TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, August 4, 2011
9:00 a.m. Session
The following represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete
accuracy nor used as a verbatim 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.
>>MARY MULHERN: I call to order the meeting of the Tampa
09:04:01 Councilman Reddick, I yield to him to give us the
09:04:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:04:10 It's an honor to have the Reverend Beverly Lane, who is
09:04:13 pastor of Bethel AME church, the chaplain for the City of
09:04:18 Tampa police department, wife of former deputy chief police
09:04:22 Curtis Lane, she's state president of One Church One Child
09:04:27 appointed by the governor, and she also is my cousin.
09:04:32 [ Laughter ]
09:04:34 Thank you.
09:04:34 >> Thank you.
09:04:44 May we pray.
09:04:47 To Him who is able to keep us all from falling, we have come
09:04:52 at this moment in time to thank you for those who are
09:04:58 assembled here for the betterment of our City of Tampa.
09:05:02 We ask that you continue to make us aware of the needs of
09:05:07 Help us to serve our fellowman with clean and pure hearts.
09:05:14 Help us to remember than you know what is good for us.
09:05:20 And thank you for sending community helpers at the time of
09:05:24 need, the mayor, this City Council as they carry out your
09:05:31 will and attempt your mercy.
09:05:34 This we ask, amen.
09:05:36 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:05:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Roll call, please.
09:05:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
09:06:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Here.
09:06:04 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
09:06:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
09:06:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:06:11 And now we will go over the agenda.
09:06:21 The addenda, addendum, to the agenda.
09:06:25 There's more than one change, right? And I need to add an
09:06:31 item that is not on your list.
09:06:32 I would like to ask that number 19, which is on the consent
09:06:39 agenda, be moved to the staff reports portion and can be
09:06:45 heard at that time before or after item 43 which is the same
09:06:53 staff reporting.
09:06:55 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Just to have been review a few
09:07:08 changes to the agenda.
09:07:10 If addendum total agenda for August 4, 2011.
09:07:15 Under new business, we have a memorandum from chief
09:07:19 assistant city attorney Sal Territo requesting a special
09:07:23 called session of council to be scheduled on August 18, 2011
09:07:28 prior to the regular session of the Community Redevelopment
09:07:30 Agency to consider the adoption of two bond resolutions.
09:07:40 As far as continuances or removal of items, item 24, the
09:07:51 ordinance is being presented for second reading and
09:07:57 A public hearing would need to be opened and continued to
09:07:59 August 25th, 2011 at 9:30 since the petitioner filed
09:08:07 their site plan late per Land Development Coordination.
09:08:11 Also, item 28, that is the same.
09:08:18 The public hearing will need to be opened and continued to
09:08:21 August 25th, 2011 at 9:30.
09:08:25 Again, since the petitioner has not filed their site plan
09:08:29 per Land Development Coordination.
09:08:34 That is regarding the property at 1208 west Linebaugh
09:08:37 Item 30 cannot be heard due to misnotice.
09:08:44 This is the second adoption public hearing on a small scale
09:08:47 plan amendment.
09:08:50 Also, item 31 also cannot be heard due to a misnotice.
09:08:57 That's also related to a small scale plan amendment.
09:09:01 Item 37, the administration will be requesting a continuance
09:09:09 to November 3rd, 2011.
09:09:12 That is regarding the request by former chair pro tem Miller
09:09:18 to remain 29th street to -- for Abraham Brown street.
09:09:29 Item 43, that was just a note to the agenda.
09:09:35 And as our chair pro tem just noted, item 19 is being pulled
09:09:40 for staff reports.
09:09:42 That's all I have so far.
09:09:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:09:48 Mr. Shelby?
09:09:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, council.
09:09:51 With regard to the changes to be today's agenda I would ask
09:09:54 for the purposes of the special called meeting that that be
09:09:56 a separate motion because you are setting a special called
09:10:01 There's also one other item, other than that, if I can.
09:10:04 Council member Montelione is not present, but if you look at
09:10:07 today's calendar you do have scheduled 1:30 this afternoon
09:10:11 what is called a City Council informational workshop.
09:10:16 I would like to have some clarification on that.
09:10:18 Obviously she's not present.
09:10:24 I don't know whether we should take it up now or not.
09:10:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: My apologies.
09:10:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Did you hear the question?
09:10:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No.
09:10:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Some clarification on the item that's on
09:10:38 the calendar for the 1:30 City Council informational
09:10:40 workshop set in the Mascotte room for the purpose of Land
09:10:43 Development Code, chapter 27, education.
09:10:46 Just for purposes of clarification, council, it is not on
09:10:52 your official agenda today because of miscommunication, and
09:11:01 frankly on my part.
09:11:03 It should have been clarified when it was set whether it was
09:11:05 an official workshop by council or whether a special
09:11:08 discussion meeting, and there was confusion about that.
09:11:12 I would like to know what is the intent of council.
09:11:14 If it is to be a workshop, obviously a quorum is required.
09:11:20 Official action can be taken after public comment.
09:11:22 It would be my recommendation that finance you do have it
09:11:24 as, in fact, a workshop that we correct the agenda by adding
09:11:28 it to today's agenda as part of the approval of today's
09:11:33 If you wish to have it as a special discussion meeting, it
09:11:36 would be my request that you then amend the title to a
09:11:41 special discussion meeting so it would comport with what our
09:11:46 standard procedures are.
09:11:47 Whatever the pleasure of council is.
09:11:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione?
09:11:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: My intention was to have this as a
09:11:55 workshop for two reasons.
09:11:57 The initial reason for my asking for the Land Development
09:12:00 Code review or session was for educational purposes for
09:12:07 separation with the Seminole Heights form-based code coming
09:12:12 before us so that we understand Wan the issues are and when
09:12:17 those items came before us, we would be able to make some
09:12:22 thoughtful decisions about the form-based code.
09:12:25 However, since the economic competitiveness committee has
09:12:27 been formed, that added another reason that this is so
09:12:33 important and why I wish to set it as a workshop, because
09:12:38 the discussion of the Land Development Code would then,
09:12:44 amongst council, be an area whereof we could ask our staff,
09:12:48 or the mayor's staff, to research or look at some items and
09:12:52 bring them back to us, and then I could bring those items
09:12:54 forward to the economic competitiveness committee, so the
09:12:59 committee is reviewing and taking suggestions for revisions
09:13:04 to Land Development Code and to the permitting process.
09:13:08 Without having it as an official workshop, we would not be
09:13:11 able to have a quorum to take action to ask staff to look at
09:13:17 particular items or for us to take action or request action
09:13:20 be taken at a future date for certain items with respect to
09:13:26 revisions to the Land Development Code.
09:13:28 So it is my intention to have it as an official workshop so
09:13:32 that if we desire to take action.
09:13:37 >>MARY MULHERN: So that should have been on our agenda.
09:13:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
09:13:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess we must not have been clear when we
09:13:46 made the motion originally.
09:13:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because it gotten changed a few times,
09:13:51 we have changed dates, changed locations.
09:13:53 So understandably there was some confusion.
09:13:56 >>MARY MULHERN: So because of it, you will have a quorum?
09:14:04 However, I will say this discussion came up early in the
09:14:06 last term of council, because there were a lot of workshops
09:14:11 and discussion meetings being set, and it turned out that
09:14:17 very seldom was there a quorum.
09:14:19 So we also had lengthy discussions and made the decision to
09:14:23 have regular workshop meetings which we adopted.
09:14:27 So I think maybe that's part of the confusion, because we
09:14:31 didn't put it on a workshop day.
09:14:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I know. Initially, the very first
09:14:38 motion I made was to set it for a workshop meeting.
09:14:43 And then for some reasons we had other workshops come up,
09:14:47 and it was put off and put off and put off, and the initial
09:14:53 motion, several months ago now, wags to have it on a
09:14:58 workshop day as a regular workshop meeting.
09:15:05 >>MARY MULHERN: So does anyone else have any -- perhaps
09:15:09 that could be made as a motion before we adopt the changes
09:15:12 to add that to the changes in the agenda, to call it a
09:15:18 workshop meeting.
09:15:18 And I believe if you don't have a quorum, you will still
09:15:20 have staff there.
09:15:21 It shouldn't be a problem.
09:15:22 It just means you won't be able to take any action.
09:15:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Staff will be there because they will be
09:15:27 conducting the workshop.
09:15:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And the other thing I wanted to say in
09:15:31 general begun workshops was that we tend not to take action
09:15:35 at workshops, and that's kind of the difference.
09:15:38 So the more people there, the better.
09:15:41 But if you don't have everyone there, or a quorum.
09:15:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So I would make a motion then to amend
09:15:50 the agenda to change the title to council workshop on Land
09:15:55 Development Code.
09:15:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, a reminder.
09:16:01 Do you still wish to have it in the Mascotte room with the
09:16:04 understanding it would not be able to be televised but still
09:16:08 be able to be recorded?
09:16:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That is correct.
09:16:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there a second?
09:16:14 >> I second that.
09:16:15 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:16:17 Anyone opposed?
09:16:22 And could we have a motion for the first item on the
09:16:24 addendum, the scheduling of the new business of the closed
09:16:32 >> So moved.
09:16:33 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:16:34 Anyone opposed?
09:16:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That was for the special called meeting?
09:16:39 Thank you.
09:16:39 >>MARY MULHERN: August 18th.
09:16:43 Prior to the regular session of the CRA.
09:16:51 Is there any discussion of the agenda from council?
09:16:56 If we could have a motion to approve the changes, the
09:17:00 >> So moved.
09:17:02 >> Second.
09:17:03 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:17:04 Anyone opposed?
09:17:05 >>THE CLERK: Would you like to approve the minutes from the
09:17:14 last meeting?
09:17:16 >> So moved.
09:17:17 >> Second.
09:17:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Last minutes, last meeting.
09:17:20 All in favor?
09:17:21 Anyone opposed?
09:17:28 At this time, we are open for public comments.
09:17:32 We'll allow 30 minutes for public comment, three minutes per
09:17:37 speaker, and we will give preference, so get in line first
09:17:41 if you are speaking on an item of that is on the agenda.
09:17:47 If we could have the agenda item speakers first.
09:17:52 >> Pete Johnson, 6113 Margo drive, Tampa, Florida.
09:18:02 As you know, I'm afternoon very strong neighborhood
09:18:05 activist, and I believe in fixing the neighborhoods.
09:18:09 One thing I want to bring up is I understand yesterday the
09:18:13 administration approved the Williams pool money to be spent
09:18:18 on reviewing the Williams pool.
09:18:22 My problem, though, is that the Cuscaden pool that cost $2.3
09:18:28 million to rehab can't be used because of the lack of due
09:18:34 diligence by contract admission.
09:18:40 I understand now that the cost to repair would be between
09:18:42 1.5 million and another $2 million.
09:18:48 This is ridiculous.
09:18:48 We need to correct the problems that we created as well as
09:18:54 take care of the problems that are on the line.
09:18:58 The second thing is, you all understand that I am very
09:19:03 proactive for code enforcement.
09:19:07 I am wondering if you have gotten this copy of this report
09:19:11 that was done in 2009.
09:19:15 I'm sure you don't but I ask workshop meeting ask that the
09:19:17 you please ask for a copy and read it.
09:19:19 It's a cost comparison between civil citations and code
09:19:25 It will explain the difference in costs.
09:19:28 I'll do that later.
09:19:29 This is the graph showing civil citations are almost 89%
09:19:39 compliance active.
09:19:40 It also takes a minimum of maybe two months to get
09:19:46 Code enforcement goes on and on and on.
09:19:49 As of this date, code is only used 931 civil citations out
09:19:56 of almost 16,000, over 16,000 violations in 2011.
09:20:04 It doesn't make sense.
09:20:06 Another thing I want to bring up is the cost factor.
09:20:18 This shows the cost factor with just a few cases totaling,
09:20:25 with the code board, $2,090 with civil citations, $1300.
09:20:33 That's just a few.
09:20:40 I will leave all these copies.
09:20:46 This is two days of case readings.
09:20:53 It adds to the cost of $2300.
09:20:57 Now, we are in a budget.
09:20:59 I would strongly suggest that council ask the code
09:21:03 enforcement department on the reasons why they do not insist
09:21:09 that they use civil citations rather than go to the code
09:21:14 Thank you.
09:21:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:21:21 >> Ed Tillou: Those are handouts in the past.
09:21:37 My name is Tillou, Ed Tillou, and this is item 21, directed
09:21:43 toward Mr. Suarez who is on the Hart board and public works.
09:21:47 The busway is in critical need of repair.
09:21:51 There's a bus 2209.
09:21:53 It shakes.
09:21:55 It's unbelievable.
09:21:56 Unfortunately, it's always in the hands of the same driver,
09:21:59 so maybe it plays a role.
09:22:05 But the thing is, this is tearing up the Hart equipment, the
09:22:08 condition of the busway.
09:22:10 And I think the beautification of Henderson is nice.
09:22:15 But I think priority has got to be put on patching the holes
09:22:18 in the busway.
09:22:20 Secondarily, another works item, they were cutting pavement
09:22:25 up in Sulphur Springs, Nebraska and they didn't have any
09:22:30 And there was this cloud of dust from some machine that has
09:22:33 a brush, and it was brushing and creating this dust cloud
09:22:37 that went down to -- it's like a church sort of thing.
09:22:41 It's a combination church.
09:22:47 And I don't know finance these people put in a complaint but
09:22:50 God help anybody who has asthma.
09:22:52 I think this truck has a tank to spray water and they are
09:22:56 just lazy, not doing it.
09:22:58 Again this is a public works problem.
09:23:00 To shift to another thing, I saw in the paper that the
09:23:02 marina in Mr. Cohen's district, and what goes with that,
09:23:10 it's a pretty good rate, and I think of that could be spread
09:23:13 around up north and you would publicize and have a lot of
09:23:16 people wanting to move down here.
09:23:18 If they realize marine space is available.
09:23:20 The only problem is rather than pay $2400 a year for, say, a
09:23:25 30-foot boat, people would join a Yacht Club.
09:23:27 So what there's a need to do is take $2 of that $7, earmark
09:23:32 it to build a community center, turn it over to the rec
09:23:35 department, try to have little social events, bring 9/11 an
09:23:38 sea scout unit and things like that, so you create a little
09:23:41 bit of a Yacht Club atmosphere.
09:23:44 And then people would want those slips.
09:23:46 So there's a marketing problem there.
09:23:52 Okay, I passed out these handouts.
09:23:55 That's where exemption of slow release fertilizers from this
09:23:58 fertilizer ban is important.
09:24:00 In terms of the economics, that would level out across the
09:24:08 Long-run, you would probably, by having fertilizing costing
09:24:10 twice as much, with slow-release fertilizers becoming
09:24:17 available, you would have the development of a fertilizer
09:24:21 market, and like you will ultimately have less people
09:24:25 employed five or ten years down the road as this picks up.
09:24:29 But, I mean, you are not worried be about that when you cut
09:24:33 our jobs right and left and there's an Army of young people
09:24:35 needing work.
09:24:36 So you are not laying people off, but there's no
09:24:38 opportunities for young people to come along.
09:24:41 You know, that's not your fault, of doors course, but still
09:24:47 people think about it.
09:24:48 You are just postponing a problem.
09:24:49 As I said, this is very important.
09:24:51 If they went to slow release fertilizer, it would increase
09:24:55 the price of food 20%.
09:24:58 If a market development facilities were online to produce
09:25:01 this in quantity, maybe the increase would be 10%.
09:25:04 (Bell sounds)
09:25:05 But you see the importance of that from the handout.
09:25:08 Okay, well, I had other things.
09:25:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:25:10 >> Okay.
09:25:16 Item 36.
09:25:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Next.
09:25:18 >> I'm Loretta Fazio, secretary of Bon Air neighborhood
09:25:21 association, and we had a few things on the agenda.
09:25:24 Number 23, 25, 26, and 27.
09:25:28 And 2001 that we are really focusing on is 25.
09:25:31 And in the first reading --
09:25:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's a public hearing.
09:25:37 >> Oh, we can't speak to that yet (okay, I'll come back.
09:25:42 >>MARY MULHERN: It will be sometime after 9:30.
09:25:44 >> At the point we are addressing.
09:25:46 So you want me to wait till 9:30?
09:25:50 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
09:25:50 Thank you.
09:25:51 >> Good morning.
09:25:55 I'm Elder Michelle B. Patty, P.O. Box 4624, Tampa, Florida.
09:26:01 I come to say thank you to first Councilman Frank Reddick,
09:26:07 to Mike Suarez, to Mary Mulhern, and to Charlie Miranda in
09:26:13 his absence for showing strong leadership for the need of
09:26:19 the people 9/11 this district.
09:26:20 We thank you for standing up for the children, the seniors
09:26:24 of William park pool.
09:26:26 We were he lated to read the paper this morning that the
09:26:28 mayor has found moneys from somewhere to gone forward with
09:26:33 the pool.
09:26:34 It might seem like a simple thing.
09:26:36 But what people need to understand, we live in the State of
09:26:38 Florida, surrounded by water.
09:26:42 Children, all people need to learn how to swim.
09:26:50 There are scholarships that could be earned to gone to
09:26:51 college, on the swim team.
09:26:51 You can even become a millionaire as Michael Phelps has
09:26:54 We would like to say once again this is not something
09:26:57 frivolous, that the community is speaking out, but we would
09:27:01 like to thank you for strong leadership at this point.
09:27:04 Thank you so much.
09:27:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:27:06 >> Jarvis El-Amin, 4818 East 99th Avenue, Tampa, Florida.
09:27:15 We definitely want to support strong leadership.
09:27:18 And district 3 representative Councilman Reddick, we really
09:27:23 appreciate your lead on that.
09:27:25 Leadership in taking positive action toward a good cause,
09:27:28 and we know when we talk about our children, that's a good
09:27:32 Moving from that, I want to say something to this council.
09:27:36 You all need to be very careful in doing your due diligence
09:27:39 and making sure staff do their due diligence.
09:27:42 That Pricewaterhouse bill, in my opinion, was insulting.
09:27:48 You want to give half a million dollar away.
09:27:51 Jobs are going away.
09:27:53 This is your responsibility, council.
09:27:55 Don't let staff come up here and just run some numbers.
09:27:58 The pool issue came back, staff dropping the ball.
09:28:03 This is your responsibility.
09:28:04 Don't let them come up here.
09:28:06 They get paid big money to do a job.
09:28:08 And we require them taxpayer money.
09:28:11 Remember, it's not their money.
09:28:12 Taxpayer money.
09:28:13 Let me also move back to Williams park.
09:28:16 I want to say to Mayor Bob Buckhorn, I know he's listening,
09:28:22 I supported him, his leadership, Bub I think he need to take
09:28:26 a more conciliatory tone.
09:28:30 This could have all been avoided.
09:28:32 And not say, let me try to work with Councilman Reddick in
09:28:37 district 3, district 5 to get this done.
09:28:39 We don't need no people up here.
09:28:42 This is not a dictator country.
09:28:45 It's a strong mayor form of government.
09:28:47 But you are the elected legislative body that controls the
09:28:51 Don't give away your power.
09:28:52 And Frank proved that.
09:28:55 Thank you very kindly.
09:28:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:28:59 >> Derrick Chamblee, St. Petersburg, founder of the homeless
09:29:08 Since 1993 I have been organizing homeless and volunteers to
09:29:11 get them housing, food and drugs on both side of the bay.
09:29:16 I want to speak today on your so-called panhandling homeless
09:29:24 I spoke to the last council before the elections in
09:29:29 So now this being a new council I am going to repeat some of
09:29:32 the same things.
09:29:34 I caution you to go the same way as St. Petersburg has gone,
09:29:37 because we are confident that they are violating our
09:29:42 Constitutional rights by taking away the ability to have
09:29:49 write a message on a sign and come out in the public town
09:29:54 square, and I mean the sidewalks.
09:29:56 It's true the medians are very, very dangerous.
09:30:00 I won't be on a median myself.
09:30:02 I work 13 intersections on both sides of the bay for a year
09:30:06 and a half now.
09:30:07 I won't even be in the medians.
09:30:09 They are very dangerous.
09:30:10 You could be right about that.
09:30:12 But we can never retreat from the sidewalk.
09:30:16 And you all campaigned back before the spring election, you
09:30:22 have volunteers, even some of the candidates themselves came
09:30:25 out with their signs.
09:30:26 Politicians are beggars.
09:30:27 Now, we all have these Constitutional rights.
09:30:31 You can't just eliminate people and group them in an
09:30:36 economic class.
09:30:37 That's against the 14th amendment.
09:30:39 We are going to assemble -- if you follow through and do the
09:30:42 same thing as St. Petersburg, we are going to assemble
09:30:45 foundation lawyers from probably the ACLU and the ACLJ,
09:30:51 American civil law and justice, the American Civil Liberties
09:30:56 I had a team of those lawyers back in the 90s pro bono,
09:31:01 and we are going to defend our Constitutional rights, if you
09:31:04 continue to shred the Constitution, we are going to shred
09:31:09 I caution you to go the same way as St. Petersburg.
09:31:12 We are going to deal with the police chief and the mayor and
09:31:14 the City Council over there.
09:31:15 I have been over there now a year, and I work the inter
09:31:20 intersections over there within signs.
09:31:22 Now, we are also dealing with freedom of the press.
09:31:28 Whoever heard that you can't come out and hawk your
09:31:30 newspapers in the town square, in the public square? So we
09:31:33 are dealing with freedom of the press.
09:31:35 We are dealing with freedom of speech.
09:31:37 Over in St. Pete they are trying to cut off the relief
09:31:40 organizations I'm working with, that we are working with,
09:31:43 the volunteers that bring food and clothing in, and many of
09:31:46 them are church people, which they are commanded to go out
09:31:51 and help the poor, the hungry and the homeless.
09:31:54 So now we are dealing with freedom of religion.
09:32:00 And that pretty much locked up the BayWalk, and that was
09:32:03 freedom of assembly.
09:32:06 So I caution you to go the same way.
09:32:09 Also, I have worked with the homeless coalition here over a
09:32:13 year ago.
09:32:13 And all they did was block federal money that exists right
09:32:18 now, that was passed down by the current president in
09:32:21 Washington that would pay rent vouchers for up to 16, 18
09:32:27 months, and virtually everybody that's on those intersection
09:32:31 was their signs, the cardboard signs and whatnot, qualified
09:32:34 for those funds.
09:32:35 (Bell sounds)
09:32:37 They are blocking them from getting apartments.
09:32:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:32:40 >> Good morning. Connie Burton, 4220-43rd Avenue.
09:32:49 I come this morning here to really thank and support
09:32:56 Councilman Peterman and all those who supported him on the
09:33:06 playground and the pool.
09:33:07 Like one of the previous speakers said, what appears to be
09:33:12 small things is what the community is always constantly
09:33:15 looking at.
09:33:17 When we hear these great slogans about Tampa becoming the
09:33:22 next great city, we want to feel that all communities fit
09:33:29 into that mesh, and that our communities are based on old
09:33:34 past traditions won't continue on into the future.
09:33:39 I'm also equally concerned about this ongoing issue of this
09:33:44 crisis of homelessness that we have in our community.
09:33:48 And I would just like to suggest to the council that, you
09:33:52 know, there's a little initiative that I feel is going to,
09:33:56 you know, bring economic hardship over our community.
09:34:02 You find people right now in serious economic crisis.
09:34:06 And the people look to leadership to help solve these
09:34:09 problems, not trying to -- whether it's through the red
09:34:14 light new ordinance, and people say it's a safety concern,
09:34:19 and then you find a number of cities have abandoned that.
09:34:23 As you all ponder and try to figure out how this community
09:34:28 will become economically sound, thinking out of the box,
09:34:32 that the people that is impoverished cannot do this.
09:34:36 When we think about people needing homes, we look to this
09:34:39 council to use your leadership and say, what is best for the
09:34:48 So the $550 that will be given to another corporation that
09:34:52 didn't need it, maybe that's thinking out of the box would
09:34:56 help them and leave other cities into thinking what they can
09:35:00 do best for their people.
09:35:03 Again, the pool issue is just going to be tremendously
09:35:08 welcome to that community.
09:35:10 When we think about economic and the welfare inside of the
09:35:13 district 5 community, the amenities that our community needs
09:35:20 to help our families.
09:35:21 So again to be Councilman Peterman -- -- I mean -- I'm
09:35:30 I'm sorry.
09:35:31 Councilman Reddick.
09:35:32 Thanks again for your leadership.
09:35:34 We support you.
09:35:35 And to all of the council that can look towards the entire
09:35:40 community, we support you as well.
09:35:41 Thank you.
09:35:41 >> Sam Kennedy, Ashton drive, Tampa, Florida.
09:35:54 Sometimes, I hear folks say that we are going to be the next
09:35:59 great city.
09:35:59 I'm convinced that Tampa is already a great city.
09:36:02 We have a great City Council of champions for the people.
09:36:06 We have an administration that appears to be visionary, and
09:36:12 we have many great employees up and down the chain.
09:36:15 But sometimes the lines of communication break down, as in
09:36:21 the case of Williams park.
09:36:23 And it appears that confusion and wordsmithing becomes the
09:36:30 order of the day.
09:36:32 But I'm thankful that this council has provided the
09:36:38 leadership to reopen the lines of communication and help us
09:36:41 get a much needed problem solved.
09:36:45 And so I'm extremely ecstatic that a decision has been made
09:36:54 to find than the money to open the Williams park pool.
09:36:57 I'm happy for the children in South Tampa that they'll have
09:37:04 their pool.
09:37:04 I'm happy that the children of Davis Island Roy Jenkins will
09:37:09 have their pool.
09:37:10 And I'm now happy for the children of East Tampa.
09:37:16 And so I come to tell you, thanks.
09:37:20 You have done great for us, and we are extremely
09:37:26 Sometimes, working in government is not always appreciated,
09:37:34 hasn't run its course.
09:37:35 And this has run the course.
09:37:36 You have been great.
09:37:37 The problems have been solved.
09:37:38 And I think now that all the people are happy .
09:37:44 I notch you all.
09:37:45 I know Frank Reddick a lot better because he has been the
09:37:53 president of my neighborhood association.
09:37:53 I have always known him to be a fighter.
09:37:54 He's still a fighter.
09:37:55 And he's a fighter among other fighters.
09:38:00 So we are extremely happy with our City Council.
09:38:04 Now we are happy with our administration.
09:38:06 Thank you so much.
09:38:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Before we move on with the agenda, I just
09:38:14 wanted to point out -- to thank our clerk, Ms. Shirley
09:38:23 Foxx-Knowles, for her memo to council and make sure that
09:38:27 everybody has seen it and just point it out today, because
09:38:30 it's about our calendar, and about as we add things to the
09:38:36 agenda to be conscious of when we come in.
09:38:44 Nobody is pointing fingers.
09:38:47 I'm just as bad to show up and don't know what we have
09:38:50 scheduled on which days.
09:38:51 Today, finance you are adding anything total agenda, just
09:38:55 make sure you have the calendar in front of you and be
09:38:58 conscious of it, especially our next regular meeting, which
09:39:01 is the 25th of August is really, really full.
09:39:09 And September 1st San regular session and does not look
09:39:14 very full.
09:39:14 So that would be better choice for regular council meetings.
09:39:20 And then our meeting on the 8th of September, which is
09:39:25 the CRA, then City Council special call, then evening
09:39:28 So the 8th is really, really busy, and the 15th.
09:39:32 So I just want to make sure that everyone saw this and I
09:39:36 just wanted to thank Shirley for doing that.
09:39:42 Are there any requests for reconsideration of legislative
09:39:50 Seeing none, we'll move to have our committee reports.
09:39:53 Public safety, Councilman Reddick.
09:39:55 >>FRANK REDDICK: I move items 1 through 3.
09:39:59 >> Second.
09:40:01 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:40:03 Any opposed?
09:40:04 Parks and recreation, Councilwoman Montelione.
09:40:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move items 4 through 7.
09:40:12 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.
09:40:15 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:40:16 Anyone opposed?
09:40:18 Public Works Committee, Councilman Suarez.
09:40:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move items 8 through 11.
09:40:23 >> Second.
09:40:26 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor? Anyone opposed?
09:40:29 Finance Committee, Councilman Cohen.
09:40:31 >> I move items 12, 13 and 14.
09:40:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
09:40:35 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:40:37 Anyone opposed?
09:40:40 Building, zoning and preservation, Councilwoman Montelione.
09:40:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move 15 through 19.
09:40:47 >> Second.
09:40:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Sorry.
09:40:56 15 through 18 then.
09:40:57 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:41:00 Anyone opposed?
09:41:01 And transportation committee, Councilwoman Capin.
09:41:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move items 20 through 22.
09:41:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
09:41:10 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:41:12 Anyone opposed?
09:41:16 We will move on to our 930 public hearing.
09:41:26 Mr. Shelby?
09:41:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again these are quasi-judicial.
09:41:30 Witnesses need to be sworn.
09:41:32 I would ask that all written material that has been
09:41:33 available for public inspection in City Council's office be
09:41:36 received and filed.
09:41:36 >>THE CLERK: I have not received anything.
09:41:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If anybody is going to speak today, there
09:41:43 is a sign-in sheet outside and we ask that your name be on
09:41:47 that sign-in sheet.
09:41:48 Thank you very much.
09:41:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Anyone wishing to speak on any item on the
09:41:53 9:30 public hearing agenda, please stand and be sworn in.
09:41:57 (Oath administered by Clerk)
09:42:14 Item number 23.
09:42:15 >>MARY MULHERN: 6:00 we open them all?
09:42:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You can with the exception of 30 and 31.
09:42:30 >>THE CLERK: 30 and 31 will need to be removed and 24 and
09:42:34 28 will need to be opened.
09:42:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You can move all of them with the
09:42:39 exceptions of 30 and 31.
09:42:42 >> So moved.
09:42:43 >> Second.
09:42:43 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:42:45 Item number 23.
09:42:48 Does anyone wish to speak on this item?
09:42:54 Seeing none, Councilman Suarez?
09:42:59 >>THE CLERK: You need to close your public hearing.
09:43:01 >> Move to have close.
09:43:02 >> Second.
09:43:03 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:43:07 >> I move an ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing, and
09:43:13 abandoning a certain right-of-way all of that portion of
09:43:16 sterile Avenue lying south of West Kennedy Boulevard, north
09:43:20 of Roland street east of Dale Mabry hey and west of Himes
09:43:24 Avenue in the Bon Air subdivision a subdivision in the City
09:43:27 of Tampa, Hillsborough County, the same being more fully
09:43:30 described in section 2 hereof, subject to certain covenants,
09:43:35 conditions and easement reservations and restrictions as
09:43:39 more particularly described herein providing an effective
09:43:42 Motion to adopt.
09:43:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Reddick.
09:43:45 All in favor?
09:43:49 Please record vote and record.
09:43:51 >>THE CLERK: It's not appearing on my system but motion
09:44:07 carried with Miranda being absent.
09:44:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 24.
09:44:12 Do we need to hear from you, Ms. Feeley?
09:44:22 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
09:44:23 No, the plans were turned in past the deadline.
09:44:26 So you can just move that to the 25th.
09:44:28 >>MARY MULHERN: So this subpoena a request of your
09:44:32 department to have do that?
09:44:33 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.
09:44:34 It didn't satisfy the code condition that they be turned in
09:44:37 one week prior to the hearing.
09:44:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:44:40 Does anyone wish Tosh speak on the continuance of item
09:44:43 number 24?
09:44:46 Seeing no one, can we have a motion to continue this?
09:44:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to continue.
09:44:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.
09:44:57 >>MARY MULHERN: August 25th at 9:30?
09:45:10 Ms. Feeley, we were just talking about the calendar and how
09:45:13 August 25th is really busy.
09:45:18 But this is a second reading.
09:45:22 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
09:45:24 There were no issues at the first hearing.
09:45:27 It is for a church.
09:45:30 I don't believe it should take -- I don't think you have any
09:45:33 other second readings biopsies our next hearing will be on
09:45:36 August 18th so we won't have a second reading until
09:45:39 September 4th.
09:45:41 It's completely at council's discretion.
09:45:43 I'm willing to Don whatever you wish.
09:45:45 >>MARY MULHERN: We have a motion from Councilman Suarez,
09:45:48 seconded by Councilman Cohen.
09:45:51 All in favor?
09:45:53 Anyone opposed?
09:45:55 >>THE CLERK: Just to clarify, August 25th at 9:30.
09:46:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 256.
09:46:04 Does anyone from the public wish Tosh speak on this?
09:46:06 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
09:46:10 Item 25, 26 and 27, you may remember, a block of Kennedy,
09:46:18 Sterling and Roland, that we discussed at length the evening
09:46:21 of July 21st.
09:46:24 The revised site plans for those cases have been certified
09:46:27 by the zoning administrator and provided to the clerk this
09:46:31 Also, item number 29 was certified as well.
09:46:34 Staff has those plans and is available for any questions.
09:46:39 Thank you.
09:46:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:46:40 >> I'm Loretta Fazio, secretary of Bon Air.
09:46:48 We are just here to make sure that the agreement -- because
09:46:51 we did agree to encourage you that the no-left-turn sign at
09:46:57 Sterling is in the final plans, the shrubs against the wall
09:47:00 that will be erected on Roland are on the final plan, and
09:47:03 that there is no cross traffic between CVS and this new
09:47:07 development are on the plan.
09:47:08 I know they agreed at the meeting, and again we encourage
09:47:13 the development based on these things.
09:47:16 So we are just here to make sure that they are in the final
09:47:19 plans before you vote on them.
09:47:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:47:22 Ms. Feeley, those are on the site plan?
09:47:24 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes.
09:47:28 Land development.
09:47:28 The no-left-turn.
09:47:42 It would be a right turn.
09:47:43 The landscaping is on the plan.
09:47:45 The access is not restricted by the plan P.it's restricted
09:47:48 by way the zoning is on the two properties.
09:47:51 So that notation is not on the plans.
09:47:53 But in order for a cross access to be achieved, it would
09:47:56 cause a rezoning for the CVS to the west.
09:47:58 So that would definitely come back before council.
09:48:01 But it is not controlled on the plan.
09:48:04 It does not show an access, just to clarify.
09:48:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:48:09 Does anyone else wish be to speak on item 25?
09:48:13 Motion to close?
09:48:14 >> So moved.
09:48:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
09:48:19 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:48:23 Councilman Capin.
09:48:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: 25.
09:48:27 An ordinance for second reading and adoption, an ordinance
09:48:30 approving a special using permit S-2 approving parking
09:48:34 off-street commercial in RS-60 residential single-family
09:48:38 zoning district in the general vicinity of 3701, 3703, 3705,
09:48:44 3707 and 3709 west Roland street in the city of Tampa,
09:48:50 Florida and as more particularly described in section 1
09:48:53 hereof providing an effective date.
09:48:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion by Councilman Capin, seconded by Mr.
09:49:06 Please vote and record.
09:49:07 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.
09:49:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 26.
09:49:29 I believe you have already spoken on this.
09:49:33 Staff, no other comments.
09:49:35 Anyone from the public who wishes to speak on item number
09:49:41 Seeing no one --
09:49:42 >> Move to close.
09:49:43 >> Second.
09:49:43 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:49:47 Councilman Reddick, would you read the ordinance?
09:49:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to adopt an ordinance approving a
09:49:54 special use permit S-26 approving a drive-in wind open in a
09:49:56 CG commercial general zoning district in the general
09:49:59 vicinity of 3710 West Kennedy Boulevard in the city of
09:50:03 Tampa, Florida and as more particularly described in section
09:50:06 1 hereof providing an effective date.
09:50:07 >> Second.
09:50:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Reddick, seconded
09:50:13 by Councilman Cohen.
09:50:16 Please vote and record.
09:50:16 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.
09:50:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Agenda item number 27, in the same area.
09:50:41 Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on item
09:50:44 number 27?
09:50:45 >> Loretta Fazio again from Bon Air neighborhood
09:50:51 And we have more of a query on the time frame of this
09:50:54 alcohol selling.
09:50:57 What time are we talking about closing?
09:50:59 We weren't sure on that.
09:51:01 >>MARY MULHERN: We don't have the hours on our agenda.
09:51:09 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The hours of operation as I stated at the
09:51:12 hearing that evening -- and I'll reiterate this morning --
09:51:15 is Sunday through Thursday would be 11 a.m. to 2 a.m.
09:51:22 And Friday and Saturday would be 11 a.m. to 3 a.m.
09:51:34 >> It raised some concern because we weren't sure about the
09:51:36 time, and we would ask for maybe a continuance because we
09:51:38 would like to maybe -- is there another one than can close
09:51:41 earlier, or does Vermont to go through a whole other
09:51:46 This is a neighborhood.
09:51:47 And if it's a restaurant, we don't see it opening till 3.
09:51:50 But we are just concerned it would change to a bar, and all
09:51:53 of a sudden at 3:00 it's loud noise.
09:51:56 I don't know how that works again.
09:51:58 I'm new to this.
09:52:00 Do we ask for another hearing? I'm not sure.
09:52:04 >>MARY MULHERN: We had a discussion about this at the first
09:52:08 Sorry it didn't come up then, but I don't know if this is
09:52:11 something that we could change now.
09:52:14 I don't know if petitioner is here to be agree to this.
09:52:19 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
09:52:22 This is a 4(COP-R) so it is required to be a restaurant, and
09:52:27 it does have the 49-51% recording.
09:52:30 So there must be 51% food sales, 49% alcohol sales.
09:52:36 If it is council's pleasure, and the applicant agrees, if
09:52:39 anything were to be modified for the hours of operation this
09:52:43 would have to go back to first reading in order for that to
09:52:46 be achieved.
09:52:46 >>MARY MULHERN: First reading?
09:52:49 Maybe we could continue this for a little bit and the
09:52:52 petitioner could talk to the neighborhood.
09:52:55 We can hear from you first.
09:52:57 >> Jim Mikas.
09:53:00 I believe of that the kitchen would be open at the same time
09:53:05 that the bar is.
09:53:06 They are not going to be open at separate times.
09:53:08 >> We were just concerned.
09:53:15 >> I got no problems committing that the restaurant -- the
09:53:19 kitchen has to be open for the bar to be open.
09:53:25 It's not a bar.
09:53:27 A bar alone.
09:53:28 Not of a free-standing bar.
09:53:29 >>MARY MULHERN: And is that codified or posted?
09:53:34 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
09:53:36 That is currently what is required by this classification.
09:53:40 So a kitchen is required to remain open.
09:53:43 So I'm not sure what further discussion --
09:53:51 >>MARY MULHERN: You must come to the mike and identify
09:53:54 >> Typically 3:00 a restaurant is not open so that's just
09:53:57 the concern of the neighborhood that it would be a bar
09:54:00 setting, and it could be loud and outside music.
09:54:03 But as related to the restaurant, I guess we have to assume
09:54:06 it won't be open.
09:54:08 >> Could you give your name again?
09:54:09 >> Loretta Fazio, 3604 west Cleveland.
09:54:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thank you.
09:54:25 Does anyone --
09:54:26 >> Move to close.
09:54:27 >> Second.
09:54:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to make sure no one else wanted
09:54:30 to speak on this.
09:54:32 All in favor?
09:54:40 >>MARY MULHERN: The motion to close.
09:54:42 And is it your turn?
09:54:45 Councilman Cohen, could you read the ordinance?
09:54:48 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for
09:54:50 second reading and adoption, an ordinance approving a
09:54:53 special use permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, large
09:54:57 venue and making lawful the sale of beverages containing
09:55:00 alcohol regardless of alcoholic content, beer wine and
09:55:03 liquor, 4 (COP-R), for consumption on the premises only in
09:55:06 connection with a restaurant business establishment at or
09:55:09 from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 3702
09:55:14 and 3710 West Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa, Florida as more
09:55:18 particularly described in section 2 hereof providing for
09:55:21 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective
09:55:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
09:55:26 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Cohen, seconded
09:55:29 by Councilman Reddick.
09:55:31 Please vote and record.
09:55:37 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.
09:55:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
09:55:44 Item number 28 is another request from staff to continue.
09:55:51 Is there anyone in the public who wishes to be speak on the
09:55:55 continuance of item number 28?
09:56:07 Seeing no one, could I have a motion to continue that to
09:56:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Motion to continue file Z-11-09 to
09:56:18 August 25th at 9:30 a.m.
09:56:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Second.
09:56:24 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:56:25 Anyone opposed?
09:56:29 August 25th at 9:30 a.m.
09:56:34 Item number 29.
09:56:38 >> I have to abstain to this item due to my father's
09:56:42 involvement in the project.
09:56:43 Thank you.
09:56:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the record, you are filing the form
09:56:48 with the clerk at this time?
09:56:50 >> Correct.
09:56:51 Thank you.
09:56:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone from the public who wishes
09:56:56 to speak on this item, number 29?
09:56:59 Seeing no one, could we have a motion to close?
09:57:02 >> Motion to close.
09:57:03 >> Second.
09:57:04 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:57:07 And Councilwoman Montelione, could you read that?
09:57:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, Madam Chair.
09:57:16 I present an ordinance for second reading and adoption, an
09:57:22 ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 3814
09:57:23 west Azeele street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
09:57:25 particularly described in section 1 from zoning district
09:57:28 classifications CG commercial general and RM-16 residential
09:57:33 multifamily to PD planned development, office, medical,
09:57:37 business/professional and CN uses excluding retail sales,
09:57:42 shoppers' goods and restaurant, providing an effective date.
09:57:45 >> Second.
09:57:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,
09:57:51 seconded by Councilman Suarez.
09:57:53 Please vote and record.
09:57:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent and
09:58:01 Cohen abstaining.
09:58:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Shelby, items number 30 and 31 we
09:58:12 cannot hear so we did not open the public hearing so we need
09:58:16 a motion to remove those from the agenda?
09:58:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
09:58:20 >> So moved.
09:58:21 >> Second.
09:58:21 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
09:58:22 Anyone opposed?
09:58:23 >>MARY MULHERN: We have one minute before our staff
09:58:43 Mr. Shelby?
09:58:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, the clock did strike but I have
09:58:47 something to take up understood new business or something.
09:58:51 Directing your attention to the September calendar.
09:58:54 If you look at September 8th you have the special called
09:58:56 workshop session for the solicitation ordinance, and its
09:59:01 related subject.
09:59:02 If you notice there is no set time there, council.
09:59:05 Just for the purposes of public notice, I would ask that a
09:59:10 reasonable time, 9:30, 9:45 or whatever, just so there is a
09:59:15 time associated with that, rather than immediately following
09:59:19 another board meeting just for purposes of the public
09:59:21 meeting so I have a greater level of comfort if you attach a
09:59:25 time to it.
09:59:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Reddick, chair of the CRA, what
09:59:30 would you suggest?
09:59:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: I would suggest probably 10:00.
09:59:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 10:00.
09:59:37 I would ask that you attach a time to it.
09:59:42 You see, the thing is, it would be anytime after 10:00.
09:59:46 In other words, if the CRA went on longer, at least the
09:59:51 public would know that it would start sometime after that.
09:59:54 Of course, if the CRA ends earlier than 10:00 you have to
09:59:58 wait until 10:00.
09:59:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Well, Madam Chair, and I haven't seen the
10:00:03 agenda for the meeting, but I'm expecting from a previous
10:00:09 meeting -- if we say 10:00, and we gone past 10, it
10:00:14 shouldn't be much more.
10:00:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to set the special called workshop
10:00:25 session being held on September 8th to anytime after 10
10:00:37 Or anytime thereafter.
10:00:40 10 a.m. or anytime thereafter.
10:00:42 All in favor?
10:00:43 Anyone opposed?
10:00:46 We will move to our staff reports.
10:00:48 Item number 32.
10:00:56 We have the applicant voting on the Planning Commission.
10:01:03 Ms. Foxx-Knowles will viruses us where we are with that.
10:01:13 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
10:01:14 This is regarding the applicant for the Hillsborough County,
10:01:19 city-county Planning Commission.
10:01:22 There were only two applicants that did not speak.
10:01:26 Clinton Parker Johnson and Donald Edmond Phillips.
10:01:35 If they are here.
10:01:36 If not, we can vote.
10:01:37 I have ballots.
10:01:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:01:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam clerk, you say there were two
10:01:43 applicants for the Planning Commission that did not speak?
10:01:48 Also Jacqueline, she had surgery.
10:01:51 >>THE CLERK: Right.
10:01:54 And we understand they are not attending.
10:01:56 We actually had ten applicants.
10:02:03 One withdrew.
10:02:03 And we have, as I noted, ten applicants that you will be
10:02:05 voting on.
10:02:06 And you will be voting to fill two slots.
10:02:20 Council, the applicants are Byron A. Arnold, Steven denson,
10:02:50 Warren C. Dixon III, David B Farrell, Clinton Parker
10:02:57 Johnston, Donald Edmond Phillips, Marilyn Smith, Steven M.
10:03:05 Sutton, Jacqueline Smith wild, and Enrique Woodruff.
10:03:16 >>MARY MULHERN: And a check mark understood our own name.
10:04:37 We'll pass it out and.
10:04:41 Not sign it.
10:04:54 These are okay then?
10:04:55 So they don't need to be signed?
10:04:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Normally there's a ballot that subpoena
10:05:01 sent out and even though it needs to be identified in the
10:05:03 public way in some wear as being attributed to you.
10:05:06 It is because we sign under our name.
10:05:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Put a check mark understood our name but
10:05:10 how do we know it's us?
10:05:11 >> Should I take mine back then?
10:05:26 >> It's always the lawyers that's the problem.
10:05:28 [ Laughter ]
10:05:30 >> Thank you.
10:05:32 We are signing our name.
10:05:54 We put it by the clerk's name.
10:05:58 Okay, we are going to vote over.
10:06:10 Then blot is going to go really quick because we know who we
10:06:14 are voting for.
10:07:04 >> Madam Chair, I would suggest not because of the other
10:07:10 appointments that are coming up after this.
10:07:12 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree.
10:07:13 We need to vote on the Planning Commission before we vote on
10:07:15 the others but if we need some time we can move beyond
10:07:19 Is that what you are suggesting?
10:07:25 36 will take some time.
10:07:34 >>THE CLERK: Are you going to address 35 which is just the
10:07:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, item 35 is just a resolution
10:07:44 memorializing the vote we took last week.
10:07:46 So if someone could read that.
10:07:51 Just move that: Motion by Councilwoman Capin, seconded by
10:07:57 Councilman Reddick.
10:07:59 All in favor?
10:08:00 Anyone opposed?
10:08:01 Motion passes.
10:08:12 Mr. Shelby, perhaps you can report on item number 33.
10:08:28 Number 36.
10:08:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: City council attorney here to talk to you
10:08:41 about item 36 regarding the request to research revenues
10:08:44 from red light cameras utilized for infrastructure needs.
10:08:48 Council, the short answer is yes.
10:08:50 The City Council can designate a funding source or a portion
10:08:54 of a funding source, a particular funding source, as long as
10:08:57 it doesn't conflict with another law.
10:09:00 And I have had the opportunity to have review the red light
10:09:04 statutes, Florida statute 316.0076, and I reviewed the
10:09:11 contract that City Council passed, and I see nothing that
10:09:14 would prohibit City Council from doing that.
10:09:18 The mechanism to do so, council, is by ordinance.
10:09:24 You would need to pass an ordinance with specific direction
10:09:27 on how you wish to have those funds restricted and
10:09:31 Council has done that in the past, and I would direct your
10:09:34 attention for purposes of an example to section 25-72 in
10:09:39 your code which deals with the transportation impact fees.
10:09:45 City Council created impact fees, and then that particular
10:09:49 section designates how funds collected are to be used.
10:09:53 So the answer is, yes, you can do that.
10:09:59 And the mechanism is by ordinance.
10:10:02 And this is why I close with the caveat that I remind City
10:10:07 Council with the charter's strong mayor form of government,
10:10:13 and that is that City Council can restrict and designate the
10:10:16 use of funds for a particular purpose.
10:10:17 You can allocate the money in the budget, but City Council
10:10:20 does not have the authority to force the administration to
10:10:25 spend the money.
10:10:28 The mayor is required to spend money when the city is
10:10:30 obligated by law or by contract, interlocal agreement, the
10:10:36 bond covenant, for example, but otherwise the administration
10:10:38 is not bound to expend funds that are budgeted for a
10:10:43 particular purpose necessarily.
10:10:44 And that's my report.
10:10:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:10:49 Any questions?
10:10:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
10:10:56 Mr. Shelby, whatever is put in place, we said transportation
10:11:04 impact fee as you stated, and say, for example, it was 60%,
10:11:11 60-40, with 40% going towards what we discussed where the
10:11:17 red light camera is located.
10:11:19 Now you are telling me if that was allocated in the budget,
10:11:23 that 40%, and if the mayor chooses not to use the 40%, just
10:11:31 put that in the budget?
10:11:32 >> It would remain in that fund, yes.
10:11:35 And I believe -- Ms. Little is here to discuss that, but you
10:11:42 could talk with the budgeting department, but the short
10:11:45 answer is, yes, sir, it would.
10:11:47 And it would be a designated fund.
10:11:50 It wouldn't be in what you call your undesignated general
10:11:53 fund balance.
10:11:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: So it would be the discretion of the mayor
10:11:58 whether he wants to utilize the discretionary fund for that
10:12:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To use those particular funds authorize
10:12:05 that particular purpose.
10:12:06 There may be other funding sources within the budget that
10:12:08 the mayor can choose to allocate toward accomplishing
10:12:12 necessarily the same goals.
10:12:15 And that is something that is available within the budget.
10:12:19 But if the mayor chooses to not expend those funds they
10:12:24 would remain as a fund balance but it would be a restricted
10:12:27 fund designated only for that particular purpose that City
10:12:30 Council set forth in its ordinance.
10:12:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez?
10:12:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Shelby, so this fund that you are
10:12:44 talking about, it's like any other trust fund, so that will
10:12:48 take it off budget, meaning that the shortfall that was
10:12:51 already projected and the $2 million hole in which the red
10:12:54 light camera revenue was supposed to generate could not be
10:12:58 used for plugging that hole in the budget, is that correct?
10:13:02 >> That's correct.
10:13:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
10:13:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
10:13:13 We can -- when we get -- if we decide to designate funds, do
10:13:18 we need to be specific as to how they are to be used?
10:13:27 I understand that improving curbs and sidewalks doesn't
10:13:37 necessarily stop people from running red lights, but
10:13:41 blinking yellow lights do help, and that could be something
10:13:45 that this money is projected for.
10:13:53 I understand that, that we can allocate the money.
10:13:58 It will be taken out of the budget or set aside from the
10:14:00 budget and it would not, again, be added to or counted
10:14:05 toward that shortfall, but it necessarily does not have to
10:14:08 be spent on this, but it can be spent on than -- can't be
10:14:13 spent on anything else either.
10:14:14 Yes or no?
10:14:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To the degree -- and that would depend on
10:14:21 how you, work with the legal department, would craft that
10:14:25 ordinance, which again, by the way, would have to be signed
10:14:27 and approved by the mayor or if he chose to allow it to go
10:14:32 into law without his signature would take effect that way,
10:14:35 or it would have to come back to council to supersede that
10:14:39 through your charter.
10:14:40 It all depends on how you craft your ordinance regarding the
10:14:43 use of funds.
10:14:44 And that would determine how that money is spent.
10:14:48 So I don't know whether that answers your question.
10:14:51 But specifically, there is -- with regard to red light
10:14:55 cameras, there is no necessarily by what I guess Councilman
10:14:58 Reddick is requesting, there is really no connection between
10:15:02 the spending -- there's no nexus between the source of the
10:15:06 funds, the red light camera, and what you want to spend it
10:15:10 Because one can assume for the sake of argument that you
10:15:15 have expended all the money for intersection safety and
10:15:21 still have people run the red light.
10:15:22 So there is really no connection necessarily, a nexus
10:15:26 between the funding source and the intention unless you wish
10:15:32 to make that as part of your ordinance.
10:15:34 I don't know if I am answering the question well enough.
10:15:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I understand.
10:15:40 I do understand what you are saying.
10:15:42 The connection is not there to stop -- running the red light
10:15:46 with improving the intersection.
10:15:48 But, again, if we are looking at safety, I'm going to bring
10:15:55 it up again.
10:15:55 A blinking yellow light, I would like to see the reports on
10:16:01 It will help to stop red light running.
10:16:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Could I ask a question?
10:16:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, Councilwoman Montelione then
10:16:10 Councilman Reddick.
10:16:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:16:14 Although, Mr. Shelby, you point out that there isn't a
10:16:17 relationship between intersection improvements and people,
10:16:19 you know, not running the red light, the intention of a red
10:16:26 light camera, and from the reports that we have seen from
10:16:29 other municipalities so far is that running red lights
10:16:37 decrease was the installation of the red light cameras.
10:16:40 The intention of the cameras is to prevent pedestrians from
10:16:49 becoming fatalities, or accidents from happening.
10:16:50 So pedestrian safety is at the core of the red light camera.
10:16:57 It's to prevent people from running the red lights, and,
10:17:00 yes, the red light cameras then reduce people running red
10:17:05 lights, but it is, in its inception, meant to improve
10:17:10 pedestrian safety.
10:17:11 And what I feel is that while running red lights and
10:17:17 pedestrians would be safer in the intersections where the
10:17:19 cameras are installed, in other areas, which may be just
10:17:23 as dangerous, in other intersections, perhaps we can direct
10:17:31 some of those funds to be used for pedestrian enhancements
10:17:35 whether they are the blinking yellow lights or some other
10:17:39 methods, enhanced crosswalks or things of that nature, in
10:17:46 other intersections that would be identified in that same
10:17:51 vicinity by the Tampa Police Department.
10:17:52 >> Councilman Reddick?
10:17:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me ask you this.
10:18:01 Since there is $2 million already in the budget for the red
10:18:06 light cameras, $2 million, if we had an ordinance that any
10:18:11 additional fund of receiving those $2 million be directed to
10:18:15 the things we discussed, could the ordinance be in place for
10:18:19 that, the additional revenue exceeding the 2 million?
10:18:21 >> Any revenue exceeding $2 million would be then to have a
10:18:30 particular use that would you then set forth in the
10:18:33 >> Correct.
10:18:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe such a thing would be possible.
10:18:37 Mr. Shimberg, Mr. Territo, I believe such a thing could be
10:18:41 crafted that way.
10:18:44 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
10:18:45 The only issues to deal with is there has to be some
10:18:47 relationship to the fees.
10:18:48 Fees are not taxes.
10:18:50 Taxes have no restrictions on how you spend the money.
10:18:53 When you have a fee, you have to bear some relationship to
10:18:55 what it is you are trying to accomplish.
10:18:56 If you can find a way to say there's a surplus about $2
10:19:01 million, that we want that money to be used for something
10:19:04 related to what red lights are supposed to do like public
10:19:07 safety, then, yes, could you put restrictions on that.
10:19:10 As Mr. Shelby has indicated, the administration is not
10:19:13 compelled to spend the money in that way.
10:19:15 It will have to be restricted, and the money will sit in
10:19:18 that fund until the administration decides whether they want
10:19:20 to use it for that purpose or not.
10:19:22 In the meantime if it sits in that fund it's not available
10:19:24 for any other use that you fight fund to have been do unless
10:19:27 you want to change the ordinance.
10:19:30 But you have to bear in mind that fees have to bear some
10:19:32 kind of connection to what it is you are trying to do.
10:19:34 Yes, you can do it.
10:19:36 The short answer is, yes, you can do it.
10:19:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Territo, I think we have heard that,
10:19:41 too, from Mr. Shelby.
10:19:43 However, it's not a fee.
10:19:44 It's a fine.
10:19:45 >> Well, it's not a tax.
10:19:49 You have to make a distinction between tax and other revenue
10:19:54 Taxes do not have restrictions unless it's a gas tax that
10:19:57 can only be used for gas purposes.
10:19:59 That was the only distinction I was trying to make.
10:20:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, I can support an ordinance
10:20:16 put of in place to say additional revenue, $2 million is
10:20:20 already a bundled item, and the mayor's expectation of $2
10:20:28 million, but anything exceeding that $2 million in the
10:20:31 fiscal year that it be utilized for some of the things.
10:20:34 Now, I could support an ordinance, and I would like to see
10:20:41 if we can direct legal or staff to come back with a draft
10:20:44 ordinance reference to that $2 million.
10:20:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:20:52 And I'll address that in a minute but I haven't spoken yet.
10:20:56 Councilman Cohen, did you want to speak?
10:20:58 I'm trying to be good and go last.
10:21:00 >>HARRY COHEN: Very briefly.
10:21:03 I think it's an interesting idea.
10:21:06 The only issue I have is I think it may be a little
10:21:09 premature prior to our having our public hearings on the
10:21:12 budget, because we might, through listening to the public's
10:21:16 input, want to talk about different options that we might
10:21:23 not have thought of now.
10:21:24 So I just wanted to throw that out there for everyone's
10:21:28 >>MARY MULHERN: That's kind of what I'm thinking.
10:21:32 But I wanted to address a couple of things.
10:21:35 It's basically council could pass an ordinance restricting
10:21:39 the fund from the proceeds, from these citations is what you
10:21:44 told us, correct?
10:21:45 >> Yes.
10:21:46 >>MARY MULHERN: So it's restricting fund.
10:21:47 We can't make the administration spend them.
10:21:49 I do want to ask you a quick question, though, because I
10:21:53 thought I was hearing things but I think I might have
10:21:56 figured it out.
10:21:56 You said if council chooses to pass an ordinance without the
10:21:59 mayor's signature.
10:22:01 Is that like if the mayor doesn't sign it, then --
10:22:07 >> It becomes by operation of the charter.
10:22:10 If he doesn't sign it within how many days.
10:22:13 >> If he doesn't sign it and he doesn't veto it?
10:22:18 So if the mayor were to not sign it but not veto it --
10:22:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: By operation of your charter it becomes
10:22:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
10:22:26 That's just a technicality.
10:22:27 I never heard that.
10:22:28 Let me say this.
10:22:29 We have an example in the news today of where this council
10:22:36 at the time of the budget attempted to restrict funds, and
10:22:43 those fund were supposed to go at the time of the budget two
10:22:47 years ago $1 million.
10:22:51 We asked to have it taken out of the budget for Zack street
10:22:55 and put into the Parks and Recreation Department, and I
10:22:59 believe -- we have been researching this for the last couple
10:23:02 of days, and now it doesn't really matter, but it does
10:23:06 indicate what can happen if we restrict funds.
10:23:12 And we probably did than by ordinance at that meeting and
10:23:16 followed up with it.
10:23:17 The money wasn't spent, and then later in another budget we
10:23:23 passed -- I think it was in the 2010 budget the council
10:23:27 passed -- asked to have the money put in specifically for
10:23:36 So it actually looks like that may have happened H.I don't
10:23:40 know if it did or not but basically that's what happened.
10:23:43 But I agree with Councilman Cohen especially because there
10:23:45 are some citizens who have want to do some research and
10:23:50 study of the actual efficacy of red light cameras.
10:23:53 And we haven't even installed any yet.
10:23:56 And I think that's just a figure, an estimate, that $2
10:24:02 So what Councilman Reddick, what you are suggesting makes
10:24:06 sense but I think the fact that -- I don't feel comfortable,
10:24:12 you know, assuming anything, or budgeting anything if we
10:24:17 don't know, you know.
10:24:19 They have not been put in place.
10:24:20 We are really early in this process.
10:24:22 So I think the study, I suggested to this group this
10:24:28 afternoon they work with TPD and within the legal
10:24:30 department, and that we look at this, because this came to
10:24:33 us from TPD as a safety issue.
10:24:36 The revenue side of it is really not what the ordinance is
10:24:43 So I think we should -- I'm not ready personally, I don't
10:24:48 think we should pass an ordinance yet on this.
10:24:50 I think we need to at least get the cameras in place, give
10:24:54 it maybe a year, at least six months, see if they are
10:24:58 generating the revenues, see if we are able to collect that.
10:25:01 We just really don't know.
10:25:03 It's a new thing for us and it's really a pretty new thing
10:25:06 across the country.
10:25:08 That's my suggestion.
10:25:09 Councilwoman Capin.
10:25:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
10:25:12 It isn't a new thing.
10:25:15 It's a new thing here but it is not a new thing.
10:25:21 Los Angeles just stopped their red light cameras so it is
10:25:25 not new.
10:25:25 Here it may be.
10:25:26 But we can look at other municipalities and see Wan has
10:25:30 happened and learn from that.
10:25:33 Thank you.
10:25:33 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree with you, I think that's what we
10:25:38 need to do.
10:25:39 We passed it.
10:25:40 I think it going to happen.
10:25:47 Whether it's put in or where, but once we do I think we
10:25:49 should ask for a study.
10:25:50 And there's people already working on it.
10:25:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can.
10:25:54 I'm sorry, council.
10:25:55 I want to make clarification.
10:25:56 When you passed the budget in general, you pass it by
10:26:00 And that's what you are referring to.
10:26:02 And within that budget has certain lines and the
10:26:04 administration has certain flexibility that is granted
10:26:08 within those lines of the budget.
10:26:09 The ordinance, when I suggested the restriction of fund, as
10:26:13 a specific change to your code, similar to 2572 where you
10:26:17 actually within the code delineate the restriction and the
10:26:20 use of the fund.
10:26:21 And that would be the distinction between the two.
10:26:23 I just wanted to clarify that.
10:26:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, I will hold off until we have
10:26:29 the budget discussion.
10:26:32 And then I would at that time entertain a motion that prior
10:26:36 to the .
10:26:38 Second public hearing.
10:26:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, council.
10:26:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you to all the Planning Commission
10:26:44 applicant for waiting through that.
10:26:46 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
10:26:59 Council, on round one, we have two individuals with three
10:27:05 I don't know if you want to go with those two individuals.
10:27:13 And they are Bowen and Enrique Woodruff.
10:27:22 Everybody else had two or one.
10:27:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, but we didn't discuss this
10:27:28 process, but I think we should have voted separate ballots
10:27:31 for each of them.
10:27:41 We vote for the top three?
10:27:46 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: I can give you the votes.
10:27:48 Bowen Arnold had three and Enrique Woodruff had three.
10:27:54 Steven L. Benson had two and Jacqueline Smith Wilds had two.
10:28:00 Warren C. Dixon had one and David Farrell had one.
10:28:05 >>MARY MULHERN: This was my thought.
10:28:13 I am just going to say it.
10:28:15 Council, you can tell me if you think it makes sense.
10:28:18 I thought about this be before we voted but didn't express
10:28:20 it, unfortunately, that one of the -- actually both of these
10:28:25 are replacements from people who have stepped off the
10:28:29 Planning Commission.
10:28:30 So I was thinking of them.
10:28:34 My feeling was that we mate want to look at who we are
10:28:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, if I can say something.
10:28:52 There was a lone African-American sitting on that Planning
10:28:56 Commission stepping down after many, many years, and she
10:29:02 recommended to replace her a qualified individual.
10:29:06 And based on our vote today we don't have diversity on the
10:29:11 Planning Commission and I think it's a disservice to the
10:29:14 citizens of this community that there's no diversity on that
10:29:16 Planning Commission.
10:29:17 And when we had opportunity to do that.
10:29:21 And Vivian Kitchens came here and asked this council she
10:29:27 wanted someone to replace her that looked like her ten years
10:29:31 She's still looking that way after ten years.
10:29:35 And I think we are going to have a Planning Commission that
10:29:49 doesn't look like the person hop is stepping down and looked
10:29:52 like her ten years ago.
10:29:53 And I think that's a disservice.
10:29:56 If the person was not qualified I can understand.
10:29:58 This person is qualified.
10:29:59 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Council, the question is, do you
10:30:02 want four votes or three?
10:30:05 >>MARY MULHERN: We are talking about it.
10:30:06 Councilman Suarez?
10:30:08 Councilwoman Capin?
10:30:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, I do want to say something.
10:30:14 When we talk about what people look like and what they
10:30:17 represent, I do have a concern.
10:30:26 And the concern is, I have a president of the United States
10:30:30 that does not look like me, but he represents me very well,
10:30:35 I believe.
10:30:36 Therefore, what a person looks like is not a concern to me.
10:30:44 Thank you.
10:30:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione.
10:30:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: First I want to thank the council for
10:30:53 postponing the vote till today so that I could be here.
10:30:57 I greatly appreciate the deference that council showed in
10:31:01 allowing me to vote on this very important issue.
10:31:04 And on these positions.
10:31:07 And I would like to say that what I'm thinking is very
10:31:13 important, and anyone who sits on the Planning Commission
10:31:15 has a full understanding of the issues, and I again with
10:31:19 what has been said here regarding diversity, and also
10:31:22 regarding Councilwoman Capin's comment.
10:31:26 I'm looking for the best qualified person for the job, who
10:31:30 has the background, the experience, and would be able to
10:31:33 understand issues.
10:31:37 I did watch the candidates who spoke last Thursday, and
10:31:46 several of them pointed out this that is a very important
10:31:49 time for the Planning Commission with growth management
10:31:52 rules having been changed, and more power being placed
10:31:55 within the local jurisdiction.
10:31:57 So that's what I'm looking for in a candidate.
10:32:03 And I would suggest as far as Ms. Fox knolls question to us
10:32:10 there, was a lot of discussion in my absence, should we
10:32:15 break with procedure and allow me to vote via a
10:32:21 And if we are concerned with procedures -- and it takes four
10:32:28 votes to pass an ordinance, or for a decision to be made of
10:32:31 council or for our council workshops to have a quorum, then
10:32:35 I feel that we need to have four votes for the candidates.
10:32:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: It doesn't matter what a person looks like
10:32:56 but if a person is qualified.
10:32:57 And for the record, to my colleague, Ms. Wilds had surgery
10:33:04 and was not here so you didn't hear her, you couldn't note
10:33:11 her speaking last week because she had surgery.
10:33:13 But she is a devoted citizen of this community.
10:33:20 And when you don't want your commission, you don't want the
10:33:26 board to reflect diversity, then we have a mind-set, and I
10:33:40 thought we were way beyond that, and I just think it's a
10:33:44 disservice to the Planning Commission.
10:33:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to thank Councilwoman Montelione for
10:33:49 clarifying what we are deciding here.
10:33:51 Because if we give the two or three votes, it's not a
10:33:56 majority of council.
10:33:58 So I think we should revote.
10:34:00 Is that what you are suggesting?
10:34:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That is what I am suggesting.
10:34:04 And to Mr. Reddick, I met with Mrs. Wilds personally and we
10:34:09 spent over an hour discussing her candidacy for council, and
10:34:13 I did meet with as many candidates in person as I possibly
10:34:16 could, those who requested interviews, and I also suggested
10:34:21 to many of the candidates than they meet with others.
10:34:24 So we spent a great deal of time talking about the Planning
10:34:29 So I might remained people, my fellow council members, this
10:34:35 is not a citizens advisory committee, this is a commission
10:34:38 appointed with legislative duties.
10:34:40 >>HARRY COHEN: If we are going to vote again, are we
10:34:50 voting -- what is the field of candidates that we are voting
10:34:53 from this time?
10:34:56 Everyone again? Or just the top vote-getter?
10:34:59 I don't understand.
10:35:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, this is what -- this is -- we
10:35:05 discussed this a little bit in agenda planning, and what we
10:35:10 have done in the past, some of you were on the other side
10:35:15 and experienced it.
10:35:16 I experienced it from this side.
10:35:18 And what we have always done was to deep voting until we got
10:35:25 a majority.
10:35:26 So I think that's why I was saying we might have wanted to
10:35:31 It doesn't really matter, I guess.
10:35:33 We just need to keep voting.
10:35:34 I think that's what we need to have been do until we get
10:35:39 four votes for anyone, and then we have the whole slate
10:35:42 without that person that got elected back, and then continue
10:35:45 to vote.
10:35:46 So you are still voicing -- I think that's watch we need to
10:35:52 And I also want to say that last week, we did fill one of
10:35:58 the appointments, because they weren't waiting for the
10:36:00 Planning Commission.
10:36:03 I had to change both of my votes.
10:36:05 So we can sit here all day, or people can realize that we
10:36:10 need to trust each other and work with each other if we get
10:36:13 into one of these stalemates.
10:36:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I may, Madam Chair.
10:36:20 Just for clarification, it would be logical to assume if one
10:36:23 person got four votes, and somebody else, remaining
10:36:27 candidate did not get it, then there would be an additional
10:36:30 ballot, that that person would then be removed from the
10:36:32 >>MARY MULHERN: That's what I just said.
10:36:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay.
10:36:38 We have something of that needs to be continued.
10:37:23 Number 37.
10:37:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Number 37 is continued with the approval
10:37:29 of the agenda.
10:37:29 >>MARY MULHERN:we already continue that?
10:37:32 Number 38.
10:37:35 Is staff here for number 38, will replatting of D-2011-4?
10:37:49 Number 38.
10:37:50 No, they are not here?
10:37:51 Let's start with Councilman Suarez.
10:37:53 Do you have any new business?
10:37:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Not at this time.
10:37:59 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Not at this time, thank you.
10:38:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: No.
10:38:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione?
10:38:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, I do.
10:38:08 We can take a few moments.
10:38:11 Many of you may have read in the newspaper this much week,
10:38:16 but we have some great news from New Tampa, and that is the
10:38:21 New Tampa little league.
10:38:23 They have swept the sectionals in Haines city two weekends
10:38:27 ago, and this past weekend they made it to the championship
10:38:31 tournament in Coral Springs.
10:38:35 Their 2-1 record put them in the semi-finals and they beat
10:38:40 Niceville, last year's state champions by 5-1.
10:38:44 They played Kindle on Friday morning and they had been
10:38:47 beaten but were triumphant this time around.
10:38:53 I want to report that the New Tampa little league major boys
10:38:55 are now the state champions.
10:38:58 So we have a state championship team from New Tampa who is
10:39:03 heading to water Robbins, Georgia for the U.S. southeast
10:39:09 regional tournament where they will be playing tomorrow.
10:39:13 So we are proud of them, proud of coach Ed Singer who has
10:39:18 coached these young boys to the state -- through the state
10:39:22 championships, now to the U.S. southeast regional.
10:39:27 And I just want to wish them the best of luck and hope that
10:39:30 we can recognize them upon their return, and that they will
10:39:34 have been successful, and capture that state regional
10:39:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I do have one item for new business.
10:39:48 I would like to have a motion to set a date for a date other
10:39:53 than August 25th for a commendation for the workers over
10:39:59 at the Tippin water treatment.
10:40:00 If we can set that for September 1st as opposed to
10:40:05 August 25th so we can clean up at least one more item
10:40:08 out of the August 25th agenda.
10:40:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we are doing the commendations on
10:40:13 workshop days.
10:40:14 Is that right?
10:40:15 Is that what we are doing?
10:40:18 >>THE CLERK: I believe Councilman's rules of procedures
10:40:21 says accommodations must be on workshop days.
10:40:24 >>MARY MULHERN: So the 27th of October?
10:40:27 Is that the next?
10:40:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just wanted to do -- we don't have touch
10:40:36 do it earlier.
10:40:36 I mean, we can do it on a workshop day this month, September
10:40:42 For September 15th.
10:40:43 >> There's a lot on that agenda and the Officer of the
10:41:00 Yes, we can have a motion to change our rules and do it on
10:41:04 the 1st.
10:41:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I make a motion to waive the rules for our
10:41:10 commendations being on September work days, to change it for
10:41:14 this particular commendation for workers over at the David
10:41:18 L. Tippin water treatment plant and setting the date for
10:41:21 September 1st for the commendation.
10:41:23 >> Second.
10:41:23 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
10:41:33 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
10:41:34 Council, we were able to get -- this is from round two.
10:41:38 This is regarding the Planning Commission candidates.
10:41:42 We were able to get four votes for Bowen A. Arnold, three
10:41:48 votes for Steven Ben son, 2001 votes for Jacqueline Smith
10:41:54 Wilds, and three votes for Enrique Woodruff.
10:41:59 So we have one down.
10:42:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:42:08 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: So this time you will vote for one
10:42:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
10:42:12 Congratulations to Mr. Arnold, if he's here.
10:42:15 >> Madam Chair, I can do 39 rather quickly.
10:42:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you for moving us along.
10:42:40 >>JIM SHIMBERG: City attorney here on item 39, report on
10:42:44 three issues.
10:42:44 The first had to do with changing the grand tree
10:42:47 determination for hazardous tree to allow an actual permit,
10:42:53 once the staff determines.
10:42:54 That's going to be contained in the changes to chapter 19
10:42:57 that you will see in a couple minutes on item 41.
10:43:02 That is contained within the changes.
10:43:03 That will be in the changes to chapter 19 that you will have
10:43:08 taken up in just a few minutes.
10:43:10 Item 2 is the possibility of employing collection agencies
10:43:13 for code enforcement.
10:43:15 Administration is working on that.
10:43:17 They are in the process of trying to work out a deal we've
10:43:21 the collection agency on that.
10:43:22 So that is moving forward.
10:43:28 And the third portion of that was to review the schedule of
10:43:30 fines at the point of property transfer.
10:43:31 And we have an executive order that we mentioned from 2005
10:43:35 of that we are in the process of reviewing that.
10:43:37 It will probably be coming back to the mayor with some
10:43:39 proposed changes to than in the near future.
10:43:42 So that's item 39.
10:43:45 I am happy to answer any questions on that.
10:43:47 But there will be a further discussion of some of the code
10:43:49 enforcement issues when you get to item 41.
10:43:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thank you.
10:43:54 Any questions?
10:43:57 Thank you, Mr. Shimberg.
10:44:09 We still don't have staff here for number 38.
10:44:14 Number 40.
10:44:17 That's going to take awhile.
10:44:21 Do you think --
10:44:23 >> I can try.
10:44:24 >> Talk fast.
10:44:25 >> Good morning, Madam Chair.
10:44:29 Santiago Corrada, chief of staff.
10:44:32 As always it's a pleasure to appear before you.
10:44:34 I'm here this morning to provide specific information that
10:44:37 was given to us yesterday afternoon by our consultant,
10:44:41 specifically to items and issues that they found regarding
10:44:44 the Williams park pool and some of the cost estimates.
10:44:47 I would like to pass that out and briefly talk through some
10:44:50 of those will, and then next steps and hope any we can move
10:44:54 on pretty quickly after that.
10:45:10 Our consultant has identified a number of issues regarding
10:45:13 the pool.
10:45:16 Some site improvement works needs to be done, some erosion
10:45:20 repair, retaining wall repair, some pool deck lighting.
10:45:23 Then there are some issues related to the bath house that
10:45:27 you see itemized there.
10:45:30 Deck and deck-side work and some pool interior finishes,
10:45:35 restoration, and obviously the pool filtration and chemical
10:45:38 He's given us a comparison between a renovation to the pool
10:45:43 as well as a complete pool replacement.
10:45:45 We feel that the numbers under the renovation are very, very
10:45:49 doable, as the mayor stated in the newspaper.
10:45:51 We could actually trim down some of those things.
10:45:55 Some of you might be wondering, well, why do you need
10:45:58 lighting to get the pool operational, or why do we need to
10:46:01 replace doors to the bath house to get the pool operational?
10:46:05 We do not and we could actually take some of those costs
10:46:08 However, those are issues we have to deal with at some point
10:46:11 in time anyway.
10:46:11 You are wouldn't want the pool operational and have cracking
10:46:14 on the deck that you don't take care of.
10:46:16 You wouldn't want the pool operational and have the bath
10:46:19 house with the doors falling off or the toilets not
10:46:22 operating or it not being ADA accessible.
10:46:24 So our recommendation is that we proceed with the 1.2
10:46:29 million dollars worth of repairs.
10:46:30 Having the scope of work, we feel very, very confident that
10:46:34 we can have an RFQ out on the street next week.
10:46:37 We obviously have to advertise for 30 days as applicable to
10:46:43 law, and then we receive all the responses, we have to rank
10:46:48 We don't know how many respondents we would have.
10:46:50 We go through a CCNA selection process, and this afternoon
10:46:53 would take some time, and then hopefully within four, five
10:46:56 months, next time we would be speaking about Williams park
10:47:00 pool it would be a contract that we would be bringing to
10:47:02 this council for approval to move on the work to repair the
10:47:05 pool and have it open.
10:47:08 It does take some time.
10:47:10 Pools are very, very tricky.
10:47:12 We are dealing with outside agencies that regulate
10:47:15 Department of Health, building codes, and so I would not
10:47:19 make you a promise as to an opening date because I don't
10:47:22 make promises that I can't keep, especially when they are
10:47:26 outside of my control.
10:47:27 And so that is in a nutshell specific information related to
10:47:31 the pool.
10:47:33 Time line, action steps going forward, and now I'm open
10:47:36 touch any questions that council might have.
10:47:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Corrada, for being here
10:47:48 this morning.
10:47:49 I want to commend the staff for moving on this.
10:47:51 And I have had many very lengthy discussions with Ms. Palus,
10:47:57 some of them late at night, some have been from home.
10:48:00 So I will have to say that she has been keeping her eye out
10:48:06 for what is best for the children.
10:48:08 She does call them "our children."
10:48:13 The suggestions that I made to staff, I'm glad to see that
10:48:15 some of them are reflected here, that we concentrate on the
10:48:20 issues at hand, that we look at what was brought to -- not
10:48:32 to me because I wasn't here at the time, but get the pool
10:48:36 opened and let's concentrate on the issue at hand.
10:48:39 I have said this on other issues, that they seem to balloon
10:48:42 out of control.
10:48:43 While we are looking at this, let's look at that.
10:48:45 Whale doing this, let's look at that.
10:48:47 And that is, I think, part of what happened here.
10:48:49 And the other part of what happened here is something that,
10:48:52 again, I try and find silver linings over issues and look at
10:48:58 what lessons can we learn from this?
10:49:02 And there are lessons with contract administration that I
10:49:05 think need to be further -- take further investigation.
10:49:12 And if they are overwhelmed, I understand with the American
10:49:24 recovery and reinvestment act coming forward with MSPs
10:49:27 being put out with parks and rec having over 100 projects
10:49:31 that need to be looked at and studied and bid, somebody
10:49:35 should have stepped up and said, we need help, we are
10:49:38 It should not have taken over a year for contract
10:49:40 administration to start putting some of these issues out for
10:49:47 study and for bid.
10:49:48 So I really think that the lessons to be learned here are we
10:49:52 need to track these projects more closely as Ms. Palus
10:49:55 herself has suggested.
10:49:56 We need to make sure that staff -- I understand within the
10:50:00 budget cuts, that we have limited staff, but when help is
10:50:05 needed, we need to step up and same we need help.
10:50:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Corrada, for coming over.
10:50:14 One of the things that happens with these types of issues
10:50:17 and I think has happened over the last few weeks is there's
10:50:20 a lot of heat involved and not a lot of light and we
10:50:23 appreciate the fact you have given us a very specific
10:50:27 detailed report on this.
10:50:28 One of the things that happened over the last few sessions
10:50:32 that we dealt with this is that we did not know when that
10:50:37 consultant was engaged, in private conversations with me.
10:50:39 You had told me he had been engaged in May.
10:51:05 I do appreciate Mayor Buckhorn quickly looked at this and I
10:51:10 know it wasn't quick enough for the people to enjoy a summer
10:51:13 of swimming but that's sometimes with what happens with
10:51:16 It moves slowly.
10:51:17 But I'm glad the mayor and the administration recognized
10:51:20 this need, has answered it.
10:51:22 So thank you very much.
10:51:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to say a couple things, then
10:51:34 Councilman Reddick, although he was speechless in the paper
10:51:39 I just want to point out again, as I said earlier, just
10:51:43 coincidentally when we were talking about the red light
10:51:46 cameras, this was an issue that the former City Council
10:51:51 brought up a couple years ago.
10:51:54 So it was inherited by this administration.
10:51:58 But, you know, as Councilman Suarez is saying, people in the
10:52:07 neighborhoods don't have term limits or have to run for
10:52:12 They are always there.
10:52:13 So I really appreciate it.
10:52:14 I appreciate all the work that Santiago and Karen did so
10:52:18 quickly to get this on the fast track now, because we have
10:52:22 been waiting.
10:52:23 The council has been waiting for years, and the people in
10:52:25 the neighborhood have.
10:52:26 So I really, really appreciate it.
10:52:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:52:35 Let me just take this opportunity to say thank you to the
10:52:40 mayor for doing the right thing.
10:52:47 I want to thank you, sir, for realizing that this was
10:52:56 needed, and after reviewing it this year, you and the mayor
10:53:09 both felt you were doing the right thing.
10:53:11 And we thank you for that.
10:53:16 And I want to also to say thanks, for those who live in the
10:53:24 community around William's pool, who now will have the hope
10:53:31 and expectation that maybe next summer they will have the
10:53:35 opportunity to swim in the pool and not be bussed.
10:53:43 So with that in mind, and I was elated to get the word that
10:53:48 the decision was made.
10:53:51 And on behalf of my neighborhood association and all those
10:53:55 involved who sincerely wanted this to happen, we thank you.
10:54:00 We appreciate it.
10:54:00 >> Thank you.
10:54:04 If I may say one word regarding contract administration and
10:54:07 the process.
10:54:08 They do have a lot of work.
10:54:09 They carry out a lot of projects.
10:54:12 They bring in a lot much projects under budget and on time
10:54:15 and things take time and we apologize if this one took
10:54:19 But I'm glad to move forward and make sure that it's getting
10:54:23 We are firmly committed to providing quality aquatics.
10:54:28 That's why in our budget in the next five year CIP cycle we
10:54:34 have committed $6.5 million to aquatic facilities.
10:54:38 So that is our mission.
10:54:39 Our mission is to make sure that these aquatic facilities
10:54:42 can come into use and provide great places for our
10:54:46 Again I thank City Council for the opportunity.
10:54:48 Thank you for your compliments, and wish you a great rest of
10:54:51 your meeting.
10:54:52 >>HARRY COHEN: Very briefly, I wanted to mention, from what
10:55:01 you were saying about shaving money out of the project, I
10:55:03 would hope that you will be able to -- that we will be able
10:55:08 to do the project in its entirety because it would be nice
10:55:11 to have the pool really at 100 percent rather than maybe
10:55:15 being penny wise and found foolish as we move forward.
10:55:21 >> Thank you.
10:55:22 That is our recommendation.
10:55:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: My question is, I'm very pleased that this
10:55:28 is coming forth, but I also want to note, the overall
10:55:36 project of Williams park continues.
10:55:39 >> Yes, ma'am.
10:55:40 And this has caused some confusion as well.
10:55:42 There were two studies going on simultaneously and on
10:55:46 parallel tracks.
10:55:47 One was our city-wide aquatics pool study in November and we
10:55:52 were expecting to be done around this time and we were
10:55:55 waiting for these specifics to be able to share with you.
10:55:57 Then there's a broader Williams park master plan study that
10:56:00 we have not received the results back from.
10:56:03 And once we receive those results, we'll share that with the
10:56:06 community and see what other things we can afford to do and
10:56:09 what other things they want to prioritize for us to get
10:56:12 So that report has not been finalized yet, and we are
10:56:15 awaiting if we should expect results sometime later this
10:56:18 month, possibly next month.
10:56:22 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
10:56:23 That's what I was going to ask.
10:56:25 I would also like to make a comment.
10:56:28 Mr. Kensing?
10:56:32 I want to tell you how much I hear on council appreciate
10:56:36 your tenor and tone over this issue, very much appreciate
10:56:42 And we listened.
10:56:45 Thank you.
10:56:45 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.
10:56:54 Clerk, are we ready?
10:57:13 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
10:57:14 On round three, you have three individuals each getting two
10:57:22 They include Steven L. Benson, Jacqueline Smith Wilds, and
10:57:28 Enrique Woodruff.
10:57:34 So we are on round four.
10:57:36 >> May I interrupt for a moment?
10:57:41 Can we look and see those applicants that are not already on
10:57:44 for the next 2001 boards that we are going to vote on, that
10:57:48 we can vote on those two if they have been removed already?
10:57:53 >>MARY MULHERN: I think -- let get this done.
10:57:56 >> I'm not saying to vote now.
10:57:58 I'm saying as she is tallying that we move forward, if there
10:58:01 are no other people from those other boards and we can move
10:58:04 forward on those other two appointees.
10:58:09 You see what I'm saying?
10:58:11 There are some people who had no votes whatsoever.
10:58:13 >>MARY MULHERN: You want to ask the clerk?
10:58:20 >> Yes, if that's okay.
10:58:21 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: For the ARC, the only individual
10:58:37 that -- well, we have five individuals -- excuse me, six
10:58:46 Steven Smith -- Steven Michael Sutton applied for the
10:58:51 Planning Commission.
10:58:52 He did not get any votes.
10:58:58 >> That's the only member?
10:58:59 I would suggest while she's tallying that we go ahead and
10:59:01 vote for the next board.
10:59:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:59:53 Okay, we are going to continue with the agenda.
10:59:54 Item number 41.
11:00:08 Chapter 19 will take awhile, Ernie?
11:00:13 Is this first reading?
11:00:15 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Assistant city attorney.
11:00:17 I'm here today as requested to present the proposed
11:00:19 ordinance making changes to chapter 19.
11:00:23 I provided a copy of the ordinance to the members of council
11:00:26 last week as requested.
11:00:29 We reviewed the ordinance in some detail during the workshop
11:00:32 on June 16th.
11:00:35 As you will recall, the significant changes in this
11:00:37 ordinance are we are changing some of the existing orders
11:00:41 that the director of code enforcement can issue.
11:00:43 We are adding a couple of orders that can be -- that the
11:00:46 director can issue, specifically the orders to secure and
11:00:49 orders to abate.
11:00:51 We are changing the billing and liening process, when the
11:00:55 city has extended under the to be address or correct an
11:01:00 And we are adding a provision that addresses pool
11:01:03 And we are adding a provision that deals with -- that
11:01:07 addresses dangerous trees, and at the workshop, that's where
11:01:11 you asked that we look at trying to waive that permitting
11:01:15 process, the administration to get together.
11:01:20 And what we came up we've, 19-58, is if the tree is
11:01:24 determined dangerous pursuant to the chapter 19 meeting
11:01:28 those requirements, meaning it was done by one of our city
11:01:33 arborists, and that the cause of the tree becoming dangerous
11:01:37 is not a violation of chapter 13, then that notice of
11:01:41 violation can act as the permit to remove that tree.
11:01:59 Any questions be? Wan is the pleasure of council?
11:02:02 I think we can move this as an ordinance if there is a
11:02:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So moved to first reading.
11:02:07 A motion.
11:02:08 >>THE CLERK: Do you wish to read the ordinance?
11:02:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
11:02:21 I move to move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida
11:02:27 making revisions to the City of Tampa code of ordinances
11:02:31 chapter 19, property maintenance, structural standard,
11:02:34 amending division 1, general provisions, administrative
11:02:37 authority, definitions, amending division 3, property
11:02:40 maintenance, regulations, amending division 6, public
11:02:45 nuisance abatement program, amending division 7, see
11:02:50 authority, special assessment, repealing all ordinances or
11:02:54 parts of ordinances in conflict therewith, providing for
11:02:58 severability, providing an effective date.
11:03:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there a second?
11:03:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Second.
11:03:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Capin, seconded
11:03:11 by Councilman Suarez.
11:03:15 Vote and record.
11:03:17 All in favor?
11:03:19 Anyone opposed?
11:03:22 Motion passes.
11:03:22 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.
11:03:25 Second reading and adoption will be held on August 25th
11:03:29 at 9:30 a.m.
11:03:47 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
11:03:48 For round four, we have one candidate receiving three votes.
11:03:55 That's Steven L. Benson.
11:03:58 Jacqueline Wilds received two votes, and Enrique Woodruff
11:04:03 received one.
11:04:05 And we are on to round five.
11:04:30 >>JIM SHIMBERG: We have item 38 if would you like to take
11:04:35 that up.
11:04:36 >> Ron Wiggins, legal department.
11:04:39 That item was requested to be continued by the subdivider.
11:04:44 I believe it has something to do with their clogs.
11:04:46 It was not at the request of the city at all.
11:04:49 So we just try to comply with what the subdivider requested.
11:04:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Item 38?
11:04:56 Do they want to continue?
11:04:58 >> They wanted to continue it back then.
11:05:03 >> I don't know why it was put under staff reports for today
11:05:08 but it should have been on the regular consent agenda.
11:05:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It was unfinished business, I guess, is
11:05:15 why it was placed on this.
11:05:18 So then you are saying no action needs to be taken other
11:05:21 than just moving the resolution?
11:05:23 >> Correct.
11:05:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I need a little more clarification.
11:05:31 This was continued.
11:05:34 Where was it -- when was it on the agenda and -- we
11:05:39 continued it?
11:05:40 >> It was on the agenda for the June 23rd docket.
11:05:44 And --
11:05:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Where was it on the agenda?
11:05:47 >> It was on the consent.
11:05:48 >>MARY MULHERN: It wasn't a public hearing or anything?
11:05:50 It doesn't have to be?
11:05:52 >> No, ma'am.
11:05:53 >>MARY MULHERN: But was it explained to us?
11:05:54 Can you just give us a brief explanation of why you are
11:05:58 doing this?
11:05:59 >> Yes.
11:05:59 It was originally put on the consent agenda for June
11:06:02 Then the subdivider contacted Susan Johnson and requested
11:06:05 that be continued: I believe the reason why was something
11:06:10 to do with their closing, to postpone, I believe.
11:06:15 Mrs. Johnson should be able to give more details about the
11:06:17 reason why the subdivider requested the continuance.
11:06:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess my question -- is this for you, Mr.
11:06:28 Replats don't have to have a public hearing?
11:06:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
11:06:33 And, in fact, you have several on your consent docket today.
11:06:40 It's mostly administerial.
11:06:41 >> I move item 38.
11:06:44 >> Second.
11:06:44 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
11:06:46 Motion was made by Councilman Suarez, seconded by
11:06:49 Councilwoman Capin.
11:06:54 Anyone opposed?
11:06:56 I guess I didn't ask that.
11:07:03 Thank you.
11:07:03 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
11:07:10 Council, for the Planning Commission candidate, this is
11:07:15 round five.
11:07:17 Two individuals each received three votes.
11:07:22 Steven L. Benson and Jacqueline Smith Wilds.
11:07:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: Making progress.
11:07:31 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: So we are on to round six.
11:07:54 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Can I proceed with 42?
11:07:58 I hope council has had time touch review the reports that I
11:08:02 have provided concerning any public land use classification.
11:08:06 This came as a result of the proposed amendment to the comp
11:08:11 plan that involved St. Johns Parish I shall and Hyde Park
11:08:20 and the intensities that were allowed in the public
11:08:22 semi-public land use classification.
11:08:24 I conduct add review of the comp plan that showed the
11:08:27 limitations which in that land use classification there is
11:08:30 no specified limit on floor area ratio or density.
11:08:37 The land use classification is typically used for public
11:08:40 facility, governmental buildings, private and public
11:08:44 schools, hospital, transportation employees.
11:08:49 They are scattered throughout the city.
11:08:52 I have on the Elmo sort of an illustration of the number of
11:08:56 parcels that are scattered throughout the city.
11:09:00 There's 326 parcels.
11:09:02 I also reviewed utilizing the property appraiser records,
11:09:07 the information on building area for each of these parcels.
11:09:12 The variety majority, 89%, has floor area ratio of less than
11:09:18 .35 which is very small.
11:09:20 That is the typical F.A.R. limitation under the R-10 land
11:09:26 use classification.
11:09:29 As part of the review, what I wanted to understand in terms
11:09:33 of the impact of this land use classification could have or
11:09:36 surrounding property owners, to look also to where these
11:09:39 parcels are located.
11:09:41 And in relationship to other land use classification as
11:09:44 round to see if they were similar to those intensities.
11:09:50 There were only just two parcels that I could identify.
11:09:54 Mitchell elementary school that has a .69 F.A.R.
11:09:58 It is surrounded by an R-20 land use classification, has a
11:10:02 limit of .5 so it's slightly larger than the intensity for
11:10:07 that district.
11:10:09 And also St. Johns has a 1.03 F.A.R.
11:10:14 Pretty good size.
11:10:16 It's surrounded by an R-10 which has the typical .35 F.A.R.
11:10:22 The comp plan does have a number of policies in chapters 3
11:10:27 and 4 that talk to compatibility of surrounding
11:10:30 neighborhood, and promoting the design to mitigate for
11:10:35 impact of development.
11:10:38 Looking at the intensity that is normally allowed for the
11:10:42 public semi-public land use, since there is no limit.
11:10:46 I am recommending to council to consider possibly amending
11:10:49 the comprehensive plan under table 2 of the future land use
11:10:55 summary table for the public semi-public, to at least give
11:11:00 the guidance that the appropriate intensity of development
11:11:02 for that land use classification should mirror the
11:11:06 surrounding land use classification.
11:11:10 So if they are in the middle of a single-family neighborhood
11:11:14 R-10, this .35 F.A.R. would use as a guide to development of
11:11:19 that public semi-public land use classification.
11:11:22 However, given that the public purpose of this land use
11:11:25 classification, I think it's important to at least build in
11:11:31 an ability for a development to be considered by City
11:11:35 Council, potentially through a rezoning to a planned
11:11:41 development district, if it can be shown that they are
11:11:44 mitigating for the intensity that they are proposing, and
11:11:46 that it is the public purpose for that use.
11:11:52 I also would ask the council consider a policy that would
11:11:56 grandfather in, so to be speak, recognize the nonconform
11:12:02 developments that may exist that exceed that F.A.R. or
11:12:07 intensity of development, allow it to be maintained and
11:12:11 recognized as a conforming use.
11:12:15 The final policy that I would urge council to consider is
11:12:19 one that would basically direct us to review the land
11:12:23 development regulations to ensure that public and
11:12:28 semi-public uses are located and designed compatible to
11:12:34 surrounding neighborhood uses.
11:12:36 Many of these uses, you have to remember, are already in
11:12:40 special uses, especially those that are in
11:12:44 residentially-zoned property.
11:12:46 So our special use criteria often have that compatibility
11:12:50 criteria built in.
11:12:52 But we can look further to it, especially those that are
11:12:57 considered permitted uses within those land use
11:13:00 I have been working with Steve Griffin, Tony Garcia and the
11:13:04 rest of the Planning Commission staff in reviewing this
11:13:09 If council is inclined to direct them to further the plan
11:13:14 amendment to incorporate these changes, I think they would
11:13:18 take this and really tweak the language even further,
11:13:23 wordsmith it and have it ready for council through their
11:13:26 next cycle.
11:13:27 It's up to council.
11:13:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Capin.
11:13:32 Gloria, can I ask you to put the overhead in focus?
11:13:36 It's been out of focus all morning.
11:13:40 >>GLORIA MOREDA: I'm sorry.
11:13:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
11:13:42 >> Do I do something?
11:13:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm not sure.
11:13:50 There is some way to focus it.
11:13:53 It's like a really bad eye test.
11:14:02 We are all flunking.
11:14:29 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you for bringing this forth.
11:14:30 I made this motion September 23rd, 2010 which was for
11:14:33 the -- refinements were to include -- be included in the
11:14:40 march 11 cycle.
11:14:43 Now we are in August, and ware looking at -- when?
11:14:50 >> If you direct staff to proceed with this plan amendment
11:14:54 it would go in the August 1st cycle.
11:15:00 >> October 1st?
11:15:02 >> August 1st cycle.
11:15:05 >> It's just beginning.
11:15:11 >> Mr. Griffith is here.
11:15:14 >> Steven Griffin, Planning Commission staff.
11:15:21 Just to let you know, we have proceeded with our first cycle
11:15:26 for 2011 which started August 1st.
11:15:29 Council has the privilege of submitting a plan amendment at
11:15:32 any time.
11:15:33 So we can take your request whenever council is ready to
11:15:37 proceed, if they choose to do a text amendment to your
11:15:40 comprehensive plan.
11:15:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
11:15:46 So that one just put us short of a year.
11:15:50 On this.
11:15:54 I have to comment on the 180 days from the time this motion
11:16:00 is made to the September 11th that it is brought to my
11:16:03 attention that there was errors in the motion after or very
11:16:10 close to the September 11th.
11:16:13 It was favor months after the motion was made.
11:16:19 Therefore, I'm glad to hear that we are moving forward.
11:16:27 >> Do you need some direction to go forward with this?
11:16:36 So Councilman Capin, are you happy with what they are
11:16:38 proposing or do you want to --
11:16:40 >> Yes, thank you.
11:16:41 I move that we move forward.
11:16:46 >> Second.
11:16:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Motion would be to forward to the Planning
11:16:49 Commission for the August planning cycle?
11:16:52 Won that be the appropriate motion?
11:16:54 And until that happens and it comes back, you wouldn't be
11:16:57 able to implement the code changes until it's adopted.
11:17:06 >>GLORIA MOREDA: If you look at the information that was
11:17:08 provided in the report, it is a rare occurrence that it is
11:17:15 going to have an impact in delaying development from
11:17:19 occurring within the public semi-public area.
11:17:23 For instance, St. Johns parish is in a residential RS-60, I
11:17:30 believe, zoning district, so development or expansion of
11:17:35 that use would have to go through a special use process at
11:17:36 minimum, if not a rezoning process.
11:17:40 But in the meantime, I think this amendment will at least
11:17:43 give a little bit more direction and ability to provide that
11:17:47 guidance and approving developments within the land use
11:17:52 >>MARY MULHERN: So we have a motion by Councilman Capin,
11:17:57 seconded by Councilman Suarez.
11:17:59 All in favor?
11:18:03 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
11:18:17 The vote was basically the same.
11:18:20 Steven L. Benson, three votes and Jacqueline Smith Wilds
11:18:24 three votes.
11:18:25 So on to round seven.
11:18:47 >>THOM SNELLING: Item 43?
11:18:49 >>MARY MULHERN: We have 42.
11:18:53 >>THOM SNELLING: Could I have PowerPoint, please?
11:18:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Wait, Thom.
11:18:59 Which item are you on?
11:19:02 >>THOM SNELLING: 43.
11:19:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to just bring up -- to give a
11:19:11 shout out to Chairman Miranda, in case he's watching, tell
11:19:15 him we miss him, and he better get better fast.
11:19:19 I'm getting used to sitting here.
11:19:23 I thought that would moth motivate him to get back here.
11:19:27 But it was one of Chairman Miranda's requirements that if we
11:19:32 are going to have a PowerPoint presentation to council as a
11:19:36 staff report that we would have it by the Monday before the
11:19:39 meeting, and we just received this yesterday.
11:19:42 So before you launch into it, we could accept it as just to
11:19:49 receive and fail and review it.
11:19:51 Or you can tell us how long it's going to be.
11:19:54 >>THOM SNELLING: The actual PowerPoint 9/11 five minutes.
11:19:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:20:04 The motion on item 43 really has three motions involved.
11:20:09 I'm kind of do them in a bit of reverse order and talk about
11:20:12 some of the items we have done we've the homeless coalition
11:20:16 and then touch on the housing programs that we have.
11:20:32 The first slide really just shows the money that we put in
11:20:45 for the homeless coalition in general.
11:20:48 We also offered them office space.
11:20:49 We have for a number of years with both of those funding
11:20:53 And that comes straight from the city's general fund.
11:20:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Excuse me for a minute because I have a
11:21:14 And this came up in our agenda review yesterday but I
11:21:17 couldn't consult council on it.
11:21:19 But the second part of this staff report says budget, to
11:21:26 appear and provide a report, identifying opportunities
11:21:28 within the city's budget to increase funding to the homeless
11:21:34 Mrs. Montelione, that's not what I remembered we asked for.
11:21:40 I thought it was just for homeless services.
11:21:41 Was it for that one agency or are we asking in general?
11:21:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I believe it was homeless coalition, the
11:21:46 And as the coordinating agency for other homeless services,
11:21:52 they were looking -- I believe it's $25,000 that they
11:21:58 currently receive.
11:21:59 >>MARY MULHERN: So you were specifically --
11:22:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was.
11:22:03 I'm sorry.
11:22:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
11:22:10 >>THOM SNELLING: Can I have it back, please?
11:22:12 Actually, had you could -- refunded the homeless coalition
11:22:18 55,000, plus they get the office space which is valued at
11:22:21 40,000 at the German-American club, just for clarification.
11:22:25 The other thing is I wanted -- because we kind of thought of
11:22:28 it as homeless services.
11:22:30 These other agencies are moneys that they receive from the
11:22:33 community development block grant program.
11:22:34 You can see the various agencies and the types of things
11:22:37 that they do.
11:22:38 The Alpha House, it's, of course, for the pregnant single
11:22:42 females for that.
11:22:43 Catholic charities and homeless coalition, they get that
11:22:48 additional 26,000.
11:22:49 They service individuals as well as families, as does
11:22:54 Metropolitan Ministries.
11:22:55 Salvation Army is on the individuals.
11:22:57 That 200,000 was the units that are up on Nebraska Avenue
11:23:03 where they have overnight where homeless people go, they get
11:23:05 the vouchers, they stay overnight and also have some
11:23:08 transitional housing in that unit as well.
11:23:10 >> Were those new units being adapted or built?
11:23:15 >> They were built and being rehabilitated.
11:23:19 They were in terrible shape.
11:23:21 We visited the site last year during that funding cycle.
11:23:27 Then continuing.
11:23:28 You can see the city also had some money from the HOME
11:23:33 funding source.
11:23:35 It's earmarked for half a million dollar.
11:23:37 That's for a 50-unit multifamily low-income facility that
11:23:42 you know what Metropolitan Ministries does, they focus in on
11:23:46 homeless families and try to get them a place to live.
11:23:48 Again we have the emergency shelter grants with those
11:23:51 various agencies.
11:23:52 And there's a lot of money that we have funded them.
11:23:59 And then specifically one of the items that came up in the
11:24:02 thing is about the rapid rehousing.
11:24:06 The homeless coalition was given approximately $1.4 million
11:24:10 as part of the federal AARA grant, stimulus money, and that
11:24:15 was a multiyear contract which has expired, and currently
11:24:18 they still have approximately $96,000 for homeless
11:24:23 prevention which is the top number and then about $56,000
11:24:25 remaining for rapid rehousing money.
11:24:29 The reason that's important, and I will show you as we get
11:24:32 into the portion that talks about MSP funding and various
11:24:34 opportunities to house people --
11:24:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Can you go back?
11:24:41 I have some questions about that.
11:24:44 So this was a multi-year -- these were multi-year stimulus.
11:24:52 And what was it for, '09, '10, and '10-11?
11:24:59 A two-year agreement?
11:25:00 >> It started in '08, '09, '10, '11.
11:25:06 Yes, '9, '10, '11.
11:25:09 I'm sorry.
11:25:10 And to be used within than three-year period.
11:25:13 I'm sorry.
11:25:16 And again those are just the totals prosecute the local
11:25:20 general fund money as well as some of the federal dollars
11:25:22 that have gone in.
11:25:24 For the homeless services, not just the homeless coalition
11:25:27 but for all homeless services that the city participants in.
11:25:30 >> Is that totaling everything that you just showed us or is
11:25:33 that additional?
11:25:34 >> That's the total of way just showed you.
11:25:36 This is the continuum of care which is specifically coming
11:25:40 straight from the federal government.
11:25:42 That goes directly to the homeless coalition.
11:25:45 And so they can administer a variety of homeless services,
11:25:51 also provide funding for ACTS, alpha house, Metropolitan
11:25:56 Ministries, money for themselves and rapid rehousing as well
11:25:59 as prevention.
11:26:00 That is money that is the city just passes through the stir,
11:26:03 goes directly to them and they administrator those fund.
11:26:06 >> The other side, the three-year funding, '09, '10, '11
11:26:16 funding that's expiring in September, you referred to the
11:26:21 stimulus funds?
11:26:23 They are funding so that is no longer available?
11:26:26 >> That is no longer available, correct.
11:26:28 >> So we are looking back to see what we did give.
11:26:33 You know, I thought the intention wags to go forward.
11:26:36 >> And now we have the fiscal 12, yes.
11:26:40 >> All of the funding, the stimulus fund, are gone, we are
11:26:46 likely not going to see any with the current situation?
11:26:49 >> I would be surprised if you did.
11:26:51 >> And the federal government, we will not be seeing any
11:26:53 more stimulus money or funding coming from Washington.
11:26:57 So it's great that we have that money available.
11:27:00 And now it's gone.
11:27:01 So that's what I'm personally worried about.
11:27:03 >> Just for clarification, we haven't been funded for that
11:27:12 prayer to the stimulus money?
11:27:13 >> (off microphone).
11:27:16 >> This is the continuum of care.
11:27:21 That's what they are continuing to get from the federal
11:27:23 dollars and it's estimated they get 4 million in the future.
11:27:28 And just to go back, the total for other program service for
11:27:32 all homeless services is 1.6 in fiscal year 12.
11:27:36 I was just giving you background for the '11-12.
11:27:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's my understanding wherein these
11:27:45 federal funds come from, this is subject to ratification.
11:27:47 So it's 4 million but it could be half that, it could be --
11:27:54 >>THOM SNELLING: And that's why we put stipulate.
11:27:55 Going on what they have done with the communities done with
11:27:59 block grant funding how that sentence decreased by 16 or so
11:28:05 >> We all heard the debt ceiling debate.
11:28:08 And ware looking at more cuts coming through that are going
11:28:12 to severely impact some of these programs.
11:28:15 >> You have seen that.
11:28:22 We were just talking about it.
11:28:23 And another portion of this motion had to do with about how
11:28:27 the RFPs that went out for rapid rehousing as well as the
11:28:34 NSP money how that was used to help the homeless populations
11:28:37 or other affordable income.
11:28:39 Both with NSP 1 and NSP 2, queued a total of $22 million.
11:28:44 And Wan is required for both of those programs is that you
11:28:46 need to have at least 25% of that money set aside for people
11:28:50 at or below the 50 percent of the area median income.
11:28:54 And the reason I give you that figure is the programs that
11:28:57 the city does, we are actually at 42% which is almost double
11:29:00 what the federal government is requiring us to do.
11:29:04 And what I wanted to show you here, if you look at where it
11:29:08 says up to 50% AMI, those are the units that you can use
11:29:14 rapid rehousing money for.
11:29:16 Those are the available units that a person who is
11:29:18 potentially homeless, because a lot of the conversation is
11:29:21 about homelessness as well as the future homeless or the
11:29:24 potential homeless or whatever, the acronym people like to
11:29:29 use, those housing units directly benefit people who are
11:29:33 this close to being homeless, and we have some programs
11:29:36 where you can use rapid rehousing money to get into those
11:29:39 units with utility and down payment assistance and things
11:29:42 like that.
11:29:42 So without those units, you can have as much rapid rehousing
11:29:46 money as you like.
11:29:48 If you don't very much a place to actually house the people
11:29:50 for a unit that simply isn't affordable.
11:29:52 Or doesn't come up to have a quality standard.
11:29:55 And you can seep the breakdown of how we used the NSP 1
11:29:59 funding as well as the NSP 2.
11:30:01 One of the other parts of that -- the last slide.
11:30:07 But one other portion is the question before whether or not
11:30:10 the NSP 2 did indeed have an idea about helping for rapid
11:30:16 rehousing and affordable units.
11:30:18 Again, it had the same requirement as the 25% or less.
11:30:21 If you go back, what we are -- you can't see it because I'm
11:30:27 On the very bottom, 46 units are being proposed with an
11:30:30 additional 12 units being set aside.
11:30:33 There you go.
11:30:34 Thank you.
11:30:34 >> You're welcome.
11:30:38 >> And that particular RFP has been back to city and city
11:30:41 staff is reviewing it.
11:30:42 Ware doing the underwriting to make sure that the person
11:30:46 that bid on the project has the financial capability to go
11:30:49 forward with that project.
11:30:54 Do you have questions?
11:30:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me ask a question.
11:30:59 When will they complete the renovation of that facility?
11:31:04 >>THOM SNELLING: When will it be completed?
11:31:06 >> Do you have a projection?
11:31:07 >> The end of August, counselor.
11:31:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: This year?
11:31:17 >> Also, planning to have a ribbon cutting in the near
11:31:21 fought, sometime the end of August.
11:31:23 So a lot of these units are right there, at the jumping-off
11:31:28 point waiting to be occupied.
11:31:30 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.
11:31:35 I would have to have say this.
11:31:40 I would move the CDBG funds to after you are. Org done
11:31:46 within this item because a lot of money that you are talking
11:31:48 about is contained in this report, which we got yesterday.
11:31:52 Now, the whole idea of --
11:31:56 >> The action plan?
11:31:58 >> We got this yesterday, right?
11:32:02 >> Oh, the PowerPoint, yes.
11:32:04 >> The action plan we got a couple weeks ago.
11:32:09 But what I'm saying about this was the request, what we are
11:32:14 asking for, I believe, I seconded it.
11:32:18 But on the first parted, we wanted you to identify
11:32:22 opportunities for using NSP 2 funds to offer RFPs.
11:32:28 We didn't want you to tell what we were already doing.
11:32:32 We wanted to know if there was, number one, if there's any
11:32:37 additional funding that we haven't applied for.
11:32:41 Is it possible that there is federal funding out there that
11:32:44 we could have apply for, for additional housing?
11:32:47 When you look at this, for instance, the multi-family
11:32:52 set-aside, 198 units, we know from the homeless coalition
11:32:57 there's 17,000 people every night in Hillsborough County
11:33:00 that don't have anywhere to sleep.
11:33:03 So this is what we are talking about.
11:33:06 What more can we do?
11:33:08 And is there an opportunity to ask for more --
11:33:12 >> The NSP 1 money is spent.
11:33:15 It's done.
11:33:15 It's all been obligated through single-family, multifamily
11:33:19 rehab, and now acquisition.
11:33:21 The NSP 22 money, this last slide on the 22nd street
11:33:26 project, that is the last piece of NSP money so there is no
11:33:30 more funding availability in the NSP money.
11:33:32 >> How much money was that?
11:33:34 >> $10 million.
11:33:37 For the total NSP package.
11:33:40 >> And we use that to be acquire land?
11:33:43 >> No.
11:33:44 Some single-family --
11:33:47 >> Those were the RFPs?
11:33:56 With Crossroads, East Tampa Business Civic Association and
11:33:59 the 22nd Street.
11:34:00 Those are the partners that we got into.
11:34:03 And they had primarily did a lot of multifamily.
11:34:06 And that utilized all of the NSP 2 money.
11:34:10 There is no money now.
11:34:10 >> So that would have been the answer to that one.
11:34:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Regarding the NSP money especially going
11:34:18 back to the single-family -- and I don't even know if it's
11:34:22 But the single-family NSP money that's out there, having
11:34:31 studied those RFPs when they went out, and than the rebid
11:34:38 conferences, the funding was extraordinary so that the
11:34:41 contractor would acquire the property understood certain
11:34:46 conditions, they would renovate the home, they would then
11:34:49 put it up for sale, and it was their responsibility then as
11:34:54 the owner of the property to sell the house.
11:34:58 Now, with the current economic conditions, and the glut of
11:35:02 single-family vacant residences that are on the market, and
11:35:06 the continual drop in housing prices around certain
11:35:09 neighborhoods, or the entire City of Tampa, but some areas
11:35:16 are harder hit than others, I know that some of those homes
11:35:20 continue to sit say can't and are now the responsibility of
11:35:25 the contractor because it is the contractor's responsibility
11:35:27 to sell that home if it is not sold within a certain period
11:35:29 of time, they carry the cost.
11:35:31 So the construction industry which subpoena already hurting
11:35:35 is now bearing the cost of that NSP funding that they were
11:35:41 given to renovate homes for lob-income housing.
11:35:44 Now, that's my understanding of the situation.
11:35:50 Has all of the single-family and NSP-1 funding been --
11:35:54 because it was done in a reimbursement basis -- has it all
11:35:57 been spent by the contractors who receive the awards under
11:36:00 the NSP 1 funding?
11:36:03 Is there still funding that has not been spent allocated or
11:36:07 transferred to the contractors, and to make a complicated
11:36:11 question even more complicated, is any of that funding
11:36:17 available for redirection?
11:36:19 Because having vacant homes on the market that has been
11:36:24 renovated, or not, doesn't do us any good, because we can't
11:36:28 sell homes in the City of Tampa.
11:36:30 >> I would like to report that of the 29 homes that we
11:36:35 purchased under NSP 1, about half of them have been sold.
11:36:39 And there may be two a month.
11:36:45 In the next six months all of our homes, I expect, would
11:36:50 actually be sold so I think our partners have had a good
11:36:53 track record.
11:36:53 Under NSP 2 -- and it's all committed.
11:36:57 We had to commit all the funding to a particular address by
11:37:02 September of 2010.
11:37:05 The only money that will be available will be program
11:37:08 And if you remember, we committed $1 million of NSP 1
11:37:13 program income to the project so all of our money, we don't
11:37:18 have -- yeah, the I-4 toward the Ellis project.
11:37:23 So we won't have any funds available for a while for any
11:37:28 additional program income.
11:37:30 Under NSP 2 we only purchased seven single-family homes and
11:37:34 we expect that the contractors will be aggressive in getting
11:37:39 them sold.
11:37:41 So we didn't ask about purchase of single-family homes with
11:37:44 our NSP 2 funding, concentrated primarily on multifamily
11:37:49 rental and making them available.
11:37:51 Because that's where most of the need is right now, is
11:37:53 affordable housing in terms of rental property.
11:38:05 >>THOM SNELLING: All of the NSP 2 money is committed except
11:38:07 for the 22nd street project which we are in the process of
11:38:10 working with a responder to the RFP, and undergoing writing
11:38:17 >> So there were 7 in NSP 2?
11:38:21 >> Single-family homes.
11:38:22 I think it's 29 NSP 1 and 7 in NSP 2, single-family homes.
11:38:28 Everything else was either multifamily homes.
11:38:32 We did -- we tore down derelict properties.
11:38:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So we were only able to put 36 homes
11:38:45 back on the market?
11:38:51 >> Yes.
11:38:51 Because the investors were coming in, and buying them was
11:38:53 very difficult to compete with the private sector, and we
11:38:56 found that our investment was better spent for multifamily.
11:39:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I understand that.
11:39:03 Actually multifamily is the direction that I would encourage
11:39:07 us to go, because those are the units that for rapid
11:39:12 rehousing, those where very low income, should be occupying
11:39:20 because of the lower maintenance cost, you know, lower carry
11:39:24 costs for themselves month to month.
11:39:26 But I'm just disappointed than weighed all that money, and
11:39:32 we don't have any opportunity to supplement the need that we
11:39:38 have now.
11:39:39 As Councilwoman Mulhern pointed out, 1700 individuals don't
11:39:43 have a place to stay, and -- 17,000, I'm sorry.
11:39:47 17,000 individuals, only have 198 units.
11:39:51 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to suggest, to deep keep this
11:39:58 meeting moving, and so that we can possibly be done by noon.
11:40:04 This is an issue that we are also discussing at our
11:40:14 And if anyone has any specific question they would like
11:40:20 answered at that workshop, other than we have already heard
11:40:30 Because this relates to the next item, which is the CDBG,
11:40:35 acceptance of the actual plan.
11:40:37 >>MARY MULHERN: We'll take that up separately.
11:40:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, but under this item there were
11:40:41 copies of applications applied for.
11:40:43 So about we can discuss that then.
11:40:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, we will.
11:40:48 Did anyone else have a question on this?
11:40:54 I think that's going to be it for today on item 43.
11:41:03 Do we have a decision?
11:41:10 Then why don't we go to.
11:41:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Why don't we hear from the clerk?
11:41:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:41:23 Jumping ahead.
11:41:24 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
11:41:31 Yes, Mr. Benson received three votes, Marilyn Smith received
11:41:37 one vote, and Jacqueline Wilds two votes.
11:41:40 >>MARY MULHERN: This is kind of a run-off.
11:41:56 So someone put a new person in there? Well, we are really
11:41:59 going to be here a long time if we start doing that.
11:42:02 So the vote before was 3-3 for Mr. Benson and Ms. Wilds.
11:42:12 I would like to --
11:42:18 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Please repeat the -- thank you.
11:42:22 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: It's between Steven Benson who
11:42:29 received three votes, Marilyn Smith one vote, and Jacqueline
11:42:35 Smith Wilds two votes.
11:42:41 So if you wanted to narrow it down to the two highest.
11:42:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Let's take up item 44.
11:43:39 Let's take up the ones that have been removed.
11:43:41 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator for public works and
11:43:57 utility services.
11:43:58 Item 44 is a request to hire a firm to just help us move
11:44:03 forward with the process to consider putting the solid waste
11:44:08 bill collection as a non-ad valorem assessment.
11:44:13 The write-up, I would have preferred that it was more
11:44:18 explanatory and not so layings it out as a process, but it
11:44:27 is our request that we hire this firm to help us move
11:44:33 forward with exploring this possibility.
11:44:37 Hillsborough County currently collects their solid waste
11:44:43 bill on the non-ad valorem process on the tax bill.
11:44:47 We would like to at least explore that.
11:44:49 We would have to do a number of steps along the way.
11:44:55 Very back, last page of the package, there's a schedule
11:44:59 And it would include adopting a resolution at some point
11:45:04 prayer to January 1st we would notify the tax collector
11:45:14 in adopting an ordinance.
11:45:15 So there's more opportunities and more discussion to be had
11:45:17 on this process.
11:45:19 Additionally, I point out of that item or paragraph 7 in the
11:45:26 contract here is a termination clause.
11:45:29 We can terminate this at any time that the council decides
11:45:33 not to continue to move forward.
11:45:36 But we think this would help us with a number of our revenue
11:45:39 issues in solid waste.
11:45:41 Again, it would line us up with Hillsborough County and
11:45:43 other agencies in the area.
11:45:47 Sonya little is here, and her endorsement of this is based
11:45:52 on how it would improve our rating and how we are seen by
11:45:57 the credit agencies. Anyway, this was pulled off of the
11:46:00 last agenda.
11:46:02 And it's back on this one, and we would entertain any
11:46:08 But we would like to again tray to move forward with
11:46:10 considering this process.
11:46:11 >>MARY MULHERN: Any questions?
11:46:12 >> I want to thank Mr. Daignault.
11:46:18 Thank you very much.
11:46:21 For moving this to staff reports again in defense to my not
11:46:24 being here last Thursday because I was the one who requested
11:46:28 that this be pulled from the consent agenda.
11:46:31 He and I have had conversation about the item since then.
11:46:34 I have had conversation with Mr. Shelby.
11:46:36 And most all of the concerns that I had with the item has
11:46:43 been assuaged, and for the benefit of all present, the major
11:46:49 issue, the concern that I had was, well, two-fold.
11:46:53 One would be this being now collected as a non-ad valorem
11:46:57 tax on people's tax bills, I was afraid would politicize the
11:47:02 issue because then this would be seen as, oh, we have
11:47:09 another something on our tax bill.
11:47:10 For those not understanding that they weren't seeing it
11:47:11 every month, you know, in the mail, and now they were seeing
11:47:14 it on a tax bill.
11:47:16 The other was with all of the vacancy foreclosures, the tax
11:47:22 bills going into tax certificate sales, that was a concern
11:47:24 of mine because I wanted to better understand the process if
11:47:29 the taxes were not paid, how is that affected by the tax
11:47:34 certificate sale?
11:47:35 And, again, Mr. Daignault and I discussed with the discount
11:47:40 rates, that is being offered by the property appraiser, and
11:47:44 then the tax collector, monthly, would that also affect the
11:47:48 collection of the solid waste fund?
11:47:51 So those were my questions and my concerns of how this was
11:47:56 going to impact builders or folks in vacation homes, and
11:48:01 otherwise do not have garbage, trash to be collected in
11:48:06 certain times of the year or at all because the house is
11:48:09 vacant, how that would affect our -- the economics of our
11:48:14 builders and our seniors who are mostly the owners of
11:48:18 vacation homes.
11:48:21 So those were my concerns and I wanted to have that
11:48:23 available to discuss.
11:48:24 >> Thank you.
11:48:28 I didn't have any concerns when this was first posed but
11:48:35 there's some time to think about it and talk about it.
11:48:38 I didn't want to take too much time but I wanted to hear
11:48:42 from Mrs. Little what the advantages of this are because it
11:48:44 will affect people who they are used to paying that monthly.
11:48:48 Some people might not be able to afford it all in one lump
11:48:53 My assumption is, if you think it's going to generate more
11:48:57 revenue, that means in the end the citizens are going to be
11:49:01 paying more for waste pickup.
11:49:03 Otherwise, there wouldn't be any reason to do this.
11:49:06 To justify this $35,000 to have this looked at, I need to
11:49:10 hear an explanation of why.
11:49:12 What the benefits are for us.
11:49:13 >> From a credit perspective, from are my viewpoint, I
11:49:20 consider a credit rating as it relates to our outstanding
11:49:25 bonds, and from than perspective having the bills put on the
11:49:29 tax bill instead of collecting revenues on a month lip
11:49:35 basis, the likelihood that we would collect revenues for
11:49:39 services rendered is hair by putting it on our tax bills
11:49:44 from a credit perspective.
11:49:45 So that being said, it will help us to maintain our credit
11:49:50 rating for our bond issues.
11:49:55 It would add strength from a credit perspective.
11:49:56 >> Is that a reality for, say, Hillsborough County?
11:49:59 Did they switch, or very they always done it that way?
11:50:02 >> I know that they have done it for several years.
11:50:04 I don't know how long it's been.
11:50:10 I don't know.
11:50:12 I would like to thank Councilwoman Montelione for pulling
11:50:16 this because now I have a lot of questions about it.
11:50:18 And I'm not sure we need to spend $35,000 if it's something
11:50:22 that we are already talking about doing, or if it's
11:50:28 something -- and we spend that money, they come back and
11:50:30 tell us to do what you are suggesting we do, and I'm not
11:50:42 sure I want that to happen until we have more information.
11:50:45 >> Council member, this will give us the opportunity to have
11:50:48 more information.
11:50:49 Hillsborough County approved this in 1996.
11:50:51 They have been doing it since then.
11:50:52 Again, other government agencies have been doing this that
11:50:58 I'm familiar with for a number of years, long time.
11:51:01 What we are asking this group to do is again lead us through
11:51:07 the process, go out and look at what body of law, what
11:51:10 changes have occurred in regulations since '96, and then
11:51:14 come back to us with a recommendation and a draft that we
11:51:18 can look at and say, yes, we like this, or no, we don't like
11:51:23 But it does a number of things for us.
11:51:26 As Ms. Little was saying, it allows us to capture the credit
11:51:31 rating agencies see us capturing the money sooner. We would
11:51:35 get it in the tax bill, which is sooner in the year.
11:51:38 People who pay for it currently in their utility bill would
11:51:42 then be paying for it if they have a mortgage and making
11:51:48 monthly payments, and with the escrow, they would be paying
11:51:51 it monthly, just in a different part of their monthly bills.
11:51:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:51:57 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: So it doesn't really hit them so
11:51:59 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, Councilman Cohen.
11:52:01 >>HARRY COHEN: Very briefly I had two comments.
11:52:04 One sort of positive and one sort of negative.
11:52:10 I think, to Councilwoman's Montelione's question, I think
11:52:15 the reason additionally that the city would get more money
11:52:18 this way is because when tax deeds go delinquent and someone
11:52:23 purchases it, they would be paying this cost at that time,
11:52:26 and when eventually the lien was cleared up and -- it would
11:52:32 be between the tax deed purchaser and the owner of the
11:52:35 The city would have gotten its money very early in the pro
11:52:43 That's number one.
11:52:44 Number two, though, just an asterisk for people who have
11:52:48 live in condominiums or places where these fees are paid,
11:52:52 they pay a monthly assessment to their association, and then
11:52:55 the association pays the deed, this is going to revert now
11:52:58 back to the homeowner.
11:53:01 So the homeowners need to make sure that their condominium
11:53:05 association or homeowners associations don't get a windfall
11:53:09 as a result of this change in policy.
11:53:12 Just two comments.
11:53:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
11:53:14 Councilwoman Capin, and then we are going to take up whether
11:53:20 this council wants to go past noon.
11:53:22 It's going to be another half hour to an hour, I think.
11:53:25 Or we can come back at 1:30.
11:53:27 What's the pleasure of council?
11:53:28 >> I move we waive the rules to go past 12.
11:53:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.
11:53:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:53:37 All in favor?
11:53:40 I'm sorry.
11:53:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I appreciate that.
11:53:45 Very good points all the way around.
11:53:50 I need to understand this a little bit.
11:53:51 The 25-25 that is billed weekly --
11:53:55 >> Monthly.
11:53:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I mean monthly is going to be a total bill
11:54:03 on the tax bill?
11:54:04 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Yes, ma'am.
11:54:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: On the annual tax bill.
11:54:08 It's going to be added.
11:54:10 12 times 25.
11:54:11 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
11:54:13 It's 270.
11:54:18 >>YVONNE CAPIN: 270 added to the end of the year or the
11:54:21 homeowner tax bill.
11:54:22 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
11:54:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: When you referred to the mortgage and the
11:54:30 escrow, which is also how people pay their taxes, so that
11:54:35 would be part of --
11:54:37 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: People who have mortgages and pay
11:54:40 principal, taxes and insurance all in there together, it's
11:54:43 adjusted each year, their insurance changes, their taxes,
11:54:46 you know, everything changes just a little bit.
11:54:48 So there is an adjustment every year.
11:54:51 This would be part of that, yes.
11:54:53 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Which is the majority.
11:54:54 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Correct.
11:54:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you for clearing that up for me.
11:54:58 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Yes, ma'am.
11:55:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have two comments.
11:55:20 Mr. Daignault, I want to make this clear.
11:55:23 We aren't changing rates so whatever you are paying now, you
11:55:25 are going to pay the same except it's in a different format
11:55:28 as opposed to monthly you this your utility bill, it's going
11:55:34 to be through your ad valorem, correct?
11:55:36 >> Correct.
11:55:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The second point I wanted to make is to Ms.
11:55:41 Little's point about how this affects the rating agencies --
11:55:45 and pleas correct me if I am wrong -- please correct me if I
11:55:50 am wrong, Ms. Little -- that we are going to get the money
11:55:54 up front, so any sale of that particular plot of land or
11:55:57 that home, we are going to be on point to be able to get
11:56:04 that money up front, and secondly, during foreclosure
11:56:07 procedures and other things, we will be able to get that
11:56:10 money once the sale goes through.
11:56:12 >> That's correct.
11:56:13 >> And that's the reason why it helps us on our rating,
11:56:16 because with a sinking ad valorem revenue coming in, this is
11:56:21 one other way of us protecting our revenues for the future,
11:56:25 and our bonding authority for the future.
11:56:27 >> That's correct.
11:56:28 That's correct.
11:56:30 Madam Chair, if I may also add directly related to our
11:56:35 rating and outstanding bond for solid waste, if you will
11:56:38 recall, in all of our budget briefings and public hearings,
11:56:42 we continue to point out that there are concerns within the
11:56:45 solid waste department, and that we need to take measures in
11:56:48 order to be able to cover our operating and debt service
11:56:53 This is just one of the measures that we have been
11:56:56 discussing and bouncing around simply because our system is
11:57:04 at a huge disadvantage because we continue to tax our fund
11:57:08 balance for the system including debt service.
11:57:11 So this is one step, and we still continue to have the need
11:57:17 to discuss and have other opportunities in which we can
11:57:21 improve the system.
11:57:24 So that is in itself supporting.
11:57:26 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione and then we are
11:57:29 going to have to move.
11:57:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, and thank you for that.
11:57:35 There are still some open questions, and that is whether or
11:57:38 not non-ad valorem tax items are attached to the tax deed
11:57:44 when that is sold is one question.
11:57:48 And to Councilman Suarez, we don't know -- and I think Mrs.
11:57:54 Little mentioned this -- we don't know if we are raising
11:57:57 rates yet.
11:57:58 There's a study underway now in solid waste that we are
11:58:00 already paying for, and part of this study, the fourth item
11:58:06 on this list, is to determine full cost of solid waste
11:58:09 So the concern that I have is that we have a study, I
11:58:11 believe, ongoing in solid waste, and then we also have as
11:58:15 part of his study the same item, which is to discover what
11:58:20 we should be charging for solid waste.
11:58:22 So this is a duplication that I see in reports.
11:58:27 And the other is that I may suggest -- and this may be part
11:58:31 of the motion -- is that the first payment under this
11:58:35 contract is 87.50, October 2011.
11:58:40 The next one is another 25% lump sum January 2012 for
11:58:46 another 87.50.
11:58:47 If I line up those payments with what the schedule is for
11:58:53 the contract is the January to March 2012 is to prepare and
11:58:58 present the assessment report.
11:59:00 So I would say that I would be in favor of going forward
11:59:03 with this contract, but we have an interim report sometime
11:59:10 back to us in March of 2012.
11:59:14 I would make that motion than we go forward with the
11:59:18 approval of this contract, and that we come back in March of
11:59:22 2012 to present the assessment report that is being prepared
11:59:26 under this contract.
11:59:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'll second that.
11:59:29 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) with the stipulation,
11:59:39 seconded by Councilman Suarez.
11:59:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt.
11:59:44 But it's being presented by the administration.
11:59:46 There are no stipulations.
11:59:47 You can do that as a separate motion.
11:59:49 But either move the resolution up or down and then do
11:59:52 whatever you wish as an aside.
11:59:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I will amend that motion to approve the
11:59:57 contract as stated in item 44 as a resolution.
12:00:02 >> You still have my second.
12:00:06 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:00:08 Anyone opposed?
12:00:09 And I am not supporting this because I haven't seen any kind
12:00:11 of cross benefit analysis.
12:00:13 And I think that in addition to the fact that we are already
12:00:15 doing the solid waste study.
12:00:20 Hillsborough County has information they can give us which
12:00:22 wouldn't cost us any money.
12:00:24 We have a real estate division that could look at what would
12:00:31 quantify to be collecting in solid waste and have an
12:00:35 estimate of that.
12:00:37 Based on whatever our current tax rate is, and putting that
12:00:41 in a yearly, we have a finance department of that could
12:00:45 really document for us, if they could document for us that
12:00:50 this really is going to affect our bond rating in some
12:00:54 significant way, or that our bond rating is really in
12:00:57 danger, and we have solid waste to, I think, has a lot that
12:01:02 they can quantify for us.
12:01:03 So basically, I don't like to support a contract for $35,000
12:01:12 when I think we have staff and resources that could answer
12:01:15 those questions for us, before we make a major policy
12:01:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would like to make a motion to have
12:01:32 the public works and solid waste department come back in
12:01:38 March of 2012 with the assessment report that is being
12:01:45 prepared under the contract.
12:01:46 >> Second.
12:01:48 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:01:49 Anyone opposed?
12:01:54 >>THE CLERK: Would you like that is correct at the first
12:01:56 regular --
12:02:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, thank you.
12:02:03 >>THE CLERK: I cannot give you a date because I do not have
12:02:06 the calendar for then.
12:02:07 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.
12:02:12 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
12:02:20 We are back to 3-3 with Steven L. Benson.
12:02:26 This is regarding the Planning Commission appointee for
12:02:34 Steven Benson 3 and Jacqueline Wilds 3.
12:02:42 We are going to round nine.
12:02:52 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm thinking since we have two people, equal
12:02:55 votes, and one of the candidates did not have the
12:02:59 opportunity to come forward, because of surgery, I'm
12:03:04 wondering if we should have them both come back.
12:03:19 Oh, we can't do that?
12:03:21 Because it was 11.
12:03:22 Adjustment a thought.
12:03:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Shelby?
12:03:29 I'm ordering a round of diet coke or coffee for everyone
12:03:33 Let's go to -- are you 45 and 46?
12:03:40 >> Tonja Brickhouse, solid waste.
12:03:58 I want to come and just request your support and approval of
12:04:01 a resolution regarding the purchase of the refuse truck.
12:04:06 Those trucks are used in a business unit that generates
12:04:09 about 19, just a little under $20 million in revenue for the
12:04:15 And right now, we have an aging fleet and limited resources,
12:04:24 and this lease agreement would better enable us to continue
12:04:30 to be provide the services up to 5,000 accounts here in the
12:04:33 city and also generate that revenue that's so necessary for
12:04:37 running the solid waste system.
12:04:43 With that I can take any questions.
12:04:44 >> Move item 45.
12:04:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: I second it.
12:04:54 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:04:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: I move item 46.
12:05:08 I thought she was through with that.
12:05:10 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) all in favor?
12:05:18 Anyone opposed?
12:05:20 >> I was here to answer any questions.
12:05:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: I thought she was come --
12:05:35 >> I did, too.
12:05:36 >>MARY MULHERN: This has nothing to do with solid waste?
12:05:40 >> No.
12:05:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me see if the clerk -- let's have
12:05:45 Shirley speak.
12:05:47 Come rate back up.
12:05:48 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
12:05:55 Council, we have a decision.
12:05:59 After nine rounds, Jacqueline Smith Wilds is the second
12:06:03 applicant to the Hillsborough County city-county Planning
12:06:09 Thank you.
12:06:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, could you just announce then
12:06:14 both candidates?
12:06:16 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: The vote --
12:06:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Both candidates, previous vote.
12:06:20 The two selected.
12:06:21 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Arnold and Jacqueline Smith Wilds.
12:06:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask, because this is an external
12:06:28 board, that you request, direct the legal department to
12:06:34 prepare a resolution formalizing that and bring it back at
12:06:35 the next regular meeting.
12:06:36 >>HARRY COHEN: So moved.
12:06:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
12:06:39 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:06:40 Anyone opposed?
12:06:44 Let's move to the other boards, I think 33.
12:06:52 >> We never did get to 46.
12:06:57 >>MARY MULHERN: We are going to finish the voting because I
12:07:00 think people are here.
12:07:00 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
12:07:03 For the Architectural Review Commission, you have six
12:07:11 They include Donnally Bailey, Jason Matthew Ebert, Clinton
12:07:17 Parker Johnston, Donald Edmond Phillips, Gregory Steven
12:07:23 Ricks, and Steven Michael Sutton.
12:07:25 And I have ballots.
12:08:03 >> There's no one here to speak on this item?
12:08:26 Or the other one either?
12:08:27 Or is this the last one?
12:08:49 Mr. Vaughan, why don't you want to come up?
12:08:52 I'm sorry to have you hopping up and down.
12:08:55 >> Dave Vaughan, contract administration, here to ask for
12:08:58 your support in passing item number 46, which adds some
12:09:02 planned work to the continuing development of the duck pond,
12:09:07 donut pond drainage improvement.
12:09:09 This is an area that is east of 30th street, south of
12:09:14 Fowler and north of Busch.
12:09:16 Historic flooding both in this area and the surrounding
12:09:20 There is an existing joint project agreement with
12:09:23 Hillsborough County, and grant moneys from both SWFWMD and
12:09:26 The development of this project.
12:09:28 Overall when it's done, it's about a $22 million investment
12:09:32 in which the city's contribution will be about $8 million.
12:09:35 You have previously approved design work, and DG and T for
12:09:43 the installation of a force main along 30th street.
12:09:45 This is the next planned step in this development, developed
12:09:50 in the original work, and this, rather than getting
12:09:53 everything designed and holding up the project, we are doing
12:09:57 the things that we can do, and as we prepare the additional
12:09:58 phases, we are going to do that.
12:10:01 Happy to answer any questions.
12:10:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Any questions?
12:10:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item 46?
12:10:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Did you have -- did you have a question?
12:10:15 Council member Montelione.
12:10:17 >> This is in my district so thank you very much for
12:10:23 improving flooding conditions in north Tampa.
12:10:24 The people in north Tampa have been struggling with flooding
12:10:27 conditions, and it hasn't really been talked about very much
12:10:30 on council so I want to recognize that.
12:10:32 We are up to 98,453,797.
12:10:38 >> The total contract is 98 million.
12:10:42 Not just this project.
12:10:44 That includes the 15th street force main that we did,
12:10:46 all of the water pipes downtown, major water line in East
12:10:51 Tampa, number of smaller projects as well.
12:10:53 This is -- and again, part of the reason for the program was
12:10:57 we had these several large projects that cross each other,
12:11:01 interact with each other, need lots of care and feeding and
12:11:06 coordination and public contact and communication.
12:11:08 So this is part of that program.
12:11:10 Also, allows us, in this particular case, to proceed with
12:11:14 things as they are ready, as opposed to having to wait to
12:11:17 get everything.
12:11:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you for that clarification.
12:11:23 I appreciate that.
12:11:24 And again the questions -- and I have said this before and I
12:11:29 will say it again and I will keep saying it -- is maybe when
12:11:32 the agenda item is written up, that there's a little more
12:11:37 clarity, because some of these questions wouldn't come
12:11:39 forward if there was maybe some better --
12:11:44 >> It's a continuing exercise for us.
12:11:46 We'll continue to work on that.
12:11:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
12:11:49 >> Second Mr. Reddick's motion to approve.
12:11:51 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:11:57 That leaves -- we are voting again?
12:12:05 Why don't we go to item 19.
12:12:12 Ms. Coyle, what -- I'm sorry.
12:12:17 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: I can give you the results of the
12:12:20 Architectural Review Commission vote.
12:12:25 Two candidates received three votes.
12:12:27 They include Donnally Bailey and Steven Michael Sutton.
12:12:31 So it's between those two individuals.
12:12:36 Three votes each.
12:12:37 >> Madam Chair, before we move forward, may I ask a quick
12:12:43 Mr. Sutton is not only on this ballot but will be on the
12:12:46 next ballot.
12:12:48 And the only person on the next board.
12:12:54 Will he not be able to serve on one versus the other if he's
12:12:57 approved for the alternate on this? Or he can only serve on
12:13:00 one, correct?
12:13:01 Even though he's still just an alternate?
12:13:08 >> According to the questionnaire, it's a dual office
12:13:11 He would only be able to serve on one board, unless the
12:13:14 second board is an advisory board.
12:13:15 >> And neither one subpoena an advisory.
12:13:20 That was my question.
12:13:21 Thank you.
12:13:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: My apologies.
12:13:30 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Donnally Bailey received three
12:13:34 Steven Michael Sutton received three votes.
12:13:40 You ever your second ballot.
12:13:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you here on the appeal?
12:13:56 >> The review hearing.
12:14:01 I was hoping to get a number of the public the petition for
12:14:04 this on their way.
12:14:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, they are waiting?
12:14:11 We will go to item number -- let's wait and here on this
12:14:19 vote because we may be able to proceed.
12:14:39 We'll start with 47.
12:14:41 >> You will need to open the public hearing and witnesses
12:14:44 need to be sworn in.
12:14:45 >> I move to open.
12:14:45 >> Second.
12:14:46 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:14:47 Anyone who wishes to speak on item 47, please stand and be
12:14:51 sworn in.
12:14:51 (Oath administered by Clerk).
12:15:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Zoning administrator for the city.
12:15:08 Briefly, the request is made as a special use 1.
12:15:11 I am going to -- a review for congregate living facility,
12:15:15 small group facility.
12:15:16 The zoning district is RS-50 single-family residential
12:15:20 We can consider those types of uses administratively.
12:15:22 However, they have to be noon less than 1200 feet from
12:15:26 similar uses.
12:15:29 And they have to be restricted to no more than eight beds.
12:15:33 This facility requesting more than eight beds and does lie
12:15:36 within 1200 feet.
12:15:37 Those are the two waivers that I did include if you are so
12:15:39 inclined to approve it on the 8.5 by 11 sheet.
12:15:45 Just for point of reference, this is 40th Street.
12:15:49 To the east, Osborne to the north.
12:16:32 >> There is a varying amount of CI, commercial intensive.
12:16:36 This is the aerial of the area.
12:16:38 You will note of that Mount Calgary Church is to the north.
12:16:42 There are several churches along 40th Street.
12:16:46 Comprehensive plan does clarify that through the
12:16:52 comprehensive plan there's a strong encouragement for senior
12:16:56 housing, housing for the disabled.
12:16:58 It does also state that the most beneficial calculation
12:17:00 should be considered.
12:17:02 Looking at the floor area ratio, the .35, that gives a
12:17:06 maximum potential square footage of approximately 3,850
12:17:10 square feet.
12:17:11 This structure has approximately 3500 square feet so it
12:17:14 meets that parameter.
12:17:16 The state ultimately determines how many beds the facility
12:17:19 can have through their licensing process.
12:17:21 So if council is so inclined, and I have no objection to the
12:17:24 waivers that are being requested, but we allow additional
12:17:28 facility within 1200 feet of a similar use, number two, we
12:17:32 allow more than eight beds within the RS-50 zoning
12:17:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
12:17:42 >> Thomas C. Hill, 5805 north 20th street, Tampa,
12:17:57 In this particular situation, I think it would be a good fix
12:18:01 for our area.
12:18:03 We are in district 5 where unemployment is very, very high.
12:18:09 This facility will create some employment for at least seven
12:18:11 to ten people.
12:18:13 And we need that pretty bad.
12:18:15 Also, it gives a chance for some more decent housing for
12:18:21 seniors, and people who have some impediments.
12:18:26 And it's a very nice facility.
12:18:28 It has everything totally done over.
12:18:34 And it's located in an area that is needed very much.
12:18:40 Thank you very much.
12:18:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone from the public who wishes
12:18:46 to speak?
12:18:46 >> My name is -- I'm a neighbor across the street from this
12:18:58 property and I want to commend them first of all.
12:19:00 You have done a very good job.
12:19:01 It has made the neighborhood look better.
12:19:03 I have no problem whatsoever.
12:19:05 My only concern is the parking and the traffic flow.
12:19:12 There's two blocks going east of 40th Street.
12:19:17 We have 38th street and 39th street to have 40th
12:19:20 And I'm concerned before TV flow of traffic and the parking.
12:19:24 That's the other problem.
12:19:24 He mentioned about employer he is.
12:19:26 You would have employees needing parking space.
12:19:29 You would need people needing parking space.
12:19:38 You will have visitors come over.
12:19:40 And I'm concerned about where do they park?
12:19:46 The lot, the street on Curtis street enroute to 40th Street.
12:19:50 That's my only concern.
12:19:52 As far as the structure, the place, the facility, I have no
12:19:58 problem with that.
12:20:00 It's the parking and the flow of traffic.
12:20:02 I'm concerned before that.
12:20:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Did you speak with the petitioner about
12:20:08 your concerns?
12:20:09 >> No.
12:20:09 I didn't know I was going to do this.
12:20:13 Like I said, it was beautiful.
12:20:15 And they invited me in, and p that's when they were doing
12:20:19 the renovations.
12:20:24 I had no idea they were planning on going with a business
12:20:29 I thought it was going to be their residence.
12:20:31 Again I have no problem with this business.
12:20:33 It's just the parking.
12:20:35 And the flow of traffic not being hindered.
12:20:38 Between those two blocks.
12:20:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
12:20:42 Thank you.
12:20:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Can I ask petition area question?
12:20:52 Sir, the business --
12:20:55 >> The people are not going to be very mobile at all.
12:20:58 They are not going to be having a lot of cars or anything.
12:21:00 It's a place for disabled and elderly.
12:21:04 Sometimes people are going to visit.
12:21:05 And any of those neighborhood that you go in there, and I
12:21:10 have been in the area for years.
12:21:13 We first of all met the parking that was on the site plan.
12:21:16 The other thing is that cars are up and down the street all
12:21:22 the time park there for a short period of time.
12:21:25 >> How many cars do your current spaces accommodate?
12:21:29 >> Well, by using the site plan, we have handicapped space
12:21:35 and two other spaces.
12:21:36 However, there is other rooms that the cars can park, that
12:21:41 people would have to come inside, and ask somebody to move.
12:21:44 So did it in a manner that somebody could back out and in.
12:21:52 If people know each other you can park six, seven cars
12:21:56 >> And let me just suggest this to you, that Mrs. Davis is
12:22:05 out here commending knew that process and that's a great
12:22:08 first step.
12:22:09 Let me tell you that.
12:22:12 And I would suggest that you work with Mrs. Davis and other
12:22:17 residents to see if you can work out a solution to work on
12:22:21 that problem with parking, and finding some type of space,
12:22:28 that it won't be a new sans to them where you have a lot of
12:22:31 cars coming in and out, because be thankful.
12:22:40 Let me just share that with you.
12:22:44 And I think you have a minor problem, and a concern from
12:22:50 Mrs. Davis but I think you can work that out.
12:22:52 >> Yes, thank you.
12:22:55 However, I am a professional, but the owners -- trying to
12:23:05 work out as much as they can on the parking on that area.
12:23:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Staff, Kathy, they met their parking
12:23:17 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.
12:23:17 Just to clarify.
12:23:19 Even though it's a licensed facility through the state,
12:23:21 typically it's not for profit or even -- it is considered a
12:23:24 residential use for disabled or elderly people by
12:23:29 >> That property, she mentioned which is a nice little
12:23:45 parking has been --
12:23:47 >> Can you state your name on the record?
12:23:49 >> Vincent Jackson.
12:23:50 I was the previous owner of that property through marriage.
12:23:54 However, I do have some personal issues with that particular
12:24:01 One being that the house was sold through foreclosure.
12:24:06 Prior to that I had a lien against the property which was
12:24:09 never satisfied.
12:24:13 And next thing I know that property was sold and all these
12:24:17 other things were coming about.
12:24:18 Yes, I do have some concerns at what's going on there, and
12:24:23 what has not been accomplished.
12:24:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Shelby?
12:24:29 We need to hear from our attorney.
12:24:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Whether or not there's a lien or the
12:24:35 process that involves the property is not what's being
12:24:39 What's come before council is whether or not council wishes
12:24:41 to approve the waiver to allow a special use 1 permit to be
12:24:45 issued by the zoning administrator.
12:24:47 So with regard to that, that would not be relevant to
12:24:53 council's decision, and obviously we are not in a position
12:24:55 to advise this gentleman of what the legal ramifications are
12:24:58 of his position.
12:24:59 >> I understand that, sir.
12:25:02 As a matter of fact, I'm in due process to collecting all
12:25:05 the items of that I need to, because I have been put down as
12:25:11 a defendant, not a plaintiff, of that particular property.
12:25:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Sir, we can't -- it's not our place to hear
12:25:19 any of that.
12:25:19 It's probably better that you not share the legal stuff.
12:25:23 If you have any -- to speak to the use that they are asking
12:25:27 for specifically.
12:25:28 >> I just want to bring those concerns, whether it was
12:25:33 relevant to the case or not.
12:25:34 >>MARY MULHERN: We can't take it into consideration.
12:25:40 Councilwoman Montelione?
12:25:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ms. Coyle, one of the waivers being
12:25:44 requested is to allow location of proposed congregate living
12:25:49 facility within 1200 feet of another such use.
12:25:56 This 1200 fate, understandably, but how much of the 1200
12:26:00 feet, and what's the density, the number of beds served by
12:26:06 that other facility?
12:26:07 >> It's actually not part of the requirement that they give
12:26:10 us an exact measure ultimate.
12:26:13 We don't require through the application.
12:26:14 They go out and get a survey to show that so I cannot tell
12:26:18 you the exact dimension.
12:26:19 I am also not aware of how many beds are licensed in that
12:26:22 other facility.
12:26:23 It just comes back to less than 1200 feet.
12:26:25 >> Understood.
12:26:27 >>MARY MULHERN: May I make a suggestion, Mrs. Davis?
12:26:38 If you step outside, privately talk about whether you are
12:26:41 comfortable with this parking, and then you can come back
12:26:43 and let us know, and we could just delay voting on this and
12:26:49 go back to some of our other items.
12:26:53 If the petitioner would like to do that.
12:27:08 >> If I may, I do have to go you have.
12:27:10 I have another obligation, unfortunately and I'm running
12:27:13 late and we have a 1:30 workshop.
12:27:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So are there any questions of Ms. Coyle
12:27:22 before she leaves?
12:27:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, if it passes, do we have the date for
12:27:28 second reading?
12:27:32 Oh, it's just a motion?
12:27:35 All right.
12:27:36 Where are we with our voting?
12:27:39 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
12:27:53 You have selected Donnally Bailey as your person for the
12:28:03 Architectural Review Commission, 5-1 vote.
12:28:07 That means Mr. Steven Sutton would be the Historic
12:28:13 Preservation Commission appointee.
12:28:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If council so chooses.
12:28:20 >>MARY MULHERN: If council would like.
12:28:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move of that we do it by acclamation, Mr.
12:28:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The motion being to select --
12:28:32 >> Mr. Sutton for the historic preservation committee.
12:28:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion by Councilman Suarez, seconded by
12:28:41 Councilman Cohen.
12:28:42 All in favor?
12:28:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Your microphone, I'm sorry.
12:28:47 >> I move that we make Mr. Bailey the alternate selection
12:28:51 for the architectural review committee.
12:28:56 With Martin Shelby preparing the resolution.
12:29:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For both.
12:29:00 >> For both.
12:29:02 >> Second.
12:29:03 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:29:07 Thanks, Shirley.
12:29:12 Let's move finally to item 19 which Mr. Snelling, you're up.
12:29:26 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management development services;
12:29:31 here on item 19 to request City Council's approval of the
12:29:35 fiscal year 2011-12 action plan so that we can submit it to
12:29:39 the United States department of housing and urban
12:29:43 development by the August 15th deadline.
12:29:45 As you know, the action plan really outlines the eligible
12:29:51 proposals that were being considered for funding for this
12:29:54 particular fiscal year.
12:29:56 Within the context of the goals and objectives of the action
12:29:59 plan itself.
12:29:59 This year, we had over 50 eligible interested applicants
12:30:04 turn in a response to this request for proposals.
12:30:08 They were reviewed by members of city staff as well as
12:30:11 private citizens.
12:30:13 They were ranked and they were scored.
12:30:15 Those scores and rankings were turned back into the
12:30:18 administration, and the appropriate funding amounts have
12:30:25 been assigned to them.
12:30:27 Currently we are funding over 25 individual agencies.
12:30:30 So we are able to fund some money to as many agencies as
12:30:37 We try to give everybody a little of something rather than
12:30:40 funding a lot of the larger projects.
12:30:43 The money from this as you know is from the community
12:30:46 development block grants, the home investment partnership
12:30:49 program, or HOME, housing for people -- housing
12:30:53 opportunities for persons with aids as well as emergency
12:30:57 Some of the agencies that were funded through this showed up
12:31:01 in my previous presentation.
12:31:02 So if you have other questions about the particular action
12:31:04 plan or details, I can answer them, and I also have members
12:31:09 of the budget and finance department here if those questions
12:31:12 come up.
12:31:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
12:31:14 I asked to have your report and have you here because I do
12:31:17 have some questions.
12:31:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Just one moment.
12:31:28 I have to go for another appointment.
12:31:31 I should be back probably in a half hour.
12:31:34 But it's family issue so I need to leave.
12:31:38 And I will be back as soon as I can.
12:31:40 I'm sorry.
12:31:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, thank you.
12:31:48 So it's this action plan.
12:31:53 That's what you call the document you are asking us to
12:31:55 approve, correct?
12:31:57 This be is what you are going to submit be?
12:32:01 >>THOM SNELLING: Correct.
12:32:02 >>MARY MULHERN: What is the total?
12:32:03 And it only includes the four listed, and that's what you
12:32:09 are applying for, those four funds?
12:32:12 We have community development block grants, home investment,
12:32:15 emergency shelter grant program, housing opportunities for
12:32:18 persons with aids.
12:32:21 Is that it?
12:32:23 That's it, right?
12:32:23 That's all in here?
12:32:26 Thank you.
12:32:27 What is the total amount you are requesting?
12:32:33 Is this an application for one year?
12:32:36 So what's the total amount?
12:32:37 >> The total amount is just a little over $9 million.
12:32:41 >> When you combine all of those?
12:32:43 >> Correct.
12:32:44 Yes, ma'am.
12:32:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
12:32:49 The staff who ranked the applications, who are those people?
12:32:57 You don't have to give me names.
12:33:06 >> Madam Chair, we have a representative from the citizens
12:33:09 advisory board, one member from growth management and
12:33:13 development, another member from housing and community
12:33:16 development, a staff member from our budget office, one
12:33:21 staff member from revenue and finance, and then one final
12:33:25 member. The economic development for a total of six members
12:33:28 on the committee.
12:33:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
12:33:40 This is probably a question.
12:33:42 I don't know who have can answer this so you may not want to
12:33:45 run away yet.
12:33:45 My question is, the way you described it, Thom, you said the
12:33:50 programs in here are an outlie of what's eligible.
12:33:56 So my question is, is every project in here, are the
12:34:08 proposed projects in here obligated be to obviously those
12:34:18 >> I'm not sure of the question, ma'am.
12:34:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, the total amount of money, you asked
12:34:23 for $9 million, and I think it's pretty much itemized in
12:34:27 here, but is it possible -- can it only go to the
12:34:35 organization that you have listed here, including the city
12:34:40 >> Yes.
12:34:40 The people who actually went through the process, they have
12:34:43 to go through the RFP process, in order to be eligible to be
12:34:48 considered for funding.
12:34:51 So the agencies that are listed here is the total number
12:34:56 that are eligible this year, correct.
12:34:58 >> You are limited to those analysis?
12:35:00 You can't give to the anyone else.
12:35:01 What about the amounts?
12:35:03 Are the amounts written in there so that they can't be
12:35:05 changed be?
12:35:06 >> These are our recommendations for approval.
12:35:11 This is based on their ranking and their score that came
12:35:12 back from the committee.
12:35:13 This is our recommendation on how to fund it.
12:35:15 >> Your recommendation to us as council?
12:35:18 Your recommendation to the federal government?
12:35:21 >>THOM SNELLING: It's our recommendation to the federal
12:35:23 governmental through City Council as agreed upon by our --
12:35:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, is this the application?
12:35:29 Does this go in?
12:35:30 So we have the application.
12:35:31 Here is my problem.
12:35:39 We got this report today that you gave prior to this, which
12:35:44 really reflected more specifically how we have been spending
12:35:49 these dollars, and when -- you know, what we are proposing
12:35:53 to do, and we didn't have that in time to really look over
12:36:01 >>THOM SNELLING: All of those figures were contained inside
12:36:03 your action plan.
12:36:05 Because we pulled them from the actual action plan.
12:36:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Just pulled them out of here?
12:36:11 I didn't realize until yesterday that there was an August
12:36:18 15th deadline.
12:36:23 I think we can talk about the process going forward.
12:36:25 But I guess my concern was that we now have a deadline, we
12:36:30 have no other options.
12:36:32 Basically, what happens is this didn't get approved today?
12:36:35 What would happen?
12:36:38 No funding? No funding.
12:36:40 So today we have to do it.
12:36:41 >>SONYA LITTLE: That's correct.
12:36:49 And gearing up for the next cycle, what we typically do is
12:36:53 we request proposals in January.
12:36:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I know what your problem is.
12:37:00 It just got lost.
12:37:01 And I had one other very important question that I suddenly
12:37:11 can't remember.
12:37:15 I'll recognize you in a minute.
12:37:17 I asked to have this pulled.
12:37:23 How did you arrive at the $9 million as a total, or the
12:37:27 individual for -- how did you arrive -- we are going to ask
12:37:32 for this much money.
12:37:35 >>THOM SNELLING: That's allocated by the federal government.
12:37:38 That's the breakdown from each of those programs.
12:37:42 It was the community development block grant, what they were
12:37:45 allocated to the City of Tampa was 3.3 million, HOME was is
12:37:49 .9 --
12:37:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Are those maximums?
12:37:52 >> They are entitlement grants.
12:37:54 >>MARY MULHERN: So that's the maximum.
12:37:56 Couldn't have asked for any more in these four grant
12:38:01 >>THOM SNELLING: Correct.
12:38:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was going to ask my questions while
12:38:05 you remember yours, to buy you some time.
12:38:08 Today is the 4th.
12:38:09 Transmittal date is the 15th.
12:38:13 With two of us or maybe more of us not being clear that the
12:38:17 15th is the transmittal date, do we have the option of
12:38:21 calling a special meeting we've members to come back maybe
12:38:28 on, you know, Tuesday to -- I mean, it would buy a few days.
12:38:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May I ask a question?
12:38:42 My question is, to do what?
12:38:48 And I don't mean to be flippant but you have in front of you
12:38:51 the administration providing the action plan for you P.I
12:38:53 don't know administratively and lop gist particularly what
12:38:57 would happen between now and as a result of council's
12:39:00 Maybe Mr. Territo has a lot of history with this can tell
12:39:03 >>SAL TERRITO: Unfortunately, I do.
12:39:05 I have been here since CDBG 1 so it's been a long time.
12:39:09 This is the process you go through every year.
12:39:11 I'm not saying you don't have questions on it but the
12:39:13 process is, you had a public hearing on this.
12:39:15 The various committees came forward and made their
12:39:17 Those recommendations run to the administration.
12:39:19 They had a staff report.
12:39:20 They came up with their recommendations.
12:39:22 Now they are bringing them to you.
12:39:24 That doesn't mean you can't discuss them.
12:39:26 But the process is pretty straightforward that we have been
12:39:29 following every year for 37 years that I have been doing
12:39:31 And that's all I would say.
12:39:35 You had a public hearing from this from the public.
12:39:37 They came forward with their recommendations.
12:39:38 Those recommendations are submitted.
12:39:39 Now they are being sent to you.
12:39:41 And the dollar amounts you are dealing with are the only
12:39:44 amounts available for these projects.
12:39:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman?
12:39:52 >>YVONNE CAPIN: April 15th I became aware of this on
12:39:54 Tuesday, of the date.
12:39:58 So this does lock in council to these amounts, this budget?
12:40:04 >> These awards, yes, ma'am.
12:40:06 >> These awards, so they can't be moved around.
12:40:10 And in here -- I'm sorry, but I need to ask you -- the
12:40:19 recommendations from the advisory committee, are they in
12:40:25 I didn't see them.
12:40:26 When they came forward as part of our packet.
12:40:30 >> The advisory committee, those were included.
12:40:34 >> There's a summary in there.
12:40:37 >> There's a summary?
12:40:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: May I say something?
12:40:43 Because I had a question about that myself.
12:40:46 And I talked to Mrs. Little.
12:40:48 Thank you very much for calling me at 10:00 last night.
12:40:50 I appreciate that.
12:40:52 The advisory committee's recommendation, not all of them
12:40:56 were allowable under the federal guidelines.
12:41:00 So while some of the committee recommendations were well
12:41:06 intended, they could not, by law, be included in the request
12:41:11 to the federal government.
12:41:12 So, no, they are not all accounted for within the funding
12:41:17 requested, is my understanding.
12:41:20 And one of the questions with Mr. Territo, I understand this
12:41:30 has been done this way for a very long time but that doesn't
12:41:33 mean that we always want to do things the way they have
12:41:35 always been done.
12:41:36 And, council, if all we do is satisfy our questions, we
12:41:43 might end up with the same report being transmitted to the
12:41:46 federal government.
12:41:47 But I know myself, when I read this report, I found some
12:41:51 inconsistencies that I don't know if they were typographical
12:41:56 errors, or if there is some piece of information missing and
12:41:59 it's not really an inconsistency, it just appears to be one.
12:42:03 It's a very difficult report to read.
12:42:05 And since many of us are new to have this process, to
12:42:09 identify as councilwoman Capin, you know, we are looking at
12:42:13 the requests that were made by the citizens advisory.
12:42:17 I'm looking -- I had asked before of what we talked about
12:42:21 the previous items, and discussed some of the copies of
12:42:24 applications that were given to us under the other items.
12:42:28 I mean, I have got a question about is the qualify for
12:42:42 homeless women for $116,000, is that included in the request
12:42:46 for fund be? So there are a lot of questions.
12:42:48 And even if we just went through at another meeting to
12:42:50 satisfy the answers to those questions, it would be helpful
12:42:53 that we feel that as a council we were doing the right thing
12:42:57 and transmitting, we completely understand what's being
12:43:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I would certainly like an opinion from
12:43:06 Councilman Shelby -- Councilman Shelby?
12:43:11 Counselor Shelby, assistant city attorney Shelby.
12:43:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is the question can you call a special
12:43:19 called meeting for this purpose?
12:43:21 Understood your rules, absolutely.
12:43:22 >> I personally don't like the feeling of transmitting
12:43:38 something that I don't fully understand.
12:43:40 And I really would like the questions that I have -- and I
12:43:44 do appreciate --
12:43:46 >> I can answer --
12:43:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If trees any questions that I have
12:43:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Do you want to make a motion to that
12:43:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, I would be in support of that if we
12:43:59 can get it scheduled soon, and absolutely not run the risk
12:44:02 of this thing not getting resolved by the 15th.
12:44:07 So it needs to be like Tuesday of next week or sometime as
12:44:11 soon as possible.
12:44:12 >>MARY MULHERN: I would agree.
12:44:14 And I also would say if you would make a motion to schedule
12:44:18 this, and look at our calendars.
12:44:22 But we would need at least those here now to be able to be
12:44:26 here for that.
12:44:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A question of council, if I may, through
12:44:31 the chair.
12:44:32 Just so -- just so the process is clear --
12:44:44 >>THOM SNELLING: Would doing it this afternoon be too soon,
12:44:46 coming back as part of your workshop?
12:44:50 >> Yes.
12:44:55 >>THOM SNELLING: One question about the Tampa Bay family
12:44:56 Development Corporation, the use they are trying to do at
12:45:00 that location doesn't have the correct zoning.
12:45:03 They would have to have a rezoning and they completely
12:45:05 changed what they were doing to be funding eligible.
12:45:08 It would not have met the deadline that we are under.
12:45:10 So, yes, they were in there.
12:45:12 We went out to the site and looked at the site.
12:45:15 They had other land use issues that they couldn't overcome
12:45:17 in the short period of time.
12:45:21 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
12:45:21 And that's exactly -- that answer is exactly why we need
12:45:26 that time.
12:45:28 So thank you.
12:45:31 >>THOM SNELLING: I'm glad to answer all those types of
12:45:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would make a motion then that we
12:45:35 convene on August 9th?
12:45:38 >> Tuesday the 9th.
12:45:39 Does that work for everyone? We need to make sure.
12:45:48 >>THOM SNELLING: Morning or afternoon?
12:45:50 >>HARRY COHEN: What time of day would work for you?
12:45:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: 1:00, 1:30.
12:45:57 >> Council, we have the mayor's economic competitiveness on
12:46:01 Tuesday at 1:30 to 3:00.
12:46:03 So I would personally be out of pocket from unanimous to
12:46:07 about 3:30, as will Councilwoman Montelione.
12:46:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And, council, you have the chamber
12:46:14 luncheon on the Tuesday.
12:46:17 >> I could do it Monday.
12:46:29 I can't do it Monday morning.
12:46:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Monday afternoon?
12:46:36 >> Monday afternoon?
12:46:37 Speak now.
12:46:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Whatever.
12:46:45 We'll have to be rearrange everything.
12:46:46 Why don't you make the motion then, Mr. Cohen?
12:46:50 >>HARRY COHEN: I make the motion --
12:46:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Monday at 1:30?
12:46:54 >> No, no, Monday is fine.
12:46:56 I would like, if at all possible, if council compiles some
12:46:59 of the questions that you might have, give to the myself, to
12:47:02 Sonya, or Pamela, so we can come back prepared and make the
12:47:05 best use of your time saying, look at this, the answer to
12:47:09 this question is whatever it happens to be.
12:47:12 That way, that information session will be a lot more
12:47:15 beneficial and cover more ground faster.
12:47:21 >>HARRY COHEN: I make a motion we have this discussion at a
12:47:25 special called meeting Monday after August 8th at 1:30 p.m.
12:47:30 >>MARY MULHERN: The motion is to continue the item --
12:47:35 >>HARRY COHEN: Discussion of the community --
12:47:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This item, actually.
12:47:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item 19.
12:47:43 And I second.
12:47:43 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:47:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You recorded the vote?
12:47:52 The vote was taken.
12:47:52 Just another thing for council to consider, and obviously it
12:47:55 being unchartered territory, as Mr. Territo said with this,
12:47:58 the issue is also going to be as a result of that meeting,
12:48:01 what then the administration has to do in order to comply
12:48:05 with the legality of getting it done by August 5th.
12:48:11 That's something that I guess would need to be considered by
12:48:13 the administration between now and then, to be able to be
12:48:16 >>MARY MULHERN: And that would have been a good thing to
12:48:19 consider question they put it on the last meeting, we could
12:48:21 possibly vote on it.
12:48:22 >> These are exciting times.
12:48:31 >>HARRY COHEN: Monday the 8th at 1:30.
12:48:37 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
12:48:50 I would like to move and see if this is appropriate that we
12:48:52 have these deadlines, reports, to us two weeks prior to have
12:49:12 avoid -- three weeks prior?
12:49:14 >> Budget office.
12:49:29 Good afternoon.
12:49:30 The only thing with the homeless PowerPoint, to send to all
12:49:36 members of council and the attorney at that time, and it was
12:49:40 presented back in June, the summary.
12:49:45 Given as a handout when all members were here at that time,
12:49:50 not the current members of council were present at the
12:49:52 public hearing on June 9th.
12:49:53 >> Then the only thing we didn't know was the date, the
12:50:01 Was it on there?
12:50:02 >> The PowerPoint presentation, they have the date of August
12:50:07 15th as the required date for HUD.
12:50:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think where the confusion is the
12:50:17 >>MARY MULHERN: We have a motion and second.
12:50:21 You removed -- okay.
12:50:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a question for staff.
12:50:26 >>MARY MULHERN: Still on this item or continued it?
12:50:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: A question for staff.
12:50:33 Anybody can ask a question.
12:50:35 We have this meeting on Monday at 1:30.
12:50:38 Do you feel it will give you adequate enough time to meet
12:50:43 that deadline on the 15th?
12:50:46 What is the date --
12:50:50 >>MARY MULHERN: The 15th.
12:50:53 >>> If it's approved on Monday, it will give us adequate
12:51:16 Save it for new business because wave to get through the
12:51:27 We have, what was it, the special use review, request.
12:51:36 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
12:51:38 As discussed, the petitioner and the adjoining property
12:51:43 owners did have an opportunity to move outside and discuss
12:51:47 any particular options related to parking, so there are some
12:51:51 assurances between them, and they can get up and address
12:51:54 I do want to make it very clear.
12:51:57 The city, it's the city's parking requirements are actually
12:52:01 exceed bid one parking space.
12:52:03 So if there's some kind of discussion between them, it's to
12:52:06 how they might accommodate additional parking spots, that
12:52:09 will be acceptable, but I'm not sure we can have those
12:52:12 placed on this site plan the way the site plan is currently
12:52:17 Thank you.
12:52:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Petitioner, do you wish to -- you have the
12:52:23 opportunity for rebuttal if there's anything you want to
12:52:25 >> I think that everybody is going to work in conjunction
12:52:37 with each other and make it as less painful as we can,
12:52:42 because we feel that we can work that out among ourselves.
12:52:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to close?
12:52:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I'm sorry.
12:52:55 Madam Chair.
12:52:55 As Ms. Cole stated, just so it's clear that any agreements
12:52:59 that the parties have between themselves, that are not on
12:53:02 the site plan, certainly is not enforceable and is not --
12:53:06 the city does not get involved in that.
12:53:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
12:53:13 Motion to close?
12:53:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: So moved.
12:53:16 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.
12:53:17 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:53:19 Pleasure of council?
12:53:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just to let council know, the appropriate
12:53:27 motion here would be for City Council to approve the waiver,
12:53:33 to allow the administrator to issue an SU-1 permit.
12:53:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Say that again?
12:53:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The appropriate motion would be for City
12:53:43 Council to approve this waiver to allow the zoning
12:53:46 administrator, Ms. Coyle, to issue and SU-1 permit P.
12:53:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: So moved.
12:53:53 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.
12:53:55 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:53:56 Anyone opposed?
12:54:01 I believe we have been through the agenda.
12:54:04 Does anyone have anything that I missed?
12:54:06 Let me know.
12:54:07 >>THE CLERK: Item 43, there was an indication you wanted
12:54:11 that continued to September 8th but thereby was no
12:54:14 motion to that effect.
12:54:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a motion to continuing item number
12:54:19 43 to September 8th.
12:54:20 >>HARRY COHEN: So moved.
12:54:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
12:54:24 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:54:29 Any new business since the last tame I asked?
12:54:32 Councilman Cohen?
12:54:33 >>HARRY COHEN: One item, Madam Chair.
12:54:35 I would like to make a motion to ask for assistance from the
12:54:38 legal department to amend section 22.235 of the code to add
12:54:43 the area on Davis Boulevard between Barbados Avenue and
12:54:46 Chesapeake Avenue as an area that can have banners.
12:54:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
12:54:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Second.
12:54:58 >>MARY MULHERN: You are asking for legal to come back.
12:55:07 >>HARRY COHEN: We would like to add Davis Boulevard between
12:55:10 Barbados and Chesapeake to the existing ordinance.
12:55:13 >>MARY MULHERN: The banner ordinance has every street you
12:55:18 can have them named in it?
12:55:20 >>HARRY COHEN: Correct.
12:55:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Did you second that?
12:55:24 >> Yes, I did.
12:55:25 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:55:26 Anyone opposed?
12:55:31 Councilman Reddick?
12:55:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Nothing.
12:55:36 >>THE CLERK: We need to receive and file.
12:55:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to receive and file.
12:55:40 >> So moved.
12:55:41 >> Second.
12:55:41 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?
12:55:43 >> Motion to recess.
12:55:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to recess, although I guess we'll be
12:55:49 back -- oh, at the Mascotte room at 1:3030th is the
12:55:55 workshop on the Land Development Code.
12:55:57 Is that what it is?
12:55:59 Something to do with that.
12:56:01 Is that broad enough?
12:56:02 I think that's it.
12:56:06 I don't see anyone who wishes to speak.
12:56:35 (City Council meeting recessed.)
This file 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.