18:12 So at this point in time I do not have results of the

11:18:15 federal study because they simply have not been

11:18:17 produced yet.

11:18:20 The second result of that workshop was after a fairly

11:18:25 long discussion and public comment, you had requested

11:18:28 the legal department to go back to work with the

11:18:31 industry, members of the community as it related to

11:18:34 potential revisions to the code.

11:18:38 At that time members of the industry had submitted to

11:18:40 City Council some proposed changes.

11:18:45 What had occurred subsequent top that, I understand

11:18:48 ongoing discussions between members of T.H.A.N.,

11:18:50 members of the industry, and the city attorney's office

11:18:55 presented with some proposed language which was

11:18:58 submitted to you, I think April 12th, we had also

11:19:02 reviewed some of that language, and many of those

11:19:05 revisions -- and I will go through those revisions --

11:19:08 are very consistent that we did have at our last

11:19:12 proceeding.

11:19:13 I know we are short of time.

11:19:14 I don't want to spend too much time going through it.

11:19:17 If you want, we can just go directly to questions, but

11:19:20 I think the highlights which are on the executive

11:19:23 summary are as follows.

11:19:28 What we had designated roadways, there's a laundry list

11:19:34 of designated roadways, both the FAP and FAI which are

11:19:39 what I call the big interstate roads, and then nonFTAI,

11:19:43 those had been proposed to be reduced to the following

11:19:48 roadways on the FAI, would be the designated roadway

11:19:53 for the potential for electronic billboards would be

11:19:55 all of interstate 275 and I-4.

11:19:59 The property which is Tampa Airport, Sports Authority,

11:20:04 Hillsborough community college property based in Dale

11:20:06 Mabry, Dale Mabry south of Kennedy, to Henderson

11:20:10 Boulevard, Hillsborough Avenue from the veterans to

11:20:13 Dale Mabry.

11:20:16 On those FAP and FAI roads, the proposed ordinance,

11:20:20 which is not on your agenda today for consideration May

11:20:24 6th, reduced the number of potentials for each

11:20:28 company to have electronic billboards from 12 to 10.

11:20:36 The nonFAP, FAI, roadways have been reduced to Fowler

11:20:42 Avenue, I-275 from McKinley, Busch Boulevard, I-275 to

11:20:47 40th Street, and have been now included our downtown

11:20:51 central business district, and the Channelside

11:20:53 district, which includes Channelside Drive from Adamo

11:20:57 to Florida, Tampa street from I-275 to east fortune,

11:21:01 and Tampa street from Whiting Street to the Lee Roy

11:21:03 Selmon Expressway.

11:21:05 In addition, the number of potential billboards which

11:21:08 can be considered by each of the companies on those

11:21:12 roadways has been reduced to six potential electronic

11:21:17 billboard faces to eight, and what had previously been

11:21:20 suggested are 8.

11:21:25 I'm just very briefly going through the executive

11:21:27 summary.

11:21:30 As you may recall, there were discussions over this

11:21:33 issue.

11:21:35 There have been exchange rates that we have discussed.

11:21:39 The previous exchange rates that have been discussed

11:21:40 with City Council was an exchange rate of a requirement

11:21:44 that in order to receive the opportunity for electronic

11:21:47 billboard, you had to remove four billboard signs, in

11:21:51 order to get one electronic sign space.

11:21:56 That has now been moved to ten billboard sign faces for

11:22:00 one electronic billboard sign face.

11:22:02 In addition, we clarified the train.

11:22:07 When you trade out your sign face, it has to be

11:22:10 permanently removed from the sign faces that each one

11:22:13 of the companies, the companies, they are allowed, a

11:22:19 permanent reduction, and that they can never come back

11:22:21 and actually have the benefit of those signs as regular

11:22:24 billboard signs.

11:22:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could the whole thing come down?

11:22:29 >>JULIA COLE: The whole thing comes down and the faces

11:22:32 are permanently removed.

11:22:37 In addition, four of those sign faces must come not

11:22:40 from banks, credits, because as you recall the

11:22:45 companies had bank credits, meaning they have been

11:22:49 removed, they would have the right to reinstall, at

11:22:52 least four of the sign faces must come from signs which

11:22:54 are considered billboard signs in place which means the

11:22:57 signs actually come down versus signs for the bank

11:23:01 credit.

11:23:02 In addition, we had a lot of discussion, and there was

11:23:04 some concern about the idea of back filling.

11:23:06 You actually remove a billboard sign, face, or entire

11:23:10 structure.

11:23:11 You go ahead and get your electronic billboard sign and

11:23:14 in essence back fill to that same location and put a

11:23:18 sign up there.

11:23:19 Would now be a five-year limitation of constructing a

11:23:22 new sign, a new regular billboard sign, within 225 feet

11:23:28 of where the electronic billboard sign would be

11:23:31 installed.

11:23:32 And that would address the back fill issue that we had

11:23:37 some conversation about.

11:23:38 In addition, the proposed ordinance was revised in

11:23:43 order to create an actual operational standard section.

11:23:48 Some of the stuff had been within the ordinance, but

11:23:51 this was to clarify that there be a new section which

11:23:53 would actually go directly to operational standard.

11:23:59 There was a new section placed in the operation

11:24:04 relating to the space between electronic billboards

11:24:07 which would be a requirement that an electronic

11:24:12 billboard could not go up within 2500 feet of another

11:24:15 electronic billboard sign facing the same direction.

11:24:22 We also defined the time of change, rate change, and I

11:24:26 know that's an issue that Garners a lot of discussion.

11:24:30 But what is in the proposed ordinance would have a

11:24:35 dwell time of ten seconds on the FAP and FAI, of 15

11:24:39 seconds on the non-FAP and FAI, and dwell time is it

11:24:44 has to stay static for 15 seconds before it can

11:24:48 actually change.

11:24:48 We also puts in a section that requires the change

11:24:51 occur within a two-second time frame.

11:24:53 And so you all know, I actually went back and kind of

11:24:56 checked on some of these as industry standards and how

11:24:59 other jurisdictions have started to handle this issue

11:25:02 with other jurisdictions, and this is really an issue

11:25:07 all over the country, so I checked in to make sure how

11:25:11 these standards are in terms of what other

11:25:13 jurisdictions are doing and it will actually falling

11:25:16 into line with what other jurisdictions are doing.

11:25:18 There's a prohibition on message -- apparently there's

11:25:23 been an issue where you have like half a message and

11:25:26 you sequence to another half of a message that kind of

11:25:29 force it is viewer to face, or be distracted by that

11:25:33 particular issue, and a lot of jurisdictions have been

11:25:36 dealing with that issue.

11:25:37 So that has been prohibited.

11:25:42 There's a specific requirement of message remaining

11:25:45 static.

11:25:45 We don't allow, and this would not have allowed for use

11:25:49 of animated signs, et cetera.

11:25:50 So this is clarifying that and making it clear that any

11:25:53 kind of animation, any kind of movement during the time

11:25:56 where the dwell time, that is supposed to stay static,

11:25:59 it actually does stay static.

11:26:04 There is also a provision which is being placed in here

11:26:07 relating to the lighting of the signs, the brightness

11:26:11 of the sign.

11:26:12 Previously, we had discussed putting in place what was

11:26:14 in previous ordinances was a requirement that the

11:26:18 brightness of the sign would be handled as measured,

11:26:24 200 feet from a residential parcel.

11:26:27 This actually puts in a provision which requires a

11:26:31 lighting sensor in order to ensure that that brightness

11:26:34 remain static, and it also requires that unless you are

11:26:40 close to a residential property -- and that has a

11:26:42 little bit of a different standard, but as a general

11:26:45 matter that the maximum brightness shall be .3-foot

11:26:50 candles, 150 feet perpendicular to the face of the

11:26:55 sign, or another distance in the code that you go to.

11:27:01 We put in a provision relating to intensity interfering

11:27:06 with official traffic signs, we have other language in

11:27:10 our sign code which I have also dealt with that but it

11:27:12 is specifically laid out in the operating standard.

11:27:15 And it also would require that the signs, the

11:27:18 electronic billboard signs have a default mechanism

11:27:21 making them -- if there's a malfunction and they start

11:27:25 to blink, et cetera.

11:27:28 Put in a requirement making sure that you don't have an

11:27:30 electronic billboard signs that uses warning or

11:27:34 configurations that can be confused with government

11:27:39 traffic signals.

11:27:40 Finally, a provision was placed in there that the

11:27:42 city -- that the electron ig billboard sign shall

11:27:47 operate the city based on their digital sign for public

11:27:51 service announcements if it's deemed necessary.

11:27:56 The other thing that we did as it relates to that

11:27:58 operational standard is we actually tied to the illegal

11:28:02 electronic billboard sign in terms of having the

11:28:04 opportunity to enforce that, to doing anything which is

11:28:09 out side the operational standards, they actually

11:28:11 become prohibited sign.

11:28:12 So for enforcement purposes, I felt that gave us a

11:28:16 little better opportunity to ensure these regulations

11:28:20 rather than trying to figure out, all right, once they

11:28:24 are met what does that mean?

11:28:27 The nutshell of their proposed changes, I know there

11:28:29 are people here to speak about it.

11:28:31 So unless there's any questions of me, I'll go ahead

11:28:33 and allow for comment.

11:28:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.

11:28:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Julia.

11:28:41 I think you are on child number 4 or 5?

11:28:46 >> My son will be one tomorrow.

11:28:48 So there you go.

11:28:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We appreciate all the years you put

11:28:53 into this.

11:28:55 Let's think about sign owners or sign operators.

11:28:59 I think we need to tighten that up a little bit.

11:29:03 I was looking at adding page 9.

11:29:07 I think our intent is good as related to the

11:29:11 trade-offs, and later on I am going to speak to the

11:29:16 number of signs.

11:29:17 But my concern is CBS outdoor didn't exist three or

11:29:22 four years ago.

11:29:23 They were some other company.

11:29:24 Clear Channel has only been in this business X number

11:29:27 of years.

11:29:28 These companies kind of come and go, and the corporate

11:29:30 structures change and this and that.

11:29:32 So I think we need to -- you need to, before first

11:29:35 reading, really tighten up on what our intent is on

11:29:41 ownership and operation and limitation on the number of

11:29:45 signs.

11:29:45 Because ultimately, if this council approves this and

11:29:49 says -- and the intent is that the total I think is

11:29:52 going to be 16 signs per operator, 16 digital signs per

11:29:57 operator, okay, then to me there's nothing that would

11:30:00 keep an operator from trying to be -- to sneak in.

11:30:05 I'm not saying they are.

11:30:07 I'm not saying this group S.but as Randy Baron mention

11:30:10 add few minutes ago as lawyers we have to think of

11:30:12 this, that they change corporate ownership, split up,

11:30:16 this and that, and eventually we could have five

11:30:18 different sign companies with 16 signs each.

11:30:23 So then you are talking about 90 digital signs.

11:30:27 I think we need to get a handle on what our total

11:30:32 number of digital signs might be in this community, if

11:30:36 this council approves anything.

11:30:37 >>JULIA COLE: On that issue, that has actually been an

11:30:44 issue previously and I did put some language in that I

11:30:47 hope captures that.

11:30:48 But if you go to the definition of existing sign

11:30:52 inventory, which is on page 9, it was my attempt to

11:30:56 deal with that issue, but that doesn't mean that there

11:30:59 shouldn't be some additional discussion.

11:31:03 We really have two classifications of owners of

11:31:06 billboard signs existing in the city.

11:31:09 And there's a certain amount and they are never going

11:31:16 to be ooh loud anymore.

11:31:17 We have what we call variance on signs which are part

11:31:20 of the variance agreements, and the agreements that we

11:31:26 had historically, agreements, two different sign

11:31:30 operators, signs that really were the substance of our

11:31:37 litigation that we were in, and that was captured, and

11:31:40 they are captured here as being defined as the variance

11:31:43 sign.

11:31:44 And then you have the second kind of universe of signs

11:31:47 which are considered the non-conforming signs, and

11:31:50 those are the signs that never really did receive a

11:31:52 variance from the city.

11:31:54 They were legally in existence at the time the City of

11:31:57 Tampa banned billboards but they were never subject to

11:32:01 any variance agreements or anything else.

11:32:03 And we have attempted to get a number of those, but

11:32:08 quite frankly the record keeping over that many years

11:32:11 hasn't been great.

11:32:12 So the universe nonconforming signs is not a as

11:32:15 complete as the universe of the variance signs which is

11:32:18 exceedingly complete.

11:32:19 We know exactly what these signs are.

11:32:21 So in an effort to deal with that exact issue, we tie

11:32:29 to an existing sign in the inventory which means if you

11:32:31 have an existing sign inventory in this ordinance that

11:32:35 is it.

11:32:35 That is the universe.

11:32:36 And then I put in a provision that said that if you are

11:32:42 a nonconforming sign, you can't come in -- if you are

11:32:46 holding a nonconforming sign that you want to come in

11:32:49 and trade and exchange, you can't use a variance in

11:32:53 that trade an exchange, so that you wouldn't have

11:32:58 somebody who goes out and buys one of these

11:33:00 nonconforming signs and goes and buys a bunch of rights

11:33:06 from one of the variance signs to come up with their

11:33:08 ten signs.

11:33:09 So since we have the universe as a variance signs, we

11:33:13 double check that is on the universe of variance sign

11:33:17 for the trade-in, they can't cross over.

11:33:19 >> What paragraph is that?

11:33:20 >> If you go to C on page 9, existing inventory shall

11:33:26 mean either the number of total variance signs owner

11:33:29 controlled by single person or business or entity as

11:33:32 the effective date of the ordinance, we define variance

11:33:34 signs as those signs which are part of the settlement

11:33:37 agreement.

11:33:38 Or the total number of non-conforming signs, owner

11:33:42 controlled by single person or business entity, those

11:33:44 would be signs which aren't on the variance sign list.

11:33:47 As of the time the owner requests -- at the time the

11:33:50 owner comes into request the upgrade, so that we are

11:33:53 capturing that in a different period of time.

11:33:56 >> Let me give you a scenario and you tell me if it's

11:33:59 covered because you have been working on this awhile

11:34:01 and I haven't.

11:34:02 Let's say one of these existing sign companies -- let's

11:34:07 say one of these existing sign companies busts up their

11:34:10 inventory into three, okay?

11:34:15 So now you have got -- let's say for argument's sake

11:34:21 one CBS 2, CBS 3. These are new entities, not

11:34:28 controlled by the same anything -- et cetera,

11:34:30 et cetera, and they bust up their inventories of active

11:34:33 billboards versus stockpile billboards, whatever

11:34:36 language you have.

11:34:38 So now CBS 1, CBS 2 and CBS 3 potentially have 16 each.

11:34:45 >>JULIA COLE: No.

11:34:48 Inventory are those signs from CBS are captured as of

11:34:52 today, and that's one existing inventory with a

11:34:54 limitation of 5%, or 25.

11:34:59 So if they bust them up and come in and say, okay, here

11:35:02 is the signs I am trying to trade in, the question

11:35:05 isn't whether or not they couldn't trade them in, the

11:35:07 question is has the cap been captured as of the date of

11:35:12 the ordinance being approved?

11:35:14 >> Clearly you put a lot of time into it.

11:35:18 The record is being stated today shows the intent of?

11:35:23 It our legal counsel.

11:35:26 >>JULIA COLE: That is the intent of what I was trying

11:35:30 to capture here.

11:35:31 I think that is a very important issue and I hope we

11:35:34 got it.

11:35:35 I believe we got it.

11:35:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's complex.

11:35:39 >>JULIA COLE: It is very complex but I tried to

11:35:41 capture it as of the date of the ordinance to avoid

11:35:43 that.

11:35:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The only question I have now, and

11:35:47 then I have a comment later, is the geographic

11:35:50 description I think has been greatly improved and I

11:35:55 commend all the participants, T.H.A.N., and the

11:35:57 industry as well, as well as staff.

11:36:01 It's been greatly improved.

11:36:02 However, for whatever reason, okay, there was still a

11:36:09 vestige of south Dale Mabry that says Dale Mabry

11:36:11 Highway south of Kennedy to Henderson Boulevard.

11:36:15 I think the intent of T.H.A.N. when they were

11:36:18 negotiating this is to keep these out of neighborhoods

11:36:20 and that's I'm sure is the intent of council.

11:36:23 Well, from going from Kennedy to Henderson still goes

11:36:26 through some neighborhoods, one of which is sitting in

11:36:28 the second row, Bon Air.

11:36:31 There's some other neighborhoods through there.

11:36:34 What's that Westshore neighborhood?

11:36:37 Swann estates.

11:36:38 And I have heard from those folks they are not the

11:36:43 least bit happy being left behind in this.

11:36:45 So hopefully we'll be hearing from other people on

11:36:47 that, and at least one of the two industry groups has

11:36:52 indicated to me that they are willing to carve that

11:36:55 out.

11:36:56 But I want to make sure that we also carve out that

11:37:02 stretch of south Dale Mabry.

11:37:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Julia, and I'm very

11:37:08 impressed and have great confidence in the work you are

11:37:11 doing on this.

11:37:12 However, it's our Josh as council to make some really

11:37:17 big policy decisions here, and I do have some

11:37:20 questions.

11:37:20 Don't go away yet.

11:37:22 About public safety, about livability, about blight,

11:37:29 ugliness.

11:37:32 But public safety is paramount.

11:37:34 And I don't know if everyone realizes it but there are

11:37:39 many communities that have banned any electronic

11:37:41 billboards, many cities including Denver, St. Louis,

11:37:46 and I believe L.A.

11:37:47 I don't know what happened to have L.A. because there

11:37:50 was some litigation. is it banned in L.A.?

11:37:53 No.

11:37:54 >>JULIA COLE: That's a very complicated question.

11:37:59 It's in litigation there.

11:38:00 >> We don't allow digital billboards.

11:38:05 >> Right now you do not allow any of the billboards to

11:38:08 be changed out to be electronic in nature.

11:38:11 And it's not simply because of the electronic nature of

11:38:14 the billboards, it's because of the situation we have

11:38:17 with billboards.

11:38:17 >> So we don't have them right now.

11:38:21 You can't put one up.

11:38:23 My question for you, I know you did a lot of work and

11:38:27 used your very powerful mind on all these details.

11:38:31 But is there any independent data that was not funded,

11:38:38 research that wasn't funded, by the billboard industry

11:38:43 at all out there with regards to safety?

11:38:47 >> I can't answer that question.

11:38:48 >> Do you know of any?

11:38:51 >> I don't know if there are.

11:38:54 When I look at stuff, I am not necessarily looking at

11:38:56 it in terms of who funded it or not.

11:38:58 What I can tell you is currently the Florida Department

11:39:01 of Transportation does allow electronic billboards, and

11:39:09 it's within their regulation to allow them so long as

11:39:12 they don't change once every six seconds out of the

11:39:15 standards they met.

11:39:16 Now going back and reading some of their literature as

11:39:19 to why that occurred, at that point in time, there has

11:39:23 been -- there were some memos that came out from the

11:39:26 federal government relating to the safety of electronic

11:39:28 billboards, indicating that at that point in time --

11:39:32 and these are somewhat historic -- that they were not

11:39:36 opining that there was a public safety problem with

11:39:39 them.

11:39:40 So in terms of moving forward under that context from a

11:39:45 public safety perspective, that is the model in terms

11:39:51 of the public safety question.

11:39:52 What I did put in this ordinance is a provision which

11:39:55 says -- not the general question of electronic

11:40:00 billboards but the rate of change exchange that is the

11:40:04 Department of Transportation changes its rule for an

11:40:08 increased amount -- they have six seconds right now.

11:40:11 This would be ten seconds.

11:40:13 If Florida Department of Transportation says yes, it

11:40:15 has to be 20 seconds by operation of this ordinance it

11:40:18 would go to the 20 seconds.

11:40:20 And because it's drafted that way in here, I would

11:40:22 argue there is no grandfathering.

11:40:26 Because of the way that's --

11:40:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, my point is we don't know what

11:40:34 that decision of FDOT is based on.

11:40:36 And my very reasonable guess is it's based on industry

11:40:41 studies and lobbyists money.

11:40:43 So since we do have the federal government -- and this

11:40:48 is my next question.

11:40:49 I don't know if you will know this either.

11:40:51 But the FHS study we are waiting for, is that an

11:40:58 independent study, do we know?

11:41:00 >>JULIA COLE: I don't know.

11:41:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, this is my suggestion.

11:41:04 And I want to negotiate from a position of strength.

11:41:08 So I know that T.H.A.N. has been -- has been meeting

11:41:12 with Clear Channel, and I know they have talked to

11:41:16 other council members.

11:41:17 But my feeling is, there is outstanding great public

11:41:26 benefit, and I there's safety first, our quality of

11:41:30 life, and economic development.

11:41:31 And basically, who is going to make money off of this

11:41:36 big 2001 companies?

11:41:39 Clear Channel and ABC.

11:41:43 So I don't see this as a big public benefit to outweigh

11:41:46 the possible dangers which are logical, which we

11:41:49 experience when we are driving, and you just picture if

11:41:53 we did have public transportation, maybe we can

11:41:55 reconsider this, when we have public transportation

11:41:58 available, so we don't have to drive everywhere.

11:42:00 But at this point, to get around in Tampa, you have to

11:42:03 drive.

11:42:04 So you are going to see these things, and they are

11:42:06 going to be distracting and they are going to be --

11:42:09 they are going to be, now, even if they are not safe,

11:42:14 the other thing, the quality of life, the envision

11:42:17 is -- invasion is very bright.

11:42:19 And to put this in perspective until 2007 you couldn't

11:42:23 even have blinking lights.

11:42:24 The FHA wouldn't even let you have blinking lights on a

11:42:28 billboard.

11:42:29 That's only a few years ago.

11:42:31 Now we have gone from that to at least here considering

11:42:33 allowing these digital billboards.

11:42:35 We don't have any data on it.

11:42:36 We do have a good FHA director now that is going to be

11:42:41 looking into this.

11:42:42 I have confidence in him.

11:42:44 So my proposal, which you can all surprise me, I like

11:42:51 nice surprises, but would be to have a moratorium.

11:42:55 And you don't need a moratorium because we don't allow

11:42:58 them yet.

11:42:59 Let's put this off until we get the study results back

11:43:01 and we can look at the study, the federal study,

11:43:04 highway a administration study and see what they say,

11:43:07 because there's in a reason for us to make this

11:43:09 decision now when we don't have any data, when it's

11:43:12 logical that it's dangerous, when it's not adding

11:43:16 anything to our neighborhoods, to our communities, and

11:43:19 if we don't -- I don't know about you, but I don't

11:43:22 really want to live anywhere near an intersection or

11:43:27 street that looks like Times Square or looks like

11:43:31 Tokyo, or Las Vegas.

11:43:34 I mean, we don't have to have our city look like that.

11:43:37 It doesn't look like that right now.

11:43:39 We have got enough light.

11:43:40 We have got ugly billboards.

11:43:41 We have got streets.

11:43:45 We have Dale Mabry and other streets that aren't very

11:43:47 pretty.

11:43:47 And I don't see any reason to do this.

11:43:53 And I think you need to be aware and everyone needs to

11:43:56 be aware that we are making these decisions, or look at

11:44:00 what we are making this based on, because you are going

11:44:03 to hear from the industry that it's safe.

11:44:04 Of course they are going to say that.

11:44:06 And a you can get a study to say anything.

11:44:08 But there haven't been independent studies.

11:44:10 And I feel like it's my responsibility to ERR on the

11:44:14 side of caution.

11:44:15 >>GWEN MILLER: We have the New York Times saying that

11:44:22 billboards does not cause crashes.

11:44:24 >> That's not what it says.

11:44:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, be it as it may.

11:44:28 One of the things -- okay, go ahead.

11:44:35 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Do you have any data, any studies

11:44:38 that show that these billboards have caused accidents?

11:44:42 >>JULIA COLE: The only studies, and the only precedent

11:44:45 that I am aware of is what the Florida Department of

11:44:49 Transportation has through its rule making and the

11:44:52 basis for that rule making which was a study which I

11:44:57 can't recall when it came out.

11:44:58 I have it up in my office, that indicated that it did

11:45:02 not cause any increase in traffic incidents per Florida

11:45:10 Department of transportation put within their

11:45:12 provisions to not allow these types of signs but also

11:45:15 placed a six-second dwell time of limitation on that

11:45:22 issue.

11:45:22 And so that is what I had moving forward.

11:45:27 And I know that was an issue the last discussion.

11:45:30 And I know that there was some hope that we would get

11:45:32 some additional information which just simply did not

11:45:35 come to us.

11:45:37 So that's why we put in some of the protection related

11:45:40 total dwell time, and FDOT changes dwell time, then it

11:45:45 would change our dwell time.

11:45:47 If it increased the dwell time in terms of studies and

11:45:50 having independent studies coming to you, I have that

11:45:57 information to provide.

11:45:58 >> You said increase in accidents, right?

11:46:00 So if someone had an accident, when they are

11:46:03 interviewed by the police officer, whoever is going to

11:46:05 cover that accident, if it was caused by he had his

11:46:10 eyes off of the road looking at the sign, do we have

11:46:14 any proof of that?

11:46:18 >>JULIA COLE: All I have is the additional study, an

11:46:20 the and the conclusion -- and I will tell you, I

11:46:23 reviewed that in the context of the FDOT rule making

11:46:27 process.

11:46:28 So that was one of the -- that was the study or one of

11:46:31 the pieces in relation to the Florida Department of

11:46:33 Transportation relied upon in making its rule of the

11:46:37 allowability for electronic billboard and for the dwell

11:46:41 time limitations that they have.

11:46:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Thank you.

11:46:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:46:53 I think that what we have before us is vastly improved

11:46:56 upon what it was before.

11:46:58 However, the central question before us is, does it

11:47:02 benefit our community to have digital billboards?

11:47:05 I don't feel that we can adequately answer that

11:47:07 question until we see the results of the federal study.

11:47:11 Therefore, I agree with the comments very eloquently

11:47:15 made by Ms. Mulhern, and I think we should defend it

11:47:18 even if it's till the fall to make a decision.

11:47:21 Because what you said, Ms. Cole -- Ms. Cole?

11:47:26 -- is that if the federal study said it's, let's say,

11:47:30 lethal, we could have greater amounts of time between

11:47:33 the signs.

11:47:34 But we would not be able to get the industry, who would

11:47:36 have made significant investments in the installation

11:47:39 of these signs, prior to the tide.

11:47:42 We would not get these things removed.

11:47:44 So if we are looking at a few months versus the future

11:47:48 safety of our community, it seems that a few months is

11:47:51 airing on the side of safety.

11:47:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Government is very hypocritical.

11:48:01 I'll say it again.

11:48:02 Government is very hypocritical.

11:48:08 When I heard the words public transportation, that lit

11:48:11 up one part of my brain.

11:48:15 That says that although the beautiful, nice, green,

11:48:21 metal buildings that we are building for bus shelters,

11:48:24 which are needed very much so -- and this is not

11:48:27 something new.

11:48:29 It happened here in the 70s that we turned it down --

11:48:32 have billboards on them, and they are not flat, they

11:48:36 sit at an angle, I, to the driver's eye, downtown have

11:48:40 to look up to see them.

11:48:41 They are right eye level with what you are driving.

11:48:45 They are lit and it says "rent me."

11:48:49 And in some cases you have about ten that I noticed

11:48:52 here lately that have some law firms on them.

11:48:58 So if you measure the light of those, I'm not one way

11:49:03 or the other, but I guarantee the focus to the

11:49:05 neighborhood on light is the same amount of 3, whatever

11:49:11 it is, canned Watt on two flashlight Watts or whatever

11:49:16 you are talking about compared to a digital billboard.

11:49:19 What I'm saying is, I don't like any signs.

11:49:22 As you well know, I have spoken to you privately about

11:49:24 the signs that we say flags all over downtown and Boy

11:49:31 Scout Boulevard that no one is making money on, so they

11:49:35 say, but they come up every once in a while.

11:49:37 Somebody has to pay to put them up and take them down

11:49:40 and there's a little name under it that you can't read

11:49:42 that is the sponsor of that sign.

11:49:45 Now somebody paid somebody to put those signs up.

11:49:49 That's why I say you look down Dale Mabry.

11:49:52 We are hypocritical.

11:49:54 If we are going to get rid of signs, get rid of all of

11:49:57 them.

11:50:00 That's how I think.

11:50:02 Get rid of those.

11:50:03 Get rid of the ones in the bus shelters.

11:50:05 Get rid of every one of them.

11:50:09 Because that's the right way to do it.

11:50:11 I don't pick and choose.

11:50:14 I just say if there's a problem here, let's get rid of

11:50:21 all signs, every one of them.

11:50:22 But we are not going to do that.

11:50:24 I won't have enough support.

11:50:26 I have been talking about this maybe ten years or so.

11:50:33 I remember one previous mayor that brought in people to

11:50:35 the office -- and I don't want to embarrass anybody --

11:50:38 he says you are not making money on them, why do you

11:50:41 have them up?

11:50:42 How many employees have you got doing this?

11:50:45 They say, you are not making any money?

11:50:48 And they say, yes, sir, we are.

11:50:50 I can even tell you the figure of the amount of money

11:50:54 they were making but I am not going to go into that

11:50:57 because that's not here today and I won't bring that

11:50:59 up.

11:50:59 So what I am saying is, let's not talk about one sign.

11:51:02 Let's talk about all of them.

11:51:04 Because they are all distracting.

11:51:07 If you think a digital billboard -- I see them all the

11:51:10 time when I drive to Oldsmar.

11:51:13 Every day, cutting down to three days a week, now twice

11:51:16 a week.

11:51:16 I see them when I am heading east.

11:51:19 They change.

11:51:21 They have got some Buccaneers or something on it that

11:51:23 says "time will come."

11:51:25 Then it changes to Ruth Eckerd.

11:51:28 But I don't drive looking at the sign.

11:51:32 I can tell you that I drive like this, focused

11:51:37 windshield level, those signs that government put up

11:51:40 that are lit that advertise, extra revenue, that I see

11:51:47 buses come by, you think you are in the jungle the way

11:51:49 they are painted.

11:51:52 That's not distracting?

11:51:55 You think a sheep is going to -- a Cheetah is going to

11:52:00 jump out and grab you by the throat.

11:52:01 A bus?

11:52:02 That's why the ridership is up?

11:52:05 Maybe them a bus and you see how ridership increases.

11:52:08 You look at that and you think you are going to a

11:52:11 Safari or you are going to a political rally, or you

11:52:15 are part of something you don't belong in.

11:52:16 I see that as more pollution than any industry and we

11:52:23 do it to ourselves.

11:52:24 And then we talk about others.

11:52:27 I just don't like to do that.

11:52:28 Thank you.

11:52:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:52:34 Linda and Mary are suggesting that we don't necessarily

11:52:39 do anything today on this digital ordinance.

11:52:41 The concern that I think has been expressed by our

11:52:44 legal department and by certain council members at task

11:52:49 meetings is that the benefit of adopting some type of

11:52:54 ordinance is that we also guarantee -- well, we don't

11:52:58 guarantee anything, but it would also encourage courage

11:53:00 the finalization of the settlement with the two

11:53:04 companies, and there are a lot of benefits to the city

11:53:07 aesthetically that come from the settlement agreement.

11:53:10 Here is my concern.

11:53:13 Okay.

11:53:14 I am going to go to a Charlie Miranda type of --

11:53:19 >> My new best friend.

11:53:21 >> When I go to a swimming pool, okay, some people jump

11:53:25 into the swimming pool without ever touching the water.

11:53:27 I tend to dip my toe in and just see how that water

11:53:31 feels.

11:53:33 And the reason I say that, Joseph --

11:53:38 >> Shock.

11:53:39 >> Well, the shock issue is exactly what I am talking

11:53:41 about.

11:53:41 Because here if we approve this ordinance today,

11:53:44 forever and always, okay, that billboard company can

11:53:49 put up 32 of these digital billboards.

11:53:52 I am going to assume everybody has driven by these

11:53:55 things.

11:53:55 Okay.

11:53:57 They are big and they are bright and they get your

11:53:59 attention.

11:54:00 And I'm not completely convinced that our community is

11:54:04 ready to digest -- and I'm not saying this will happen

11:54:08 overnight, and I know they are going to come up and say

11:54:11 this isn't going to happen overnight because they cost

11:54:13 a half million dollars each.

11:54:14 It isn't going to happen overnight.

11:54:17 But by stopping the ordinance we will be allowing up to

11:54:19 32 of these.

11:54:20 I think that's a huge jump.

11:54:22 What I would rather suggest is that this council

11:54:26 consider dipping our toe into the pool, that we would

11:54:30 approve somewhere in the neighborhood of, let's say,

11:54:32 six of these digital billboards per company, four on

11:54:38 the interstate type areas and two in the others.

11:54:42 But I know this industry is not going to necessarily

11:54:44 like that.

11:54:45 But what I would also like is that by resolution, or by

11:54:48 ordinance, we would mandate that a future council two

11:54:51 years from now, after the federal study is in,

11:54:56 et cetera, to come back and revisit this issue, the

11:54:59 whole entire issue.

11:55:01 That way, you know, they are not going to install more

11:55:03 than, you know, six.

11:55:06 They don't even want to install more than six over the

11:55:08 next two years.

11:55:09 Financially it's not part of their plan.

11:55:11 Okay.

11:55:12 So I think it's something that they can live with.

11:55:14 It's something perhaps council could live with.

11:55:16 Maybe we can dip our toe into the pool and say -- and

11:55:20 then we can gauge the community's reaction.

11:55:23 This is not just about safety.

11:55:24 This is about aesthetics.

11:55:27 And I believe that after three, four, five, six of

11:55:30 these, if we have six each, that could be 12 of these

11:55:33 around the community.

11:55:33 The community might two years from now come back to

11:55:37 council when the issue comes up and say, we have

11:55:40 enough, we don't want anymore.

11:55:42 >> And then we have six.

11:55:43 >> And then we have 12.

11:55:44 Okay.

11:55:45 But Linda, what I started out saying when you were out

11:55:48 of the room is the positive side about adopting an

11:55:51 ordinance is that we do get the settlement agreement,

11:55:53 and the benefits of the settlement agreement.

11:55:56 And the benefit of the settlement agreement are the

11:55:59 fact that some of these old billboards get taken down,

11:56:01 and that sort of thing.

11:56:03 You were part of that negotiations for years.

11:56:05 And the scenic corridors, I didn't mean that in the

11:56:09 negative way, I meant that in the positive way.

11:56:11 >> The city never followed through, and that was our

11:56:13 problem.

11:56:13 >> Well, that's water under the bridge, I guess.

11:56:16 But, anyway, I'm sort of suggesting a compromise, maybe

11:56:19 somewhere in the neighborhood of six instead of 16

11:56:22 billboards per company, a total of 12 instead of 32.

11:56:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I listened to everybody here

11:56:36 today.

11:56:36 I think our ultimate objective has been is make sure we

11:56:39 protect the neighborhoods.

11:56:40 I think that's foremost and primary.

11:56:45 And I think this ordinance does that to a degree, from

11:56:50 what I heard John point out earlier, a few

11:56:52 neighborhoods, and I agree with that.

11:56:59 I think T.H.A.N. has done an excellent job, and the

11:57:08 industry has to admit they really took them to the task

11:57:13 on this particular issue.

11:57:15 One of the things we have to keep in mind, a couple

11:57:17 things.

11:57:17 One is, we cannot stick our heads in the sand and live

11:57:21 in a vacuum.

11:57:24 A few years ago, we didn't have cell phones.

11:57:28 Right?

11:57:30 We didn't have cell towers.

11:57:32 And yet today we have all of that.

11:57:36 And you talk about safety.

11:57:37 The biggest distraction there is is a cell phone.

11:57:43 Cell phones cause more accidents, whether you are

11:57:45 connecting which they shouldn't be doing, or whether

11:57:48 you are talking about on it.

11:57:51 Everywhere you go now, there's some type of digital.

11:57:55 You are going to the airport, there's digital signs.

11:57:58 We are in the 21st century.

11:58:00 And the issue comes for us, how do we protect our

11:58:06 neighborhoods?

11:58:06 How do we protect them?

11:58:08 And also at the same time, I think you make a valid

11:58:11 point, is from anesthetic standpoint, we are also

11:58:16 enhanced by taking down some of the older ones.

11:58:19 Actually those things are pretty much obsolete to a

11:58:22 point anyway.

11:58:23 So I'm open to moving something, move forward so we can

11:58:28 get off the dime on this.

11:58:31 I spent several years on this at the county.

11:58:34 I thought I was threw through with billboards until I

11:58:39 came over here.

11:58:40 I thought this -- here we are again, the last two

11:58:50 years, back on billboards.

11:58:53 At some point, we have to recognize this is not going

11:58:58 away, whether we go to court or not.

11:59:00 It's going to court if you don't do something.

11:59:03 I'll tell you that now.

11:59:04 Yeah.

11:59:05 And so what I have heard our city attorney say, this is

11:59:08 a good settlement agreement.

11:59:10 It's on the record.

11:59:13 Something to move forward so that we can protect what

11:59:15 we already have in place, and going to limit the

11:59:20 exposure of the city, and from anesthetic standpoint,

11:59:24 also keep our city looking well.

11:59:29 Folk, this is not going away.

11:59:31 I don't care what you say.

11:59:32 It's not going away.

11:59:34 We are living in the 21st century.

11:59:36 And technology is changing every day.

11:59:40 Every day.

11:59:41 Technology is changing.

11:59:43 And so we need to understand that.

11:59:45 And we need to do something to move this thing forward

11:59:48 and protect our neighborhoods is the biggest most

11:59:54 single factor, protecting the neighborhood, and I think

12:00:02 T.H.A.N. and legal staff have done a good job at that.

12:00:05 However, Mr. City attorney, I think the issue has been

12:00:07 raised by councilman Dingfelder about these other

12:00:10 neighborhoods that need to be redacted or taken out of

12:00:14 or protected.

12:00:16 Can you address that?

12:00:17 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: If council's desire is to take out

12:00:21 that reference, we can remove on page 2 of the draft,

12:00:28 it's section 20.5-11 (B).

12:00:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Page 2, again what?

12:00:38 >> Basically, there's one paragraph in (B) 2-1-C that

12:00:47 references that particular stretch of roadway of that

12:00:50 we could remove from the draft, and that would resolve

12:00:55 that issue.

12:00:56 There are no other references to that stretch of

12:00:58 roadway.

12:00:59 >> So if we do that, then I will take those

12:01:01 neighborhoods that we just spoke of.

12:01:04 I'm amenable to that, to do that.

12:01:09 You know, council, I think council Miranda is

12:01:11 absolutely right.

12:01:16 Look what we allow Hart to do.

12:01:18 You're right.

12:01:19 Look at the buses.

12:01:20 To me, they are just mobile billboards.

12:01:27 The shelters.

12:01:28 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Are we going to ban them, too?

12:01:32 I think we should.

12:01:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

12:01:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Then we need to take public comment.

12:01:37 >>MARY MULHERN: If you want to propose an ordinance to

12:01:42 ban driving using cell phones while you are driving,

12:01:45 I'll support that.

12:01:47 I think because you have a problem somewhere else

12:01:51 doesn't make it okay to expand it.

12:01:56 I just want to reiterate the fact that, to Mr.

12:02:00 Dingfelder, there are cities who have passed billboard

12:02:04 ordinances, who do regret it because people, L.A.,

12:02:08 people were just up in arms when they opened themselves

12:02:11 up to this problem and now they are still in

12:02:13 litigation, so the idea that by allowing this is going

12:02:17 to protect us, you know, my question is -- and

12:02:22 actually, I would like to hear from Mr. Fletcher on

12:02:24 this.

12:02:26 What if we do find out that these are really dangerous?

12:02:33 And the study that the FHA is going to do is having

12:02:37 cameras in the cars as they are driving.

12:02:39 So they are going to be giving us the perspective of

12:02:43 what it's like to be driving with digital billboards.

12:02:48 And that's what they are going to analyze.

12:02:50 It's complicated.

12:02:51 I'm not sure how they are going to do it.

12:02:53 But if we find out that it is dangerous and are

12:02:57 allowing digital billboards have allowed accidents to

12:03:01 happen, do we have any liability as a council?

12:03:10 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: You all would not have liability.

12:03:12 If there were liability, there would be liability

12:03:16 because of sovereign immunity and how sovereign

12:03:19 immunity would be applied in this context.

12:03:22 If for example the federal study were to make a

12:03:24 dramatic finding regarding safety, now what the past

12:03:30 studies have done have really provided general

12:03:32 recommendations, so I am not expecting a clear for

12:03:36 example regulatory statement in the study.

12:03:39 What typically would happen is that the staff would do

12:03:41 a study like that.

12:03:43 It would then go into some kind of a policy making

12:03:46 process, through guidance, through the department of

12:03:49 secretary's office, with the rule making in that

12:03:55 agency, Federal Highway Administration has previously

12:03:57 issued guidance authorizing digital billboards that was

12:04:02 currently in place.

12:04:04 If they were to reverse that and somehow limit them, or

12:04:08 change the dwell time or what have you, that would --

12:04:12 my expectation is that would trickle down to FDOT as

12:04:16 the operators of the federal highways in Florida.

12:04:20 They would be required for state law to change their

12:04:22 rule, in which case we would then follow whatever their

12:04:25 rule was.

12:04:25 And that's why we drafted the ordinance the way we did.

12:04:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thanks.

12:04:31 I'm not done.

12:04:33 The other point I wanted to make to Mr. Dingfelder, who

12:04:36 is hopefully watching, is that if we were basing this

12:04:39 just on aesthetics, we would all vote yes, because it

12:04:43 is not anesthetics benefit to have more of these signs.

12:04:46 So I think, yeah, it's a good settlement.

12:04:49 But who is it a good settlement it for?

12:04:52 Not for me.

12:04:53 Not for my constituents.

12:04:54 Know it for people who are afraid that this is going to

12:04:58 cause more distraction and cause more accidents.

12:05:01 So I don't see any reason for us to move forward with

12:05:04 this.

12:05:06 I don't see it as a public benefit.

12:05:08 And the only people it benefits are a few large

12:05:13 companies who have a monopoly, duopoly, and perhaps

12:05:18 they are beneficiaries.

12:05:20 So I am not going to support.

12:05:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Settlements are not for either side.

12:05:27 You come to a compromise and say okay, nobody really

12:05:30 wins but nobody really loses either.

12:05:32 You know that.

12:05:32 You come to -- yeah, okay.

12:05:35 Councilman Dingfelder.

12:05:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And that's how I framed my

12:05:38 modification as to reducing the potential number of

12:05:41 signs from 32 down to 12 as a compromise.

12:05:47 And this is a big step.

12:05:48 And, Mr. Chairman, if council could indulge me for 30

12:05:51 seconds, the last time we had this discussion, somebody

12:05:55 brought in a video.

12:05:58 It's about 30 second.

12:05:59 But it shows these things at night.

12:06:01 Okay.

12:06:01 And they have got it wrapped up in there.

12:06:03 And if I can take my 30 second.

12:06:07 Downtown have to hear me talk.

12:06:08 I'll just let them run.

12:06:09 If we can do that, Mr. Chairman.

12:06:12 Thank you.

12:06:13 These look like they are turning on a six or ten-second

12:06:41 turn.

12:06:41 Thank you.

12:06:41 >> Okay.

12:06:44 30 second.

12:06:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to add to Mr. Dingfelder

12:06:47 one thing.

12:06:48 If you only had 16 signs or however many it is, but

12:06:53 it's dangerous, what difference does it make?

12:06:55 Somebody gets in an accident.

12:06:58 I mean, that's the point.

12:07:00 You can either not allow any, or -- and we don't have

12:07:04 the data.

12:07:05 And that's my point.

12:07:06 I would be willing to reconsider fountain we had some

12:07:08 good data but we don't have any.

12:07:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's take public comment real quick.

12:07:16 So we can get out of here and go to lunch and come

12:07:18 back.

12:07:19 >> I'm Phil warmly, 3707 west Cleveland street.

12:07:24 First I want to apologize to Julia because you just got

12:07:26 this today.

12:07:27 I should have been involved in this earlier.

12:07:31 I did a little mini study last night and went to two

12:07:34 locations, one on Dale Mabry, one over by Eisenhower.

12:07:40 And I went there thinking that I was going to object

12:07:43 because of the amount of light given off.

12:07:46 I will tell you that's third on my list.

12:07:48 The number one problem that I encountered last night

12:07:52 was noise being generated by these signs.

12:07:55 In fact I walked off last night with traffic going by,

12:07:58 and I could still hear it 90 yards away.

12:08:02 Now, in the middle of the night, if it was near a

12:08:06 neighborhood with somebody in a residential

12:08:08 neighborhood, believe me, my guess is I think it ought

12:08:12 to be studied how far does this noise carry at night?

12:08:16 Because it's a buzzing sound, and it's loud, and it

12:08:21 would be irritate field goal you are trying to sleep.

12:08:23 The second thing that occurred to me was that the noise

12:08:32 has to be the electronics in the sign.

12:08:34 I don't know what kind of radiation or whatever is

12:08:36 coming off of these signs.

12:08:38 And I'm not an engineer.

12:08:41 I have no way of determining that.

12:08:43 But I think that should be determined before you put

12:08:45 another sign up.

12:08:46 That would be my opinion.

12:08:48 Third, the only light in terms of those two signs, the

12:08:51 only light that was bothersome was the white light.

12:08:54 And it was changing back and forth and there was no

12:08:56 white in the sign or very limited white.

12:09:00 It wasn't flickering.

12:09:02 It was that it would change from the darker colors to

12:09:04 the darker colors.

12:09:05 I turned my back and Lee at the buildings, and it

12:09:08 wasn't like it was irritating unless the white came on.

12:09:11 And that would be a problem if you had a home near one

12:09:14 of those signs.

12:09:18 So the only other thing I would say is they are

12:09:21 massive.

12:09:22 If you stand next to one of them, they are massive.

12:09:28 I heard council say about Dale Mabry.

12:09:30 That's great.

12:09:30 The bottom line is, any sign that would be near a

12:09:34 residential area -- I think it was about 30 yards off

12:09:39 of the road, just post.

12:09:44 So it's going to be placed into neighborhoods.

12:09:46 Wherever they are.

12:09:48 Those particular signs are a commercial property.

12:09:53 I don't know anything about the safety part of it.

12:09:56 I'm just saying from the standpoint.

12:09:58 I doubt they were irritating anybody because there

12:10:00 wasn't anybody there at night and there wasn't anybody

12:10:03 to hear the noise.

12:10:04 That would be my comments for you to think about, look

12:10:06 at.

12:10:06 Thank you.

12:10:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

12:10:08 Next speaker.

12:10:12 As you come forward you may want to address the issue

12:10:15 also raised by councilman Dingfelder.

12:10:17 >> Good morning.

12:10:20 Good afternoon now.

12:10:20 Randy Baron, west Comanche Avenue, vice-president of

12:10:24 T.H.A.N.

12:10:25 We have been living with these billboards for a long

12:10:27 time.

12:10:27 This particular issue.

12:10:29 Personally, today in a perfect world there would be no

12:10:33 big boards at all, but we don't live in a perfect

12:10:36 world.

12:10:36 We live in a world where we have litigation, we have

12:10:39 settlement agreements, and frankly it's unclear to us

12:10:43 what would happen if Clear Channel or CBS did not --

12:10:49 CBS did not sign or opted out of that settlement

12:10:52 agreement.

12:10:52 Therefore what T.H.A.N. did is on the assumption that

12:10:55 if something was passed, and we had taken no position,

12:10:58 official position on the threshold question, but if

12:11:01 something did pass, we met with Clear Channel to come

12:11:04 up with something that we would not oppose.

12:11:08 That we would embrace, but we -- we wouldn't embrace

12:11:11 but we wouldn't oppose.

12:11:13 And that's what we came up with, what was incorporated

12:11:15 into this proposed ordinance.

12:11:16 Now, the devil is in the details as we all know, and I

12:11:19 have gone through this ordinance and there's a couple

12:11:21 of things in here that I want to raise.

12:11:24 I also raise it with the billboard representatives to

12:11:28 make sure that if we had an understanding on principle,

12:11:32 if something was passed, that it was reflected in this

12:11:34 ordinance.

12:11:35 The first thing that comes to mind is the exchange

12:11:38 rate.

12:11:38 If you look on page 7, it talks about a minimum of 300

12:11:49 square feet and 3,000 square feet.

12:11:52 To me, what we had discussed was a 10 to 1 swap rate,

12:11:58 four live signs, six signs from the sign bank.

12:12:00 The sign is 672 square feet, then it's four times 672.

12:12:07 Likewise for the sign bank, six times 672.

12:12:11 If you do it by 300 square feet then what you end up

12:12:14 with is essentially a four and a half to one swap rate.

12:12:19 From our point of view if you are going to have digital

12:12:21 signs you have to remove existing signs and reduce your

12:12:23 sign bank by a ratio of 10 to 1.

12:12:28 I think it's just a drafting issue.

12:12:30 There may be some technical details worked out with the

12:12:33 billboard companies in terms of how many faces that

12:12:36 works out to.

12:12:37 But it's got to be 10 to 1.

12:12:38 That's what we agreed to.

12:12:42 There are some other issues on here concerning what is

12:12:47 a live sign and what is a bank sign.

12:12:50 If you look at the one right below the exchange rate,

12:12:52 it seems to indicate that a sign that's taken downtown

12:12:55 down counts as a live sign, if it's taken down after

12:12:59 the ordinance.

12:13:01 I don't know if that really is in the spirit of what we

12:13:03 agreed to.

12:13:04 Again, four live signs, six sign bank in terms of

12:13:09 square footage.

12:13:10 Sign faces.

12:13:14 Let's see.

12:13:15 With regard to the dwell time, T.H.A.N. did not take a

12:13:19 position on that.

12:13:21 We are not experts in that.

12:13:22 We do not know whether or not a -- whether the time

12:13:27 being proposed is a safety issue.

12:13:29 Dwell time does deal with safety issues.

12:13:31 You drive along the street, there's a sign that draws

12:13:35 your attention.

12:13:36 We leave that up to council.

12:13:38 We trust you will come um with a dwell time that's in

12:13:40 the best interest for the public safety of the city.

12:13:42 And the residents.

12:13:46 The other things I want to make sure is we understand

12:13:48 the interaction between the settlement agreement.

12:13:51 (Bell sounds)

12:13:52 May I have 30 more seconds?

12:13:53 Thank you.

12:13:54 The interaction between the settlement agreement and

12:13:56 this proposed orthopedics.

12:13:57 There are terms in the settlement agreement that say

12:13:59 the proposed ordinance controls.

12:14:00 There are terms in the ordinance that say the

12:14:03 settlement agreement controls.

12:14:04 We need to work those out to make sure.

12:14:07 For instance, the settlement agreement says that this

12:14:12 control location under the settlement agreement, if you

12:14:14 upgrade a sign, an existing sign, especially along 257

12:14:21 and I-4 under this proposal, and what we agreed to, you

12:14:23 can essentially upgrade any of those signs, existing

12:14:26 signs, convert it from a regular billboard to a digital

12:14:30 billboard.

12:14:31 So if you tear it down it can be converted to digital

12:14:36 along I-4 and I-275.

12:14:38 But then it goes on to say that this can control the

12:14:40 location and the terms of that.

12:14:42 So in here, you say, well, it can be -- the, what can

12:14:53 and cannot be converted.

12:14:54 That being said, if you do pass an ordinance, like we

12:14:58 said in the letter to you, we do not oppose an

12:15:01 ordinance that contains those provisions, as long as

12:15:03 the language that's been proposed.

12:15:05 With regard to Mr. Dingfelder's --

12:15:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, your time is up.

12:15:13 You stretched at bit.

12:15:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can't leave it hang willing.

12:15:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: He can say yes, do you support that?

12:15:20 >> Well, saying we would never object to additional

12:15:24 restrictions.

12:15:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's good.

12:15:25 Thank you, Mr. Baron.

12:15:26 >>> Susan Rosetti, 5115 West Cleveland street.

12:15:35 And I want to make the board aware that I have been

12:15:36 involved in the billboard regulatory process on behalf

12:15:42 of D.O.T. for close to 20 years.

12:15:45 And it seems that we are state controlled as far as the

12:15:54 electronic billboards to possibly be change to

12:16:00 electronic billboards.

12:16:02 What coordination is between the city and the State of

12:16:08 Florida regarding the permitting?

12:16:18 If the city takes down structures, we are talking

12:16:24 faces, correct?

12:16:25 The ten faces.

12:16:26 And those faces are tied to permitted structures.

12:16:31 Is there any requirement that the billboard company is

12:16:35 going to surrender those to the State of Florida?

12:16:39 Because, if not, this is going to open up inventory

12:16:46 problems for the State of Florida with those permits.

12:16:55 I would like to see some coordination between whatever

12:16:59 the city is proposing and what the state regulations

12:17:05 allow.

12:17:08 The other thing I would like to clarify for the record,

12:17:17 that the Federal Highway Administration, referred to as

12:17:22 FHA, which is really the Federal Housing

12:17:25 Administration.

12:17:25 The Federal Highway Administration, we don't want to be

12:17:32 identifying the Housing Authority when we are talking

12:17:34 about the Federal Highway Administration.

12:17:39 Now I go back to my homeowner hat, if I may.

12:17:42 I live on Cleveland street.

12:17:43 Kennedy Boulevard is one of the roads that was

12:17:47 identified as electronic billboard.

12:17:57 I'm smack against a commercial area.

12:17:58 As a property owner, it's been knocked down 40%.

12:18:09 If I have a billboard that's in my backyard, that house

12:18:15 basically becomes, you know unsaleable at some point in

12:18:22 the future, and I know we have some very good height

12:18:24 restrictions in the city there, billboard in close

12:18:28 proximity to my property, but it sits below the

12:18:32 building, you know, it's not visible from my property.

12:18:40 But negotiations confirm about the impact of the

12:18:46 increased lighting in the neighborhoods.

12:18:50 And I also would like to direct the City Council to

12:18:59 join me to --

12:19:00 (Bell sounds)

12:19:00 -- to look at the national alliance of beautification

12:19:06 agency Web site.

12:19:07 They have been monitoring electronic billboards

12:19:10 nationwide.

12:19:14 It's a hot subject.

12:19:16 And it proves to be very informative.

12:19:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

12:19:19 Next speaker.

12:19:20 >> Todd Pressman, P.O. Box 6105 Clearwater Florida

12:19:28 34614.

12:19:29 We appreciate your timing.

12:19:30 Your obvious consideration and attention here.

12:19:32 We would like to thank all the stakeholders involved,

12:19:34 the City Council, city attorney's office, the mayor's

12:19:37 office, the citizens.

12:19:39 This has been really as far as I can see an

12:19:41 unprecedented effort and we appreciate you recognizing

12:19:43 that.

12:19:44 If you will roll the tape for me.

12:19:46 There we go.

12:19:46 What you see here is just a reminder.

12:19:48 This is a reminder of the almost 149 separate

12:19:54 structures and billboards faces that are under the

12:19:56 headline of elimination from the streets of the City of

12:19:59 Tampa and the avenues.

12:20:01 These are coming down.

12:20:02 I don't think, ladies and gentlemen, you ever had a

12:20:07 proposal before you that sought to remove so many types

12:20:10 of items that you might consider to be just distracting

12:20:14 or might consider to be not the most best looking

12:20:16 things in the city.

12:20:16 That's part of what you are involved with today.

12:20:19 I do want to make you aware that, Councilwoman Mulhern,

12:20:23 there is a lot of information out there.

12:20:25 You are going to find a lot of studies that say one

12:20:28 thing, a lot of studies on the other side that say

12:20:31 another thing.

12:20:32 There is one thing on the traffic accident report just

12:20:33 in Cleveland, seven year basis that and I will be happy

12:20:38 to bring that to you but these signs as you well know,

12:20:41 as the chairman told you are all throughout the bay

12:20:43 area.

12:20:43 I do have two letters, one from Hillsborough County,

12:20:45 one Pinellas Park.

12:20:47 Hillsborough County has quite a number of signs as does

12:20:50 Pinellas and they are all operating at six or eight

12:20:52 seconds and both use letters indicated to you from

12:20:55 their traffic services division, they have had no

12:20:57 complaints.

12:20:58 Regard to Pinellas Park, they had no complaints.

12:21:00 I'll submit these into the record.

12:21:01 I think you might want to see these.

12:21:03 These signs are already here, they are already tested.

12:21:07 Additionally, in regard to the federal study, this

12:21:10 federal study has gone on for I don't know how long.

12:21:14 Our last communication we received is that the next

12:21:16 report is going to be a recommendation.

12:21:18 They are going to need two or three more studies will

12:21:22 literally take years, before we as we understand it

12:21:25 come to any serious conclusions.

12:21:26 But you don't have to go to feather study.

12:21:31 A couple of quick comments.

12:21:32 I want to let you know the noise the gentleman is

12:21:35 speaking of are first generation boards.

12:21:37 They have large air conditioning units.

12:21:38 Those are antiquated.

12:21:40 They are not around anymore.

12:21:41 In regard to the illumination issues, councilman

12:21:46 Dingfelder showed you the county is pretty much in wild

12:21:49 wild west in terms of illumination.

12:21:52 As Julie indicated to you there is an extremely strict

12:21:54 standard backed up by illumination engineering society

12:21:57 as to what the proposed illumination should be.

12:22:00 And that is an element that is electronically checked

12:22:04 every minute of the day for the ambient light condition

12:22:08 so we feel it meets standards and is well under

12:22:11 control.

12:22:12 We do appreciate your attention.

12:22:13 Thank you.

12:22:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted the TV people to turn

12:22:15 off --

12:22:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Turn that off.

12:22:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are on a continuous loop

12:22:23 throughout your entire presentation in front of the

12:22:25 council members.

12:22:26 It's very effective.

12:22:27 We agree they are really unattractive.

12:22:29 >> We want to Lea remind you oh he-

12:22:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We don't need reminders.

12:22:34 We have been working on this issue for decades.

12:22:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Council, do you want to raise a reel

12:22:40 question real quick?

12:22:41 We have to get out here.

12:22:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Press man.

12:22:45 Todd, we had a discussion about the foot candles and

12:22:48 that sort of thing.

12:22:49 But as I just read this, and perhaps not from you, from

12:22:52 Julia, as I just read it,ed looked like the food foot

12:22:57 candle only kicked in if it was within 2700 feet of a

12:23:00 residential property.

12:23:00 So clarify if I am wrong.

12:23:02 >>JULIA COLE: There is also a new operational standard

12:23:05 provision on page 10, which says can't exceed .3-foot

12:23:12 candles of ambient light as measure measured, 150 feet

12:23:16 perpendicular Dar regardless of its location and

12:23:20 approximate I am the I to residential.

12:23:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And my other question, I'll ask

12:23:25 Tom.

12:23:26 >> I want to introduce Mr. Houston from Orlando, the

12:23:32 national digital board guy from clear chant channel, an

12:23:35 expert in illumination. If there are any questions, he

12:23:37 is here today.

12:23:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The clerk has asked me to remind

12:23:41 those people who have spoken just so that everything is

12:23:43 accurately recorded that sign-in sheet, if you have

12:23:45 spoken but you haven't signed in, please do make sure

12:23:47 you put your name in on the way out.

12:23:52 Thank you.

12:23:52 >> Tom O'Neal, Promenade place, Tampa, Florida Tampa,

12:23:57 Florida 33602, and 33602 is right down the road. Again

12:24:02 I come up here, and many thanks to all of you.

12:24:04 I have been through a lot on all of this.

12:24:06 You guys had a couple of tough years here.

12:24:10 When I started coming, three years ago, I started to

12:24:13 question the sanity of this council and how things

12:24:16 operated.

12:24:17 I am very proud to be part of your Tampa community.

12:24:20 Absolutely.

12:24:20 You guys have tackled some tough issues.

12:24:22 I personally have tried to make this amenable to

12:24:26 everyone and to work through T.H.A.N. and make this

12:24:29 work.

12:24:29 There are mechanisms in this agreement to remove the

12:24:32 view corridor location, to keep bank credits from

12:24:36 becoming new locations, to keep signs from being

12:24:38 rebuilt in areas of removed signs, to have protection

12:24:42 from, to lower the overall number of digital locations

12:24:47 from the original, to combine the footprint whereof

12:24:50 these can go.

12:24:51 We continually reduce that down, and as Mr. Dingfelder

12:24:55 said, there may be a further enhancement.

12:24:58 We have taken great pains to make sure they are in

12:25:01 appropriate commercial areas.

12:25:02 I think we have done a good job with that.

12:25:04 I think we worked hard with T.H.A.N.

12:25:06 I think they have got some great folks with great minds

12:25:09 that have gone through this with a fine tooth comb and

12:25:12 I know we can continue along that path.

12:25:14 Clear Channel and the industry want to be good

12:25:16 corporate citizens.

12:25:16 I cannot wait until we are not perceived as an enemy,

12:25:19 until we are perceived as a friend, for each and every

12:25:22 one of you to consider us an opportunity to help

12:25:24 promote this city and these digital billboards allow

12:25:27 that cheaply, freely, with very little notice, and can

12:25:32 really enhance our ability to promote ourselves to the

12:25:34 tourists, to students, people coming from international

12:25:37 areas.

12:25:38 We want to be on the interstates with these primarily

12:25:41 and commercial areas, Busch Gardens, University of

12:25:43 South Florida.

12:25:44 I think that's reflected in this agreement.

12:25:46 And I greatly appreciate your consideration.

12:25:48 Thank you.

12:25:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.

12:25:50 Next speaker.

12:25:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Could I ask Tom a question?

12:25:54 >> We'll have him come back.

12:25:56 I want to get through with the public comment.

12:25:58 Then you can bring him back up.

12:25:59 >> I'm JB hickey, 3211 West Swann.

12:26:04 I have nothing to do with the billboard industry

12:26:06 whatsoever anyway, shape or form.

12:26:09 But I want to compliment John Dingfelder on his

12:26:14 comments about the negotiations and cutting back, and

12:26:16 the way he's proposing a recommendation.

12:26:19 I think it's a great idea.

12:26:21 Wave got to do something.

12:26:23 I also want to mention something to Mr. Miranda, that I

12:26:27 was born in Tampa over 80 years ago.

12:26:30 At that time, there were street cars running up and

12:26:33 down Franklin Street, double track, cost us a nickel to

12:26:38 go to Tampa but we didn't have a nickel.

12:26:41 But they went from Port Tampa to Sulphur Springs down

12:26:44 to Bayshore for a dime.

12:26:46 And these are all the renovations that we are having

12:26:49 today, like all of us have cell phones, all of us are

12:26:52 involved and so forth, and this is one more innovative

12:26:55 thing that the city can do that's good.

12:27:01 In the late 40s when they took out all the street

12:27:03 cars, those street cars got rid of pollution, they

12:27:07 didn't have buses with motors, they didn't sell any

12:27:10 tires, didn't sell any batteries and that's why they

12:27:14 are gone.

12:27:15 But the street cars were a boom to the community.

12:27:17 If the street cars today were running through

12:27:19 neighborhoods, they would work.

12:27:22 They could bow go back and forth in a certain area,

12:27:25 would be far, far superior, something you all need to

12:27:27 think about, get them back working again and all the

12:27:30 restrictions that were put, and I will get off the soap

12:27:33 box.

12:27:34 That's not what I came up here for but I do want to

12:27:37 compliment you on trying to do something, because you

12:27:39 are reducing the number of billboards that you have,

12:27:42 and you are getting a different type of message across.

12:27:44 and small businesses need help in their messages.

12:27:49 Thank you very much.

12:27:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

12:27:51 Next speaker.

12:27:52 >> My name is George hickey, 5219 west Neptune lane.

12:28:04 I was born here.

12:28:05 My father was born here.

12:28:06 My grandfather was born in Florida.

12:28:08 My great grandfather came here, was an Irish immigrant

12:28:11 in the 1840s.

12:28:13 I'm a small businessman here.

12:28:15 My grandfather had a store in downtown Tampa in 1910.

12:28:21 Here it is 2010.

12:28:22 I also have stores in Tampa.

12:28:25 But the small businessmen need some of these

12:28:30 electronics.

12:28:31 I think my daughter's store had one sign over the front

12:28:35 of the doorway, the store.

12:28:39 Today, small business people need signs also.

12:28:43 And some of them are electronic signs.

12:28:45 It gives you a chance to give specials, tell people

12:28:52 about parking, and identify your business and tell what

12:28:58 kind of business you are in and what you are doing.

12:29:00 Small business people need these electronic signs,

12:29:02 whether they change rapidly or every some or 15 or 20

12:29:09 or 30 seconds, that's fine, whatever happens.

12:29:11 But one gentleman up there mentioned this is 2010.

12:29:16 My grandfather started his store 100 years ago in 1910.

12:29:20 Everything is new, electronic and different.

12:29:25 Today we are aggressive.

12:29:26 Thank God we are progressive.

12:29:28 I have a computer in my pocket that I bought 15 years

12:29:31 ago and I still use it today and it still works and it

12:29:34 does everything including databases.

12:29:36 It's a full-blown computer.

12:29:40 This is 2010.

12:29:41 We need electronics.

12:29:42 We need all kinds of information.

12:29:45 We need to be able to using all kinds of tools in our

12:29:49 small businesses today.

12:29:51 And God bless all the small businessmen.

12:29:54 A lot of them are going out of business today.

12:29:57 People drive up and down MacDill, Dale Mabry, you

12:30:01 drive up and down Florida Avenue, Nebraska Avenue,

12:30:05 Hillsborough Avenue.

12:30:07 Small businessmen are dropping out.

12:30:09 We need to -- and they use these electronic signs as

12:30:13 aids for their business.

12:30:16 Thank you very much for hearing me.

12:30:17 I appreciate that.

12:30:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

12:30:19 We have one more speaker and then we need to take a

12:30:22 recess.

12:30:26 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 south Sherill.

12:30:28 I'll kind of wrap up on some of the issues that Randy

12:30:31 brought forward, the exchange rate is definitely

12:30:35 changed from what it was in the agreement with us, and

12:30:39 then as far as the time, he said T.H.A.N. didn't take a

12:30:44 position on that but we hope council will at least

12:30:47 stick to something that won't be just a flashing.

12:30:49 And what the gentleman just now brought up has been a

12:30:53 concern to T.H.A.N. because the city has now been

12:30:57 enforcing the five-minute change signs on the small

12:31:00 electronic signs, and we would hope that if you make

12:31:04 these signs less that that would not affect those

12:31:09 smaller signs and we hope as I understood from Julia

12:31:16 that that would not affect it, but I guess they could

12:31:19 come back to council and ask for it, if you would just

12:31:24 ask for it, and we would hope that you would keep those

12:31:27 at the five minutes, because those are more closely

12:31:30 related into the neighborhoods and on the streets.

12:31:36 Than these hopefully less than 16 signs in the next few

12:31:40 years.

12:31:44 But as T.H.A.N. said, we don't particularly want to see

12:31:47 them, but we hope that council will put produce an

12:31:53 ordinance that we can live with.

12:31:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

12:31:55 Councilman Dingfelder, if you can raise your question,

12:31:57 and we can get whatever you want to do so we can get

12:31:59 out of here and come back at 1:30.

12:32:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.

12:32:04 Let's clean out the easy issue first.

12:32:06 I would like to strike the paragraph that spoke to --

12:32:12 it's section 20.5-11 (B) 2-C and that spoke to that

12:32:19 little segment of Dale Mabry from Kennedy to Henderson.

12:32:22 >> Second.

12:32:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's the Bon Air.

12:32:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion to strike that.

12:32:31 Moved and second.

12:32:31 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

12:32:33 Opposes?

12:32:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The second issue, council, without

12:32:39 belaboring it, we are taking a big step.

12:32:43 I have got some e-mails here that I am not going to

12:32:45 read to you.

12:32:45 Hopefully you got the same e-mails.

12:32:47 There are folks in the community who are concerned

12:32:49 about the visual blight aspect.

12:32:51 Mary expressed some good comments about the safety

12:32:56 concerns that we aren't totally 100 percent sure on.

12:32:59 What I am suggesting is as we ease into this and allow

12:33:02 each company six digital billboards, four highways and

12:33:11 two on the non-highways for six each, to be a total of

12:33:14 12, and also include a provision -- and this is

12:33:19 directing legal to make these changes -- include a

12:33:21 provision that would mandate the that two years from

12:33:24 now council would hold a workshop to revisit the entire

12:33:27 ordinance again.

12:33:27 And that way, if there are problems, this community can

12:33:30 speak.

12:33:31 If there are no problems, the industry can ask for

12:33:33 more.

12:33:34 I think it's a reasonable compromise as opposed to

12:33:37 jumping in with 32.

12:33:39 I do believe that if we approve this with 12 boards, I

12:33:45 believe they will go through with the settlement

12:33:47 agreement.

12:33:48 They want the settlement agreement.

12:33:49 We want the settlement agreement.

12:33:51 I think that as long as they get 12 boards to start

12:33:54 with, six per company, you think they are going to say,

12:33:58 now what?

12:33:58 That's a start, let's ease this community into it.

12:34:01 Because the example is Los Angeles.

12:34:04 Los Angeles didn't ease into it.

12:34:06 They said, hey, let's allow digital billboards.

12:34:08 And now they are in massive litigation and everybody

12:34:10 hates them.

12:34:11 >>GWEN MILLER: My question is, they did not answer

12:34:14 that.

12:34:15 Would they be satisfied where that?

12:34:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I didn't ask the industry but you

12:34:20 are welcome to.

12:34:21 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to hear from somebody, the

12:34:23 president or somebody, the motion that Mr. Dingfelder

12:34:25 is making.

12:34:26 Who would like to --

12:34:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: As a point of order, Mr. Chairman,

12:34:29 I believe we put this on our agenda, we weren't going

12:34:32 to vote today.

12:34:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not vote willing.

12:34:36 I'm asking staff to revisit.

12:34:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The ordinance is set to come back at

12:34:40 our first meeting in May, which is May 6th is my

12:34:42 understanding, that today we decided that we would have

12:34:45 a workshop to bring the ordinance back on May 6th.

12:34:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the six per company is clearly

12:34:51 tied to revisiting this two years from now, okay, with

12:34:55 another workshop, a different council, probably the

12:34:59 same T.H.A.N.

12:35:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you want to speak to that?

12:35:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

12:35:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have two companies here.

12:35:07 We would probably like to hear from both.

12:35:09 >>GWEN MILLER: The motion he made to have six

12:35:13 billboards.

12:35:16 16?

12:35:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 6 instead of 16 per company, and

12:35:20 that's just a start.

12:35:21 >> We greatly appreciate anything that moves the

12:35:25 dialogue along.

12:35:27 However, today, the concessions that were made to

12:35:31 T.H.A.N. that have moved this through our large

12:35:36 corporate system, and through what we have to do to

12:35:39 make this work for us, I cannot say today that we are a

12:35:45 amenable to those changes, completely, outright, I

12:35:52 can't say that but today we would like to see if we can

12:35:54 move forward.

12:35:55 There's a lot of stipulations that we made.

12:35:57 This is moving parts, guys.

12:36:00 It's as easy as I can do it.

12:36:03 Taking signs down, he removing signs, it's not as easy

12:36:06 as to say 16 can become 6.

12:36:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

12:36:09 >> Marilyn Healey representing CBS outdoor.

12:36:18 As we said a long time ago and still want to reiterate,

12:36:21 CBS is willing to work with the city and T.H.A.N. and

12:36:24 the rest of the neighbors, and your suggestions are

12:36:28 just fine with us.

12:36:30 Thank you.

12:36:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would support the suggestion, if

12:36:40 removing the signs the city has -- you shouldn't say

12:36:43 city.

12:36:44 The government agencies or government supporting

12:36:46 agencies have to reduce it by the same amount equal to

12:36:49 the 12.

12:36:49 And that's how I play the game.

12:36:51 I don't play the game one side or the other side.

12:36:54 It's not a game.

12:36:55 This is life.

12:36:57 So I'm willing to support that wholeheartedly today, if

12:37:01 we say that we are going to do the same thing to the

12:37:03 other agencies, that you can only have so many buses

12:37:07 with signs on them, you can have so many shelters, bus

12:37:11 shelters with signs on them.

12:37:13 And if you think they don't cause accidents, I'm going

12:37:15 to bring you some pictures.

12:37:17 Now I have a new camera, and I am going to give

12:37:19 pictures to everybody.

12:37:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll accept that as a friendly

12:37:23 amendment.

12:37:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

12:37:25 >> With all due respect, Mr. Miranda, I don't see how

12:37:32 that's germane to this.

12:37:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, it's money.

12:37:38 Money is money whether it's money for them or money for

12:37:40 government.

12:37:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I clarify my acceptance of the

12:37:45 amendment?

12:37:46 The reason why I am willing to, it hit home when you

12:37:50 said that about the Hart bus shelters because I serve

12:37:53 on the Hart board and I approved that, voted for it.

12:37:56 And the reason we did that is because the company that

12:38:00 build the shelters, we don't pay a penny for the

12:38:02 shelters.

12:38:03 They put up the shelters, they get a sign.

12:38:06 But I agree with it that we would limit it we could go

12:38:09 to Hart and say we want to limit those things.

12:38:11 We can't tell them to take down the ones that are

12:38:14 already there but we can limit the future expansion of

12:38:16 those if they are offensive to the city and to this

12:38:18 council.

12:38:19 And I'm totally amenable to that.

12:38:21 And I didn't realize they were offensive to anybody.

12:38:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

12:38:25 Councilwoman Mulhern.

12:38:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I have to say there's no comparison

12:38:28 between something that you see at eye level when you

12:38:30 are walking or driving your car on the side of the road

12:38:33 to a billboard that you can see from miles away.

12:38:37 And I would also like to point out if you think those

12:38:40 are dangerous, then I would guess that the next logical

12:38:43 conclusion is that the billboards, digital billboards

12:38:46 are dangerous.

12:38:47 So I just wanted to say that.

12:38:51 The other things I wanted to point out, I'm not

12:38:53 supporting any settlement.

12:38:55 But I think it's important to point out to people that

12:39:01 we are writing an ordinance -- this is what we are

12:39:05 talking about doing right now, based on a settlement

12:39:09 over another issue.

12:39:10 So if we go forward with this, the argument, only

12:39:16 argumentative heard for it, good argument, was that,

12:39:19 well, we need to settle this other problem we have with

12:39:22 the billboard company.

12:39:25 So I just want to make it clear that I don't think

12:39:29 that's a good way to make policy.

12:39:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

12:39:32 >>MARY MULHERN: And to legislative by agreeing to

12:39:36 change and create an entirely new policy that's

12:39:40 untested, because we think it will help us settle

12:39:44 something else.

12:39:45 So I think, again, we need to learn how to negotiate.

12:39:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's going on 1:00 here.

12:39:51 >>GWEN MILLER: I can't support that.

12:39:53 I think our legal department should meet with the

12:39:57 industry.

12:39:57 If it's something new to legal and to -- I think they

12:40:00 need to get together.

12:40:01 And let's get this all in one day we are going to come

12:40:05 up with a change.

12:40:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: In the motion pending --

12:40:10 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I haven't spoken yet.

12:40:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Go ahead.

12:40:13 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, I think we should

12:40:14 accept the recommendations from our city attorney who

12:40:19 made recommendations.

12:40:20 I won't support this motion the way it is.

12:40:23 We have to have fairness and equality for everybody.

12:40:26 And that's not happening.

12:40:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, we have a problem there.

12:40:35 Because now it's 20 minutes of one.

12:40:37 We have a meeting at 1:30.

12:40:39 I want to say, councilman Dingfelder, I think the

12:40:41 motion you put on the floor is a very good compromise.

12:40:44 I think it helps the community.

12:40:48 You are limiting the industry to six, a total of 12.

12:40:51 I think these a very good compromise versus 32.

12:40:55 And it allows us to see what it's going to be like for

12:40:59 two years.

12:41:00 You are testing it to see what it looks like.

12:41:04 And you have an opportunity in two years, if there's no

12:41:07 complaint, like Hillsborough County Hillsborough

12:41:10 County, and then could you look at granting more or

12:41:13 not.

12:41:14 But I think it's a very good, reasonable motion and

12:41:17 compromise.

12:41:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: With Charlie's addition.

12:41:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.

12:41:25 Everybody has spoken more than once on this issue.

12:41:27 So therefore there's a motion.

12:41:29 All in favor of the motion made by councilman

12:41:32 Dingfelder, signify by saying Aye.

12:41:36 Opposes?

12:41:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you want a voice vote?

12:41:49 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: No.

12:41:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.

12:41:52 >>GWEN MILLER: No.

12:41:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.

12:41:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.

12:41:59 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

12:42:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.

12:42:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Take it up afterwards, I guess.

12:42:07 >>GWEN MILLER: He won't be here.

12:42:16 Mr. Caetano, make your motion.

12:42:18 I'll second it.

12:42:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Push your button.

12:42:25 >> I make a motion we accept the city attorney's

12:42:30 recommendations so we have fairness and equality.

12:42:33 And I want to thank Ms. Cole for all the work she has

12:42:36 done on this.

12:42:37 >> Second.

12:42:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say, we are going to leave

12:42:42 but I am not going to support it.

12:42:43 I think the motion that was made by council is the best

12:42:45 motion I've heard all day.

12:42:49 So I am not going to support that.

12:42:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.

12:42:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What's your point of order?

12:42:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On the last motion.

12:43:00 Mr. Shelby, if they don't support the motion I made

12:43:07 today, we are not voting on the ordinance.

12:43:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.

12:43:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We are voting on directing staff to

12:43:14 reduce the number of signs to a potential ordinance

12:43:16 vote several weeks from now.

12:43:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then I would be willing to redo my

12:43:22 vote.

12:43:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You are on the prevailing side.

12:43:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to reconsider.

12:43:27 >> Second.

12:43:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.

12:43:30 Opposes?

12:43:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So my motion that was on the floor,

12:43:33 my motion --

12:43:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Excuse me, councilman Miranda.

12:43:40 (overlapping conversations).

12:43:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member Miranda's amendment, I

12:43:44 want to be sure it's clear for the clerk, just so it

12:43:48 was related to a direction to legal, to address the

12:43:53 Hart bus signs, to limit those in the future.

12:43:55 >> Then we are clear on this.

12:43:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Vote and second the motion?

12:44:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have already voted.

12:44:05 >>MARY MULHERN: We haven't voted.

12:44:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We are all revoting.

12:44:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are back to the motion that

12:44:10 councilman Dingfelder made.

12:44:11 We voted to consider that that pass.

12:44:14 Now we are back to the original motion that councilman

12:44:17 Dingfelder made which means you are directing staff to

12:44:20 bring it back for first reading May 6th.

12:44:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Was there a second to Mr. Caetano's

12:44:28 motion?

12:44:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, I did.

12:44:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That motion was on the floor before

12:44:33 the motion to reconsider.

12:44:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.

12:44:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you still want that motion?

12:44:39 Because that motion has to be addressed before we go on

12:44:41 to this motion.

12:44:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move the question then.

12:44:45 The motion that I made --

12:44:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

12:44:47 It's been moved.

12:44:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That motion is --

12:44:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Our legal recommendation.

12:44:53 Legal recommendation.

12:44:54 And that is that 32 signs, and legal recommendation,

12:45:00 which means it didn't take out the streets that we

12:45:03 mentioned earlier, which -- none of that is in there

12:45:06 now.

12:45:07 So there's a motion.

12:45:09 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

12:45:11 Opposes?

12:45:13 Nay.

12:45:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you want a voice vote?

12:45:17 >>THE CLERK: Yes, please.

12:45:18 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.

12:45:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.

12:45:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.

12:45:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.

12:45:24 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

12:45:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.

12:45:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No.

12:45:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion failed.

12:45:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move for reconsideration.

12:45:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

12:45:38 All in favor?

12:45:39 Opposes?

12:45:39 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller voting no.

12:45:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Now we are back to councilman

12:45:48 Dingfelder's motion.

12:45:50 Seconded by councilman Miranda.

12:45:52 Directing legal to bring back an ordinance with

12:45:56 reduction of signs for the first reading.

12:45:57 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

12:46:01 Opposes?

12:46:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you need a brief vote?

12:46:06 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena, Miller and

12:46:10 Mulhern voting no.

12:46:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, that's not correct.

12:46:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do a voice vote.

12:46:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: No.

12:46:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.

12:46:19 >>GWEN MILLER: No.

12:46:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.

12:46:24 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

12:46:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.

12:46:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.

12:46:27 >>THE CLERK: Okay, motion carried.

12:46:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 4 to 3.

12:46:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, that includes the

12:46:33 redaction that Mr. Dingfelder had previously suggested.

12:46:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Be back at 1:30?

12:46:45 >> Yes.

12:46:45 1:30 for the finish up the text amendment.

12:46:47 We stand in recess till 1:30.

12:46:50 We'll be back at 1:30 to address that issue for one

12:46:53 hour.

12:46:53 Thank you.


12:46:55 (Recess)


12:46:54 ΒΆ

13:46:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.

13:46:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

13:46:13 Okay.

13:46:13 Let's pick up on -- the text amendments E.

13:46:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

13:46:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have to be done by 2:30.

13:46:32 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It will be entirely up to you.

13:46:34 I can be exceptionally short.

13:46:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You won't be the holdup, right?

13:46:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I can make this really short if

13:46:41 council wants to.

13:46:41 You know, we didn't have any of the backup for this so

13:46:44 I don't even know what we are talking about.

13:46:45 I don't know what happened.

13:46:47 But there was no backup.

13:46:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And now we do, right?

13:46:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.

13:46:53 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.

13:46:55 Whatever.

13:46:58 So the community gardens --

13:47:01 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The community.

13:47:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The communicated gardens for about

13:47:06 eight months.

13:47:06 >>MARY MULHERN: It's good to know it hasn't changed.

13:47:10 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It hasn't changed.

13:47:11 As I recall, you continued it to-you personally wanted

13:47:14 to work on the language.

13:47:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I did.

13:47:17 And I thought it was a workshop like we were just going

13:47:22 to be discussing and I didn't know it was for

13:47:24 transmittal.

13:47:25 Fine, it's my fault, but I have too many changes that I

13:47:28 want to talk about and request.

13:47:29 So I don't even think there's any way we can do this

13:47:31 today.

13:47:32 So I think it's better just to continue it.

13:47:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I make a suggestion?

13:47:36 There are all these neighborhoods that wants to do

13:47:38 this.

13:47:38 If you give yourself a deadline before the Planning

13:47:40 Commission meeting, write up your stuff, submit it

13:47:43 whenever it's coming before the Planning Commission,

13:47:45 and then when it comes back to us, we'll have your

13:47:48 changes, which I'm sure --

13:47:50 >>MARY MULHERN: If you want to tell me what my

13:47:52 deadline is and I'll do this: I just got it this

13:47:56 morning some requested changes from people who were

13:48:00 doing community gardens.

13:48:01 So I just need to go through it.

13:48:04 But if I can work on this with you, or separately and

13:48:08 then bring it to you, when do you need it by?

13:48:11 Because whenever you need it I'll get it done.

13:48:13 >>CATHERINE COYLE: A couple different things I need to

13:48:17 think about.

13:48:18 When is the second Monday in June, clerk?

13:48:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: June 14th, I believe.

13:48:34 >>CATHERINE COYLE: June 14th.

13:48:35 So one month prior.

13:48:36 May 14th.

13:48:40 I would need to transmit at least a month prior to them

13:48:43 so they can get it on their agenda and transmit it.

13:48:47 Taking a step back from that, though -- the next

13:48:53 month's workshop should be after May --

13:48:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Isn't that our CRA meeting date?

13:49:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Or council meeting.

13:49:03 May 6th?

13:49:04 No?

13:49:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We could do it at the beginning --

13:49:10 you are doing plan amendments at 5:00.

13:49:12 Maybe then.

13:49:12 I mean, this is kind of plan-amendment-like.

13:49:19 5:00 on the 13th which is before your deadline.

13:49:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know why we can't do it at the

13:49:25 council meeting but the 13th is good.

13:49:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Council, council --

13:49:30 >>> It's your discretion.

13:49:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If we have so many issues --

13:49:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we do it on the 13th

13:49:37 at 5:00?

13:49:38 We have an evening session.

13:49:39 May 13th at 5:00.

13:49:41 We have plan amendments.

13:49:42 >> I'll second your motion. May 13th.

13:49:48 >> That's only the community gardens issue.

13:49:53 >>MARY MULHERN: It's the community gardens ordinance.

13:49:53 I'll get with you before then so it's not like a

13:49:54 discussion. We'll be agreed on what we can do.

13:49:59 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Maybe we can set up an appointment

13:50:01 where we are sitting together going line by line.

13:50:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry.

13:50:04 I know I've had it for a long time. I didn't realize

13:50:05 the deadline.

13:50:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thursday at 5:01.

13:50:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone in the audience want to speak

13:50:11 to that?

13:50:12 Someone from the audience want to speak?

13:50:14 >>MARY MULHERN: And Ms. Vizzi, I made a float of your

13:50:18 concern about getting notice.

13:50:20 So we'll talk about that.

13:50:21 >> My name is Robert warback.

13:50:26 I just wanted to weigh in with my support for the

13:50:29 community gardening ordinances.

13:50:31 I met this morning with Mayor Iorio and her

13:50:37 environmental round table, and the discussion included

13:50:40 a community garden effort.

13:50:42 And one of the suggestions that I made was that we

13:50:46 identify the uneconomical remainders that are located

13:50:50 within the city, then reach out to the neighborhood

13:50:54 association leaderships where those parcels might be

13:50:58 located, and include them in the community garden

13:51:07 efforts, so that there is proper oversight, and that

13:51:12 the consistency and adherence to the ordinances can be

13:51:17 maintained.

13:51:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

13:51:22 That's good news.

13:51:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion, moved and seconded,

13:51:25 moved by Councilwoman Mulhern and seconded by

13:51:28 Councilwoman Saul-Sena for May 13th at 5:00.

13:51:31 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:51:33 Opposes?

13:51:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman --

13:51:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 5:01.

13:51:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To follow the comprehensive plan

13:51:41 amendments, correct?

13:51:42 To follow the --

13:51:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can it go first?

13:51:47 It can go first.

13:51:54 Did we finish up with the Channelside?

13:51:57 >>MARY MULHERN: We voted on something.

13:52:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did we vote on that?

13:52:08 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We are back to the animal rescue

13:52:09 facilities, I believe.

13:52:16 The animal rescue facilities, we broke it into two.

13:52:20 There's the animal rescue facility on office and

13:52:22 commercial parcels and then the animal rescue facility.

13:52:26 After listening to the comments from Ms. Vizzi and Mr.

13:52:29 Johnson and Mr. Baron, there's a couple different

13:52:34 things.

13:52:34 One thing I did want to clarify with you about the

13:52:37 language specifically is that they are actually called

13:52:41 animal rescue facilities.

13:52:42 And by definition, criteria to dogs and cats only, and

13:52:48 with definitions on page 4, it is specifically for

13:52:51 rescuing, fostering and/or placing animals into homes,

13:52:56 not breeding and sales of animals.

13:52:59 I know there was a question of whether or not this

13:53:01 could be a puppy mill or some other type of commercial

13:53:03 activity which is actually a kennel breeding facility.

13:53:07 I do suggest just to make it clearer, in each

13:53:09 definition to add a statement at the end, the sale

13:53:12 and/or breeding of permitted animals is strictly

13:53:15 prohibited with new facilities.

13:53:17 I can add that statement to make sure it was very clear

13:53:19 in the definition, the definition is not waivable.

13:53:22 It is indeed the definition use.

13:53:26 Breeding is not permitted.

13:53:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Mulhern, then councilman

13:53:36 Dingfelder.

13:53:36 >>MARY MULHERN: I was first.

13:53:38 My question is for you.

13:53:39 What brought this on specifically?

13:53:44 An individual was --

13:53:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There was a family over in Port

13:53:48 Tampa that loved Dachshunds.

13:53:53 They would also do Dachshund rescue.

13:53:55 So they would go down, and --

13:54:01 >> Why did it turn into --

13:54:03 >> Because there was a very ugly neighbor who didn't

13:54:06 like this going on there and he turned it into code

13:54:08 enforcement, and code enforcement had nothing to do

13:54:11 except to look at our existing code which didn't

13:54:14 accommodate this type of little small rescue operation.

13:54:18 So he came to my office, and I said, you know, you are

13:54:21 doing a good deed here, and I want to put in there that

13:54:24 this is about folks who are doing this for free.

13:54:26 This is about charitable operations.

13:54:27 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.

13:54:29 I understand now.

13:54:30 So let me say what I think about it.

13:54:37 I think if the neighbor has some kind of complaint so

13:54:41 that brings up the fact there's probably going to be a

13:54:43 problem.

13:54:43 Now, my yard, my lot is about 5,000 square feet, and so

13:54:49 I could have five dogs, right?

13:54:56 >> Correct.

13:54:57 >>MARY MULHERN: I could have five tiny little noisy

13:55:00 dogs.

13:55:00 We have one next door or behind us, and it does turn

13:55:03 into a problem.

13:55:03 So I think -- I don't know why we want to get into

13:55:09 regulating this.

13:55:10 If you decide to bring a dog home as a volunteer to

13:55:13 protect it, then you should not be annoying your

13:55:18 neighbors.

13:55:19 Now, maybe you can --

13:55:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Animals in general are declared a

13:55:25 public nuisance within chapter 19 with a list of things

13:55:29 they could do.

13:55:29 Barking.

13:55:30 Excrement.

13:55:32 Smells.

13:55:33 Odors.

13:55:34 Noise.

13:55:34 The whole nine yards.

13:55:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They are not inherently a public

13:55:37 nuisance.

13:55:38 They can be a public nuisance if not dealt with

13:55:41 appropriately.

13:55:42 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Let me clarify.

13:55:43 Within the regulations, in your home, you can have up

13:55:46 to four animals.

13:55:47 By right, you can own them.

13:55:48 You also could be rescuing.

13:55:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Four is the limit?

13:55:54 >>> Four is the limit.

13:55:55 When you are over there, you automatically --

13:55:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On occasion, he would have his own,

13:56:00 I think, two or three and then he would go rescue

13:56:03 another two or three.

13:56:04 It wasn't a big deal, and frankly the neighbor in this

13:56:07 case was completely unreasonable.

13:56:09 He was a city employee.

13:56:10 He was abusing his city employment, and he got

13:56:13 disciplined by his city department because he was

13:56:16 abusing the privilege.

13:56:18 But, anyway, that's sort of a side issue.

13:56:23 I think what I would like to do if council has problems

13:56:26 with this and Ms. Vizzi and T.H.A.N. have problems with

13:56:29 this is actually bring in some of the folks from the

13:56:31 Humane Society, from some of the rescue groups, to tell

13:56:34 about what their operations are and how they would get

13:56:39 it.

13:56:40 This is not new.

13:56:41 This is going on all across the city today, in multiple

13:56:44 houses all across the city there are people who are

13:56:46 rescuing and usually it's breed-specific, but they are

13:56:50 rescuing these animals.

13:56:51 They love that particular breed and take home a few

13:56:53 until they can get them bark into the system and find

13:56:55 them a home.

13:56:56 And I think it's a good thing, and if it's happening in

13:57:00 the city, then it's something -- we can either ignore

13:57:02 it and just go back to where we were, which maybe

13:57:05 that's a better thing.

13:57:06 Or we can try and address it with some restrictions and

13:57:10 some regulation which is what this thing does.

13:57:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

13:57:14 And this is an example of not having the backup.

13:57:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There really wasn't any backup.

13:57:21 It was just a motion from council.

13:57:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.

13:57:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

13:57:29 Nothing has been written up yet?

13:57:31 >> The language you have is what I had.

13:57:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, that's what I need.

13:57:36 I didn't have the draft ordinance.

13:57:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern, it goes back to

13:57:43 if there is a situation -- I mean, right now, I don't

13:57:48 want to create an ordinance ---

13:57:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think the problem is

13:57:54 rampant.

13:57:54 The problem was very isolated.

13:57:56 And now the Dachshund family decided to move out into

13:58:01 the county just to get away from this mean neighbor so

13:58:05 that problem has gone away.

13:58:06 If we want to pull this thing and leave it status quo,

13:58:08 then maybe that's what we should do.

13:58:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I just think we should be very

13:58:14 careful.

13:58:14 Sometimes overregulating, it can become a problem,

13:58:23 because -- and I think councilman Miranda raised it --

13:58:27 who is going to enforce this, and that kind of thing.

13:58:30 >> I'm fine with that but if we end with issues down

13:58:33 the road --

13:58:35 >>MARY MULHERN: And I don't think anybody wants five

13:58:38 pit bulls.

13:58:39 Dachshunds, they are cute.

13:58:41 Or those little yippy, the ones that bark a lot.

13:58:45 >> The other question I was walking door to door.

13:58:47 I went down to pick up this little dog because I

13:58:50 thought it was so cute and the dog bit me, right here

13:58:55 in the thumb, first time it's ever happened to me.

13:58:59 And the lady said, oh, my God, the dog never bit

13:59:02 anybody.

13:59:03 I said, I guess it never met a politician.

13:59:06 True story.

13:59:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Maybe you get to vote because you got

13:59:14 bit now.

13:59:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to strike this from the

13:59:20 plan amendment.

13:59:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

13:59:22 All in favor?

13:59:23 Okay.

13:59:26 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you, council.

13:59:27 The next item, page 12, this is the one that I tried my

13:59:37 best not to have this continued the last time.

13:59:39 This is about the vendor regulations.

13:59:41 And this is the clarification.

13:59:42 It's not changing how they are regulated.

13:59:45 This is a clarifying statement that these vendors shall

13:59:48 provide a sworn statement that they will meet all these

13:59:51 local, state and federal regulations clarifying

13:59:56 basically the application process.

13:59:58 That the property owner is responsible as well.

14:00:00 But it's a very clear statement that the vendor will

14:00:03 provide a sworn statement also.

14:00:04 The property owner are obligated to.

14:00:09 This one is clarifying that they will also swear that

14:00:11 they are going -- I think it got caught up in the last

14:00:17 round of continuances.

14:00:18 >> So moved.

14:00:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

14:00:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

14:00:22 All in favor?

14:00:22 Opposes?

14:00:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The community gardens was moved.

14:00:25 The recommendations from the legal department.

14:00:27 I'll go over them briefly and Rebecca can add if she

14:00:31 needs to, page 17.

14:00:32 The first one the VRB change, right now, the time limit

14:00:36 on the variance is granted by the Variance Review Board

14:00:39 is one year.

14:00:40 They can get a six-month extension if they apply to me,

14:00:43 and I give them a six-month extension.

14:00:45 This is put in by the legal department making it five

14:00:48 years.

14:00:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.

14:00:51 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Simply to make it consistent.

14:00:52 Any variances that are granted by the ARC or BLC which

14:00:56 are also variance boards are five years.

14:00:58 We were trying to make the variance boards across the

14:01:00 board consistent.

14:01:02 Totally your discretion.

14:01:04 Remember that the other variance boards of the city

14:01:05 also had a five-year provision.

14:01:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It seems to me that there is a very

14:01:12 distinct difference between the ARC and the BLC which

14:01:16 are dealing with very specific design parameters, and

14:01:19 these general variances, and we heard from the public

14:01:23 that they thought that five years was too much.

14:01:25 So I think two years is more reasonable.

14:01:26 And then they probably get another six months on top of

14:01:28 that, which means split the baby and it would be two

14:01:32 and a half years.

14:01:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Then we shouldn't vote until we

14:01:37 hear from folk.

14:01:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I know Mr. Johnson spoke to it earlier

14:01:40 and Ms. Vizzi.

14:01:42 They said maybe two.

14:01:43 >> They didn't like the five.

14:01:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It looks like there's another --

14:01:52 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Just a fairness issue.

14:01:54 You have boards where you are investing things for four

14:01:57 or five years.

14:01:57 It takes time to get it through the process.

14:01:59 And you have to remember a variance is not an

14:02:01 engineered drawing.

14:02:02 It takes another six or eight months to get that.

14:02:04 And it used to take a lot longer to get through

14:02:08 permitting.

14:02:08 Some people just don't have the money.

14:02:10 And when they get to variance they need to GOP forward

14:02:12 when they are able to do that.

14:02:14 Five years is consistent with all your other codes.

14:02:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The motion is for two years.

14:02:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Two years.

14:02:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Two and a half years.

14:02:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's a good compromise.

14:02:27 We are into compromises today.

14:02:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's the motion.

14:02:31 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

14:02:34 Opposes?

14:02:36 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The next item, 27-184, you will

14:02:39 notice that the language has changed to the denial as

14:02:43 opposed to the submission of a new application.

14:02:45 For certificate of appropriateness, right now it just

14:02:48 talks about use of it and how you submit.

14:02:52 This language is modeled after the rezoning language.

14:02:54 If you are denied by a board, it's a 12-month hold on

14:02:58 reapplication, unless your application actually meets

14:03:00 the grounds for denial.

14:03:01 This language is identical to the rezoning language.

14:03:08 For the BLC.

14:03:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move that language.

14:03:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

14:03:14 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

14:03:16 Opposes?

14:03:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Everything else looks like it's

14:03:18 just --

14:03:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The next four sections are clearing

14:03:23 up the appeal versus petition for review language that

14:03:24 was passed by council.

14:03:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Your motion?

14:03:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move that, too.

14:03:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

14:03:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.

14:03:32 Opposes?

14:03:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: 2:05.

14:03:38 Not bad.

14:03:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is that it?

14:03:41 Wait a minute, is that all you have, Ms. Coyle?

14:03:44 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes, sir.

14:03:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I passed out section 27-133,

14:03:49 the proposed changes to language, I believe there that

14:03:52 was a motion councilman Dingfelder made to go and have

14:03:55 that language back on electric fences.

14:04:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Actually, I wrote the initial

14:04:10 language.

14:04:10 I don't have a copy of it with me right here.

14:04:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We didn't pass that motion already?

14:04:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: You made a motion to have Ms. Cole

14:04:22 bring it back.

14:04:22 This is my original language.

14:04:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want to make sure that's your

14:04:26 motion.

14:04:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's one line.

14:04:33 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The current code says security need

14:04:35 is needed to be demonstrated by the applicant, the

14:04:38 Variance Review Board.

14:04:40 What I did in the original amendment was demonstration

14:04:44 as such may include but not be limited to documents,

14:04:47 criminal reports related to current or recent criminal

14:04:50 activities for the use/occupant of the land.

14:04:52 It's just to clarify what that security means, how it's

14:04:56 demonstrated.

14:04:57 Right now it's open.

14:04:58 So I link it to criminal.

14:05:00 Anything that was documented.

14:05:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's loose enough where they can

14:05:05 bring other things.

14:05:05 >> From this it went to the other.

14:05:10 A much longer --

14:05:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you need a motion?

14:05:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe there was one, if I am

14:05:15 correct.

14:05:17 I just wanted to be clear that's what council's intents

14:05:20 was.

14:05:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Good.

14:05:22 The other item was the motion that we voted upon.

14:05:25 Did you have that, Mr. Shelby?

14:05:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you wish me to read that?

14:05:29 The city clerk's office reviewed the tape, and did put

14:05:36 the motion in writing.

14:05:37 I would like to read it to you, a motion by councilman

14:05:40 Dingfelder.

14:05:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Digital signs.

14:05:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.

14:05:43 Before the break today.

14:05:44 Seconded by council member Saul-Sena.

14:05:46 That the legal department be requested to amend the

14:05:49 ordinance to allow each sign company six billboards

14:05:52 each (four digital billboards for highways and two

14:05:56 digital billboards for non-highways) for a total of 12

14:06:01 digital billboards; to also require that government

14:06:03 agencies or government supporting agencies sign be

14:06:06 reduced by the same amount to equal 12; to include a

14:06:11 provision that will mandate that council will hold a

14:06:13 workshop two years from now to revisit the entire

14:06:16 billboard ordinance again.

14:06:19 Motion carried by voice roll call vote of 4-3 with

14:06:22 council members Caetano, Miller and Mulhern voting no,

14:06:26 and that is the direction of Council.

14:06:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, what's not included is the

14:06:31 street that -- also that should have been in the

14:06:33 motion.

14:06:34 Then we added the streets.

14:06:35 >> That was in an earlier motion, and that was the

14:06:38 first motion taken up that council strikes, made by

14:06:41 council member Dingfelder, seconded by council member

14:06:45 Saul-Sena, that council strike section 20-5 -- 20.5-11.

14:06:52 >> I just wanted to make sure we have it. And what

14:06:53 about the rate?

14:06:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The rate of --

14:06:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Change.

14:06:59 Rate of change.

14:07:00 >> I do not see that.

14:07:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That was reflected in the

14:07:06 information that we received.

14:07:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The draft.

14:07:09 We didn't change that from Julia's draft.

14:07:11 >> But shouldn't it be changed to reflect the

14:07:13 information we received from Mr. Pressman that said ten

14:07:16 seconds for blah-blah-blah and 15 seconds for the

14:07:18 other?

14:07:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's in the draft.

14:07:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's what T.H.A.N. was agreeing to?

14:07:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Not agreeing but --

14:07:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, yeah.

14:07:29 Come on, Ms. Vizzi, to the mike, please, if you don't

14:07:32 mind.

14:07:32 Thank you.

14:07:35 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 south Sherill.

14:07:37 What we said was that we hoped it would be a longer one

14:07:41 but that whatever council decided was the best we would

14:07:47 have to accept.

14:07:47 We didn't take a position on exact.

14:07:50 Amount of time.

14:07:51 But the other issue of that was we hoped that you in

14:07:53 the future wouldn't change the electronic signs to less

14:07:57 than the five minutes that they now are.

14:08:01 That was a concern.

14:08:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Cole did address that earlier this

14:08:06 morning.

14:08:06 Ms. Cole, do you want to come back, Julia Cole, come

14:08:10 back and address that issue again that Ms. Vizzi is

14:08:12 speaking about, if the state changed the code and you

14:08:15 addressed that be?

14:08:16 >>JULIA COLE: I advised you that what was in the

14:08:19 ordinance, which was part of the proposal that will be

14:08:21 heard on first reading, is a provision that says that

14:08:26 in essence, if they have a longer rate of change,

14:08:32 longer dwell time, it would revert to that D.O.T.

14:08:35 standard.

14:08:35 Right in and out the FDOT standard, that we have in the

14:08:38 proposal, is 10 and 15 respectively, and that if for

14:08:42 some reason the FDOT changes say 20 seconds, it would

14:08:46 then by operation of the ordinance as part of an

14:08:48 operational standard revert top that.

14:08:53 >>MARGARET VIZZI: That wasn't really our issue.

14:08:54 Our issue is small CVS signs and the Walgreen's signs,

14:09:03 the on-site signs would not become the same --

14:09:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: They are the not part of this

14:09:09 ordinance.

14:09:10 >>MARGARET VIZZI: We just wanted to make sure it in any

14:09:13 way --

14:09:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It doesn't address that concern at

14:09:16 all.

14:09:16 Yes.

14:09:16 Okay.

14:09:17 Any other questions?

14:09:18 Yes, Councilwoman Mulhern.

14:09:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question for Ms. Cole.

14:09:23 I don't know if you had time to figure out of what the

14:09:25 acreage is on that channel -- I said Coyle.

14:09:32 Sorry.

14:09:35 The Channelside acreage.

14:09:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

14:09:37 It's 36 acres.

14:09:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.

14:09:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman?

14:09:48 I misspoke earlier when Linda was talking about, what

14:09:53 is it called?

14:09:53 What you are saying is we expand and called it the

14:09:56 Garrison district but it's still subject to the

14:09:58 Channelside regulations?

14:10:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.

14:10:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I didn't know that.

14:10:04 Is that abundantly clear in the code?

14:10:06 >> No.

14:10:08 >> Yes.

14:10:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: She says yes.

14:10:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll take a look at it on first

14:10:13 reading.

14:10:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is a Julia Cole question.

14:10:17 Julia Cole.

14:10:19 There was a woman who works for FDOT here today who

14:10:22 spoke about the impositions by state legislature and

14:10:28 FDOT in regard to signs and whatever we do that impacts

14:10:32 them needs to be communicated with them before our

14:10:34 whole sign deal comes back to us in a couple of weeks.

14:10:37 Would you please have an indexed conversation, make

14:10:40 sure we have the ability to do the things we are

14:10:42 promising to do?

14:10:44 >>> I already have a note on that.

14:10:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, it's either Federal Highway

14:10:56 Authority or Federal Highway Transit Authority or the

14:10:58 Federal Transit Authority.

14:11:00 But I'm sorry I misspoke.

14:11:02 And we had a good bureaucrat here to correct me.

14:11:06 And that was really interesting what she was saying

14:11:09 about the state roads.

14:11:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sharp lady.

14:11:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

14:11:14 New business?

14:11:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

14:11:16 I passed out to everyone two items.

14:11:18 One is at 2:30 today, which is in 20 minutes, we are

14:11:22 having an innovative bike rack program to launch on

14:11:27 earth day in Tampa.

14:11:28 Bike rack constructed out of pieces of bicycles which

14:11:33 is pretty cool.

14:11:34 That's happening in just a few minutes down by the

14:11:37 St. Pete Times Forum.

14:11:38 And then I sent you all a memo about bicycle safety

14:11:44 saying when we talk about complete streets that Euclid

14:11:47 was going to become a street with a bike line lane and

14:11:51 I found out from a citizen that the administration

14:11:53 changed their mind.

14:11:54 I'm not sure that was us and I was very disappointed.

14:11:58 So, anyway -- also, my friend was hit by a bike on a

14:12:06 car.

14:12:07 She's okay.

14:12:08 But we have to make bicycling safer in our community.

14:12:11 I would like to request that our transportation

14:12:13 department appear and report on May 20th under

14:12:15 staff reports on how we will address these safety

14:12:19 needs, and why the commitment to bicycle safety on

14:12:22 Euclid Avenue is being broken.

14:12:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to add something to that

14:12:26 request, staff report.

14:12:30 It made sense to me that El Prado would be a better

14:12:37 street to have the bicycle lanes on.

14:12:39 I would like to hear from them.

14:12:41 >> I didn't hear that it was being shifted to El Prado.

14:12:43 >>MARY MULHERN: I did hear that that was what some of

14:12:46 the neighbors had requested, or somebody had suggested

14:12:49 that El Prado would be a better street, because Euclid

14:12:52 is busier, and -- so that might be a solution as well.

14:13:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That would be great.

14:13:04 And hopefully they will figure that out.

14:13:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think it's called not in my front

14:13:10 yard.

14:13:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

14:13:13 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

14:13:15 Opposes?

14:13:19 Come back May 5th?

14:13:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 20 under staff reports.

14:13:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to mention that the

14:13:27 Lowry Park earth day celebration was rained out on last

14:13:33 Sunday, and it's being rescheduled for this Sunday, and

14:13:36 I just want everyone to know that I ran into someone

14:13:40 who works for the Parks Department out side at lunch

14:13:43 and she said she didn't know.

14:13:45 They didn't know if they were going to be able to get

14:13:47 out there.

14:13:48 So people know it's happening this week.

14:13:50 And you can get your Dachshund washed there.

14:13:53 And pet portraits and dog washing.

14:13:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

14:13:59 Anyone else?

14:13:59 I have two new items.

14:14:01 So you have the chair.

14:14:04 Request accommodations for Moore health, Inc., a

14:14:07 nonprofit whose mission is to teach health and injury

14:14:10 prevention education to children and families

14:14:13 throughout the Tampa Bay area, and this will not be

14:14:15 presented here at council.

14:14:16 It will be at one of their meetings.

14:14:18 That's my motion.

14:14:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:14:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: All in favor say Aye.

14:14:22 Opposed, Nay.

14:14:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The other one I have is a request for

14:14:27 commendation to Dave Taggett, contract administration

14:14:33 department, planner, design division.

14:14:35 He's retiring on Friday, April 30 after 32 years of

14:14:38 service.

14:14:39 And this will be -- we will give that to them for their

14:14:43 presentation by a member of council.

14:14:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:14:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: All in favor say Aye.

14:14:49 Passes.

14:14:49 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) starting the

14:15:02 area in New Tampa which actually is extended all the

14:15:05 way into Pasco County.

14:15:09 And that we give him a commendation.

14:15:13 He does have some children for his service that he's

14:15:16 done to the community.

14:15:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:15:18 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: What do they call that?

14:15:30 >> Posthumous presentation.

14:15:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You will give to the his family?

14:15:38 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: A son and a couple of daughters.

14:15:41 I'm sure there's somebody living up thereof that knows

14:15:45 where.

14:15:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

14:15:47 All in favor.

14:15:48 Opposes?

14:15:49 Anything else?

14:15:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two issues.

14:15:54 Speaking of dogs and cats.

14:15:57 The Humane Society of Tampa Bay in conjunction with a

14:16:01 good organization, SPCEA and animal services this

14:16:06 weekend from Saturday from ten in the morning till four

14:16:08 in the afternoon at the fairgrounds.

14:16:09 And they are having Tampa adoption Expo, and you go in.

14:16:14 It's free admission.

14:16:15 You go in on the MLK side of the fairgrounds.

14:16:18 And they are going to have veterinarian there for

14:16:20 advice, rescue groups, lots of free pets to adopt, and

14:16:27 information about animals.

14:16:29 So it's this Saturday, April 24th, 10 a.m. through

14:16:32 4 p.m. at the fairgrounds, MLK entrance.

14:16:36 That's my announcement.

14:16:37 Last week, I made a motion about officer Lopez who is

14:16:43 the reservist who got injured over in Iraq last year,

14:16:48 the woman, and she's now back working with TPD.

14:16:51 She's available to come in to City Council for a

14:16:54 commendation on May 6th.

14:16:57 At nine in the morning.

14:16:59 And I make a motion to that effect.

14:17:01 And I encourage any of the reservists who hear about

14:17:04 this who work for the city that want to join us to also

14:17:07 join us as well.

14:17:08 >> Second.

14:17:15 Moved and seconded.

14:17:16 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

14:17:18 Opposes?

14:17:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Last but not least the Humane

14:17:21 Society director as well as Dennis McCullough from

14:17:25 animal services want to come in on May 20th for

14:17:28 five minutes and just tell how they partnered with the

14:17:31 city and county as well as the private sector to

14:17:34 address the animal issues.

14:17:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.

14:17:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

14:17:42 All in favor say Aye.

14:17:44 Opposes?

14:17:44 Any other business?

14:17:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to say, before we broke

14:17:49 for lunch I said I was going to be a little delayed.

14:17:51 I had a meeting with the Sarasota Herald Tribune

14:17:54 reporter, and offered my services for what it's worth

14:18:01 on water.

14:18:02 And I understand that the negotiations and the labor we

14:18:07 had with the police department regarding the payback of

14:18:09 the money, that some of those had received before the

14:18:13 contract was finally finalized, and I believe they had

14:18:17 received some moneys that they thought they were

14:18:22 entitled to but they were not under the negotiations, I

14:18:25 understand that that could be substantial, the amount

14:18:28 in excess of $200 a paycheck.

14:18:31 And I was wondering if we could ask the administration

14:18:33 to soften than to something less.

14:18:38 The money will be repaid but maybe in a little longer

14:18:40 time.

14:18:41 I don't know how much money it is but if we can get a

14:18:43 report in the next council meeting on that subject

14:18:44 matter, what is the amount, and they could do something

14:18:48 to stretch it out.

14:18:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Was that in the lawsuit that got

14:18:54 settled?

14:18:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I I'm not sure that was a lawsuit.

14:19:00 I think that was by counsel in house, worked on during

14:19:04 that period of time between the '09 and '10 tax.

14:19:14 >>MARY MULHERN: It must have been the year before.

14:19:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Could be.

14:19:19 >>MARY MULHERN: -- before they were awarded.

14:19:22 I thought they were award the raises retroactively?

14:19:25 Oh, that's when we gave them --

14:19:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right, right.

14:19:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We are not closing our eyes and

14:19:35 saying everything is forgiven.

14:19:37 We just want to see if it can be done in a different

14:19:39 format.

14:19:40 That's all we are asking.

14:19:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ask for a report and what the amount

14:19:48 is.

14:19:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, because I was wonder ago

14:19:50 question for you, Marty.

14:19:52 Don't we have to approve that?

14:19:53 Or did we already?

14:19:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That was part of what council acted

14:19:57 upon.

14:19:58 And I believe what Mr. Miranda you a is saying this is

14:20:01 a consequence of that, and asking for a report to be

14:20:03 able to address those concerns.

14:20:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.

14:20:06 So the motion, seconded by councilman Dingfelder, all

14:20:09 in favor signify by saying Aye.

14:20:10 Opposes?

14:20:12 Okay.

14:20:12 Any other business need to come before council?

14:20:15 We stand adjourned.

14:20:16 Thank you.

14:20:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to file all the documents.

14:20:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor say Aye.

14:20:25 We stand adjourned.

14:20:26 Thank you, clerk.

14:20:27 (City Council meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m.)



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