Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL

Thursday, July 21, 2011
Budget Workshop

DISCLAIMER:

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


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

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.)

12:04:06

12:04:11

DISCLAIMER:

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