Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Thursday, July 21, 2011
Budget Workshop


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

10:53:48 >>MARY MULHERN: The meeting is called to order.

10:54:43 Roll call.

10:54:43 [Roll Call]

10:54:51 I have a couple of memos, one from Councilman Chairman

10:54:54 Miranda that he will be absent from today's meeting due to

10:54:58 medical reasons, and a memo from Councilman Suarez, will be

10:55:05 out of town and therefore absent from all sessions of

10:55:08 council today.

10:55:10 You may have already heard those today.

10:55:13 I would like to just quickly address the agenda.

10:55:16 We have one item on our regular council agenda which we will

10:55:20 take up.

10:55:23 And we have the budget workshop after that.

10:55:29 It's our hope that we may be able to get done before, say,

10:55:35 11:45.

10:55:37 We are probably going to lose a quorum if we don't.

10:55:39 So we would have to come back at 1:30.

10:55:42 So I'm hoping we can get through it quickly and be done

10:55:44 before lunch.

10:55:46 There is one other item I wanted to bring up now.

10:55:50 We have a night meeting tonight, and at 5:01 we have three

10:55:55 items scheduled.

10:55:55 Of those three items, two of them cannot be heard, and the

10:56:00 other has requested a continuance.

10:56:03 So if it would the pleasure of council, and if we could ask

10:56:10 the clerk, I would like for us to hear those three items,

10:56:15 one, two and three at the beginning of the meeting that

10:56:19 starts at 6:00, and if we could post that on the door of

10:56:24 chambers so that anyone who arrives here for the 5:00 items,

10:56:30 which is unlikely since they are going to be continued, and

10:56:33 we can let the continuance know that we are going to hear it

10:56:37 at 6:00.

10:56:38 >>THE CLERK: We'll post a notice on the doors.

10:56:40 >> If I could have a motion to do that, to move those three

10:56:44 items.

10:56:44 >> So moved.

10:56:45 >> Second.

10:56:45 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

10:56:48 Anyone opposed be? So we are going to hear from Bob

10:56:51 McDonaugh, our economic development director, on item 1.

10:56:54 >> Bob McDonaugh, a economic development.

10:56:58 I'm here asking for the approval of a resolution

10:57:01 recommending that the company identified by Tampa

10:57:04 Hillsborough economic Development Corporation as project

10:57:08 11-021 be approved for additional incentives and cooperation

10:57:13 with Hillsborough County's premier business program.

10:57:18 There is some language in here that you could read.

10:57:21 I believe the nexus of this is that we have been working

10:57:24 with the State of Florida and Hillsborough County to incent

10:57:29 a local company, who is already operating in our area, we

10:57:33 have talked about them bringing additional jobs, but this is

10:57:36 about them investing $78 million in our community, which is

10:57:41 a byproduct which will keep them in our area, and as well as

10:57:50 maintain a large number in our community.

10:57:54 The amount seems large, $550,000.

10:57:57 What's important to understand about this is that we will

10:58:02 enter into a written agreement with them, with Hillsborough

10:58:04 County, and this company, and assays in your agenda request,

10:58:10 Hillsborough County and the City of Tampa anticipate

10:58:13 entering into an agreement with project 11-021 to ensure

10:58:17 that the company fulfills all future job retention,

10:58:20 creation, and capital investment prior to disbursement of

10:58:23 funds.

10:58:24 The first dollars for this company would not be due until

10:58:29 2017.

10:58:30 So the $550,000 would be paid in six equal installments of

10:58:35 $91,666.

10:58:39 In the meanwhile, they would have invested $78 million in

10:58:43 our community.

10:58:45 The anticipation is that they would be building a building

10:58:48 between 225 and $250,000.

10:58:53 For the council's pleasure, way did is I went through the

10:58:56 Hillsborough County property appraiser's tax rolls, found a

10:58:58 building that had been built recently of approximately that

10:59:01 size, and the City of Tampa receives from that building

10:59:04 $154,000 annually in property taxes.

10:59:08 So my assumption a building like that takes between a year

10:59:12 and two years to build.

10:59:14 So they commence construction.

10:59:17 I'm assuming that it done by, let say, 2014 to give us a

10:59:23 cushion, and we receive property taxes in 2015, 2016, 2017

10:59:28 is the first year that we would be responsible for meeting

10:59:33 out some of this incentive money.

10:59:35 In the meanwhile we would have received $50,000 in property

10:59:38 taxes.

10:59:40 So we will always remain, at least in a cash position, ahead

10:59:45 of the disbursements.

10:59:47 And so what this does, it's, A, an investment in our

10:59:50 community, and also buttressing and keeping jobs in our

10:59:54 community.

10:59:56 Again, we will be protected by an agreement, and we will not

10:59:59 disburse any money until after the firm fulfills the

11:00:05 requirements in our agreement.

11:00:08 Questions?

11:00:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I had a question very quickly.

11:00:16 On the building, do we have a specific start date from them?

11:00:21 >> The assumption is that it would be sometime within the

11:00:25 next six months.

11:00:26 >> The assumption?

11:00:28 >> Well, our agreement is that, again, as I mentioned, we

11:00:34 will enter into a written agreement, and there is no money

11:00:38 involved until they fulfill their requirements.

11:00:41 >> And one of the requirements is the building?

11:00:44 >> That's correct.

11:00:45 The investment of the $78 million in our community.

11:00:48 Some of that is building.

11:00:49 Some of that is equipment.

11:00:50 Some of that is furniture and fixtures.

11:00:54 Yes.

11:00:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

11:00:57 That answers my question.

11:00:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a number of yes, sir since this came

11:01:09 up so quickly and I only got details of it yesterday

11:01:12 afternoon.

11:01:13 Or Tuesday afternoon.

11:01:18 When we enter into this agreement -- I'm really following up

11:01:24 on Councilman Capin's question -- that $78 million

11:01:27 investment, which is going to be in a building, so --

11:01:37 >> Some of it will be building, some of it will be

11:01:40 equipment, some of it will be furnishings, yes, ma'am.

11:01:44 >>MARY MULHERN: How is this agreement or contract written?

11:01:46 And you have to approve these future tax incentives.

11:01:49 Do we have any of this language in writing to look at?

11:01:53 >> The agreement has not been written yet, no.

11:01:56 What I could do is provide you with an agreement that we are

11:01:59 assuming we are going to use as a template, which was the

11:02:05 depository trust, which was a similar agreement, and

11:02:09 contemplated certain actions by depository trust, certain

11:02:13 people working here, spending certain amounts of moneys in

11:02:16 our community, and the assumption is that will be the

11:02:19 template we will use and I will be happy to share that with

11:02:23 you.

11:02:23 >> And is the obligation -- and will it be written into the

11:02:26 agreement that that $78 million will have been spent before

11:02:33 they receive their tax incentive?

11:02:36 >> Absolutely.

11:02:37 Yes.

11:02:37 >> All 78 million dollars will have been spent?

11:02:42 >> Invested in our community, correct.

11:02:44 >> So when you say "invested in our community," if they are

11:02:51 just -- unless they are buying property, we are not getting

11:02:54 property tax revenue back from them?

11:02:57 >> No.

11:02:58 Actually, do you pay personal property tax on commercial

11:03:02 equipment in an office building or something like that.

11:03:05 You own computer systems, you own desks, you own equipment.

11:03:08 You are actually taxed on that and you pay taxes on it.

11:03:11 >> Is that at the same rate as you are taxed on land?

11:03:15 >> It's assessed differently, but, yes, we have -- and be if

11:03:20 you like I can get something from Jake Slater, our business

11:03:24 tax expert for that.

11:03:25 >> Well, you can get that for us, but you are asking us to

11:03:30 vote on this today.

11:03:31 >> And what I did as my example was basically stripped it

11:03:37 down to just the building.

11:03:38 If I was comparing apples to apples.

11:03:41 You are saying, well, you know, this is valued at this and

11:03:44 this is valued at that.

11:03:45 What I did was I took a building of the same size, recently

11:03:48 constructed, and looked at how much money did the City of

11:03:50 Tampa get?

11:03:52 And it's $154,000 a year.

11:03:54 >> And how do you know the size of the building?

11:04:00 What's telling us -- you are saying the size of the building

11:04:03 if you spent $78 million?

11:04:06 >> No.

11:04:06 They are telling us that based on the number of employees

11:04:09 that they will have, it will be somewhere between 225 and

11:04:13 250,000 square feet.

11:04:14 >> Okay.

11:04:15 Now, this is my next question.

11:04:20 This is an amendment.

11:04:21 And I think I have the QTI that we approved in -- or is this

11:04:30 today?

11:04:30 We approved a QTI in June for the same company, correct?

11:04:36 >> That's correct.

11:04:37 >> Mystery company, which I'm not so sure is a mystery

11:04:40 anymore after reading the paper this morning.

11:04:45 At least there is some more clues to the mystery.

11:04:52 The QTI that we approved was to create 2 loon new jobs,

11:04:57 right?

11:04:57 >> That's correct.

11:04:58 >> So is this building supposedly going to house those 200

11:05:02 employees?

11:05:03 >> Not necessarily, no.

11:05:05 This is talking about building a building and retaining

11:05:10 approximately 1633 jobs.

11:05:12 >> Okay.

11:05:13 So, really, what they are committing to is to retain jobs

11:05:22 that are already here?

11:05:24 >> No.

11:05:25 Actually, the promise is to invest $78 million, and enter

11:05:28 into a long-term lease, which will, as a byproduct, retain

11:05:33 these jobs.

11:05:33 >> Okay.

11:05:35 So we are actually -- we are helping them build the new

11:05:44 building for existing employees?

11:05:47 Otherwise, they are threatening to leave?

11:05:49 >> As far as I know -- I don't know if they threatened to

11:05:53 leave.

11:05:54 This was an inducement to get the company to set down more

11:05:57 roots and spend more money in our community to build a new

11:05:59 building of which we would benefit from the property taxes.

11:06:02 >> Okay.

11:06:04 I'm a little less clear about that property tax.

11:06:09 And yesterday was 190,000 a year that we were expecting.

11:06:14 Today it's down to 150,000 a year?

11:06:18 >> Again --

11:06:19 >> In the estimate?

11:06:20 >> All I did was just use the property taxes for a building.

11:06:23 I did not put anything for equipment, FF&E, to show at a

11:06:30 minimum just what a building is.

11:06:32 Because the assessment on equipment always varies, and the

11:06:35 equipment always depreciates.

11:06:37 >> Okay.

11:06:39 Have we done this before?

11:06:41 Has the city done this, provided this kind of cash tax

11:06:47 incentive to a company who is not actually going to be

11:06:52 creating more jobs?

11:06:54 >> I believe that they have, yes.

11:06:55 I believe they did it with depository trust.

11:06:57 And I believe they have done it with a couple of other

11:07:00 companies, yes.

11:07:01 >> And when was that?

11:07:04 >> Two years ago.

11:07:06 >> So they weren't going to be creating any new jobs?

11:07:10 >> Depository trust actually, I believe, has self agreements

11:07:15 with the City of Tampa.

11:07:17 Some was about job creation.

11:07:18 Some was about investment in the community.

11:07:20 >> Okay.

11:07:22 The difficulty for me is that we approved -- we are asked to

11:07:28 approve something with so very little information a few

11:07:34 months ago, which was incentive for somebody, and they

11:07:37 received it.

11:07:38 And now they are back.

11:07:39 >> And they received nothing.

11:07:41 They do not get anything until they actually --

11:07:44 >> They received our agreement.

11:07:46 >> That's correct.

11:07:47 >> For future tax.

11:07:50 They received our approval.

11:07:51 >> They went to the State of Florida.

11:07:53 The State of Florida actually pays 80% of that.

11:07:57 The local community each pays 10%.

11:07:59 They got a pledge from us that if they do go forward and

11:08:03 create those jobs, then, yes, they will receive that money.

11:08:06 But until they create the jobs, they get nothing from the

11:08:09 community.

11:08:09 >> Right.

11:08:10 But now they are back.

11:08:11 And wanting more.

11:08:15 Perhaps we need money to build something in order to create

11:08:17 those jobs.

11:08:18 And it makes me feel a little not real secure where the

11:08:26 negotiating here.

11:08:28 And, you know, as we saw the comments and the information,

11:08:36 you know, we got more information from the stories in the

11:08:38 paper yesterday than we got really from -- you know.

11:08:47 >> I think the reason that Florida statute 288.106 is set up

11:08:52 is for a couple of reasons.

11:08:55 One, when companies are talking about expanding or

11:08:57 contracting or relocating, there are personnel issues that

11:09:05 there are concerns that people might leave or people will

11:09:07 look at something else.

11:09:08 >> Yeah, I understand that.

11:09:10 I understand that.

11:09:11 It's a fine line we walk, because we are in a situation

11:09:16 where, you know, our revenues are dropping.

11:09:22 We have a lot of people who need help.

11:09:25 >> We absolutely do.

11:09:27 >> So when we are giving it to, you know, a global company,

11:09:32 and don't know who they are, and my comment on this in the

11:09:37 future is that the way the state law is written, this

11:09:41 council is actually, I believe, the government officials who

11:09:47 ought to know who we are dealing with.

11:09:49 >> I would be happy to --

11:09:53 >> I don't think the state -- I don't think the county

11:09:55 commission gave their approval yesterday without knowing who

11:09:59 they were talking about.

11:10:00 So there could be some research so you could know what the

11:10:04 likelihood of the results of these incentives were going to

11:10:10 be.

11:10:10 >> One point I would like to make, again to reiterate, is

11:10:14 that we are not giving them anything until they invest all

11:10:19 of that money, and again it's 2017.

11:10:23 So they will have built the building, occupied the building,

11:10:26 and paid taxes on the building for several years before we

11:10:29 give them the first installment.

11:10:30 >> I understand that.

11:10:32 And I appreciate that, and --

11:10:37 >> Well, I think talking with the taxpayers is very

11:10:40 important to me as well, and I appreciate your diligence in

11:10:42 that.

11:10:43 >> Well, it's both decisions about where we can afford to

11:10:47 make these cuts, you know.

11:10:49 We are basically giving a big tax cut to a global company.

11:10:54 And, you know, the little guys, those of us who -- and this

11:11:00 is probably one of the companies than we bailed out a few

11:11:03 years ago, too.

11:11:06 All right.

11:11:06 So one more question.

11:11:09 You said that by the time, by 2017, they would have paid an

11:11:13 estimated 450,000?

11:11:17 >> On the down-side, yes.

11:11:19 >>MARY MULHERN: On the down-side?

11:11:23 >> A minimum.

11:11:24 >>MARY MULHERN: So we would start our -- and how does work?

11:11:30 Reduction in their bill, their tax bill?

11:11:33 Or are we --

11:11:35 >> We write them a check for $91,666.

11:11:40 >> 91,000 a year?

11:11:42 >> That's correct.

11:11:43 For six years.

11:11:44 >> For six years.

11:11:45 Okay.

11:11:46 So they will have paid -- is there somewhere written into

11:11:52 that agreement since the tax rate is really an estimate that

11:11:59 we don't know what it's going to be, it's going to depend on

11:12:03 a lot of things, the market and what they choose to invest

11:12:07 that $78 million in, is there any way that we can guarantee

11:12:17 that they have paid that much, or invested that much before

11:12:20 we give them --

11:12:24 >> I don't know.

11:12:25 I don't know the answer to that.

11:12:27 Again, the arrangement from what I understand is that we are

11:12:32 asking them to invest $78 million to build a building

11:12:35 between 225 and 250,000 square feet.

11:12:39 I went to the market.

11:12:40 I looked for a building that had been recently constructed

11:12:43 of that size and looked at the tax bill, and that's how I

11:12:47 came up with that number.

11:12:48 Again, I went to the market.

11:12:50 And we are in ab deflated market right now.

11:12:54 So I'm somewhat comfortable that the valuation is good.

11:12:57 >> All right.

11:12:59 Thank you.

11:12:59 I appreciate it.

11:13:02 Councilman Reddick.

11:13:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Well, if there's a need for us to approve

11:13:07 this today?

11:13:09 >> Yes, sir.

11:13:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: It's urgent?

11:13:11 >> Yes.

11:13:12 That's the only reason that it was put on this agenda,

11:13:14 because this was not a normal course of business, and I

11:13:18 would not have asked that.

11:13:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: The only reason I'm asking is because

11:13:21 there seems to be a lot of questions that draws a

11:13:26 reservation.

11:13:27 So --

11:13:29 >> No, sir, it was AP request and again the meeting at the

11:13:34 county commission was not a normal scheduled county

11:13:36 commission meeting that approved that either.

11:13:39 >> So what will be the outcome if it is not approved today?

11:13:43 >> Honestly, I don't know.

11:13:45 I don't know if the deal goes away or not.

11:13:51 There's a memo from the Hillsborough County EDC that might

11:13:54 have a little more information than I, but I know that we

11:13:58 were requested, because the manage management of this

11:14:02 company was making their decision, was imminent and they

11:14:05 asked us to please take this to our various municipalities.

11:14:09 >> Well, the Hillsborough County EDC person to give some

11:14:14 determination whether this needs to be done today?

11:14:27 >>JUSTIN VASKE: Legal department.

11:14:28 I think the question is asking, if we don't do it today,

11:14:31 what could potentially happen?

11:14:32 My opinion, the deal on our side would be squelched.

11:14:38 My understanding, Hillsborough County wanted this done as

11:14:41 soon as possible.

11:14:43 But also keep in mind that this resolution is a

11:14:46 recommendation.

11:14:46 There is no contract from the board today.

11:14:51 This is a mere recommendation that at some point we are

11:14:55 going to come in front of the City Council with an agreement

11:14:58 to move forward.

11:14:58 >> That's way want to hear.

11:15:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

11:15:05 Councilman Capin.

11:15:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you for that clarification.

11:15:08 That's the way I understood it.

11:15:10 But it will come -- the agreement --

11:15:15 >> The contract for your approval.

11:15:16 >> It is not here.

11:15:17 We are in essence approving to put together --

11:15:23 >> To enter into an agreement.

11:15:24 >> To enter into an agreement.

11:15:26 And real quick, wages.

11:15:29 >> At least 115% of the Tampa Bay area average which is

11:15:36 $46,000.

11:15:37 >> Okay.

11:15:39 Thank you.

11:15:40 >>MARY MULHERN: But there weren't any jobs commitments in

11:15:43 this, right?

11:15:47 >> The company right now, again, the byproduct of them

11:15:52 investing in a brand new building and signing a long-term

11:15:55 lease would the retention of these jobs.

11:15:57 >> Okay.

11:15:58 So that's the average of the existing jobs?

11:16:02 >> That's correct.

11:16:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione.

11:16:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, point of clarification, Bob,

11:16:09 on the description that we received from the agenda request.

11:16:12 At the bottom, it states that the prospect is in the

11:16:16 financial consulting services business.

11:16:19 75 new jobs would be created by December 31st, 2012, 85

11:16:25 new jobs would be created by December 31, 2013, 40 new jobs

11:16:31 by December 31st, 2014, for a total of 200 total jobs

11:16:36 being created.

11:16:37 Those are new jobs, correct?

11:16:39 >> They were the jobs that were previously approved with the

11:16:41 QTI.

11:16:42 So this is a recap of everything that we approved prior to

11:16:47 this and what we are talking about today.

11:16:48 >> So both of the actions we are taking, the one that we

11:16:52 previously took --

11:16:54 >> The one previously, that stands alone.

11:16:57 >> Right.

11:16:57 That one stands alone.

11:16:58 But they are related?

11:17:00 >> Yes.

11:17:01 It's the same company.

11:17:02 And, again, I put it on the same piece of paper because I

11:17:05 wanted -- not this particular action but they are a part of

11:17:16 the overall project for this company for us here in the City

11:17:20 of Tampa?

11:17:21 >> That's correct.

11:17:22 >> So and then we have got the retention of 1633 new jobs,

11:17:27 correct?

11:17:27 >> Yes, ma'am.

11:17:28 >> I just wanted to clarify that.

11:17:29 >> Yes.

11:17:30 Again, I put that down there as a recap because that was

11:17:34 previously approved by council.

11:17:35 >> Okay.

11:17:36 Thank you.

11:17:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, if I am in order, I want to

11:17:44 move the resolution.

11:17:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to ask.

11:17:48 I neglected to ask for any public comment at the beginning

11:17:50 of the meeting.

11:17:50 So if there is anyone that wishes to speak, I would like to

11:17:56 hear it before we vote.

11:17:59 On anything on this agenda which is this one item.

11:18:05 Okay.

11:18:05 >> I move the resolution.

11:18:10 >> Second.

11:18:11 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

11:18:14 Anyone supposed opposed?

11:18:17 >> Bob McDonaugh: Thank you.

11:18:21 >>MARY MULHERN: At this time, we will -- I will yield to

11:18:25 Councilman Cohen to conduct the budget workshop.

11:18:31 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

11:18:36 As was mentioned earlier, we have a budget workshop on the

11:18:39 agenda today.

11:18:41 And here from the City of Tampa is Sonya Little and Dennis

11:18:47 Rojero from our budget office.

11:18:51 >> Good morning, council members.

11:18:53 On June 9th, we presented the first budget workshop

11:18:56 where we provided an update on our revenue collections for

11:19:02 our various general fund and revenue.

11:19:05 In today's workshop my intent is to just highlight the areas

11:19:08 where we have seen some changes since June 9th, and very

11:19:14 carefully walked through with you the solutions that we have

11:19:16 come up with for fiscal year 2012 budget.

11:19:27 We will start right into the proposed fiscal year 2012

11:19:31 budget, then providing a very broad overview of our general

11:19:37 fund and utility tax activity, and then again moving into

11:19:42 our enterprise fund, but also in this workshop, in

11:19:45 comparison to the other, we will also go over briefly our

11:19:48 capital improvement program with special focus on investing

11:19:52 in neighborhoods.

11:19:58 When we first started, our preparation for the fiscal year

11:20:01 2012 budget, we were at a budget shortfall of $34.5 million,

11:20:07 and that was largely due to the expected reductions in

11:20:10 property values of $17 million.

11:20:14 Additionally, we had expenditure increases for parking of 6

11:20:19 million, pension of 11 million and health care of 1 million.

11:20:22 Again that was very early on in the budget.

11:20:24 And I will walk you through where we actually are falling

11:20:27 out and what we are projecting for our fiscal 2012 budget.

11:20:34 At the June 9th workshop, we had made some progress in

11:20:41 narrowing that shortfall from 34.5 million, and we shared

11:20:45 with you at that workshop our projected revenues,

11:20:53 expenditures of $396 million leave us at $28.4 million as

11:20:59 projected.

11:21:00 Shortfall for fiscal year 2012.

11:21:04 And we left you at that point, we went over very thoroughly

11:21:10 these scenarios that were provided by our department, as far

11:21:16 as their recommendations for operating reduction.

11:21:20 I shared with you at that time that three scenarios were

11:21:23 provided by each of our departments, one of which was a base

11:21:29 case scenario which in actuality was 2009 operating levels

11:21:35 plus an additional 3% reduction.

11:21:38 So we were 3% less than our 2009 levels.

11:21:42 In addition to that our scenario 2 was a 10% reduction over

11:21:46 the base case, and scenario 3 was a 15% reduction over the

11:21:50 base case.

11:21:52 That being said

11:21:53 We then went back and started to describe and analyze on a

11:21:58 case-by-case basis all of the scenarios to come up with a

11:22:01 solution.

11:22:02 I want to start out first by just saying that in this

11:22:04 proposed 2012 budget, we are honoring the existing contracts

11:22:11 with our unions.

11:22:14 In addition to that we are proposing a merit increase for

11:22:19 nonunion employees, and the impact on our budget will be

11:22:22 $2.4 million.

11:22:24 As it relates to our contracts, we are not changing anything

11:22:26 for our union contracts.

11:22:28 We are honoring what was already in place last year.

11:22:31 The specific steps taken to further mitigate our budget

11:22:36 shortfall, I'll start out with first of all our vacant

11:22:41 positions.

11:22:42 On the books, we had a total of 151 general fund vacant

11:22:48 positions.

11:22:49 We took a very close look position by position.

11:22:52 The concern was that we were certain that there were some --

11:22:55 we could provide some relief to our budget by eliminating

11:23:00 some of these vacant positions, but our priority was to not

11:23:05 severely impact services.

11:23:07 So in saying that, and running that analysis, we came up

11:23:10 with a total of 21 positions where we felt that services

11:23:13 would not be impacted by eliminating the positions, and that

11:23:18 in itself saved, as far as our budget is concerned, $1.2

11:23:23 million.

11:23:23 In addition to the elimination of vacant positions, other

11:23:26 reductions were based on a spending analysis of each of the

11:23:33 departments' spending habit.

11:23:36 We took a look at how they historically spend it.

11:23:39 And I have to commend all of departments because each of

11:23:42 them have done a tremendous job historically, being very

11:23:46 mindful of budget, and many of them have come in far below

11:23:49 what they were budgeted for in prior years.

11:23:51 So taking that into account, I guess we are holding our

11:23:54 expectations very high, and confident that they will be able

11:23:57 to continue coming in far below budget as far as their

11:24:01 spending habits.

11:24:02 That being said, we did somewhat of a sweep and kind of

11:24:07 compressed the budget even further for each of the

11:24:09 departments, and that being said, we came up with savings in

11:24:12 the neighborhood of $1.4 million.

11:24:15 We have mentioned previously -- and you are all aware --

11:24:18 that as it relates to property values, when the

11:24:22 certifications came in, they came in a 4% reduction over the

11:24:25 prior year which even though it's a reduction, it's a much

11:24:29 smaller reduction than we experienced in fiscal 2011 where

11:24:34 we were 13% over the prior year.

11:24:36 That being said, we anticipated as much as a 6% reduction.

11:24:42 So there we were able to pick up some additional savings

11:24:45 over our original production for the fiscal 2012 year of

11:24:49 $1.5 million.

11:24:51 Additionally, many of you have heard that we are undergoing

11:24:55 implementation of intersection safety cameras, as a result

11:25:00 of that program or better known as the red light camera

11:25:03 program.

11:25:04 We anticipate, and we believe this is a very conservative

11:25:07 figure for new revenue stream of $2 million.

11:25:17 One of the larger items that we are imposing is the increase

11:25:24 of the TECO franchise fee.

11:25:26 Currently the City of Tampa's percentage of is 4.6%.

11:25:31 Florida statutes allow municipalities to impose a TECO

11:25:34 franchise fee of 6%.

11:25:37 We have not increased our TECO franchise fee for the past 15

11:25:43 years.

11:25:43 And when we took a look at our peers in our general area, we

11:25:47 were the lowest of them all.

11:25:49 One of which was roughly just over 5%, whereas there were

11:25:54 four others that were 6%.

11:25:56 So we did analysis to determine the impact on our residents

11:25:59 by raising this particular fee.

11:26:01 And we found that for the average household, it would

11:26:05 increase their monthly bill $1.50 roughly a month.

11:26:10 So that headquarter said, it's going to be a tremendous help

11:26:12 to our general fund as far as filling the gap, and we are

11:26:17 expecting to generate $7 million as a result of increasing

11:26:21 in that fee.

11:26:22 Other items included we are stepping up our collection

11:26:28 efforts for unpaid AMS and code enforcement liens, talking

11:26:35 to agencies that have experience with working with

11:26:38 municipalities, and very mindful of the nature of

11:26:41 collections related to these two areas in particular.

11:26:45 Our Tampa Convention Center continues to do extremely well.

11:26:49 Since I last talked to you and provided you with figures, we

11:26:52 are estimating that in addition to what we previously

11:26:57 discussed with you, an additional $2 million in revenue

11:27:01 receipts just from the Tampa Convention Center.

11:27:06 The next item, the TPD vehicles, the C.I.T. project list

11:27:12 that was presented to you a couple of weeks ago,

11:27:14 historically, we have covered purchase of our TPD vehicles

11:27:21 through the utility tax fund.

11:27:24 And as you are aware, we can use the utility tax fund for

11:27:27 operating expenditures as well as capital expenditures, but

11:27:30 because C.I.T. has specific usages, it made sense for us to

11:27:36 maybe consider using our sales tax revenues to purchase

11:27:39 these vehicles, thereby freeing up our utility tax fund to

11:27:43 better serve our operating expenditures and on the general

11:27:46 fund type capital expenditures.

11:27:52 In all, we have captured roughly $9 million from the prior

11:27:58 fiscal year.

11:27:59 And this goes back to really analyzing spending habits of

11:28:02 our departments who again have done an excellent job in

11:28:06 managing their budget.

11:28:09 We took a look at fund that had been appropriated in prior

11:28:12 fiscal years and the projects associated with them to

11:28:15 determine if the likelihood that they would be expended in

11:28:20 fiscal year 2012.

11:28:21 That being said, we were able to pull, if you will, $9

11:28:26 million across the board from the departments for projects

11:28:30 that were not likely to be funded in fiscal year 2009, and

11:28:35 knowing the large capital projects list that we have that

11:28:40 you have seen and been notified both under C.I.T -- and I'll

11:28:44 share some with you regarding the CIP for this budget year,

11:28:49 you can very well understand why we need to be mindful and

11:28:52 better manage how we appropriate to our capital projects.

11:29:01 In all we have made huge stride and come from $34.5 million

11:29:05 shortfall which is what we originally anticipated to a

11:29:08 shortfall of just $6 million, and it's the $6 million that

11:29:12 we will use general fund to fill the gap, leaving with us a

11:29:19 balanced budget.

11:29:28 I want to put it in perspective where we are.

11:29:30 The city has --

11:29:37 >>YVONNE CAPIN: May I ask a question?

11:29:38 So on the part where we have the eliminated 21 of the 151

11:29:44 jobs, that leaves us a net of 130 that will be filled or

11:29:50 could be filled?

11:29:50 >> They could be filled.

11:29:51 Yes, ma'am.

11:29:52 They will remain on the books, but only be filled in cases

11:29:56 where it's absolutely necessary for providing the services

11:29:59 we intend to provide.

11:30:01 So we did not want to wipe them from the book and then have

11:30:05 to readd them.

11:30:06 But they will be very much evaluated on a case-by-case

11:30:09 basis.

11:30:10 >> But we have enough for 130?

11:30:20 >> Yes, ma'am.

11:30:21 That's correct.

11:30:22 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

11:30:23 >> To put where we are ending up this year as far as our

11:30:28 general fund balance into perspective, we wanted to give you

11:30:31 a historical snapshot of our general fund and just a minute

11:30:36 tax fund balances.

11:30:37 And you will see that in fiscal year 2010 we ended up 36% of

11:30:43 our expenditures, and our internal policy is to be 20% of

11:30:48 expenditures, and that's an industry standard from a credit

11:30:52 perspective.

11:30:53 So we feel very comfortable with the 20% threshold.

11:30:57 For projected 2011, we anticipate usage of $25 million in

11:31:03 general fund revenues to fill the shortfall, taking us down

11:31:07 to 30%, also again very healthy.

11:31:11 And then with the proposed $6 million shortfall, filling the

11:31:17 gap with general fund revenues, we will still be at a very

11:31:22 healthy 27% of expenditures for our general funding

11:31:25 utilities taxes.

11:31:26 >>HARRY COHEN: One of reasons we are able to make the

11:31:35 budget work this year appears to be the aggressive effort

11:31:38 that was made by the city's employees and management across

11:31:41 the board to save money in this fiscal year that is going to

11:31:46 end soon.

11:31:47 Do you have plans to do the same thing next year going

11:31:49 forward to try to either minimize the ultimate amount that

11:31:53 has to come from reserves, or maybe make up for shortfalls

11:31:57 that occur that are unanticipated through the fiscal year?


11:32:01 >> Yes, sir.

11:32:02 And, as a matter of fact, we are in the process of

11:32:05 implementing procedures and revenue and finance where we can

11:32:09 work more as partners with each of the departments so that

11:32:13 they fully understand that any given point in time, the

11:32:16 revenues that they have available, the revenues that have

11:32:19 been actually appropriated and the amount expended -- and we

11:32:24 are working on now putting together some type of quarterly

11:32:27 report so that not only do we have a handle of how the money

11:32:31 is being expended but we feel it's very important for each

11:32:34 of the departments to have that information.

11:32:36 >> And is that something that could be shared with council

11:32:39 quarterly so that we could see what the city's cash position

11:32:42 is as we move through the fiscal year?

11:32:44 >> Yes.

11:32:45 We certainly can.

11:32:46 And, as a matter of fact, I believe and this has

11:32:51 historically been done and we continue to continue providing

11:32:53 you with our monthly financial statements as well.

11:32:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Little, from our discussion the other

11:33:04 day, and correct me if I am wrong or maybe clarify for

11:33:08 everyone at home listening, the department budget has been

11:33:15 tightened, not shrunk but tightened to reflect the

11:33:19 historical spending patterns.

11:33:20 >> Yes.

11:33:22 >> Because I know I hear from a lot of my constituents that

11:33:26 there is angst when they hear, you know, use it or lose type

11:33:31 of philosophies.

11:33:34 So I am assuming that our city employees have not been doing

11:33:38 that.

11:33:38 They have used only what they have to use, and therefore

11:33:42 there is a surplus in their budgets at the end of the year.

11:33:47 >> What I have, my opinion is from what we could see, I

11:33:52 think they have been very mindful of how they have been

11:33:56 expending the funds allocated to their departments.

11:33:59 So I think moving forward with more of a joint test between

11:34:04 our department and each of the individual departments that

11:34:07 we will become more effective and efficient, in our spending

11:34:11 habits.

11:34:12 I have not seen where, based on the numbers, because like I

11:34:16 said, we were able to sweep $9 million so they didn't jump

11:34:21 in and start spending or lose it.

11:34:25 And I have to commend them for that, because you would think

11:34:28 that, in human nature, that you would want to do that so

11:34:31 that your budget wouldn't be swept for the following year.

11:34:35 So I think that they have demonstrated year after year that

11:34:39 they are not just trying to use it or lose it.

11:34:42 >> And I commend them for that.

11:34:47 >> Absolutely.

11:34:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: In my days and years in banking, we were

11:34:54 required -- I was in charge of capital budgets for a major

11:34:59 banking institution, and we were required for monthly

11:35:02 variance reporting.

11:35:04 So I would get a call from the CFO whether it was -- whether

11:35:10 I was under budget or over budget.

11:35:13 They wanted to keep an eye on if we were budgeting properly.

11:35:19 If we were grossly under budget, then there was a question

11:35:24 of whether or not we were accurately forecasting.

11:35:28 So is there a similar process in place for our employees,

11:35:33 for our departments?

11:35:34 >> There is a similar process.

11:35:36 And what we have discussed internally in revenue and finance

11:35:39 is we refining that process.

11:35:42 So the information received by the departments is more

11:35:45 frequent and more ongoing dialogue in conversations

11:35:49 regarding the amounts expended, amounts appropriated and the

11:35:56 balance, and the likelihood to spend those funds, more of

11:35:59 that dialoguing communication between the departments and

11:36:01 revenue and finance.

11:36:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

11:36:06 >> Now, I won't spend a whole lot of time on our major

11:36:21 revenues, simply because we did much of this in the first

11:36:25 budget workshop.

11:36:26 But just real briefly, I want to highlight some of the major

11:36:29 changes that occurred since we last spoke.

11:36:32 I already mentioned our TECO franchise fees and the

11:36:36 increases in the revenues expected as a result of changing

11:36:41 our percentage charge on their electric bills.

11:36:49 But I also wanted to point out that wave done some internal

11:36:52 movement of divisions from the general fund into special

11:36:56 revenue funds, and this was done in order to better match

11:37:05 the actual function of certain divisions with the revenue

11:37:09 source.

11:37:10 And these revenue sources were actually outside of the

11:37:12 general fund.

11:37:13 So we took measures to move them out.

11:37:16 And so if you were to go back and compare totals to what we

11:37:20 shared with you at the first workshop, you will see a

11:37:23 difference of $13 million in revenues and 13 million in

11:37:28 expenses in the general fund.

11:37:32 So just explain that difference.

11:37:34 It's just a matter of moving those divisions to where we

11:37:37 feel they appropriately should go.

11:37:40 And that's outside of the general fund.

11:37:48 Since utility tax is such a huge component when we are

11:37:51 talking about our fund balance, merely pointing out that

11:37:55 there was little to be no change from our workshop in these

11:37:59 revenues, it's very consistent with prior years.

11:38:01 What we expect to transfer to our general fund to help cover

11:38:06 our operating expenditures, and we are still on track as far

11:38:11 as these revenues and how we factor them into the budget for

11:38:16 operating and capital expenditures.

11:38:29 On our revenue trend, only showing the slide again, simply

11:38:33 because when we last spoke to you, the revenues expected in

11:38:37 budget fiscal years 2012 were adjusted, not because of the

11:38:42 4% decline but because the value adjustment board process

11:38:47 has been completed, so our final number came in, and I'm

11:38:51 very pleased to say that it was not significantly different

11:38:54 from where we had projected, but roughly about $700,000.

11:38:58 >> (off microphone)

11:39:07 >> Yes.

11:39:10 This is yet another slide that you saw at the last one.

11:39:13 I keep putting this up here because I want us to really,

11:39:15 really understand the total impact of our ad valorem

11:39:19 revenues on our general fund balance and how from year to

11:39:23 year we continued it to experience huge decline in our

11:39:27 revenue, our property tax revenue, comparatively speaking

11:39:31 from 2011 to budgeted 2012.

11:39:35 We have a decline of $49 million.

11:39:42 A good story in our proposed budget is showing you where we

11:39:48 moved from our projected 2011 to 12 budget, fiscal year, in

11:39:54 the way of our TECO franchise fee.

11:39:58 Significant increase, mentioned our convention center

11:40:03 revenues, and the continued improvement of revenues

11:40:06 collected due to events, and also I have been told that a

11:40:11 large portion of this is due to better monitoring of food

11:40:14 preparation and expenses.

11:40:16 So improvements to concessions is helping quite a bit, and

11:40:22 our continued uptick in revenues for convention center.

11:40:28 Now

11:40:31 Into our major expenses,

11:40:38 You will see we are slightly better on our expense side due

11:40:41 to transferring our positions out of the divisions that we

11:40:44 talked about out of the general fund into the special

11:40:46 revenue funds.

11:40:48 So the reason for this improvement is directly related to

11:40:59 moving those divisions.

11:41:01 Utility tax expenditures, there are no major differences

11:41:04 over the first workshop.

11:41:05 Again, just wanted to shop you simply because just a minute

11:41:08 tax is such a huge component of our budget, and specifically

11:41:11 our general fund balance that we are being consistent in

11:41:16 comparison to prior years as to how we use those funds to be

11:41:19 satisfy a portion of our general fund operating expenses.

11:41:28 Our trends for personnel costs, it's a good story.

11:41:35 We talked about the 21 vacancies.

11:41:37 Those figures are incorporated into the budgeted fiscal year

11:41:40 2012 figure where we see a down-tick over the prior year.

11:41:46 It also considers moving the divisions we talked about out

11:41:50 of the general fund, and the benefits associated with all

11:41:55 the positions.

11:41:56 So as a result of taking those measures, the overall fund

11:42:02 has declined significantly.

11:42:10 General employees pension, this is specifically related to

11:42:12 the city's contribution to the general employees pension

11:42:15 fund.

11:42:16 We are down 4.3% over the prior year.

11:42:20 That's largely due to improved investments within the

11:42:23 pension fund, as well as changes in the functions, actually

11:42:29 adjustments to the assumptions used by our actuarial

11:42:32 accounting.

11:42:33 They are specifically related to staffing numbers and

11:42:36 salaries.

11:42:42 The same downward trend for fire and police, but obviously

11:42:45 to a greater extent.

11:42:47 We are down 24.6% over the prior year.

11:42:50 We are projected to be for the city's contribution in '12.

11:42:57 That summarizes the overview for the general fund.

11:43:04 And I wanted to move more into the enterprise fund where

11:43:09 some analysis is still being done in our enterprise fund,

11:43:13 whereas we pretty much closed off most of the work to be

11:43:17 done on the general fund. There's still some to be done on

11:43:21 the enterprise fund, but we have taken care of the items

11:43:26 that will directly impact our shortfall.

11:43:29 So we are comfortable that what we are presenting to you on

11:43:31 our general fund is a solid projection for fiscal 2006.

11:43:37 We want to present to you where we are without any changes

11:43:40 to our enterprise fund.

11:43:43 Keeping in mind that throughout the year we will have to --

11:43:47 some decisions will have to be made for certain of them.

11:43:49 Starting out with the parking fund, as we discussed last

11:43:55 time, the revenues are not sufficient to cover the system's

11:44:01 operating expenses and the debt service associated with the

11:44:03 parking system.

11:44:06 Additionally --

11:44:14 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't mean to cut you off in the middle

11:44:16 of a sentence.

11:44:17 But those projected operating expenses include the debt

11:44:20 service?

11:44:21 >> Yes, they do.

11:44:22 >>MARY MULHERN: How much of it is debt service?

11:44:28 >> 6.1 million annually.

11:44:30 >>HARRY COHEN: How many more years does the city have that

11:44:36 obligation until the parking garages are paid in full?

11:44:39 >> Right.

11:44:39 I'll point out as it relates -- if I may, as it relates to

11:44:43 the debt service, we went from debt service.

11:44:48 There's no additional debt.

11:44:50 It just the way that the debt was structured, where the

11:44:52 payment went from just under $2 million annual debt service

11:44:56 to $6 million starting this fiscal year, and we will be at

11:45:01 those levels for the next almost nine years.

11:45:04 >> And that will be at the end of the nine years --

11:45:10 >> Will drop down for two years to roughly $2 million and

11:45:14 then the debt is all gone.

11:45:16 Sure.

11:45:27 This is a slide that really depicts historically revenue

11:45:30 collections compared to our expenses for the parking system.

11:45:35 Just let me explain that in the years other than fiscal '12

11:45:42 budgeted, those are actual revenue and expenditure

11:45:45 collections.

11:45:45 But because it's an enterprise fund, and the purpose of this

11:45:49 workshop is to show you how we are balancing the budget

11:45:51 including the enterprise fund, that's why you see where the

11:45:54 revenues and expenditures lines meet, but in essence, in

11:45:59 order to get there for fiscal year '12, for the parking

11:46:03 system, we'll have been to use roughly $7 million in general

11:46:06 fund revenues in order to balance the parking system's

11:46:11 budget.

11:46:19 Similarly, with solid waste, our solid waste enterprise

11:46:24 fund, we have a shortfall projected for fiscal year 2012 of

11:46:30 just over $5 million.

11:46:36 We have some general fund balance that we can use that we

11:46:39 expect to be able to use to satisfy the shortfall, but in

11:46:46 future years beyond 2012, we will have a serious problem if

11:46:50 we do nothing and take no action.

11:46:53 Because the fund won't be there and it will be -- the system

11:46:57 fund balance will no longer be sufficient enough to cover

11:47:00 any shortfall.

11:47:01 So then we would need to be prepared to have the general

11:47:04 fund subsidized.

11:47:06 So in addition to parking, we would also have solid waste if

11:47:11 we do nothing.

11:47:12 We are currently working right now, both internally and with

11:47:16 one independent consultant, to do feasibility analyses, so

11:47:21 that we can determine what our options are to address these

11:47:24 issues.

11:47:24 We are taking a very proactive approach.

11:47:27 >>HARRY COHEN: So far we have a year to figure it out?

11:47:29 >> Roughly, yes, sir.

11:47:31 And again, this is the same type of slide that we showed

11:47:34 where 12 is showing you just basically how we fill the gap,

11:47:38 and that includes in fiscal year 12, $7 million of the

11:47:44 system fund balance to balance the budget for solid waste.

11:47:53 Our wastewater fund is slightly better story.

11:48:02 In that for fiscal year 2012, we have sufficient revenues to

11:48:07 could have all of our operating and our debt service, and we

11:48:11 will maintain a very healthy fund balance.

11:48:15 We actually have a fund balance gain of over $6 million in

11:48:19 the wastewater fund.

11:48:21 The same scenario where we provide you from a historical

11:48:28 perspective the revenues expenditures and balancing the

11:48:34 budget, in fiscal year 2012, whereof we were actually good

11:48:41 with our revenues being over expenditures.

11:48:47 The water fund, also, we are positive as far as our fund

11:48:51 balance is concerned, and revenues being sufficient enough

11:48:54 to cover our operating expenses, our spread is slightly

11:49:01 lower on the waterside.

11:49:04 It roughly 500,000 so we are looking at it as almost a

11:49:08 break-even for the water system.

11:49:09 But we have to keep in mind the economic conditions.

11:49:13 There were sometimes where we were considered to be in a

11:49:17 drought-driven environment, but the advantage that we have

11:49:21 for both water and wastewater system is that we have our

11:49:25 rate structure already implemented.

11:49:27 We are in the last year for both water and wastewater system

11:49:32 as far as our current rate structure is concerned.

11:49:41 Moving into our capital improvement program for fiscal year

11:49:45 2012 through 2016, I provided a list for you of major

11:49:51 categories for the capital improvement plan, the five-year

11:49:55 plan, and these categories have several projects listed

11:50:01 under each line item.

11:50:03 You will receive, when the mayor presents the budget at next

11:50:07 Thursday's meeting, the 28th, the full-blown budget will

11:50:11 include all the details related to the capital improvement

11:50:14 plan, the five-year plan, but we wanted to give you a

11:50:18 snapshot today of what's been budgeted for in our five-year

11:50:22 plan.

11:50:23 >> And we passed on this broadly already as a council, and

11:50:33 that the allocations to each category are therefore set in

11:50:39 stone going forward, but the individual line items within

11:50:43 each category are things that can be revisited from year to

11:50:47 year as we move through the five-year period?

11:50:50 >> Yes, sir.

11:50:50 Very similarly to what you passed for C.I.T. will be the

11:50:54 same for capital improvement.

11:50:58 By category, this is the amount that has been budgeted, by

11:51:01 category.

11:51:02 There is ab basket full of projects under each category.

11:51:08 And based on available funding as comes in, because a

11:51:12 five-year period is significant when you are in an economy

11:51:15 like this, determining what your revenue stream is going to

11:51:19 look like.

11:51:19 But as revenues become available, departments, along with

11:51:25 the administration, will prioritize the projects under each

11:51:28 category, and then come back to you for approval.

11:51:36 For the projects to actually be funded.

11:51:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: Question.

11:51:43 Will we have this line item detailed prayer to the mayor

11:51:46 presenting this to us next week?

11:51:49 Will we have this in advance?

11:51:50 >> I can work to get it to you in advance, sir.

11:51:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

11:51:54 Because I think it would be fair to us if we had a line

11:52:00 item, at least some type of projection, where these dollars

11:52:04 are going.

11:52:05 If you take parks and recreation, for example, if there's a

11:52:10 priority, I would like to know what the priorities are going

11:52:12 to be for fiscal year 12 or fiscal year 3.

11:52:17 And I would like to know in advance because just in case the

11:52:22 mayor comes and presents this, and if I have a problem with

11:52:26 it, I want to be able to question the mayor.

11:52:29 That's my point.

11:52:30 >> Yes, sir.

11:52:31 May I caution that what we are presenting on the 28th is

11:52:35 very similar to what the structure we did for C.I.T., simply

11:52:40 because the large majority of the projects that were

11:52:44 submitted, they have never gone out to bid for contractors

11:52:47 to provide full-blown estimates.

11:52:50 These are coming from the departments as needs for their

11:52:53 particular department, waiting on funds to be allocated.

11:52:58 So the approach that we have taken is to allocate by

11:53:02 category, have the department shave their priority list for

11:53:09 those that are likely to be done in '12 but need to get done

11:53:13 in '12, and as they reprioritize they come back again

11:53:17 requesting for the actual funding.

11:53:19 So what you will see is the categories we have here with a

11:53:22 list with no dollar amount of the project under each

11:53:26 category.

11:53:27 >> Let me just ask a follow-up then.

11:53:30 Take, for example, investment in neighborhoods.

11:53:35 What does that really mean?

11:53:37 Are you talking about beautification?

11:53:39 Are you talking about sidewalks, infrastructure improvement?

11:53:45 When you say investment in neighborhoods, what actually does

11:53:48 that mean?

11:53:48 >> Investing in neighborhoods will include projects for

11:53:53 parks and rec, transportation projects, and public

11:53:58 works-related type projects.

11:54:00 So there are varying projects that will be included under

11:54:04 that category.

11:54:05 >> But if the investment in neighborhood is similar to parks

11:54:12 and rec, there will not be a duplication in the parks and

11:54:16 rec line item versus what you have got listed in the

11:54:19 investment in neighborhoods?

11:54:20 >> Absolutely.

11:54:21 We wanted to know -- be absolutely sure there was no

11:54:24 duplication.

11:54:25 But we wanted to highlight the projects that were

11:54:28 specifically related to neighborhood projects.

11:54:30 >> Okay.

11:54:32 Thank you.

11:54:42 Finally just to give you a snapshot of how the city has

11:54:45 performed specifically as relates to investing in

11:54:49 neighborhoods, you will see that from 2003, we are 2.6

11:54:54 million was allocate specifically for that purpose all the

11:54:57 way through '11 where $10 million and we are budgeting for

11:55:01 fiscal year 2012 at $12.4 million.

11:55:04 So we have -- we are making a conscious effort to continue

11:55:09 to offer funding so that we can improve our neighborhoods.

11:55:17 And one final thing, if I may just remind everyone that our

11:55:22 public hearings have been approved for September 7th and

11:55:26 September 21st.

11:55:28 So we will be back once again to answer any questions as it

11:55:32 relates to our budget at those hearings.

11:55:35 >> And as you mentioned the mayor will be coming here next

11:55:38 week to formally present the budget.

11:55:42 >> Yes, sir.

11:55:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me just ask a question before you go.

11:55:53 When you stated -- I made a notation here.

11:55:56 Let me go back and find it.

11:55:59 I thought we were going to ask questions at the end.

11:56:01 And I didn't want to interrupt you.

11:56:05 When you say you are projecting $2 million from the

11:56:11 intersection, say the red light camera program, that's your

11:56:19 projection of revenues you are going to receive.

11:56:21 Those revenues, this $2 million, where will they be used?

11:56:25 For what purpose?

11:56:27 >> They would be used to -- as a full-blown, to come into

11:56:34 our general fund to be used for capital projects -- are they

11:56:39 restricted?

11:56:41 >> They are not.

11:56:42 They are not restricted.

11:56:43 >> So those funds can be allocated for infrastructure

11:56:49 improvement in the areas where those red light cameras will

11:56:53 be located?

11:56:55 They can be allocated?

11:56:57 >> They could.

11:56:57 >> They could be?

11:56:58 >> They could.

11:56:59 >> All right.

11:57:01 Then what would it take, and what is the process?

11:57:05 You might not want to answer this question.

11:57:08 But to have some of those revenues be used for

11:57:20 infrastructure improvement in the areas where the red light

11:57:23 cameras will be. I don't know if that's in your purview.

11:57:27 Someone needs to answer. Because here is my point.

11:57:29 Those areas where those 10 or 20 cameras are going to be

11:57:35 located, and going to generate revenues from those areas,

11:57:41 then at least is go back and improve the infrastructure in

11:57:47 those areas.

11:57:50 Sidewalks, curbs, whatever needs to be done. But let me ask

11:57:58 council, our counsel. What is the process to pursue having

11:58:05 some of those designated for those purposes?

11:58:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have to refresh my recollection as to

11:58:14 how the red light camera is structured, but normally, a

11:58:18 legislative body can designate a fund that revenue is put

11:58:25 into, and then limit the use of the revenue.

11:58:31 And it's the accounting practice.

11:58:33 How we would do it under a strong mayor form of government,

11:58:36 I would be happy to research and report back to council on.

11:58:39 And it's a good general question.

11:58:42 It's a question that I want to be able to give you a clear

11:58:44 answer on.

11:58:45 >>HARRY COHEN: Is something we could find out the answer to

11:58:49 by next week's meeting?

11:58:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's what I hope.

11:58:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Absolutely.

11:58:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Has the answer changed in the last few

11:58:57 months?

11:58:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It all depends on how it's structured.

11:59:03 If it's done through ordinance, or it's done through the

11:59:08 administration.

11:59:10 I have to research that.

11:59:11 But normally, normally, you can take a revenue source, put

11:59:15 it in a particular accounting process, a particular count,

11:59:19 and designate those uses for that account.

11:59:21 >>MARY MULHERN: We haven't of done that, have we?

11:59:27 By process that was an administrative function?

11:59:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And under the charter it may very well be

11:59:32 which is why I want to discuss this with the city attorney

11:59:34 and discuss it with Ms. Little and be able to give you a

11:59:37 definitive answer.

11:59:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Good. I hope maybe it will be a new

11:59:40 answer.

11:59:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Well, if wreck have something by next

11:59:46 week.

11:59:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you would lake a report, if you want to

11:59:49 do it in the form of a motion I can put it under staff

11:59:52 reports, however you wish, or I can talk with you, Mr.

11:59:54 Reddick, or discuss it with council.

11:59:57 However you want.

11:59:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: I move that you research how revenues from

12:00:03 the red light camera can be utilized for infrastructure

12:00:07 needs in the area, the intersection in which those cameras

12:00:11 are located.

12:00:11 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion by Councilman Reddick, seconded by

12:00:19 Councilwoman Mulhern. Discussion.

12:00:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would ask Councilman Reddick to maybe

12:00:26 expand the motion or make an amendment to the motion that --

12:00:29 I agree with you, that that's a fantastic idea, but I want

12:00:33 to maybe expand it to at one point you said the area where

12:00:39 the red light cameras are located and not specifically just

12:00:42 to that intersection where the red light cameras are

12:00:45 located. So maybe just semantics. Vicinity.

12:00:52 >>HARRY COHEN: I think we can get to that issue later.

12:00:58 The motion itself really just deals with getting an opinion

12:01:00 on what it is we are allowed to do.

12:01:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Right.

12:01:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have been reminded by the clerk that

12:01:06 before you do take any official action that you have to open

12:01:08 the floor for public comment.

12:01:09 So if you would do that before you take action on the

12:01:11 motion.

12:01:11 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there any public comment on the motion?

12:01:16 Hearing none, is there any additional comment from council?

12:01:20 All in favor?

12:01:22 Opposed?

12:01:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.

12:01:26 >>HARRY COHEN: I believe that is the conclusion of the

12:01:31 formal presentation.

12:01:32 Are there any additional comments or questions from council

12:01:34 members?

12:01:36 If not, I will go ahead and yield the floor back to our

12:01:38 chair.

12:01:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

12:01:44 Do any council members have any new business?

12:01:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: No.

12:01:54 >>THE CLERK: We do have to receive and file documents.

12:01:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I get a motion to receive and file all

12:01:59 the documents?

12:02:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: So move to receive and file.

12:02:03 >> Second.

12:02:04 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

12:02:06 We are adjourned.

12:02:08 Till 6:00.

12:02:11 Till 6:00.

12:02:17 (The meeting adjourned at 12:03 p.m.)




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