TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, January 12, 2012
9:00 a.m. Session
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.
08:55:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Good morning.
09:08:20 We call this Community Redevelopment Agency board meeting to
09:08:25 I will yield to Councilwoman board member Capin for the
09:08:32 >> Thank you, chairman.
09:08:33 It is with great pleasure that I introduce for the
09:08:35 invocation this morning being given by Loueda Nelson,
09:08:44 secretary to the mayor, a hard working board member and very
09:08:47 respected resident of the community.
09:08:48 She is retired from Xerox corporation and is a volunteer
09:08:53 guardian ad litem program.
09:09:01 Mrs. Nelson.
09:09:01 Please stand and remain standing for the pledge of
09:09:04 >> Would everyone bow their heads, please?
09:09:07 The sons of man are one, and I am one with them.
09:09:13 I speak to love, not hate.
09:09:15 I speak to service and not -- I speak to heal, not hurt.
09:09:22 But pain brings due reward of life and love.
09:09:26 Let the full control, the out of form and life for all
09:09:31 And bring to life the love which underlies the happiness of
09:09:35 the time.
09:09:39 Let the future stand revealed.
09:09:47 Let love prevail.
09:09:49 Let all men love.
09:09:53 In honor of Dr. Martin Luther King's birthday, this is my
09:09:57 Thank you.
09:09:58 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:10:20 >>FRANK REDDICK: Roll call.
09:10:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
09:10:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.
09:10:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:10:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:10:35 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
09:10:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
09:10:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Good morning, members of the board.
09:10:54 I have the- doing a special commendation this morning.
09:10:59 And especially because for two reasons.
09:11:03 One, we didn't get a chance to eradicate this.
09:11:13 This person who has been helping us out for years, she
09:11:15 transferred, been here, moving on to another division, and
09:11:28 We just felt it was special to recognize her before she
09:11:32 moves from her division and to another division.
09:11:35 So with this commendation, Tampa City Council would like to
09:11:41 present this commendation to you in recognition of ten years
09:11:45 of protecting and providing the highest level security to
09:11:48 the members of the Tampa City Council.
09:11:50 It is gratifying and reassuring to know that you always had
09:11:55 our back, and we are extremely grateful.
09:11:58 City Council of the City of Tampa is proud to recognize
09:12:01 master patrol officer Patricia Paychik, and we wish you well
09:12:06 in your new assignment.
09:12:07 We will miss you.
09:12:08 Signed by all members of the Tampa City Council.
09:12:10 >> Thank you.
09:12:13 [ Applause ]
09:12:14 I have been working this assignment for ten years, and it
09:12:24 has given me great pleasure to serve you and to protect you,
09:12:28 and also has taught me a lot about what City Council goes
09:12:34 through what you have to handle, and I really appreciate the
09:12:37 Thank you all.
09:12:41 [ Applause ]
09:13:00 >> All right, staff reports?
09:13:02 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman and board.
09:13:09 Happy new year to all.
09:13:10 Ed Johnson, urban development manager for East Tampa.
09:13:18 Sitting in for Bob McDonough who is out of town on business.
09:13:21 We'll go ahead and get started with our monthly reports for
09:13:26 We would like to highlight the beckon instruction finishing
09:13:34 the interior of the USF CAMLS project and slated for ribbon
09:13:38 cutting on March 30 of 2012 so that project is coming to
09:13:42 completion very soon.
09:13:43 Also, downtown, staff is working with Parks Department to
09:13:49 get the necessary approvals for the commencement of Franklin
09:13:53 Street improvements.
09:13:55 Over in Ybor, we would like to highlight the Ybor City
09:14:01 Development Corporation committee that's been working to
09:14:05 identify priorities and initiatives for their upcoming year.
09:14:11 Staff is also working to develop recommendations for the
09:14:14 2012 facade improvement program, and allocating fund for
09:14:27 facade improvement programs in 2012.
09:14:30 Over in the Channel District, the Washington street park was
09:14:35 completed and open to the public.
09:14:37 Dedication took place on December 13th.
09:14:41 Also in Channelside, staff is working with contract
09:14:44 administration to prepare the bids for the Kennedy Boulevard
09:14:51 Drew Park, I would like to highlight the extension of the
09:14:55 westbound lane of Martin Luther King Boulevard from church
09:14:59 to Grady which was completed and the extension improves
09:15:04 safety particularly in periods associated with events around
09:15:09 Raymond James and Steinbrenner field.
09:15:11 Also, the contractor has been selected in the
09:15:15 preconstruction conference to initiate the Drew Park
09:15:18 stormwater improvement will be held on January 26th.
09:15:23 In East Tampa, we are continuing along with our very
09:15:27 successful commercial facade program.
09:15:29 To date, we have ten approved grants that total an
09:15:33 investment of $338,189 in our commercial facade program.
09:15:40 And you will be getting more update next month where we are
09:15:44 going to highlight several of our completed facade projects
09:15:49 four and the picture review.
09:15:51 Also in East Tampa we are working right now on developing
09:15:53 the application for submission to U.S. department of
09:15:57 environmental protection for a one-time pilot multi-purpose
09:16:04 We were encouraged to apply for this grant, to go on the
09:16:23 application for $400,000 grant.
09:16:27 Over in Tampa Heights, riverfront, would like to highlight
09:16:34 conducting meetings right now with the Heights community,
09:16:37 advisory committee, parks and recreation, hard a man
09:16:42 association to discuss the plan and schedule for phase one
09:16:44 improvements to Waterworks Park.
09:16:46 Over in Central Park, those of you that have been riding by
09:16:50 that site, you can see the yellow, continuing along
09:16:56 construction of the first building and Encore.
09:17:00 The Encore development team is working to secure funding for
09:17:03 the trio and the reed apartment complexes.
09:17:08 Then the overall department, a couple things to highlight,
09:17:12 we are taping the 15th episode of first look of Tampa's
09:17:16 redevelopment, and we will be featuring the downtown CRA,
09:17:20 and the 2011 CRA annual report, which is required by Florida
09:17:26 statute, in production and being drafted.
09:17:34 Questions on any of those reports?
09:17:35 If not I'll move to the next item.
09:17:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Are there any questions or comments from
09:17:41 board members?
09:17:52 Before we move to public comments, we are going to have the
09:18:03 attorney make the announcement regarding item 7.
09:18:07 >>SAL TERRITO: There's been some confusion on item 7 so what
09:18:09 I would like to do is spell out what it is we are doing.
09:18:11 Item number 7 is a resolution authorizing the expenditure of
09:18:14 funds to buy a piece of property.
09:18:16 The way the original resolution came out, it looked like
09:18:20 $65,000 of CRA funding going towards this.
09:18:23 Actually, it's all of $28,000 which is what the advisory
09:18:27 committee recommended takes maximum CRA would spend.
09:18:31 If you approve this resolution the administration will then
09:18:33 have to find $37,000 difference to complete the purchase.
09:18:38 What you don't have on your agenda today, the issue of
09:18:41 whether to go forward with the roundabout or not.
09:18:43 Because that has already been approved by a previous CRA and
09:18:47 City Council, that item will move forward, unless there's a
09:18:51 motion made by someone on the council that is seconded and
09:18:54 then support by a majority of the council and CRA to move
09:18:57 forward on the roundabout, to stop moving forward on the
09:19:01 roundabout, because right now it will move forward unless
09:19:04 some action is taken to rescind that earlier activity.
09:19:07 If that were to happen, then the CRA would have to find the
09:19:11 funding to do the new redesign, which is estimated to be
09:19:15 between 150,000 and 200,000 to change the design that's
09:19:19 already been paid for, for the roundabout.
09:19:21 And that's where some of the confusion has come about.
09:19:23 It's already moving forward, unless there's an affirmative
09:19:26 action to rescind the privilege action.
09:19:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Is there any specific time on the agenda
09:19:34 we need to do that?
09:19:36 >>SAL TERRITO: When it comes to the new business portion, if
09:19:39 someone wants to make a motion and get the second, then that
09:19:41 would the time to do that.
09:19:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay, thank you.
09:19:47 Public comments, if anyone wishes to speak at this time, you
09:19:49 have three minutes to speak to any matter on the agenda.
09:19:54 Please state your name.
09:19:56 >> Essie Simms, Jr., East Tampa, chairman, standing before
09:20:06 you today, Mr. Chairman and distinguished board members,
09:20:08 just to give my support for the project going forward as one
09:20:15 Some confusion also that is out there is we talked and
09:20:18 deliberated last time when we were here about just the
09:20:21 $150,000 of the design money that may have been spent, but I
09:20:25 would hope that we have a wise decision and take into
09:20:31 consideration also, that there's some that has already been
09:20:38 spent in property around this proposed roundabout to bring
09:20:43 in stability to our community and economic development.
09:20:47 So I would hope that as you deliberate this issue that in
09:20:51 your wise decision making, do the best thing for the whole
09:20:56 of the community.
09:20:57 I know sometimes leadership, you know, much is given, much
09:21:01 is required.
09:21:02 And I think in the long run, as we go forward, as we
09:21:06 continue to go forward with this project, I think the
09:21:09 community of East Tampa in the long run would appreciate the
09:21:13 decision that you would make.
09:21:15 Thank you.
09:21:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next.
09:21:18 >> Good morning.
09:21:21 I'm Maritza Astorquiza. I'm chair of Drew Park CRA,
09:21:25 outgoing chair at that point.
09:21:27 I wanted to comment -- soon -- wanted to make a point.
09:21:33 I have worked really hard with Drew Park, and I have a lot
09:21:37 of passion for Drew Park and I really care about the area.
09:21:40 It's come to my attention that we have two working
09:21:45 definitions of what the qualifications are to become an
09:21:47 applicant to be on the board of the CRA advisory committee.
09:21:53 My understanding, and other people based on number 5, that
09:21:59 you have to work or live or own a business there, property,
09:22:06 or some sort of significant interest.
09:22:08 Based on that, I know of applicants who have not applied for
09:22:17 the position, and these are position.
09:22:19 And I guess back ten years as a resource professional that
09:22:28 this is one that we need to be clear and concise on the
09:22:31 qualification itself.
09:22:32 Based on the qualifications there have been people who have
09:22:34 been interested, at least three round and possibly a fourth,
09:22:37 who could not apply because they felt that they did not have
09:22:40 a business, a property, living here, or significant ongoing
09:22:44 business -- excuse me, interest -- in Drew Park.
09:22:48 I think that has made it unfair to some people who were not
09:22:51 able to apply.
09:22:55 What seems like there's another definition which is
09:22:59 basically if you have any interest defined by anything, you
09:23:05 can apply.
09:23:08 I don't feel that that's the definition that has been put
09:23:11 out there for a lot of people, and they have been denied
09:23:14 access to apply.
09:23:15 What I am saying is at this point, we have four fine
09:23:19 candidates, I know two personally which think are fine
09:23:22 It's not about that.
09:23:23 It's about the fact that we have denied access to people to
09:23:25 apply to the position.
09:23:27 I would ask that the right thing to do, having knowledge of
09:23:30 this now, that has come to my light, and I understand it --
09:23:34 it is also my integrity that I have put out that
09:23:37 information, that maybe the -- may be the correct one or may
09:23:41 be not be.
09:23:42 I think it has to be defined by you all.
09:23:44 But I think there's some confusion that people have been
09:23:47 denied access we need to postpone right now at least for
09:23:50 another month right now, whatever the time period is, so we
09:23:52 can allow people to apply and have a fair application
09:23:57 process, which I don't think right now is.
09:24:01 That's my comments.
09:24:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
09:24:05 Sal, what is the legal definition of at-large?
09:24:11 >>SAL TERRITO: Talking about at-large and someone having a
09:24:12 significant interest in the area, it has never really been
09:24:17 It came up in one of the contexts about a year ago in East
09:24:19 Tampa and the question was, what are does significant
09:24:23 interest mean?
09:24:24 Does that mean you have to own something?
09:24:26 And the feeling of the board at that particular time is if
09:24:29 you have an interest, a significant interest, irrespective
09:24:32 of whether you live there, own any property there, you have
09:24:34 an interest in seeing that area develop, that was
09:24:38 It hasn't really been defined.
09:24:40 That's up to the board if they want to define that, either
09:24:43 broaden it or narrow it or clarify it.
09:24:46 It was -- in East Tampa, if you are interested in working in
09:24:50 that area, even if you don't live there, own a property or
09:24:53 work there, that was sufficient as long as the interest was
09:24:56 in seeing that area developed.
09:24:57 >> Mr. Miranda.
09:25:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, when I look at this, that
09:25:04 falls under number 5, qualifications, serving on the
09:25:07 advisory committee.
09:25:07 I start to think and wonder, we may have significant
09:25:10 interest to seek office, but guess what happens.
09:25:14 If you don't qualify and live in that district or do other
09:25:18 things, you can't seek office.
09:25:21 You have to have significant interest.
09:25:22 I don't know what "significant interest" means, and I think
09:25:27 our attorney, Mr. Territo, explained it, because there is no
09:25:32 definition for "significant interest."
09:25:35 You may have significant interest in writing Hartline, but
09:25:38 guess what, maybe you don't go to the bus stop.
09:25:42 There is no significant interest if you never ride the bus.
09:25:45 So what I'm trying to say is, let's get a clarification on
09:25:50 what is significant interest.
09:25:52 Does that mean that you drive through occasionally through
09:25:54 that area of town, wherever it may be?
09:25:57 Or that you either live, work, own property in those areas?
09:26:02 There's a fine line, and that happens even in the political
09:26:06 process when you say, well, I have significant interest but
09:26:09 I don't live in that district but when I get elected I'm
09:26:12 going to move.
09:26:13 Those things have happened in the past.
09:26:14 But I think we have to narrow it down to some form of degree
09:26:19 so that this could be put behind us.
09:26:23 Because the old cliché is, it's always been that way.
09:26:26 Well, that's fine up to a point.
09:26:28 But then you have to clarify what that point is.
09:26:30 And that's what I'm asking, for the legal department to
09:26:34 define what is significant interest, and I make that into a
09:26:38 motion, if it's permissible at this time, Mr. Chairman.
09:26:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right, and there's a second.
09:26:45 Any discussion on the motion?
09:26:48 >> Mr. Territo, this is a friendly amendment to the motion,
09:26:53 to look at the enabling legislation in which CRAs are
09:26:59 created, if there is any kind of help that we can give in
09:27:03 terms of that definition.
09:27:05 Obviously, this is not something that we have created
09:27:08 ourselves in terms of the legislation, but have created our
09:27:12 CRA as a basis from that particular legislation.
09:27:16 I am curious about it because community redevelopment is not
09:27:19 just about people coming from the outside in in order to
09:27:24 develop the neighborhood, but from people on the inside
09:27:30 working to improve their own neighborhoods.
09:27:32 And to me that's really the essence of CRA.
09:27:35 And I think if you will accept that as an additional
09:27:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Certainly, sir.
09:27:42 I appreciate it very much.
09:27:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by board member Miranda, seconded
09:27:47 by board member Suarez.
09:27:49 Further discussion in the motion?
09:27:50 All in favor?
09:27:53 It's carried.
09:27:53 >>THE CLERK: Could I ask the motion be formally stated for
09:27:57 the record?
09:27:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: For the legal department, this is the
09:28:01 motion I believe the intent was to have the legal department
09:28:03 come back with their recommendation on "significant
09:28:10 interest" within the CRA category in those areas.
09:28:14 You may have significant interest in your mind about serving
09:28:21 but you are living in Lakeland, Florida, and things of that
09:28:23 nature have to be cleared up.
09:28:24 It's not cleared up the way it is now.
09:28:26 I think only proper thing, like Mr. Suarez said, those who
09:28:33 want to serve and do the right thing, not that somebody from
09:28:35 Lakeland or somebody else won't do the right thing, but
09:28:37 let's get some clarity into the issue so it's not what it's
09:28:41 always been in the past.
09:28:43 And I think that will carry along with the friendly
09:28:46 amendment that council member Suarez added, which was well
09:28:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
09:28:54 >> My name is Diane Hart, 2912 north 26th street.
09:28:59 I appreciate the fact that Sal did explain exactly what has
09:29:04 transpired in the past when this roundabout -- I too was a
09:29:09 little confused because I thought it had passed a long time
09:29:12 ago by the previous CRA.
09:29:15 So thank you very much for clearing that up.
09:29:17 However, I hope that the city will continue on this process.
09:29:24 I mean, we have a lot of money at stake here.
09:29:26 It's going to be very, very beautiful, it will be a nice
09:29:30 invite into our community.
09:29:32 We definitely need to continue on.
09:29:35 I hate to think what would happen if we have to stop and
09:29:38 start over.
09:29:38 We don't have any money as it is, and we definitely don't
09:29:41 have any money to just throw away because we thought we had
09:29:45 not passed this.
09:29:46 This is passed.
09:29:47 It's done.
09:29:47 And I would greatly appreciate it if you all refer back to
09:29:51 Thank you very much.
09:29:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
09:29:53 >> May I ask a question if you want that to apply to the
09:29:58 members now?
09:30:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Well, we'll get feedback by the members of
09:30:06 the board.
09:30:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: If I may way, was thinking is looking at
09:30:13 some of the applications, there is specifically more in Drew
09:30:18 Park some of the other areas.
09:30:20 A lot of at-large applications with no specific interest.
09:30:24 And when I use interest, I mean either property owner,
09:30:27 resident or business owner in that particular area.
09:30:31 Now, I think that we need to look at that specifically, and
09:30:35 maybe hold votes on that at this particular time so we can
09:30:41 get clarification and do it at the next CRA meeting.
09:30:43 That would be my suggestion.
09:30:44 I'm not making a motion for that but I think that's
09:30:46 something we may need to look at first, so that going
09:30:49 forward we have a better clarification, a better knowledge
09:30:52 of really what is an at-large selection and what is
09:30:57 "interest" in the particular CRA.
09:30:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's all CRA?
09:31:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think having looked at the other
09:31:07 applications, I don't think that it's a bigger issue than
09:31:12 the rest of them as there is on just Drew Park.
09:31:14 When I look at all of them, most of them have significant,
09:31:18 either residential or business interest in that particular
09:31:20 So I would just suggest that maybe we hold off on Drew Park,
09:31:24 because I think that they are the one area which does not
09:31:27 have a significant number of even business owners or
09:31:30 residents that are applying for these positions currently.
09:31:33 >> Any other comments?
09:31:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: For discussion, Mr. Chairman, there was
09:31:39 one interesting part brought up by Ms. Astorquiza that
09:31:47 someone had approached some members about applying, and
09:31:49 because they didn't live in the area, or they wanted to be
09:31:53 in the area, whatever it was that was stated, therefore they
09:31:59 did not apply. And to me, that's something that has to be
09:32:06 determined, that if those people that live in the area
09:32:09 wanted to apply, and they didn't apply, then there's a
09:32:13 system that has some flaw in it.
09:32:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone else?
09:32:20 >>HARRY COHEN: I'm very comfortable with the suggestion.
09:32:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree with Councilman Suarez and Miranda.
09:32:28 I just want to suggest that maybe we wait to hear from
09:32:31 everyone and see if we hear from any of the other districts,
09:32:37 if they want us to continue it.
09:32:38 But I think we could just continue and renotice Drew Park.
09:32:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right, thank you.
09:32:44 >> My name is Curtis Brown.
09:32:48 I'm here this morning to ask the question, why do we need a
09:32:54 roundabout, even though it may have been approved in
09:32:58 previous years, with things are different now, the money is
09:33:01 very tight now, and it costs more money to build the
09:33:05 roundabout than what it would be to make the correction that
09:33:11 the attorney said would have to be made, because once the
09:33:13 roundabout would be built, then it's going to be left up to
09:33:16 the East Tampa redevelopment to maintain it, to make it look
09:33:21 beautiful as some people say, because just building the
09:33:24 circle doesn't make it beautiful.
09:33:26 It's what's on that circle is going to make it beautiful.
09:33:28 And you have to go spend additional money that we don't have
09:33:32 for the roundabout.
09:33:33 And number two, I gave you one in number, a petition, and
09:33:41 the people, they don't want the roundabout.
09:33:44 I think the City Council should consider over 126 people
09:33:48 saying they don't want the roundabout compared to 25.
09:33:57 It's like dictatorship instead of democracy because you are
09:34:02 ignoring what the people said they want, and the chairman
09:34:07 said whatever the citizen wants, he got up and say he's for
09:34:11 the roundabout, which is just contradictory to what he told
09:34:14 us in the partnership meeting.
09:34:16 But I just think that we need to really give the
09:34:19 consideration and when you go through a roundabout, you are
09:34:24 going on a one-way street.
09:34:27 We don't have east-west traffic to speak of.
09:34:30 If you do you need a traffic count to see why it's not need.
09:34:34 It's not so much we are against the roundabout.
09:34:36 It's just that it's money wasted.
09:34:38 We have wasted over $15 million in East Tampa.
09:34:44 If you go back and look at it, you can find where to spend
09:34:50 You know, we got $27 million.
09:34:57 We can account for 5 or 6 million.
09:34:59 The rest we can't account for.
09:35:01 MLK, the police station, some improvements on Lake Avenue,
09:35:06 and there's some on Martin Luther King.
09:35:11 And that's not $27 million worth in that area.
09:35:15 You need to really look at what we have done with our
09:35:18 dollars and vote against this roundabout.
09:35:32 This is the petition.
09:35:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next.
09:35:38 >> Good morning and happy new year.
09:35:43 Kay Andrews, publisher of The Florida Sentinel, located at
09:35:47 2207 East 21st Avenue.
09:35:51 I'm right in the midst of the controversy for the
09:35:57 And this is indeed a controversy.
09:35:59 When the roundabout was proposed, it was not proposed as a
09:36:04 It was proposed as an enhanced interest to East Tampa.
09:36:09 There was a discussion about which streets should be on the
09:36:14 entrance to East Tampa and it was between 22nd street and
09:36:17 34th street.
09:36:18 22nd street was voted on, and development did start there.
09:36:23 The controversy on the editorial side of it is when the
09:36:30 enhancements were decided upon, there were certain parts of
09:36:35 streets that were jumped completely over.
09:36:38 So we have one part of 22nd street of the substation that
09:36:45 has been completed from MLK to Lake Avenue.
09:36:48 And you have Lake Avenue up to 26th street that is the
09:36:51 major business district that's owned by an African-American
09:36:57 that was completely jumped over.
09:36:58 Now we are at 26th right up to 23rd, right at the
09:37:03 entrance of where this roundabout will be, where that is all
09:37:07 torn up now.
09:37:09 We have been told that because they could not negotiate with
09:37:13 the business owner between lake and 26th is why that
09:37:19 corridor was completely jumped over.
09:37:21 Now we are at the apex of where this supposed roundabout is
09:37:26 going to go, which is right in front of my uncle's doctor's
09:37:33 So he's retired, but I have another interest in this.
09:37:36 My grandmother lived all her life, her adult life, on
09:37:41 23rd Avenue.
09:37:41 So I was raised up right in the area where we are talking
09:37:46 The other controversy is that there are residents there,
09:37:51 there is a lady who owns a house, and two other lots right
09:37:55 on 21st that is in the proposed -- a proposed grocery
09:38:04 store that certain people in city government are part of as
09:38:07 well that has been threatened with imminent domain, when she
09:38:12 has three lots.
09:38:13 (Bell sounds)
09:38:14 You have a lot, LLC, a law firm that is the owner of this
09:38:23 house that we are proposing to spend $35,000 for, so that's
09:38:28 another controversy.
09:38:29 The partnership does not have any money now.
09:38:33 In 2012, we have been told by the mayor's office in city
09:38:38 government that there will only be $30,000 in the
09:38:40 partnership money.
09:38:41 So to spend 1.7 million on a roundabout is not good
09:38:46 (Bell sounds)
09:38:48 And it's not good government business.
09:38:49 So please consider this when you consider it.
09:38:55 >> Good morning CRA members.
09:38:58 I'm Linda Saul-Sena, and I live at 157 Biscayne.
09:39:03 I'm here to encourage you to revisit an investment that was
09:39:06 made by a previous CRA.
09:39:08 About seven years ago, the Channel District CRA spent about
09:39:14 $100,000 on an arts plan for the Channel District.
09:39:18 After a lot of searching we hired an excellent consultant
09:39:21 named Lisa van Nulen.
09:39:25 She did the study. I was a big proponent when I was a CRA
09:39:29 Nothing was ever done with it.
09:39:30 We said to Mark Huey, let's do something with this.
09:39:34 He said, you know, to focus on the proposals just in the
09:39:36 Channel District is too narrow.
09:39:38 Let's focus it on the whole urban core.
09:39:41 The good news is that the study is excellent, we paid for
09:39:44 it, we have it.
09:39:45 The bad news is that it's never been implemented.
09:39:48 And I think that there's nobody on council now who was even
09:39:51 there, and there's no staff who was here when this was done,
09:39:54 so there's not a memory of it.
09:39:56 So I am here as your historian to say it's an excellent
09:40:00 study, dust it off, it's a wonderful time to use the arts as
09:40:05 an economic development and revitalization tool for urban
09:40:10 core, and I called legal.
09:40:12 They said that I should call the clerk.
09:40:13 I called the clerk, and she said that economic development
09:40:16 would have a copy.
09:40:17 But I'm certain someone has a copy of this.
09:40:19 And I think you would find it interesting.
09:40:22 What I might propose, Yolie has done a lot of initiatives as
09:40:27 far as economic development of the arts, and I don't know if
09:40:30 you had a chance to see the study, but perhaps you all could
09:40:32 set aside a future time as a CRA or council to look at these
09:40:37 suggestions, and perhaps implement them.
09:40:39 And I wish you a wonderful year.
09:40:42 I think it will be a great year for our city.
09:40:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
09:40:46 Board member Montelione.
09:40:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ms. Saul-Sena, before you walk away, I
09:40:51 did request a copy of that study, and it is very lengthy and
09:40:58 very detailed, and a beautiful outlook, and -- I didn't know
09:41:08 you were going to be speaking on it this morning.
09:41:10 But is there any aspect that you recall of that study as far
09:41:15 as priority that you would recommend?
09:41:20 >> There are two things.
09:41:22 One is talking about joint marketing which I think this city
09:41:24 really could do well with, you know, doing more in
09:41:27 conjunction with other organizations that promote the arts,
09:41:30 to market what we have going here.
09:41:32 Secondly, using vacant properties to fill in urban areas to
09:41:36 function as interim gallery spaces, or at the very, very
09:41:42 least, hang work in the front windows, but do things to make
09:41:46 us visibly appear more arts oriented.
09:41:49 The truth is, the good news is we have a lot more going on,
09:41:51 and people working to market it.
09:41:53 But the study suggestions ways it might even be done more
09:41:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you very much.
09:42:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next speaker.
09:42:02 >> Mr. Chairman and members of the Community Redevelopment
09:42:08 Agency, I'm Al Davis, in the area of East Tampa,
09:42:16 redevelopment area.
09:42:22 Mr. Chairman, I communicated with you and the members by fax
09:42:37 of a document that I hope each of you have received, and I
09:42:40 would like to offer it now for the files to be received with
09:42:46 my comments.
09:43:00 I commend this agency in your engagement of your legal
09:43:07 duties as members of the Community Redevelopment Agency.
09:43:14 But our year really began about three months ago, first of
09:43:17 October, because now we are in a new year of 12-13 now.
09:43:31 I want to encourage you to support the commitment that this
09:43:37 agency made through the development of this strategic action
09:43:42 plan, through its communication with the people of the area,
09:43:52 the neighborhood association meetings, and that roundabout
09:43:58 is a betterment of the strategic action plan.
09:44:12 I hope you will stick to the evening nearing that you made
09:44:18 that that roundabout is needed.
09:44:22 And also I want to commend you for looking at the
09:44:29 eligibility of individuals who may wish to serve on the
09:44:32 citizens advisory committee, that whatever the attorney
09:44:36 takes into consideration, and that is stakeholder.
09:44:39 I don't know what a stakeholder is, you know.
09:44:41 (Bell sounds)
09:44:43 But that's like a big opportunity.
09:44:54 Persons of interest or having an interest but also take a
09:45:01 look at the term stakeholder.
09:45:04 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:45:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
09:45:08 Any additional comments from the audience?
09:45:10 Anybody wish to speak at this time?
09:45:14 Do we want to take up that issue pertaining to the motion --
09:45:21 not the motion but discussion we had at this time?
09:45:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Chair, if I could, I think based on what
09:45:31 I said previously, maybe we can hold off on votes for the
09:45:37 Drew Park advisory committee at this point so that we have
09:45:42 it off the agenda to get the legal opinion from Mr. Territo
09:45:46 and maybe come back next month with new candidates or
09:45:50 continuation of some of the other candidates based on what
09:45:54 the recommendations are from Mr. Territo.
09:45:57 >> Is that a motion?
09:45:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I will so move.
09:46:00 >> (off microphone).
09:46:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I will go ahead and include that in the
09:46:11 motion to renotice for all positions.
09:46:13 I think that we may be at a point that we might be putting
09:46:17 the cart before the horse, though, because we need to find
09:46:19 out what at-large actually means first.
09:46:22 I think maybe coming back next month with that definition of
09:46:25 what we are doing will help us, and then go from there.
09:46:31 So that will be my motion.
09:46:32 >> We need a second on that.
09:46:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm still waiting for it.
09:46:44 From a fine horseman like yourself I appreciate that.
09:46:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Seconded by board member Miranda.
09:46:55 If there is no further discussion, all in favor say aye.
09:47:00 So that will be back in the next CRA meeting.
09:47:03 So today, just for clarification, we will not be voting on
09:47:07 the Drew Park applicants today.
09:47:09 But everybody else we'll vote on.
09:47:11 >>MARY MULHERN: The radioactive Iodine O --
09:47:20 >> The reason I didn't second your motion, your motion we
09:47:23 haven't voted on, right?
09:47:25 Did we vote on it?
09:47:27 >> We did vote, yes.
09:47:28 This motion was really just to take it off the agenda at
09:47:31 this point.
09:47:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Johnson.
09:47:36 >> Ed Johnson, urban development, East Tampa.
09:47:40 We move on to item number 2 that's on the agenda.
09:47:43 This is concerning a memorandum from Mr. McDonaugh to the
09:47:47 chairman of the board concerning the Central Park community
09:47:52 advisory committee, and is dated -- and I will just
09:47:54 paraphrase a little bit of this.
09:47:56 As you know, outside of Encore, there has been very little
09:48:00 redevelopment activity within the Central Park CRA, and
09:48:02 annual TIF revenues have been very low since the creation of
09:48:06 the district in 2006.
09:48:08 As a result of that, TIF funding, the committee has canceled
09:48:15 the majority of its meetings over the past two years.
09:48:20 With only one of six members whose term expires in 2012
09:48:23 applied for reappointment.
09:48:26 With this in mind, we respectfully are requesting that new
09:48:30 appointments not be made at this time, and that the
09:48:32 committee be suspended until further notice or until we give
09:48:36 new residents in the Central Park CRA.
09:48:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: And the recommendation, Mr. Suarez?
09:48:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Johnson -- and maybe this is a question
09:48:47 for Mr. Territo -- when you say suspended, that means
09:48:50 obviously we are not going to continue any meetings, we are
09:48:52 not going to do anything specific to it.
09:48:54 Does that mean that they still will have a extra component
09:48:59 at some point, if there is development, and there is
09:49:01 interest in order to redevelop or to have folks involved in
09:49:06 the redevelopment process in Central Park?
09:49:08 >> That's right.
09:49:11 Just lay dormant until we have some new residential activity
09:49:15 and new folks that are willing to come forward and serve on
09:49:17 the committee. And it also prevents us from having to go
09:49:20 back and change the community advisory committee policies
09:49:23 that we have created, that created --
09:49:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I appreciate the fact that that will --
09:49:34 obviously with Encore come online at some point in the next
09:49:37 couple of years, this is a good point where we can probably
09:49:41 reenergize and reinstitute that particular committee.
09:49:46 But I just want to make sure that we didn't have to start
09:49:49 all over again with the process.
09:49:50 >> No.
09:49:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
09:49:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:49:59 Because of the discussion we had about the Drew Park
09:50:03 appointments, it makes me wonder if maybe we should do the
09:50:09 same thing with the Encore, with the Central Park CRA and
09:50:17 see if there's anybody who might apply, you know, if we gave
09:50:22 it a couple months, and renotice.
09:50:27 >> That could be an option.
09:50:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Because there are a lot of people.
09:50:31 It's a big area.
09:50:32 There are a lot of people interested in redevelopment.
09:50:38 As was pointed out, there are at-large opportunities for
09:50:43 people --
09:50:47 >> Michael Hatchett, manager for the Central Park CRA.
09:50:52 The interest here in the request of suspending or making
09:50:57 dormant this committee is not necessarily related to lack of
09:51:01 The Central Park CRA committee is a nine-member committee,
09:51:05 and there are eight people presently on that committee.
09:51:08 There is one vacancy on one of the county seats.
09:51:14 The concern here is not lack of interest, it lack of
09:51:16 activity, and lack of substance or reason for the committee
09:51:20 to meet.
09:51:21 So I can get people together, and then meet, but as has been
09:51:27 our practice for the past two years, more times than not, I
09:51:30 will look at a potential agenda and then ask the chair to
09:51:33 cancel the meeting, not because of lack of interest, but
09:51:36 because of lack of activity and funding for the group to
09:51:40 >>MARY MULHERN: How often were you meeting?
09:51:42 >> Originally when the board was put in place, we held a
09:51:46 monthly meeting.
09:51:47 Some of them were canceled over the course of the year.
09:51:50 It became such a routine that the committee chose to keep a
09:51:53 quarterly schedule for a year, and we canceled one or two of
09:51:59 those, and then we went back to a monthly meeting after the
09:52:02 Encore development agreement was established.
09:52:08 And since then, I think in year 2011 we met three times.
09:52:11 >>MARY MULHERN: What if you just met quarterly or
09:52:17 biannually, maybe met twice a year?
09:52:20 I mean, I hate to see no community advisory interest at all.
09:52:25 >> That is an option if the board would like to direct us to
09:52:28 have those twice a year meeting, and not completely suspend.
09:52:35 But the request is being made on lack of activity, not lack
09:52:39 of interest.
09:52:40 >>MARY MULHERN: You don't -- well, there's in a activity so
09:52:50 you don't think there would be any new applicants that might
09:52:53 be more interested in meeting?
09:52:55 Or you have got people that are good advisors?
09:53:01 >> There are six of the seven seats that are presently open.
09:53:08 I have one person reapply, and the feedback that I received
09:53:12 from the other committee members was, I would be interested
09:53:15 in serving on the board if there were activity and reason to
09:53:19 I'm not going to reapply because we have been canceling all
09:53:22 the meetings.
09:53:22 I can get people together.
09:53:25 It's just having a reason for them to meet, and having them
09:53:28 know that they are engaging and making a difference in the
09:53:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Maybe if you did that twice-a-year meeting
09:53:37 and have given three months or six months to reopen the
09:53:42 applications, and then come back and see.
09:53:46 >> Okay.
09:53:47 I would ask and request of the board if you do want to
09:53:50 direct me to have a committee and meet two or three times a
09:53:55 year per your direction that we not try to move on any
09:53:59 Central Park applications today.
09:54:00 We don't -- aren't prepared for it, but to bring it back
09:54:05 next month and perhaps open up the recruitment again.
09:54:07 >>MARY MULHERN: We don't have applications today at all?
09:54:14 I would make that as a motion that maybe they come back in,
09:54:21 what would you say, three months, six months, reopen it, and
09:54:26 reopen the application process in four months, and then six
09:54:32 months from now come back and see if we have got
09:54:35 applications, and you could put the team back together.
09:54:41 >> A question that was on the mind, if we came back, we
09:54:46 started the process again, in the four to six months, got up
09:54:50 and running with the new committee, it would be time for the
09:54:53 next annual appointment project.
09:54:55 And we would be back before you before another round of
09:54:58 appointments in 2013.
09:55:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, six months -- this is the annual
09:55:06 appointment process today, right?
09:55:07 >> Yes.
09:55:08 >>MARY MULHERN: So wouldn't it be in a year that we are
09:55:10 doing it again?
09:55:11 >> Yes.
09:55:12 If we are going to wait four to six months to, for lack of a
09:55:16 better material, to have Central Park, it would be that four
09:55:20 months to six months before we do the recruiting.
09:55:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, you can make those appointments for
09:55:28 early and include the next year.
09:55:30 So you have 18 months appointment.
09:55:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Before you make the motion, a few of them
09:55:38 want to speak.
09:55:40 Mr. Miranda.
09:55:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:55:43 Although I agree with the maker of the motion, there is a
09:55:48 question in my mind who makes that determination when you
09:55:52 Is it us?
09:55:54 Or is it your board members?
09:55:56 Are you saying this is what the agenda is going to be two
09:55:59 times a year or three times a year, because of lack of
09:56:03 activity, and within that certain area?
09:56:05 And that's a legal question that I don't have an answer to.
09:56:08 I don't know what it is.
09:56:09 >> Up to this point, the committee itself, a meeting
09:56:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Do we set that when they meet, how often
09:56:20 they meet, or do they set it?
09:56:22 >>SAL TERRITO: Unless there's something in their bylaws,
09:56:25 it's sort of their decision.
09:56:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I agree with the maker of the motion.
09:56:29 I will second that.
09:56:31 It's your committee.
09:56:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just for discussion.
09:56:38 I agree, but the only concern I have is that if we appoint
09:56:45 individuals to the board, or to the advisory committee, and
09:56:52 there isn't any real activity for them to discuss or to
09:56:57 render opinions on, those people have the risk of being
09:57:03 eliminated for the next round because they will have burned
09:57:09 through their eligibility, and then when there is activity,
09:57:15 we will have lost some very good people who were interested
09:57:18 and engaged, involved, or want to be involved, because they
09:57:25 have term limited.
09:57:27 That's the only concern that I have.
09:57:29 >> You are correct, they would be using one of their
09:57:32 eligible terms during the period of inactivity.
09:57:37 And then at some point in the future, when activity picks
09:57:40 up, they would only be able to apply for an additional
09:57:45 two-year term.
09:57:47 And some of the members that I have on the committee now,
09:57:51 that has been their comment.
09:57:52 I am not going to reapply now since there is so little
09:57:56 activity, I will wait until there is a reason, in the
09:58:02 substance of agendas and participant, so that is a good
09:58:05 You would be -- could be using those terms over a period of
09:58:12 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know what the answer to that is
09:58:22 other than is that the same rule for every citizens advisory
09:58:27 committee about the term limit thing?
09:58:30 Or is it specific to each?
09:58:38 >>SAL TERRITO: (off microphone) What you can do is decide to
09:58:41 suspend that period of time, the period of suspension.
09:58:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we do that specifically for this CRA?
09:58:52 >>SAL TERRITO: (off microphone) term limits are the same,
09:58:59 you can make that change.
09:59:00 >> And it also this advisory committee does not have bylaws.
09:59:04 We operate on the CRA advisory policies.
09:59:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I just add that to my motion?
09:59:16 So we are going to add that change to the bylaws.
09:59:22 I'm sorry, did you want to speak?
09:59:23 Bylaws for the Central Park CRA.
09:59:29 And we will renotice --
09:59:36 >>SAL TERRITO: CRA policies.
09:59:41 >>MARY MULHERN: And that we will renotice the application
09:59:43 process in four months, and do the appointments in six
09:59:54 Do I have to find the dates?
09:59:57 >>SAL TERRITO: We'll get the dates for you.
10:00:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll go along with that since I seconded
10:00:02 the motion.
10:00:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Further discussion on the motion?
10:00:05 The motion by board member Mulhern, second by board member
10:00:10 All in favor?
10:00:11 Okay, thank you.
10:00:14 >> Brenda Doran Shipp, 518 Tampa street.
10:00:21 Didn't plan to speak to you about this issue.
10:00:23 But as a private citizen, a member of the Encore team, I am
10:00:27 on the CDD for the Encore project.
10:00:30 And I just want to go on record, whatever the city decides
10:00:34 and the CRA decides in terms of activity, no one wants to
10:00:37 meet for the sake of meeting.
10:00:38 That's for certain.
10:00:42 I can tell you that because we have the private community
10:00:48 development organization within Encore, so our services are
10:00:52 needed, and we have some points that we can help them, I can
10:00:55 stand in front of you today and tell you that we will do
10:01:00 However you decide to suspend, not suspend, but we are there
10:01:02 to help.
10:01:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:01:10 >> Ed Johnson: Number 3 through 6 are the applicants
10:01:19 applying for the various CRA advisory committees.
10:01:23 And we'll take the first one is Channel District.
10:01:26 They have three seats available.
10:01:29 And they have five applicants.
10:01:36 Harriet Brantner, Robert Canton, Abbey Dohring, Kate Thorpe,
10:01:42 Lynette Williams Austin.
10:01:44 I want to go on record stating that Kate Thorpe and Lynette
10:01:49 Williams Austin have applied for numerous CRA advisory
10:01:54 committee vacancies on other CRAs.
10:01:57 So we need to make sure if either one of these are voted in
10:02:01 on any one of the CRA areas that come up for consideration,
10:02:07 that eliminates them from being considered on any of the
10:02:09 other CRAs.
10:02:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: Those two that you named, do they live in
10:02:15 any one of these CRAs?
10:02:19 Live or work or have businesses?
10:02:22 >> These are at-large.
10:02:25 There again, they are not business owners, they are applying
10:02:31 in the at-large position.
10:02:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Are they here today?
10:02:38 >> Are any of the individuals that are here that want to
10:02:43 come forward?
10:02:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: So none of the five are here at this
10:02:56 >> Ed Johnson: At this moment.
10:02:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If we could read the names off and make
10:03:12 one last call to see if any of them are here.
10:03:14 Harriet Brantner, Robert Canton, Abbey Dohring, Kate Thorpe,
10:03:19 Lynette Williams Austin.
10:03:26 >> Ms. Dohring's mother is here.
10:03:29 >> Yes, I realize that.
10:03:30 >> An e-mail that came from Abbye that said she would like
10:03:34 to be considered for the Channel District CRA.
10:03:36 And wanted to know if her mother could speak on her behalf
10:03:41 because she was doing some other business.
10:03:43 >> Would you want to speak on Abbye's behalf?
10:03:50 >> Brenda Dohring Hicks, mother, Abbye Dohring. One of my
10:04:00 important roles.
10:04:02 Abbye is out of the country, so this was something she
10:04:05 applied for, she felt very strongly about.
10:04:08 She is a big advocate of downtown and the Channel District.
10:04:10 She's been involved in a lot of activity.
10:04:14 She is responsible in a large part for the art program that
10:04:18 put 20 sculptures throughout the downtown area.
10:04:20 She attends an awful lot of meetings.
10:04:22 And I know this is something that's important to her.
10:04:25 That's what I can tell you.
10:04:26 >> But she's out of the country.
10:04:30 >> She's out of the country or she would be here.
10:04:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: While she's recording, do you want to move
10:05:33 to item 7?
10:05:40 What's the next one, 4?
10:05:46 >>ED JOHNSON: The next one is downtown.
10:05:49 Two seats available in downtown.
10:05:51 And they have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,
10:05:54 eight, nine applicants.
10:05:57 And I will read their names.
10:05:58 Alana Braser, Robert Canton, Brenda Dohring-Hicks, Robert
10:05:58 Edwards, David Jae, Christina North, Eric Odum, Kate Thorpe,
10:05:58 Lynette Williams Austin.
10:06:12 >> Do we have anyone from the applicants of downtown here?
10:06:16 All right.
10:06:16 >> I'm Robert Edwards, Long-time member of the St. Paul AME
10:06:28 What I did leave off my application by mistake was a former
10:06:31 member of the St. Lawrence board, that worked with the city
10:06:34 over the years, worked with the apartments.
10:06:37 I reside at Metro 510, and look forward to putting in good
10:06:46 work to help the city move along.
10:06:48 >> Can I put my mother on speakerphone? (Laughter)
10:06:58 My name is Christina North.
10:07:01 I live downtown.
10:07:02 I work downtown.
10:07:05 If you read my application, I have been working at the law
10:07:07 firm of Cordell and Cordell at the Regents Building and I'm
10:07:13 proud to say I opened my own practice this past Monday, and
10:07:17 my office is at the beer can building.
10:07:20 So suffice it to say, I am very interested in downtown.
10:07:25 As you can see by my application, I lived in San Francisco
10:07:28 for many years.
10:07:29 I grew up in Sarasota, lived in San Francisco for about 12
10:07:32 years, absolutely loved it, but my family was so far away,
10:07:36 moved back to Sarasota, and there wasn't a gel there, there
10:07:42 was something missing, and I just happened to take a job in
10:07:46 Tampa, and I love it here.
10:07:47 I know I am going to spread my wings, I know I am going make
10:07:51 roots, and I do want to be a part of the community in a very
10:07:54 proactive way.
10:07:56 In addition to loving Tampa, having lived in a beautiful
10:08:02 city, San Francisco, I bring to the table two perspectives.
10:08:05 One is that I am a young-ish urban professional without
10:08:11 And I do love my life and I have a lot of freedom and I have
10:08:16 a lot of fun.
10:08:17 I also work very hard.
10:08:18 But the second perspective is that my boyfriend of several
10:08:22 years, who I am crazy about, has an eight-year-old daughter
10:08:26 and he time shares with her duct during the bulk of the
10:08:29 summer, winter break and spring break.
10:08:31 So from that perspective, I am sort of a stepmother looking
10:08:36 at the community, and in being able to guide her around
10:08:40 urban living.
10:08:41 She comes from rural Canada.
10:08:43 So I'm very excited to walk around with her downtown.
10:08:47 I have noticed, I have only lived here about five months now
10:08:54 but I noticed growth in downtown, and I'm thrilled,
10:08:57 particularly we just got a somewhat new urban market, and we
10:09:03 have been waiting for.
10:09:03 This we were buying our milk at CVS and it wasn't a fun
10:09:08 So I see the growth in downtown Tampa.
10:09:10 I love downtown Tampa.
10:09:12 And I think I can be an absolute asset on this committee.
10:09:16 I thank you for your time and attention.
10:09:18 And I do hope you select me.
10:09:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:09:21 >> Brenda Dohring Hicks, and I would like to adopt you.
10:09:31 [ Laughter ]
10:09:31 Beautiful, energetic, wonderful.
10:09:36 You and Abbye would make a great team.
10:09:37 I come to the downtown CRA after having taken a break.
10:09:39 I did serve once before.
10:09:40 I believe some really good history.
10:09:43 I consider myself a very conservative optimist.
10:09:47 But I absolutely love this city.
10:09:49 I have owned my property.
10:09:51 My one building which is 518 Tampa street, and cafe for
10:09:59 almost 15 years, but I started my own business in downtown
10:10:01 Tampa at the top floor of what is now our police station.
10:10:05 So I was certainly an urban pioneer back when there wasn't
10:10:09 much going on in this city.
10:10:10 And I'm just pleased to see what has happened over the past
10:10:15 We have a lot more to work on.
10:10:16 And I'm happy to give my time and do that.
10:10:19 We are also working very hard on advocating the waterfront.
10:10:25 I have a sailboat that we have put in service for taking
10:10:28 tours of our city.
10:10:29 And we are getting ready to try to add some electric boats
10:10:32 into our waterfront to do that.
10:10:34 So we need a lot more activity.
10:10:36 We need that energy.
10:10:37 We need the young people.
10:10:39 We need older folks.
10:10:40 We need everybody to understand what is here in Tampa.
10:10:46 It is really a little bit of a secret and we need to get out
10:10:51 there and tell people what we have for downtown Tampa and
10:10:53 how it contributes to the Tampa Bay area.
10:10:55 Thank you.
10:10:55 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
10:11:03 Do you want to pass your ballots down?
10:11:11 >> CRA members -- Shirley Foxx-Knowles, city clerk.
10:11:18 I wanted to let you know that Harriet Brantner, Robert
10:11:23 Canton and Abbye Dohring were selected.
10:11:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: We just needed three.
10:11:31 Okay, good.
10:11:32 Thank you.
10:11:37 Tampa Heights.
10:11:37 >> Tampa Heights, riverfront, there were five seats
10:11:49 And they have ten applicants for Tampa Heights Riverside,
10:11:58 and if any of those individuals are here that might want to
10:12:02 come forward.
10:12:04 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members.
10:12:14 My name is Emily Rogers.
10:12:15 My address is 801 west Alfred street.
10:12:19 I currently work as an independent contractor, an
10:12:24 I have lived in the Tampa Bay area for almost 20 years.
10:12:28 And in terms of my training and experience, I have a
10:12:31 master's degree in international development in public
10:12:34 policy, and a recent graduate of the community real estate
10:12:38 development credit course at USF, I also have certification
10:12:46 in organizational development.
10:12:47 I applied to become a member of this committee because I'm
10:12:51 aware of that committee of the dynamics.
10:12:56 At the local level we see that communities change sometimes
10:12:59 on a monthly basis, on a weekly basis, and at the
10:13:03 neighborhood level, almost on a daily basis.
10:13:07 So in submitting my application, I want to be part of the
10:13:09 process that creates a positive change, that ensures balance
10:13:15 in the Tampa Heights community.
10:13:18 My goal is to be part of that process to help solve problems
10:13:22 by analyzing the current policies and practices, by ensuring
10:13:28 accountability and listening to all viewpoints, and also
10:13:32 engaged to review and prioritize solutions that benefit the
10:13:36 entire community, and therefore our city at large.
10:13:42 My overall goal is to ensure that the community has access
10:13:45 to the information that it needs to make the decisions that
10:13:49 are the best for that community.
10:13:52 So to summarize, public policy and community redevelopment
10:13:58 is an important process, and I hope to become a part of that
10:14:01 process, create positive change, create balance, and
10:14:07 So I'm excited about this opportunity.
10:14:10 And I solicit your support in order to move forward.
10:14:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:14:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Rogers, do you live in the Tampa
10:14:20 >> I'm applying as an at-large member.
10:14:24 >> You don't live in that neighborhood?
10:14:25 >> No.
10:14:26 My residence is not.
10:14:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:14:29 >> Thank you.
10:14:30 >> My name is Matt May, a resident at 206 west Ross Avenue,
10:14:42 one of approximately 15 permanent residents by my count
10:14:45 within the legal boundaries of the Tampa Heights Riverfront
10:14:48 In April of 2011 my family and I completed construction of a
10:14:53 private residence artist studio.
10:14:58 This project represents the largest development of vacant
10:15:00 land in the CRA since the Beck building was completed.
10:15:04 As a I have been a small business owner in this region for
10:15:07 over ten years.
10:15:09 I'm a commercial photography, works for several area
10:15:12 professional sports teams, as well as national and
10:15:14 international business publications.
10:15:19 Also own property in Seminole Heights, south Seminole
10:15:21 Heights to the north of this area.
10:15:25 In summary, I have got a young family and interested in
10:15:29 development of the CRA, in particular how things move
10:15:31 forward as the Heights project emerges from bankruptcy and
10:15:36 any potential changes that may come down the road to the
10:15:39 development agreement.
10:15:41 We obviously feel there's great potential in this area.
10:15:46 I'm an avid outdoorsman, Fisherman, artist.
10:15:50 This represents an amazing opportunity for residents of the
10:15:54 city and has potential to become one of Tampa's greatest
10:15:57 I thank you for your attention.
10:16:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:16:02 >> Good morning.
10:16:08 My name is Lena Young-Green.
10:16:10 I reside at 3406 North Avon Avenue, Tampa Heights, and I
10:16:15 want to take this opportunity to wish everyone the very best
10:16:20 for this new year.
10:16:22 I feel in my bones it's going to be an exciting year, and we
10:16:25 will get those things done under your leadership.
10:16:29 As a member, current member of the CRA, I reapplied,
10:16:35 continue to offer my services.
10:16:37 I'm delighted to hear those who have already put in
10:16:40 applications and their interest in continuing to help our
10:16:45 neighborhood develop.
10:16:47 I have worked for quite awhile in Tampa Heights and various
10:16:50 areas, and mostly Tampa Heights.
10:16:55 I seek the opportunity to continue to be a part of our -- to
10:17:02 serve as somewhat of an institutional memory as we move
10:17:06 forward and as new things develop.
10:17:09 We do have major challenges for our CRA, and it's going to
10:17:16 be very interesting, important that we make good decisions
10:17:20 as we decide how we manage the issues that exist on that CRA
10:17:28 Therefore, I offer my services once more, but recognizing
10:17:32 that many of the people who have already applied also bring
10:17:37 a value and would be great assets to developing our Tampa
10:17:42 Heights area.
10:17:43 Thank you.
10:17:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:17:46 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman, City Council members.
10:17:53 My name is Frederik Fourie, 313 West Cypress Avenue which is
10:18:00 just two blocks north in the Heights.
10:18:05 I am a current homeowner.
10:18:07 My wife and I are in the process of restoring our historic
10:18:10 home, which as you probably know is quite a challenge.
10:18:16 I'm a Tampa resident for 16 years, been in the Tampa Bay
10:18:19 area for 20 years, and USF graduate.
10:18:25 During my 20 years construction management degree, I worked
10:18:29 on countless projects across the United States and
10:18:36 I am currently construction cost consultant.
10:18:39 My expertise, has been to design buildings to budget.
10:18:45 I specialize in performing arts centers and museums.
10:18:49 Also, I was vice-president of development services for and.
10:18:54 We developed multi-use projects, and a couple retail
10:18:58 Also, been a director of design and development services for
10:19:01 the Ritz Carlton development in Grand Cayman.
10:19:05 I was basically the guy that organized a lot of that stuff
10:19:07 down there.
10:19:11 Further, I'm certified to qualify buildings green, then
10:19:18 member of such association as the American association of
10:19:22 engineers, construction management association of America,
10:19:24 and American association of professional estimators.
10:19:28 Basically, if you guys are talking about numbers, I'm the
10:19:32 guy that understands better than anybody else.
10:19:35 The reason why I want to volunteer with the CRA is because I
10:19:39 love my city and my community.
10:19:40 I'm very passionate about Tampa Heights, and the future, and
10:19:45 that is the part of the city that I died decided to live in
10:19:48 because it's centrally located and it is the key to our
10:19:51 You can see that there's many of us who are passionate about
10:19:54 our community.
10:19:54 And I am hope to be part of it.
10:19:56 Again my name is Frederik Fourie.
10:20:04 Thank you very much.
10:20:04 >> Do you know anything about community gardens?
10:20:05 >> I know it's going require eight hours of my time.
10:20:08 [ Laughter ]
10:20:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: You are right.
10:20:11 >> If you see my backyard.
10:20:16 [ Laughter ]
10:20:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:20:30 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
10:20:32 The individuals selected for the downtown CRA community
10:20:34 advisory committee include Brenda Dohring Hicks and
10:20:40 Christina north.
10:20:42 Thank you.
10:21:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: While she tallies the vote, do you want to
10:21:28 do the next item?
10:21:30 >> Ed Johnson: Item number 7 is a resolution.
10:21:37 Which the attorney referenced earlier in his comments,
10:21:40 offering up a substitute resolution in the amount of $28,000
10:21:44 for the purchase of property at 3020 north 22nd street as it
10:21:50 relates to the property that is needed to complete the
10:21:55 roundabout project on phase 3 of the 22nd street project.
10:21:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right, do we have a motion?
10:22:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 7, I think it's a substitute
10:22:10 resolution that we are looking to move.
10:22:11 So, Mr. Chairman, I move the substitute resolution based on
10:22:14 the fact that when you talk about the cost, it would be more
10:22:19 costly for us to stop whatever was done years back by
10:22:23 council members and those members sitting honorably as the
10:22:27 CRA than it would be to continue on a project that I think
10:22:29 would be an enhancement to the area.
10:22:33 >> Second.
10:22:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Discussion on the motion?
10:22:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just have one question, if I may.
10:22:45 Mr. Johnson, could we have a substitute resolution -- we
10:22:49 have to come up with a difference as the city for the
10:22:52 purchase of the home, correct?
10:22:54 >> That's correct.
10:22:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Have moneys already been identified for that
10:22:57 purpose yet?
10:22:58 Or we are going to do this and then we are going to be
10:23:01 looking for some cash?
10:23:03 >> The latter.
10:23:04 The discussion has been already taken place with the chief
10:23:07 of staff, and with the CRA chair, and at that time, it was
10:23:12 stated that he wanted to wait until -- we wanted to make
10:23:15 sure that the 22nd street roundabout was going to move
10:23:18 forward, and then he would move forward with identifying a
10:23:21 funding resource that will then come back to you next week
10:23:24 on the 19th to approve the whole total purchase of that
10:23:30 property using the TIF dollars and whatever resource is
10:23:34 provided by the city for the remainder.
10:23:36 >> Thank you.
10:23:38 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to go on the record once again
10:23:44 that although I respect the decision of the previous
10:23:50 citizens advisory committee and their desire for
10:23:55 improvements along 22nd street and there were a couple of
10:24:00 different renderings that were provided over the meantimes
10:24:04 we have discussed this.
10:24:06 I have suggested other alternatives, and really don't feel I
10:24:11 have ever gotten any of my questions fully answered.
10:24:17 The perspective that I have from the development background
10:24:20 is that there are other alternatives, and you look at all of
10:24:26 the alternatives based on what input there is from the
10:24:30 community, what the cost of the project will be, and what
10:24:34 the impact of that project will be.
10:24:37 I think that this particular property purchase and this
10:24:41 project fail on two of those three counts.
10:24:45 So I cannot support this motion to purchase this property.
10:24:51 Again, we are in dire financial need both within the
10:24:56 redevelopment agency, in all of the redevelopment agencies
10:25:00 because of declining property values.
10:25:02 Our budget within the city has been, you know, discussed ad
10:25:07 nauseam during the campaigns of all of us, and even on
10:25:11 council as we were passing the budget.
10:25:15 Our Councilman Suarez voted out, we don't have funds
10:25:19 It was in the budget because it's not an expense that we
10:25:22 anticipated as City Council and the budget to accommodate
10:25:26 this purchase.
10:25:28 And I for one, you know, will not support it because I want
10:25:33 to send that message to our property owners in the City of
10:25:35 Tampa that when the city does a project, it's not an open
10:25:39 You can't dictate to us what we are going to pay for that
10:25:45 Eminent domain, yes, is an expensive process.
10:25:48 I worked on eminent domain cases.
10:25:51 I worked on expert testimony for eminent domain cases.
10:25:54 I am intimately familiar with the process.
10:25:57 It's not necessarily that we need to go there and use
10:26:00 eminent domain if property owners have a perspective that
10:26:04 they are doing the right thing by the tax paying citizens of
10:26:07 this city, and by the projects that we select by not
10:26:13 demanding four, five, six, seven times what the property
10:26:17 values are for the land that they are sitting on.
10:26:20 So based on, you know, just the dollar value alone, and that
10:26:29 we are paying way too much money for this property, I won't
10:26:34 ever support a project -- and you never say never in this
10:26:41 day and age -- but I will be hard pressed to support
10:26:44 approval for purchasing a property that is tremendously
10:26:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Councilwoman Montelione, for
10:27:02 putting that in perspective.
10:27:03 And the thing that I want to add to this, to what she had to
10:27:08 say, I can't support this either.
10:27:14 This has been coming back to us over a months and month and
10:27:17 months, and the outcry I have heard from the community, from
10:27:25 the East Tampa, and this particular neighborhood, has been
10:27:31 really strong.
10:27:32 We got another petition today with all these names.
10:27:35 So the problem for me, in addition to it, not really meeting
10:27:44 the economic criteria that Councilwoman Montelione put
10:27:47 forward, is this is community redevelopment, and we created
10:27:55 these in order for the community to meet the needs that they
10:27:58 see necessary.
10:27:59 And I think what this community is telling us is that
10:28:03 because of limited resources in this TIF funding, that
10:28:12 that's not what they want to spend their money on.
10:28:14 They don't want to spend it on this acquisition of property,
10:28:17 and they don't want to spend it on the redevelopment of
10:28:24 roundabouts that is planned to happen.
10:28:26 So I can't support it either.
10:28:28 >>HARRY COHEN: What I'm troubled by is that we have taken
10:28:43 this issue up a couple of times, and every time we meet,
10:28:49 there seems to be a resolution, and then we come back, and I
10:28:54 feel like something different than what was discussed the
10:28:56 last time is happening.
10:28:57 If I remember correctly, the last time we talked about the
10:29:01 roundabout, there has been a vote in the community.
10:29:04 I remember it was a very close vote.
10:29:06 I believe that the community defeated the roundabout by one
10:29:13 Now, at the time, I seem to remember that we decided to
10:29:19 honor that vote.
10:29:25 Now today it's in front of us, and it seems in total
10:29:28 contravention of what we discussed the last time that this
10:29:31 issue was brought up, and my discomfort, I would like to go
10:29:34 back and review the proceedings of when we discussed this
10:29:37 the last time to make sure that what we are doing today is
10:29:42 following up with where I felt this was going.
10:29:46 You know, it seems as though there's tremendous dissension
10:29:49 in the community about whether or not to build the
10:29:51 roundabout, and I hate to move forward with something when
10:29:58 it just seems so unsettled.
10:30:01 And that's what troubles me about voting.
10:30:05 I do have one question, though, and I actually took a ride
10:30:09 by there a couple of times after our last discussion, and
10:30:13 for clarification, I was sort of understood the impression
10:30:16 that the city was going to have to purchase this house
10:30:19 regardless of whether they ultimately built a roundabout or
10:30:23 ended up redesigning the intersection for any kind of
10:30:27 improved -- if I remember correctly the house almost sits
10:30:32 like right literally in the middle of the intersection.
10:30:35 Is that correct?
10:30:36 >> Not the actual intersection.
10:30:40 The house is bordered by some -- yes, it's very close to the
10:30:47 apex where the roads split off and become one-way pairs.
10:30:52 If the roundabout is not approved, no, there is no need to
10:30:54 purchase the house.
10:30:57 If the corner was basically stay the same as it is, or if
10:31:00 you choose to redirect dollars to redesign the project in
10:31:04 another way, then it could potentially come back in as an
10:31:11 unnecessary need, if that's one of the options in the design
10:31:17 or redesign of the project, cot come back into play.
10:31:20 But if the roundabout is not approved going forward, as it
10:31:24 was already approved, if we are not going forward with the
10:31:27 roundabout, then there would be no need for us to purchase
10:31:29 the house.
10:31:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: If I may, let me clear up some confusion
10:31:37 The neighborhood partnership, they were voting on whether or
10:31:44 not to accept the roundabout, and that was the 26-25 vote.
10:31:47 The neighborhood voted to approve the purchase of this house
10:31:55 when they limited it to $28,000.
10:31:58 There is no controversy about that.
10:32:00 The only controversy is about whether they want the
10:32:03 roundabout or not.
10:32:09 The chairman can confirm this.
10:32:11 They voted with no controversy to say we will only put
10:32:14 $28,000 of our TIF funds toward the house.
10:32:19 The chief of staff had discussed with me that he identified
10:32:26 additional funds that he wanted to see first what was going
10:32:29 to transpire with this roundabout.
10:32:33 There was no need of him going forward or putting this item
10:32:36 on the agenda to approve unless they were assured that the
10:32:41 roundabout -- that the issues of the roundabout were
10:32:47 Dent want to get involved.
10:32:48 But I think that's the confusion.
10:32:50 We need to clear it up.
10:32:51 They have in a problem with the house.
10:32:53 But they wanted to limit their dollars to $28,000 only. And
10:32:58 that's the resolution here today, if we want to move forward
10:33:02 with this $28,000.
10:33:03 But this is not a discussion about the roundabout.
10:33:07 All the discussion is about, do we accept their request that
10:33:12 they would limit their $28,000 of TIF funds towards the
10:33:16 purchase of the house?
10:33:18 And am I correct on this, Mr. Chairman, from the
10:33:24 Thank you.
10:33:26 All right.
10:33:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:33:32 I'm glad that you clarified that because that was my
10:33:34 understanding, that the roundabout issue -- and again, you
10:33:37 know, we talked a little bit about this last CRA meeting,
10:33:40 which is the history of this goes back to, I believe, 2005,
10:33:44 correct, Mr. Johnson?
10:33:45 >> That's when it started, yes.
10:33:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And I really believe that the issue here is
10:33:51 that we have a duly appointed board that has to report back
10:33:57 to us, and we can second guess almost any decision that
10:34:00 comes before us.
10:34:01 I think that the issues concerning the cost of the home, and
10:34:06 Ms. Montelione has brought up, is a very good issue.
10:34:09 That's separate than the decision about the roundabout
10:34:12 The roundabout itself is that we can keep continually
10:34:17 reassessing the decisions that are made by these advisory
10:34:20 committees, and then essentially remove their power.
10:34:24 And that's part of the problem that we have here.
10:34:27 Now, is that a problem of the advisory committee not
10:34:32 reaching out more to the community and finding out more what
10:34:34 the community actually wants?
10:34:35 That may be an issue.
10:34:37 If it's something that we haven't done the right process in
10:34:41 order to allow people to have their viewpoints aired, that
10:34:45 may be a problem.
10:34:46 But in terms of once it comes to this board, in terms of
10:34:50 what our decisions are, I look at it as this.
10:34:53 We have to trust our citizen advisory committees.
10:34:56 And if we don't, let's disband them and make our owned
10:35:00 darned decision based on whatever we think.
10:35:02 And I don't believe in that.
10:35:03 I think that's why CRAs are created.
10:35:06 They are really from the grassroots up.
10:35:08 I do think that we can lend some expertise -- and I think
10:35:13 that Councilwoman Montelione is very specific about her
10:35:16 expertise on these particular issues -- and that type of
10:35:20 thing is a different aspect than whether or not the
10:35:22 roundabout is built or not built.
10:35:24 It has to come from our advisory committee, in my mind.
10:35:27 And I am going to support the roundabout primarily because I
10:35:32 respect our chair in terms of how much he's worked on this,
10:35:36 having been a member of that advisory committee.
10:35:39 And I think that is an important aspect of it.
10:35:43 We can second guess every decision we ever make, and believe
10:35:48 me, every election that's what's going to happen every time
10:35:50 we go out there to talk about what we have done on this
10:35:53 board and on council.
10:35:54 So I would rather not do that with the advisory committees,
10:35:57 because their charge is to give us the best advice possible
10:36:00 as to what they want to spend their TIF dollars on.
10:36:05 So, Mr. Johnson, I appreciate you giving me sort of a time
10:36:08 line there.
10:36:08 And Mr. Chair, thank you so much for your service previously
10:36:12 and currently in terms of giving us some idea of this
10:36:15 particular issue.
10:36:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:36:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:36:25 Mr. Johnson, you said that we don't need the property if we
10:36:35 don't build the roundabout.
10:36:36 Is that correct?
10:36:37 >> Ed: That's correct.
10:36:41 >>MARY MULHERN: We also heard from Councilman Cohen, which
10:36:45 I think you confirmed, that the community voted that they do
10:36:51 not want the roundabout.
10:36:54 Is that correct?
10:36:55 >> What took place at the last CRA board me meeting was the
10:37:01 chairperson of the advisory committee was asked to go back
10:37:03 again a second time, because as you recall, previously,
10:37:06 there was a vote, a special called meeting that took place
10:37:10 in September of last year on this issue.
10:37:13 And that vote was 15 to 7 for it.
10:37:17 And then some folks came to you at the last CRA board
10:37:21 meeting and asked that they go back out again and recanvas
10:37:29 the community.
10:37:30 That vote was taken in December, I believe it was, and that
10:37:32 vote came back 25-26 against it.
10:37:36 But at that time, our counsel advised you that the
10:37:42 roundabout and the 22nd street project had already been
10:37:46 approved by you the CRA agency.
10:37:50 >> Right, downtown have to go into all.
10:37:53 That I just wanted to make clear what the vote was.
10:37:55 So it was a close vote at that meeting.
10:38:00 So I think -- I think there's way too many questions to
10:38:10 support it.
10:38:10 I can't support it.
10:38:12 I'm wondering if -- I thought that's what Mr. Territo told
10:38:19 us that we needed to move first on the roundabout before we
10:38:24 voted on that.
10:38:26 So -- well, I think it's very clear, that this is not what
10:38:35 the neighborhood wants, it's not a good use of our TIF
10:38:39 Each though only 28,000 is coming out of the TIF money, it's
10:38:44 still going to be taxpayer dollars that pays for the other
10:38:50 more than half of the costs for that house, which is
10:38:53 I just cannot support it.
10:38:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Very briefly, do you have a contract on
10:39:01 that house?
10:39:02 >> Yes, we do.
10:39:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What happens if today you lose that
10:39:05 contract and Councilman back?
10:39:07 Do you think you are going to buy it for 65,000?
10:39:09 >> With all of the conversation taking place?
10:39:12 It will probably be 85,000.
10:39:13 >> And I'm not an expert.
10:39:15 I'm a realist.
10:39:16 Not an expert, I'm a realist.
10:39:18 I understand things that are real.
10:39:20 What we have here by experience, of mine and other members,
10:39:25 that have seen things go from what you could purchase and
10:39:29 what you would purchase under eminent domain, it's a lot
10:39:36 I challenge anyone to read and understand what all the
10:39:41 eminent domains have cost this city, including relocation,
10:39:45 including if it was a business, you have got future business
10:39:50 loss, this, that and the other.
10:39:51 I have sat here and I voted, and the public has lost.
10:39:57 When you start that, you start going into details that are
10:40:01 much more costly today, this morning, we had evidence that
10:40:05 to stop this project and redesign it, it would be a minimum
10:40:10 of 150,000 to $200,000 cost.
10:40:16 Without nothing being done.
10:40:18 I'm not one that supports roundabouts in the past based on
10:40:24 my decision of looking at the roundabout on North Boulevard
10:40:26 and Fowler, the size of a dime.
10:40:29 Dangerous intersection because even though it is around
10:40:32 about, you are turning real sharp all over.
10:40:35 The same people, including myself, that sort of lifted their
10:40:43 eyebrows on the roundabout on Lois and MLK, by the wonderful
10:40:51 Hillsborough community college area, were against it.
10:40:54 Guess what.
10:40:56 The same people including myself, you have to see something
10:41:00 come of something and see what it does that changed our
10:41:05 That roundabout is functional.
10:41:06 It works.
10:41:07 And it helps move traffic, including the large semis that
10:41:12 I witnessed myself going through.
10:41:13 So things change.
10:41:14 Time doesn't change.
10:41:19 Realistically what you see and do changes.
10:41:22 Not what you don't do.
10:41:24 Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
10:41:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone else need to speak now?
10:41:30 Last round so we can move this.
10:41:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
10:41:33 Speculating that had this is going to come back at $85,000
10:41:37 is completely out of the realm.
10:41:39 And the only reason why people expect that their price is
10:41:42 going to go up is because this body will pay it.
10:41:45 And nobody is talking about going eminent domain unless we
10:41:48 need to have this property purchased.
10:41:51 And if we do not approve the roundabout, we do not need to
10:41:55 purchase the property.
10:41:56 So eminent domain doesn't come up.
10:41:59 My personal opinion on roundabouts, anybody's personal
10:42:02 opinion on roundabouts, doesn't make a difference.
10:42:05 Because I would it works.
10:42:09 I like it.
10:42:09 But that doesn't matter.
10:42:11 That's my opinion.
10:42:12 Anybody's personal opinion in a public matter really has no
10:42:17 It's what the experts tell us.
10:42:20 Roundabouts work in some circumstances.
10:42:22 They don't work in other circumstances.
10:42:24 It pays no never mind.
10:42:26 The 25, 26 vote against in December, that is too close to
10:42:32 That is not a decisive vote, in my opinion.
10:42:37 So whether that's for or against is weighing in the balance,
10:42:44 because it was pretty evenly split.
10:42:48 There was no clear message sent.
10:42:52 The 15-7 vote in September, look at the numbers.
10:42:55 There weren't a lot of people at that meeting.
10:42:57 So that's not a clear read on the community either.
10:43:00 So not that -- we are not taking any powers or any respect
10:43:06 away from the citizens advisory committee by looking at
10:43:09 these votes and saying that neither one of these vote is a
10:43:12 clear message.
10:43:13 That's not removing any of their power.
10:43:16 That's not taking away from the work that they have done.
10:43:19 It's just calling it for what it is.
10:43:22 One is too close of a vote to really say it's a clear
10:43:26 And the other one, there weren't even enough people present
10:43:29 at the meeting to say it was representative of the entire
10:43:35 And, you know, we have got a $37,000 commitment out of our
10:43:39 city budget.
10:43:42 For those of us who talk about doing things for senior
10:43:46 citizens, for doing things for people in our community that
10:43:48 are in great need. $37,000 would go a long way to one of
10:43:53 those efforts.
10:43:54 And we don't find money all the time for things that are
10:43:57 very worthy, but we can find money for purchasing a piece of
10:44:05 And if we send a consistent message, that price isn't going
10:44:09 to go from 65 to 85, we are going to send a consistent
10:44:12 message that, no, we are not going to pay inflated costs for
10:44:15 real estate, we are not going to go down that road, and we
10:44:18 are going to send that message.
10:44:20 The only ones who can do that is this board and this body.
10:44:24 And if we continue to approve inflated prices of real
10:44:28 estate, we are going to send a message that you can demand
10:44:31 any dollar amount you want from the City of Tampa because we
10:44:34 are going to approve it.
10:44:39 >>SAL TERRITO: I don't want to get in the middle of the so,
10:44:41 but the roundabout has already been approved.
10:44:43 And when I mentioned earlier, and I apologize if you weren't
10:44:46 here, but what I happened earlier is the roundabout is
10:44:49 approved if you do not want the roundabout to go forward
10:44:53 then you have to make an affirmative action to overrule.
10:44:58 That's your decision if you want to do that.
10:45:00 But the roundabout has been approved.
10:45:01 All you have to da is to approve the purchase of the
10:45:05 If you want to take the action of overturning a previous
10:45:07 decision on redesigning the roundabout, that will require
10:45:09 another vote.
10:45:11 The roundabout has already been approved by a previous
10:45:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: And Sal, let me ask you this.
10:45:19 And I thought I made it clear.
10:45:20 We are note voting on the roundabout.
10:45:24 We did it at another meeting.
10:45:26 And we can bring that up under new business, to affirm the
10:45:31 previous council's vote or overturn.
10:45:34 And this is all about the process.
10:45:36 Now, since it was brought up by a previous council, let me
10:45:42 ask you a question.
10:45:43 When was that vote at a by the previous council?
10:45:46 >>SAL TERRITO: Maybe Mr. Johnson knows.
10:45:48 I don't have that.
10:45:50 >> I don't have that in front of me.
10:45:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right, taken back in 2009 by the
10:45:59 Let me ask you this.
10:46:00 Do you recall the vote of that council, the vote of that
10:46:04 Was it a unanimous vote or was it a 4-3, was it 35-2?
10:46:08 What was the vote?
10:46:10 >> I would say it was a unanimous vote, but don't hold me to
10:46:14 I didn't hear any objections to voting on the project when
10:46:17 it was first presented, or the funding necessary to pay for
10:46:20 the 22nd street enhancement and the paying for the design of
10:46:25 the roundabout.
10:46:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: That was in 2009 that that board voted.
10:46:33 >> 2009 -- I don't know the exact date.
10:46:37 >> Was it 2010?
10:46:43 I'm only making a point here.
10:46:44 >> 2008, 9 and 10 is when the funding was appropriated by
10:46:55 the CRA board and the City Council, all three of those.
10:47:03 2008, 9 and 10 is what makes up the funding for the
10:47:07 enhancement project which includes the design of the
10:47:09 >> So this seven-member body right here, that means some
10:47:16 members of the certain board would be overturning their vote
10:47:20 if they voted to do that.
10:47:22 So they voted to confirm their vote or to overturn their
10:47:26 So they were on the board at that time.
10:47:28 Is that correct?
10:47:29 >> That's correct.
10:47:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:47:31 And also, my understanding, the representative for district
10:47:34 5 and the chair of the CRA from the community was on the
10:47:40 council at that time.
10:47:41 Am I correct?
10:47:42 >> Yes, they were.
10:47:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: So we are sitting here, you know, I don't
10:47:53 know why the attitude has changed.
10:47:54 But if you have got a formal board, and you have current
10:47:58 members that are sitting on this council that vote, and now
10:48:02 you are going to go back and overturn their vote, that
10:48:07 position, and you have four members who represent the
10:48:12 position calling individuals, asking them for you not to
10:48:16 vote on this, there's a hypocrisy there.
10:48:23 So we either vote to move for the 28,000, or come back and
10:48:30 overturn the previous council that voted who some of the
10:48:33 members were sitting up here a unanimous vote and they voted
10:48:37 for it.
10:48:38 And that was the plan that includes the roundabout.
10:48:40 Am I correct on that?
10:48:41 >> That's correct.
10:48:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Now, the last question I have.
10:48:46 If we vote -- if we move the roundabout, since that's the
10:48:51 controversy, if we remove the roundabout from the plan, we
10:48:53 have to go back and redesign a new plan.
10:48:56 Is that correct?
10:48:57 >> You would have to redesign that particular area, if you
10:48:59 take out the roundabout.
10:49:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Do we have an estimated dollar cost?
10:49:04 >> Between 150 and 200,000.
10:49:07 Remember, the budget that was already previously approved
10:49:10 was for $225,000 for the design of the roundabout.
10:49:15 160,000 of that has already been spent.
10:49:18 So that would be -- the additional funds would have to be in
10:49:21 addition to what is already what's available so that would
10:49:26 be in the neighborhood of 41 to $90,000 that you would have
10:49:30 to find to make up the difference to make up that cost.
10:49:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: We'll hear from board member Capin again.
10:49:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The other option would be to not do anything
10:49:43 and leave it.
10:49:46 That's an option, isn't it?
10:49:50 >> Ed: That's correct.
10:49:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: We can do that after we vote on this
10:49:55 $28,000, correct?
10:49:57 We can come back under new business and do all the other
10:50:00 >> I call for the question.
10:50:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Do we have a second?
10:50:04 >> Second.
10:50:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Can we get a motion?
10:50:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I already have a motion.
10:50:12 Called the question.
10:50:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm sorry.
10:50:15 I got confused on that.
10:50:17 We call the question.
10:50:18 All in favor of the motion?
10:50:24 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern, Cohen and mother
10:50:27 Montelione voting.
10:50:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:50:29 >> Take a vote on whether you were going to approve the
10:50:37 >>SAL TERRITO: The motion was to call the question.
10:50:38 You have taken the vote to call the question.
10:50:41 That's on the floor now.
10:50:42 >>THE CLERK: The motion and second to call the question.
10:50:45 >> I made the motion.
10:50:49 >> And I seconded.
10:50:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Suarez.
10:50:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There was a motion on the floor.
10:50:54 Prior to that we did not vote.
10:50:56 I'll state that motion again.
10:50:57 To move item number 7, substitute resolution.
10:51:01 And it was seconded by Mrs. Capin, I believe.
10:51:04 >> Motion by board member Miranda, second bid board member
10:51:10 All in favor?
10:51:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Montelione, Cohen and
10:51:15 Mulhern voting no.
10:51:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Kay okay.
10:51:18 Item number 8.
10:51:19 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City clerk.
10:51:32 The individuals selected for the Tampa Heights riverfront
10:51:37 CRA community advisory committee include Frederik Fourie,
10:51:45 Matthew May, Emily Rogers, and Lena Young-Green.
10:51:49 Thank you.
10:51:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: Congratulations.
10:51:53 Item number 8.
10:51:56 >> Item 8 is our quarterly TIF report presented for your
10:52:08 review and file.
10:52:11 If there are any questions I will be glad to address them.
10:52:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to receive and file the resolution
10:52:18 if there's in a more discussion on it.
10:52:19 >> Second.
10:52:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Seconded by board member Cohen.
10:52:23 All in favor?
10:52:28 Thank you, sir.
10:52:30 New business.
10:52:31 Board member Suarez.
10:52:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have no new business at this time.
10:52:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Board member Capin.
10:52:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No new business.
10:52:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, sir.
10:52:43 >>MARY MULHERN: No, sir.
10:52:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No, thank you.
10:52:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, thank you.
10:52:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: There being no new business --
10:52:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion to receive and file, please.
10:52:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to receive and file items presented
10:53:00 on this agenda.
10:53:01 >> Second.
10:53:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:53:04 We stand adjourned.
10:53:05 But I have been told that we need to take pictures.
10:53:10 Put your smiling faces on now.
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.