Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Thursday, February 2, 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.

09:04:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Good morning.

09:04:14 The chair yields to council member Mike Suarez for the

09:04:18 invocation.

09:04:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.

09:04:21 Good morning.

09:04:26 Today we have Sister Kathy. She's from the Franciscan

09:04:28 Center from Allegheny, New York, and she lived in Tampa over

09:04:32 25 years, was the director of the Franciscan center on the

09:04:35 beautiful Hillsborough River, Riverside Heights, my

09:04:39 neighborhood, for 23 of those years.

09:04:40 She currently resides at St. Claire Convent in West Tampa.

09:04:44 She leads retreats for groups around the country and she is

09:04:48 also a Red Sox fan but we are not going to hold that against

09:04:51 her.

09:04:52 Please stand and remain standing for the pledge of

09:04:56 allegiance.

09:04:57 >> Good and gracious God, we ask your blessing as this group

09:05:01 gathers here.

09:05:02 We thank you for your gift to us, gifts to the beautiful

09:05:07 city, gifts of government that works for the people.

09:05:14 We ask your blessing as Steve moves on to something else.

09:05:19 We ask you all to find ways to live together for the common

09:05:21 good and keep us grateful for all of your good gifts to us.

09:05:25 Amen.

09:05:25 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]

09:05:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Roll call.

09:05:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

09:05:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

09:05:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

09:05:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

09:06:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

09:06:01 We will adopt the minutes in a second.

09:06:03 We are going to go to ceremonial activities, and Mr. Mike

09:06:07 Suarez help out with Steve Daignault, former employee in one

09:06:14 hour, director of public works, and I'll be helping out Mr.

09:06:20 Suarez, since I know Mr. Daignault is an avid Gator and the

09:06:30 Gators and I don't get along too well.

09:06:32 Mr. Suarez.

09:06:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, council.

09:06:49 Steve, as you all know, is our public works director, has

09:06:53 been a terrific employee, but he's done a lot of things in

09:06:56 his life, because he has been around the world, so to speak,

09:07:01 so many different ways.

09:07:02 He grew up here in Tampa, graduated from Plant High School

09:07:05 in 1967.

09:07:07 Did you play football there?

09:07:09 He swam there.

09:07:10 Swam all the way to the Navy.

09:07:12 He got a bachelor's degree at USF.

09:07:18 I don't know how you turned gator.

09:07:21 He got his master's degree in engineering.

09:07:25 Although he's an avid gator, don't forget it, and he's been

09:07:32 a rabid gator fan for life, he has two sons who are mostly

09:07:37 UF grads, and a swamp buggy.

09:07:42 Ville to check that out.

09:07:43 And he says that there's apparently some of the staff said

09:07:47 price is no object to put into this endeavor, so obviously

09:07:51 his wife has been complaining for years that he spends way

09:07:54 too much on the swamp buggy.

09:07:56 That's another thing.

09:07:57 He spent 24 years in civil engineering corps, U.S. Navy.

09:08:02 Many of you might know what that is, that are the Seabees,

09:08:09 the movie made popular by John Wayne.

09:08:14 He doesn't look like John Wayne to me, but nonetheless he

09:08:17 was a fighting Seabee.

09:08:25 After that he retired, and became city manager.

09:08:30 And what's interesting about Cape Coral, of course, south of

09:08:33 here, a smaller town, goat a chance to do anything he

09:08:36 wanted.

09:08:37 Then he came to Tampa and realized that he couldn't do

09:08:40 anything he wanted.

09:08:46 But, anyway, he went to the naval war college, graduated

09:08:53 1981, and mastered negotiate strategic skills, and I want to

09:08:57 attest to that, asking him to do things, he knew how to

09:09:01 negotiate his way to what the administration truly wants.

09:09:06 When in the Navy he had a project at Midway Island, famous

09:09:10 because it was a naval battle there during World War II,

09:09:14 1942, the first battle that the United States Navy or any

09:09:19 naval forces fought totally by the air.

09:09:21 There was no battle on Midway Island but it was fought as a

09:09:26 strategic landing point for the Japanese and for the U.S.

09:09:29 Navy.

09:09:31 The turning point in the war -- were you there?

09:09:37 [ Laughter ]

09:09:39 Well, anyway, the U.S. department of fish and wildlife

09:09:43 service acknowledged his exemplary clean-I am and closure of

09:09:46 the island.

09:09:48 Part of the problem was the -- okay, I was just going to

09:09:58 say. Anyway, he also had an interesting tour of duty over

09:10:03 at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

09:10:06 And he said when he was stationed in Hawaii, they said that

09:10:13 was the most fun tour.

09:10:14 And you may retire there, I'm not sure. Anyway, he's

09:10:18 retiring after 24 years.

09:10:21 After Cape Coral, I guess you worked there at Brooks point

09:10:27 development and in charge of infrastructure and development?

09:10:33 Real passionate in public service.

09:10:35 He's been here for many years, doing a great job.

09:10:39 And Charlie has some ideas on some of the things that you

09:10:42 may have been involved in here in the city.

09:10:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You did a great job, read all my stuff.

09:10:57 Mike Suarez was this big and he read two and a half hours.

09:11:00 It's all right.

09:11:02 He's the only gator that wears a pirate.

09:11:07 So you're a pirate gator. As Mike said, Steve grew up in

09:11:15 Tampa, went to Plant High School, graduated, and the same

09:11:18 year worked as a lifeguard in 1967.

09:11:20 But among those things, he was -- Mike said that he was in

09:11:27 the Seabees and worked for the Navy, midway, did a fantastic

09:11:32 clean-up job and saved a lot of the environment if not all

09:11:35 of it.

09:11:36 The island was in bad shape after our military had to do

09:11:39 what they had to do.

09:11:40 The first time I met Steve some time back was this.

09:11:46 You remember that, Steve?

09:11:47 What is this, Steve?

09:11:51 Is it signed by me, Steve?

09:11:53 And I told him I am going to outlive you in this job.

09:11:57 No, I did not.

09:12:01 [ Laughter ]

09:12:02 He's a fantastic individual, and we did some large water

09:12:09 projects for 15, 20 years.

09:12:11 I signed a pink slip jokingly for him and put it behind the

09:12:15 door.

09:12:15 I said every night when you go home I want you to look at

09:12:18 that slip.

09:12:19 When you come in tomorrow you work just a little bit harder.

09:12:22 And he gave me one.

09:12:23 And we were pink slipped out but we worked very hard

09:12:28 together, and the City of Tampa is honored to have had you

09:12:34 all those years.

09:12:35 Seems like many more, because this is your accomplishment in

09:12:39 this book, and everything here has something to do with the

09:12:46 city, water, wastewater, and I am going to give you this

09:12:49 book.

09:12:51 And it is an amazing run of things that you did.

09:12:54 You were hired to do one thing, and you did a lot more, and

09:13:01 we want to thank Mayor Pam Iorio for bringing you over, and

09:13:07 did you an outstanding job.

09:13:08 Not too long ago, I was in a foreign country, and I saw this

09:13:15 gator.

09:13:15 So, Steve, I am going to make a presentation to you of the

09:13:19 only Cuban gator I know in the world.

09:13:25 And it's your gator, because you are going to have a hard

09:13:33 time communicating with that gator.

09:13:35 >> Oh, that's a scorpion.

09:13:43 [ Laughter ]

09:13:44 >> But it's wonderful to have had the opportunity of being

09:13:48 an individual.

09:13:49 You know, when you work in that position, I always say

09:13:53 things are going to come your way you never asked for.

09:13:56 And you handled them with honor and dignity and utmost

09:14:00 respect for the public.

09:14:01 And I'm grateful for everything you have done.

09:14:03 [ Applause ]

09:14:14 >> You don't have to give me that look, okay?

09:14:17 >> The five-minute rule.

09:14:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: On behalf of City Council, in recognition of

09:14:22 your years in the City of Tampa as public works director and

09:14:27 utility services administrator, virtually every brick and

09:14:30 mortar project successfully accomplished during that time

09:14:33 has your input.

09:14:35 You have left an indelible mark.

09:14:37 It is abundantly apparent given your extensive resumé that

09:14:44 you were people and service oriented, in fact practically

09:14:48 your entire life has been in civil service.

09:14:52 During your tenure as administrative works you worked

09:14:56 tirelessly to improve the delivery of services to Tampa.

09:14:59 Your dedicated ethic models those who work for you.

09:15:05 We wish you well in your retirement.

09:15:07 And we are going to sorely miss you.

09:15:10 I am going to miss our monthly meeting where you tell me

09:15:13 what actually you are doing, and then find out later on that

09:15:16 you really are doing it.

09:15:19 And your lovely wife is obviously your rock in all these

09:15:25 endeavors:

09:15:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I know you took the blame for a lot of

09:15:39 things.

09:15:39 [ Laughter ]

09:15:42 You deserve this.

09:15:44 You deserve a lot more.

09:15:47 But we have a very small budget.

09:15:49 [ Laughter ]

09:15:56 Thank you very much for holding him up.

09:15:59 Thank you very much.

09:16:00 And Steve, here is a book.

09:16:04 We appreciate everything you have done.

09:16:06 Thank you very much.

09:16:13 [ Applause ]

09:16:19 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: First of all, thank you all for coming.

09:16:23 Council members, thank you all so much for the recognition.

09:16:28 It's certainly been a pleasure to serve you and to serve the

09:16:31 citizens of the City of Tampa.

09:16:33 I started out here, I grew up here, and quite honestly, I

09:16:37 never thought in a million years that I would ever be back

09:16:40 here after I was in the military.

09:16:42 But again it was a pleasure and an honor working with you.

09:16:49 I used to think mine was the toughest in the city, but by

09:16:52 far yours is the toughest job in the city.

09:16:55 I know all the demands that come to you on a regular basis,

09:16:58 and I certainly wish each and every one of you well in doing

09:17:01 your job.

09:17:02 Again, it's a very, very difficult job, but you do a great

09:17:06 service for the city.

09:17:07 So I thank you for that.

09:17:08 And again I recognize, I know how difficult your job is.

09:17:13 The only other thing that I really want to say is you have a

09:17:17 wonderful staff.

09:17:18 I mean, I have had an outstanding staff.

09:17:21 You have a wonderful staff that works for you.

09:17:24 They come in here week in and week out and just try to do

09:17:27 the very best they can, give you the best information, make

09:17:30 the best recommendations.

09:17:32 And so appreciate them for what they are, because, again,

09:17:37 they really are here, they are dedicated.

09:17:39 They are not here for the money.

09:17:41 They are here because they are dedicated to doing a good job

09:17:44 and to serve you.

09:17:46 So again I commend every one of them, and I thank every one

09:17:49 of them for all the work that they have done.

09:17:51 And I know you will appreciate them going forward.

09:17:55 Again, I just can't say anything else.

09:17:57 I am pleased to have been here with the city and to work

09:18:00 with you.

09:18:01 Thank you very much.

09:18:02 [ Applause ]

09:18:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Steve, we are going to miss you so much.

09:18:22 It's been a pleasure to work with you and to be able to

09:18:24 count on all the help that you would give every time we call

09:18:28 or ask.

09:18:29 And I know you are going to miss all my questions.

09:18:41 Your job has been incredibly tough and you have done a great

09:18:46 job. It's wonderful to see the staff here to recognize you,

09:18:49 and I know everybody is going to miss you and there's not

09:18:52 going to be a dry eye in the room by the time you walk out.

09:18:55 So we wish you the best.

09:18:57 And you have been the most helpful, open, up-front person

09:19:06 and it's just been a pleasure.

09:19:09 Thank you for everything that you have done.

09:19:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mrs. Montelione?

09:19:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Steve, I have a to say as a new member

09:19:18 of council, my first two weeks, I think, in the office, I

09:19:21 called upon you to help me with a situation that was very

09:19:27 controversial.

09:19:28 And although you had had numerous community meetings and had

09:19:34 been out in the public you didn't hesitate to say, yes,

09:19:37 let's do it again.

09:19:38 And I can't thank you enough for helping me transition into

09:19:43 public life with a very difficult situation.

09:19:51 And your willingness to step up and just move forward and

09:19:57 guide me through that situation was very much appreciated.

09:20:02 And I know you inherited a lot of difficult projects, and

09:20:12 always handled them with grace and dignity, and have been

09:20:16 the most helpful member of the staff that I can ever hope

09:20:21 for.

09:20:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen.

09:20:27 Then Mr. Reddick.

09:20:28 >>HARRY COHEN: I just want to echo the sentiments of my

09:20:31 colleagues but also acknowledge that during the time we have

09:20:34 worked together, we have faced a lot of difficult questions

09:20:38 from the public.

09:20:39 And I know that I really appreciate the fact that you have

09:20:42 always been willing to step up and tell people the truth,

09:20:45 even if sometimes it's difficult to hear an explanation that

09:20:52 maybe people don't want to hear.

09:20:53 And it's not been lost on me or any of us, and I will miss

09:21:02 that candor and diplomacy, and we certainly will do the best

09:21:07 we can to follow in your example in continuing the level of

09:21:10 people -- level with people about what we are really doing

09:21:13 and what the state of affairs really is in the city.

09:21:16 So thank you very much.

09:21:18 Red ready thank you, Mr. Chairman.

09:21:20 I just want to say I enjoy the time that I have been on

09:21:27 council.

09:21:30 The previous time I served on council and working with you,

09:21:33 and I really want to thank you for coming through when we

09:21:39 had a crisis on 43rd when that person died, and you

09:21:49 worked with me to make sure those things were accomplished,

09:21:53 so we can have not a sore spot on the city again but a

09:22:00 bright future for those who live in the community.

09:22:03 And just this morning, I watched the newscast on channel 8

09:22:10 to see them do a story on that area that was affected by

09:22:16 them, and I thought of you and some of the others, that you

09:22:22 did come through and that you might be in this crisis again

09:22:30 today.

09:22:30 So I want to thank you.

09:22:31 I hope you enjoy traveling.

09:22:34 And I read somewhere that you want to travel all over

09:22:39 somewhere, so I hope you enjoy your traveling.

09:22:44 And you will be truly missed and by this City Council and

09:22:55 staff.

09:22:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Steve, for being direct and

09:22:57 straightforward, and we really appreciate your work on this.

09:23:00 Thank you very much.

09:23:00 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you very much.

09:23:03 [ Applause ]

09:23:26 The next presentation is by Mr. Reddick.

09:23:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Chairman, we are not making a

09:23:34 presentation.

09:23:34 What we will do is have Frank Crum and members of the city

09:23:38 black history committee come and give us a commendation.

09:23:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay, thank you, Mr. Reddick.

09:23:45 >> Frank Crum: First I would like to thank you on behalf of

09:23:59 the City of Tampa black history committee for allowing us to

09:24:01 be here today especially to see and celebrate the life and

09:24:04 career of Mr. Steve Daignault.

09:24:07 He's done a wonderful job with the city.

09:24:10 And in terms of celebration, that's what brings us here

09:24:13 before you all today.

09:24:14 The City of Tampa black history committee is hosting the

09:24:17 24th annual black history celebration for the City of

09:24:20 Tampa.

09:24:21 It's going to be on February 8th at the Tampa Convention

09:24:24 Center beginning at 11 a.m.

09:24:27 Our committee has been in existence since 1988 and Tampa

09:24:31 City Council is really a part of our family.

09:24:33 And I say that because I had the opportunity to look at the

09:24:37 very first black history celebration.

09:24:39 Members of council were there.

09:24:41 And since that time, we have grown in numbers and we have

09:24:44 grown in terms of what we do.

09:24:47 The core of what we do has to do with celebrating the

09:24:50 history and culture of the Tampa Bay area but we also are

09:24:54 involved with organizations that help young people who have

09:24:56 a desire to go to college.

09:24:58 We provide scholarships for them.

09:25:00 Now, this year, in terms of the celebration, our theme is

09:25:06 reshaping the American dream, and we thought that would be

09:25:09 appropriate because we need to remind people on a daily

09:25:12 basis of things that they can do at home, practical to help

09:25:20 in their financial planning.

09:25:22 So we are asking that you attend our celebration and also to

09:25:25 our viewers at home that they also attend.

09:25:29 It's open to the public.

09:25:29 And as I said before, the black history celebration is just

09:25:34 one of the things that we do, and our membership runs the

09:25:39 gamut of who we have in the City of Tampa.

09:25:44 You can see behind me we have a lost city departments here

09:25:46 and many more watching and we have our former president,

09:25:50 retiree, Betty Johnson.

09:25:52 She has done a great job for us and continues to do a great

09:25:55 job as well as Shirley Foxx-Knowles.

09:25:59 So once again thank you for allowing us to be here today.

09:26:02 Thank you, Councilman Reddick, for allowing us to come out

09:26:05 today and Councilman Cohen.

09:26:06 We would like to also say that we are going to continue to

09:26:10 do things to help out in the community.

09:26:11 And again, February 8th at 11 a.m. at the Tampa

09:26:15 Convention Center.

09:26:16 If you come a little early, that's also great, because what

09:26:19 we have is black history living museum where young people

09:26:22 will get the opportunity to roll play the lives of Americans

09:26:28 who have done a lot of great things in our community.

09:26:30 Thanks once again for your time.

09:26:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

09:26:33 Would anyone else like to speak?

09:26:38 A handsome man like that and six women, and everything is

09:26:41 going to be all right.

09:26:46 [ Laughter ]

09:26:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: I want to congratulate the committee, the

09:26:49 work you are doing, and I look forward to being a part of

09:26:53 your program on the 8th.

09:26:54 And I didn't know that we are always taking pictures.

09:27:09 We have a future politician here.

09:27:10 >> Thank you for coming.

09:27:21 We appreciate the work you do.

09:27:22 I need the minutes of the last session to be approved.

09:27:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So moved.

09:27:27 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

09:27:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All in favor?

09:27:30 Opposed?

09:27:30 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:27:32 I need approval of the agenda.

09:27:38 I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mr. Reddick.

09:27:41 All in favor?

09:27:43 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:27:44 Before we go any further, we are going to go to public

09:27:46 comments for up to 30 minutes for anyone who would like to

09:27:50 speak to any item on the agenda first.

09:27:52 Anyone in the audience care to speak to any item on the

09:27:54 agenda first?

09:28:03 Give the item number you are going to speak on when you get

09:28:05 here.

09:28:12 I need your name and address.

09:28:13 >> Item number 4.

09:28:14 Mark Crawford, north 9th street, Tampa, Florida 33604.

09:28:24 I propose acceptance of all funds from the Department of

09:28:26 Homeland Security to the City of Tampa.

09:28:29 Realize the Department of Homeland Security will be used

09:28:35 to -- disengage our citizens to assemble.

09:28:43 My discussions with the Tampa police is to the paramilitary

09:28:48 organization by officer Bennett for law enforcement to been

09:28:51 cultured in a career based on militarization, puts the

09:28:57 public in inhumane intelligence whose goal is winning

09:29:04 conflicts instead of solving.

09:29:05 It is my understanding pursuant to the Republican national

09:29:07 convention that laws are being passed exclusively for this

09:29:10 event.

09:29:10 I also understand that cameras and surveillance technologies

09:29:13 is being subsidized by federal, to a sure safety to

09:29:19 convention people and politicians but who are these

09:29:22 infrastructures aimed at?

09:29:23 I also understand that free unused military equipment are

09:29:27 given to police in preparation for what I do not know but

09:29:31 for the City Council, police department, to accept better

09:29:33 and more dangerous toys for our police makes police

09:29:37 institutionalization increasingly simpler.

09:29:40 If Rick Scott can turn away federal funding to help Florida

09:29:45 secure a social safety net, surely City Council can reject

09:29:49 funds for send setting up a police state.

09:29:52 Thank you.

09:29:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:29:54 Next?

09:29:56 Item on the agenda.

09:30:00 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

09:30:03 City Council.

09:30:03 Mr. Shelby.

09:30:04 My name is Don Rhode, 412 Madison street.

09:30:09 In reference to item number 24 in the section of the budget

09:30:13 resolution, this calls for a $25 million set-aside reference

09:30:18 to the Republican national convention August 2012.

09:30:22 I would like to say that $25 million should buy an awful lot

09:30:25 of prom December dress and a lot of lipstick.

09:30:31 However, there would be more affordable and important things

09:30:34 that council might do soon to consider amending three

09:30:38 sections of the city code to reflect freedom of speech --

09:30:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to tell you that you are going

09:30:45 after one item.

09:30:46 You are talking about the 25 million, not the city code.

09:30:48 Which one do you want to speak on?

09:30:51 Do you want to speak on the 25 million or city code?

09:30:54 City code is not on the agenda.

09:30:57 It's the $25 million that you are talking on, am I correct?

09:31:03 >> $25 million.

09:31:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Right.

09:31:05 Speak on the 25 million then.

09:31:07 >> All right, sir.

09:31:08 Thank you.

09:31:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You can continue on speaking on the 25

09:31:17 million.

09:31:17 I'm not cutting you off.

09:31:18 >> I'm sorry, sir, I was done.

09:31:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:31:21 Anyone else care to speak to any item on the agenda?

09:31:24 Anyone that cares to speak to any other items that are not

09:31:27 on the agenda, please come forward.

09:31:28 >> Todd Pressman, Clearwater, Florida.

09:31:42 I'm also here today with Mr. Tom O'Neill.

09:31:45 Just about two years ago from today, about 22 months ago,

09:31:49 Tampa City Council and the mayor supported and voted for

09:31:54 really what was a trial to allow six digital billboard

09:31:58 spaces for Clear Channel Outdoor for one year and also six

09:32:05 spaces for CBS.

09:32:09 The motion at that time, and Mr. Miranda was here, of

09:32:11 course, was to allow the digital boards to see how they

09:32:16 work, try them out, see how the public felt about them.

09:32:22 Fast forward two years to today I can tell you that digital

09:32:26 has worked extremely well. I personally checked with the

09:32:29 last administration and I also checked with this

09:32:34 administration, and we have not heard one single complaint

09:32:37 about the use of the digital billboards in the city.

09:32:41 And when there's a problem, believe me, we hear about it.

09:32:45 That response lines up with the other jurisdictions in the

09:32:47 area, and all had a positive response including Hillsborough

09:32:51 County, Pinellas Park, Largo, Pasadena.

09:32:56 Now, in terms of working great, the City of Tampa has

09:33:00 actually be an advertising partner, and digital billboards

09:33:05 as council are aware play a very high civic role beyond the

09:33:10 crime aspects and emergency aspects.

09:33:15 Also Clear Channel worked with the city on things such as

09:33:19 the museum, share the road, downtown, Channelside.

09:33:24 Critically it has opened up for the first time the ability

09:33:27 of small business to use these outdoor advertising devices

09:33:33 efficiently and cost effectively.

09:33:34 So, Mr. Chairman and council, considering the prior motion

09:33:37 by the council, which was to look at this issue again in two

09:33:40 years, and after making the rounds, including Mr. O'Neill

09:33:44 and I have just recently sat down with the T.H.A.N. folks,

09:33:47 and spoke to them, and preliminarily looked at it with them

09:33:51 as well, our request today is ask you to consider putting in

09:33:55 motion the process to consider an increase in the number of

09:33:59 digital billboard faces by eight, and that would be eight

09:34:03 for Clear Channel, and would be eight for CBS, although I am

09:34:07 only here today for Clear Channel.

09:34:08 So we ask you today to consider a motion to ask the city

09:34:11 attorney to move forward and make those changes in the

09:34:14 ordinance and agreement and bring those back to you either

09:34:18 by public hearing or by workshop.

09:34:22 We appreciate your consideration, and we appreciate your

09:34:26 consideration on that motion today.

09:34:28 Thank you very much.

09:34:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:34:30 We'll consider those things as we do have a full agenda, and

09:34:34 I believe there's four council members that have to be at a

09:34:39 certain location at 11:30, and that's what I hear.

09:34:45 We'll wait till the end of the agenda and take them up in

09:34:48 order to see what the council's response is.

09:34:50 Thank you very much.

09:34:50 I really appreciate it.

09:34:51 >> Susan Ramos.

09:34:54 I live at 4101 west Watrous Avenue.

09:34:58 I want to say thank you.

09:35:00 It Tampa Convention Center only took me a week to get here

09:35:02 and find out all the information.

09:35:03 Everyone was very helpful on the phone.

09:35:06 This shows that it's being run really well.

09:35:08 And you go even got my e-mail which is nice.

09:35:11 I'm here to talk about backyard chickens, nothing to do with

09:35:17 the running chicken in Ybor.

09:35:20 I know in Key West, Ybor, the only reason they are loud is

09:35:27 because of the roosters.

09:35:29 So chickens got a bad rap because of roosters.

09:35:33 Pinellas County just passed on December 20th an

09:35:38 ordinance, which is not backyard chickens.

09:35:42 It's not so much for raising the cost today, teaching

09:35:49 children eggs, family unity, chickens actually have a great

09:35:56 personality.

09:35:56 I have a bunch of information that Pinellas County voted on.

09:36:01 They are not roaming in the backyard.

09:36:03 They are actually in the coop and there are special sizes.

09:36:08 In Pinellas County they have four Hens.

09:36:10 You can only have four Hens.

09:36:13 Hens lay eggs anywhere from five to seven months.

09:36:16 And they can lay them without a rooster.

09:36:20 They are just not fertile.

09:36:23 But in their box they lay one egg a day so you have four

09:36:26 eggs every day, and you will have plenty for the week.

09:36:33 And they lay for about three years.

09:36:37 That's it.

09:36:38 It's not a huge commitment where someone is going to have

09:36:41 chickens for 20 years in their backyard.

09:36:43 They can be short term while children are young.

09:36:46 They are friendly.

09:36:47 They have personalities.

09:36:49 They are actually a bird.

09:36:50 They were a domestic bird in the beginning, and then they

09:36:54 became a fowl, a farm animal.

09:36:56 I know that a lot of people now do have the chickens in

09:36:59 their backyard, and as long as you keep the roosters out of

09:37:04 it, we will be fine with it, and teach children to have --

09:37:11 that eggs come from chickens.

09:37:13 So I have a bunch of facts.

09:37:17 And I am going to leave this with you, and hopefully -- I

09:37:21 don't know how the process works.

09:37:23 I didn't pay too much attention.

09:37:29 Thank you so much.

09:37:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would also make the assumption that

09:37:31 roosters come from eggs.

09:37:33 >> Roosters do come from eggs, yes.

09:37:38 But I don't know what the next process is.

09:37:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:37:43 We'll take that into consideration.

09:37:44 You got information you want to pass out?

09:37:46 Give it to the clerk, please.

09:37:51 Next.

09:37:51 >> My name is Antoinette Glover, 1702 Palm Warbler Lane, and

09:38:01 I'm coming in front of the board with a complaint concerning

09:38:06 the neighborhood corner store.

09:38:12 Can I show someone these pictures?

09:38:13 I don't know how to do that.

09:38:14 Just put it here?

09:38:16 Okay.

09:38:18 The reason why I am here is because this is my grandson.

09:38:21 And a couple of the reasons you don't see his face is

09:38:25 because he's a minor.

09:38:26 He's only eight years old.

09:38:28 And this could be you guys' children.

09:38:31 And what he's looking at is drugs, the synthetic drugs, that

09:38:39 people use these drugs with.

09:38:41 And my sister and I have taught our children to stay away

09:38:44 from drugs, just say no to drugs.

09:38:50 But when you walk into these corner stores in our

09:38:53 neighborhood, it's there like a bag of potato chips.

09:38:56 Now, I spoke with the police department, and they told me

09:38:59 that they are hiding behind a law that allows them to sell

09:39:10 this stuff because they are 50% tobacco.

09:39:13 Well, Walgreen's sells tobacco, Sweetbay sells tobacco, but

09:39:17 they don't sell this stuff right here.

09:39:19 So whatever, it needs to be revealed, because this is

09:39:26 dangerous.

09:39:28 It says send a bad message.

09:39:32 For some reason it's flooding in Jackson Heights, Belmont

09:39:35 Heights, all these areas where children can walk in.

09:39:38 Now, they say it's an herb.

09:39:49 I'm 52.

09:39:50 And every time I walk in a store with herbs, salt, pepper,

09:39:57 oregano, those are herbs.

09:39:59 The next thing they said is incense.

09:40:03 Again, when I walk to this store, and they smell this, what

09:40:14 our houses are smelling like.

09:40:15 So I think the best I can give it to you is when you go to a

09:40:20 store, they say this is not -- these are the pipes they

09:40:33 smoke it with.

09:40:42 So I am just asking if there's some kind of way that this

09:40:45 stuff be out of our sight of our children, or put a sign on

09:40:48 the store letting them know that minors are not allowed in

09:40:51 there without an adult.

09:40:52 Thank you.

09:40:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick.

09:40:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: I concur with her.

09:41:03 When you go into just about any store in the black

09:41:05 community, you will see these all on the wall and the

09:41:10 shelves of the stores.

09:41:10 >> Yes.

09:41:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: And it is a serious problem.

09:41:14 >> It is.

09:41:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: I remember asking the store clerk.

09:41:21 I say, why are you selling marijuana in the store?

09:41:24 And he told me it was not marijuana but it was something

09:41:27 else that looked like marijuana, but you still get high from

09:41:31 it.

09:41:32 >> Exactly.

09:41:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: And it would sit there openly in the

09:41:35 store.

09:41:35 So just about every corner store, they have it.

09:41:39 Now, state House of Representatives Rouson --

09:41:47 >> I spoke with him.

09:41:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: He attempted to pass a law to ban these

09:41:52 type of products in the stores in the last administrative

09:41:56 session.

09:41:56 I don't know if it passed or not.

09:41:58 But, Mr. Chairman, if I can, I would like to ask the legal

09:42:02 staff department if they will review the law, the

09:42:08 legislative law that Mr. Rouson attempted to pass to ban

09:42:13 this, or, two, what else we should do in the City of Tampa

09:42:17 to regulate it in the stores about selling these products.

09:42:21 >> Second.

09:42:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Mr. Cohen.

09:42:26 Discussion on the motion.

09:42:27 Let me say this.

09:42:28 I believe there was a law passed.

09:42:30 But then the manufacturers changed the contents of those

09:42:32 packages so it doesn't meet the criteria of the law.

09:42:35 And they are working on it again.

09:42:38 But I think let me take care of this motion first to have

09:42:43 the legal department review, see if we could do something

09:42:47 regarding that in the City of Tampa and I'm really moved by

09:42:57 you coming in and explaining this.

09:42:59 This is nothing more than a continued attempt from not only

09:43:01 here, throughout the world, from unscrupulous people just

09:43:06 trying to make money on the innocent people.

09:43:08 >> Yes.

09:43:08 Exactly.

09:43:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I'm tired of that and you're tired of

09:43:11 that.

09:43:12 The community is tired of that.

09:43:12 The whole world is tired of that.

09:43:14 >> Actually, can I say --

09:43:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, ma'am, go on.

09:43:20 >> Okay.

09:43:21 What I have done, just so it -- so they don't say that crazy

09:43:32 woman, take 60 signatures, and I have committed myself to

09:43:35 the whole year 2012 because like I said I was in touch with

09:43:40 someone who said he couldn't do anything about it until

09:43:42 2013.

09:43:43 So I committed myself to go to different neighborhoods once

09:43:49 a month, I mean different areas that I wanted to show that I

09:43:53 have already done one in Highlands pines and today I have

09:43:59 almost 500 signatures.

09:44:00 So by the end of 2012, somebody, even if the state don't

09:44:07 pass the law, it's not just p me saying it's a problem.

09:44:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's find out what the legal department

09:44:12 will tell us and then we'll go from there.

09:44:14 And we really appreciate you coming in here and speaking to

09:44:17 us this morning.

09:44:20 If you want us to sign that petition, we will.

09:44:21 >> Oh, definitely.

09:44:23 Definitely.

09:44:23 Thank you so much.

09:44:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else care to speak who has not

09:44:28 spoken?

09:44:29 I have a motion on the floor.

09:44:31 >> Can I pass it around?

09:44:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.

09:44:34 Not that way, this way.

09:44:39 I don't want to start a new procedure here.

09:44:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: If I can request legal department to come

09:44:44 back in three weeks, it will be fine.

09:44:47 >> Also, I do show appreciation for the signatures is that

09:44:56 once a month, like I said, I already did January, but in

09:45:00 February I go back to the areas, and the things they are

09:45:05 supposed to be.

09:45:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

09:45:11 Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Cohen, for March

09:45:14 1st to be put on the agenda for staff report to come

09:45:17 back, see what we can do.

09:45:18 I appreciate it very much.

09:45:19 Thank you so much.

09:45:20 And that motion hasn't been voted on yet.

09:45:23 All in favor indicate by saying aye.

09:45:27 Opposed, nay.

09:45:29 Motion passes.

09:45:31 Anyone else care to speak not on the agenda who has not

09:45:37 spoken prior?

09:45:38 All right.

09:45:38 I see no one.

09:45:45 Have we approved the agenda?

09:45:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think we approved the agenda but --

09:45:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: On the addendum, I need approval of the

09:45:54 addendum.

09:45:56 Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mr. Reddick.

09:45:59 All in favor of the motion?

09:46:01 Opposed?

09:46:02 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:46:05 All right.

09:46:06 Requests by the public for any legislative matters from the

09:46:10 prior week?

09:46:11 Anyone in the public care to speak on any legislative

09:46:14 matters that were approved?

09:46:16 I see no one.

09:46:18 We go to Public Safety Committee report.

09:46:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move 3 through 6.

09:46:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Seconded by Mr. Cohen.

09:46:33 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:46:36 Opposed, nay.

09:46:38 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:46:39 Parks, Recreation, Culture Committee, Ms. Mary Mulhern.

09:46:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items 7 through 10.

09:46:48 >> Second by Mr. Suarez.

09:46:50 All in favor of the motion?

09:46:52 Opposed?

09:46:52 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:46:54 Also, I forgot that Ms. Capin has a memorandum, she said she

09:47:01 should be in sometime right at 10:00.

09:47:03 Public Works Committee chair, Mr. Mike Suarez.

09:47:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move 11 through 23.

09:47:10 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

09:47:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mr.

09:47:14 Cohen.

09:47:14 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:47:18 Opposed nay.

09:47:19 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:47:20 We go to Finance Committee, Mr. Harry Cohen.

09:47:23 >>HARRY COHEN: I move items 24, 25 and 26.

09:47:27 >> Second.

09:47:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

09:47:31 Further discussion of that motion?

09:47:32 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:47:35 Opposed, nay.

09:47:36 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:47:37 Building, zoning, preservation committee, Lisa Montelione.

09:47:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move items 28 through 39.

09:47:44 >> 28 through 39.

09:47:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

09:48:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: On the agenda, the addendum to the final

09:48:05 agenda where it has item 27 being pulled along with -- to be

09:48:09 heard under staff reports, under item 52.

09:48:12 And item 34 and 35 also on the addendum to the final agenda

09:48:17 being pulled for discussion.

09:48:26 I thought we moved them when we approved the agenda.

09:48:28 >>MARY MULHERN: You can't move them.

09:48:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What do you want to pull?

09:48:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, sir, I'm sorry.

09:48:37 I'm pulling items 27, to be heard along with 52.

09:48:46 Item 34 and 35.

09:48:48 So I'm moving items 28 through 33, and 36 through 39.

09:48:59 My apologies.

09:49:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No problem.

09:49:03 I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr. Reddick.

09:49:06 All in favor of that motion?

09:49:08 Opposed?

09:49:09 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:49:11 Transportation committee, vice chair Mr. Frank Reddick.

09:49:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move items 40 and 41.

09:49:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

09:49:21 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:49:24 Opposed nay.

09:49:24 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:49:27 Need to open public hearing on item 41 -- excuse me, 42.

09:49:37 This is a nonjudicial proceeding.

09:49:39 >> Move to open.

09:49:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr.

09:49:44 Reddick.

09:49:45 The ayes have it unanimously to open number 42.

09:49:49 Yes, sir.

09:49:54 >>MORRIS MASSEY: Et East Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa, Florida

09:49:56 here on behalf of the university of Tampa.

09:50:00 Franchise ordinance that would allow the university to

09:50:03 place -- utility owned utilities to connect university

09:50:06 buildings under public streets that separate the campus.

09:50:09 If you have any questions, we are here.

09:50:12 I have the vice-president for administration as well.

09:50:14 >> Thank you very much.

09:50:16 Anyone in the public?

09:50:24 Motion by Mr. Suarez.

09:50:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move an ordinance being presented for

09:50:42 second reading and adoption, an ordinance amending,

09:50:44 restating and superseding City of Tampa ordinance number

09:50:48 201185 in its entirety granting to the university of Tampa

09:50:52 incorporated, a Florida nonprofit corporation, its

09:50:56 successors and assigns a nonexclusive franchise to use the

09:50:59 public streets, alleys, highways, bridges, easements of the

09:51:05 City of Tampa for the construction, maintenance for the

09:51:07 operation of chiller and electrical facility including all

09:51:10 necessary appurtenances and stormwater infrastructure for

09:51:13 the delivery and return of chilled water and electrical

09:51:16 service and for drainage for the sole and private use of the

09:51:20 university of Tampa in the City of Tampa describing the

09:51:23 terms and conditions under which Seth said nonexclusive

09:51:26 franchise may be exercised, providing for severability,

09:51:30 providing an effective date.

09:51:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez.

09:51:33 I have a second by Mr. Reddick.

09:51:36 Roll call vote.

09:51:38 Vote and record.

09:51:38 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.

09:51:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I need a motion to open 43 through 49.

09:51:56 Motion by Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr. Cohen.

09:51:59 All in favor?

09:52:00 Opposed?

09:52:03 All in favor of that motion.

09:52:05 It passed unanimously.

09:52:06 Item 43 through 49 are now open.

09:52:09 43.

09:52:24 These are quasi-judicial so the clerk will swear in anyone

09:52:27 on 43 through 49.

09:52:29 (Oath administered by Clerk)

09:52:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I noticed the lawyers don't stand up.

09:52:41 I wonder why.

09:52:42 Yes, ma'am, 43.

09:52:44 >> Rebecca on behalf of petitioner and we are here if you

09:52:51 have any questions.

09:52:51 >> Anyone in the public care to speak on item number 43?

09:52:55 43?

09:52:56 Need a motion to close.

09:52:59 Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Suarez.

09:53:02 All in favor?

09:53:03 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:53:05 Mr. Reddick, will you kindly take number 43?

09:53:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an ordinance for second reading and

09:53:11 adoption, an ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing, and

09:53:14 abandoning an alleyway lying west of Oregon street, west of

09:53:18 Willow street, south of Gray Street, and north of Fig Street

09:53:21 in the fuller's subdivision a subdivision in the City of

09:53:25 Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully

09:53:27 described in section 1 hereof subject to certain easements,

09:53:30 covenants, conditions and restrictions as more particularly

09:53:33 described herein, providing an effective date.

09:53:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Reddick, seconded

09:53:39 by Mr. Suarez.

09:53:40 Vote and record.

09:53:41 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously with Capin being

09:53:51 absent.

09:53:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much for attending.

09:53:53 Item number 44.

09:53:54 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

09:54:01 Items number 44, 46, 47, 48 and 49 require zoning

09:54:08 administrator certification.

09:54:10 I believe 44, 47, 48, 49, which are rezonings and special

09:54:15 uses related to land, have been certified.

09:54:18 And I believe will speak to item 46.

09:54:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We are at item number 44.

09:54:28 >> Rebecca Johns for Lieber enterprises.

09:54:38 Petitioner is here if you have any questions.

09:54:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion to close by Mr. Cohen, second by

09:54:45 Mr. Suarez.

09:54:45 All in favor?

09:54:47 Opposed?

09:54:47 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:54:51 Mrs. Mulhern, would you take number 44?

09:54:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance presented for second

09:54:58 reading and adoption, an ordinance approving a special use

09:55:01 permit S-2 approving parking off-street commercial in an

09:55:05 RS-50 residential single-family zoning district in the

09:55:07 general vicinity of 1315 West Fig Street in the city of

09:55:18 Tampa, Florida.

09:55:20 >> I have a second by Mr. Reddick on 44.

09:55:23 This is a roll call vote.

09:55:26 Vote and record.

09:55:26 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously with Capin being

09:55:40 absent.

09:55:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 45.

09:55:51 Is petitioner here on 45?

09:55:53 Come forward.

09:55:54 >> Debra Higginbotham, St. Pete, Florida.

09:56:01 I don't have any comments unless there's opposition.

09:56:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

09:56:04 Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 45?

09:56:08 I see no one.

09:56:09 >>HARRY COHEN: Move to close.

09:56:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Seconded by Mr. Suarez.

09:56:14 All in favor of that motion indicate by saying aye.

09:56:16 Opposed, nay.

09:56:17 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:56:19 Mr. Cohen, would you kindly take number 45?

09:56:22 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for

09:56:24 second reading and consideration, an ordinance vacating,

09:56:27 closing, discontinuing, abandoning an alleyway lying east of

09:56:32 south Lois Avenue, west of south Clark Avenue, south of west

09:56:37 DeLeon street and north of west Swann Avenue in Normandy

09:56:44 Heights subdivision, a subdivision in the City of Tampa

09:56:48 Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully

09:56:50 described in section 1 hereof subject to certain easements,

09:56:53 covenants, conditions and restrictions as more particularly

09:56:56 described herein providing an effective date.

09:56:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

09:57:01 Roll call vote.

09:57:03 Vote and record.

09:57:03 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.

09:57:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 46.

09:57:17 >> Land development.

09:57:21 Council, site plans could not be certified by the zoning

09:57:24 administrator at this time.

09:57:28 Hours of operation, site plans are in conflict with respect

09:57:31 to the hours.

09:57:33 Chapter 3.

09:57:34 And then the hours discussed between 3 p.m. and 3 a.m.

09:57:38 In addition, parking exceptions have not been obtained.

09:57:45 They have only obtained 27 spaces.

09:57:49 Transportation has issues with the site.

09:57:54 >> Truett Gardner, here on behalf of the tenant.

09:58:04 At our last meeting there were three outstanding issues.

09:58:07 One dealt with hours of operation.

09:58:08 Two which I believe was a motion made by Councilman Suarez.

09:58:15 Decibel levels which I believe was Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:58:18 Then lastly was parking.

09:58:20 With respect to the hours of operation, and what I believe

09:58:26 you wanted us to state was you wanted us to track current

09:58:29 hours of operation in the code.

09:58:31 That was done.

09:58:32 In addition to that, we put the further limitation on

09:58:35 ourselves which to be precise, code allows for hours of

09:58:43 operation between 7 a.m. and 3 a.m. on Monday through

09:58:47 Saturday.

09:58:48 Sunday 11 a.m. to 3 a.m.

09:58:50 We cited code.

09:58:52 We have the actual proposed hours of operation which are

09:58:54 Monday through Friday, 3 p.m. to 3 a.m., and then Saturday

09:59:01 through Sunday 11 a.m. through 3 a.m., which is more

09:59:05 restrictive as relates to Saturday.

09:59:08 I believe we caused some confusion there.

09:59:11 We are more than happy to go either way.

09:59:13 Our goal is to try to -- at the intersection of government

09:59:18 and business on this one, and we are trying to get these

09:59:22 gentlemen open as quickly as possible.

09:59:24 And so we are happy to go either way on that.

09:59:26 With respect to decibel levels, note 6 clarified that.

09:59:33 I believe there's no issues with it.

09:59:35 And basically what it says is that decibel levels are

09:59:40 limited to code standards as of the date of approval, and

09:59:43 that was placed in in case code became more lenient we

09:59:49 wanted more restrictive and any speaker systems, oriented

09:59:55 away from multifamily use abutting property.

09:59:58 That issue has been resolved.

09:59:59 Lastly and perhaps the biggest sticky wicket is the parking.

10:00:05 We are not sure what that offerings count was going to be.

10:00:08 We did submit leases.

10:00:13 What Eric Cotton determined was we do have four on-site

10:00:18 spaces.

10:00:19 Fishman's has 13 and Pipo's gave 13, and he gave that with

10:00:25 an aerial.

10:00:25 Practically if you were to go to Pipo's today there would be

10:00:29 33 cars parked there.

10:00:32 If you total the official number of spaces, you get 32.

10:00:37 If you total the practical number of spaces, you get 50,

10:00:40 which is even greater than what we were here presenting to

10:00:44 you before.

10:00:46 But there is that difference between what is legally

10:00:49 counseled based on this aerial count versus what's

10:00:52 practically allowed on there.

10:00:54 So if possible we would like to get some direction from you.

10:00:58 In addition to that, the tenants have also secured more

10:01:03 spaces.

10:01:04 They can't be counted towards off-site but they will be used

10:01:08 for valet purposes and I believe that totals an additional

10:01:11 75 spaces.

10:01:14 And then going back further, it's been in operation since

10:01:18 1950 in the exact same layout as what we are proposing.

10:01:23 So anything over and above what was allowed just a couple

10:01:27 months ago when the rainbow room was operating is greater

10:01:31 than what we are proposing now.

10:01:34 And we believe we have handled these issues, and we would

10:01:38 like to try to get this approved today if at all possible

10:01:43 but I believe we need direction from you.

10:01:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:01:48 I would like to hear from transportation.

10:02:01 Explain to me the legal versus what he's saying, the actual

10:02:06 parking and count.

10:02:14 >> I need to be sworn in.

10:02:17 I'm sorry.

10:02:17 (Oath administered by Clerk).

10:02:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I want you to speak loudly.

10:02:28 We are not here to bite anybody's head off yet.

10:02:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Speak to what Mr. Gardner just said about

10:02:33 the parking.

10:02:33 >>REBECCA KERT: I think you have the wrong staff up there.

10:02:42 Land development.

10:02:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Land development.

10:02:44 I'm sorry.

10:02:45 >> We are looking for legal parking spaces.

10:02:50 Pi ICO's under their original permit had 15 parking spaces.

10:02:55 The adjacent parcel has 12.

10:02:57 Also Fishman Mortgage.

10:03:00 So with regard to legal permitted parking we are looking at

10:03:04 27 parking spaces by permit.

10:03:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, explain to me -- and Mr. Gardner is

10:03:10 saying there's actually instead of 15 or 13, there's 30?

10:03:19 >>> I believe he's saying if you rearrange things and move

10:03:22 things around and maybe did some unique parking --

10:03:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Does anybody have a map?

10:03:30 >>MARY MULHERN: What is your recommendation to us?

10:03:32 And how are we supposed to determine what is actually there

10:03:36 for parking?

10:03:38 >>> We are telling you there's 27 legally permitted parking

10:03:42 spaces.

10:03:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

10:03:46 And the waiver, actually the requirement would have been

10:03:51 for --

10:03:55 >>> 64 to 4.

10:03:57 On-site.

10:03:57 The applicant was requesting to bring up to 43 off-street

10:04:01 parking spaces by agreement.

10:04:03 >>MARY MULHERN: So do we have the agreement?

10:04:06 >> No.

10:04:07 The agreements are going through design and review right

10:04:11 now.

10:04:12 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

10:04:18 If I could just clarify briefly where you are right now.

10:04:21 Right now, the site plan hasn't been certified so they can't

10:04:24 go forward on second reading.

10:04:26 So this is all kind of discussion.

10:04:29 I believe one issue that it would be appropriate to certify

10:04:33 so it can come back for second reading and done are the

10:04:36 issues on the hours of operation, because in reviewing the

10:04:39 transcript it wasn't completely clear whether City Council

10:04:41 was approving the full limit of the hours that are allowed

10:04:46 currently under code or whether they are asking for changes

10:04:49 to the more limited hours.

10:04:50 Currently, the site plan has both hours which is considered

10:04:55 a conflict so we need to get some direction and pick one of

10:04:58 those and have that change made between first and second

10:05:01 reading, in addition to the clarification on the actual

10:05:05 amount of parking, as well as the transportation comments

10:05:08 that were on the revision change sheet which were not made

10:05:12 between first and second reading.

10:05:13 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm going to address the parking and then

10:05:20 hopefully somebody else will address the hours.

10:05:22 I think the only thing I would be able to support would be a

10:05:29 continuance to resolve the parking issues, and come back.

10:05:36 I think what we said at the last hearing was if you came

10:05:39 back with actual agreements for the off-site parking.

10:05:49 >> I was talking -- both the leases were submitted prior to

10:05:52 our hearing two weeks ago.

10:05:55 I believe Julia will say the leases are fine.

10:05:59 I am not trying to put words in her mouth.

10:06:01 If you are going to go to Pipo's today, and Mr. Newkirk did

10:06:09 yesterday, there are 25 spaces, two parallel spaces and six

10:06:12 employee spaces in the rear behind the property which totals

10:06:15 the 33.

10:06:17 Eric Cotton, when he did his count, looked at an aerial and

10:06:20 determined there are 15 legal spaces.

10:06:24 So that's the intersection between what's practical and

10:06:26 legal.

10:06:28 Again, we would argue based on how this business operated

10:06:32 six months ago when it was the rainbow room, we enhanced the

10:06:36 parking by up to 46 spaces.

10:06:39 And so in addition to that, 75 valet spaces and we feel we

10:06:49 have done exactly what you were saying and do need

10:06:52 clarification on whether the leases were approved.

10:06:54 And I am not trying to answer that for Julia, but feel free

10:06:57 to ask her that.

10:06:59 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

10:07:02 The code provides an opportunity for alternative parking

10:07:06 agreement which are reviewed by the legal department to

10:07:08 determine if they are sufficient legally and long-term

10:07:13 leases which we consider five year renewable leases,

10:07:17 long-term leases.

10:07:19 I reviewed these leases and they met the criteria for going

10:07:22 through the alternative, the process for parking, to allow

10:07:27 off-street parking as well as on-site parking.

10:07:30 What I am clear about, and may need clarification, and it's

10:07:36 a waiver on the site plan is down to four spaces, which is

10:07:40 the amount of parking which is available on-site.

10:07:43 It appears the waiver is appropriate.

10:07:45 It's just that the information being provided for the number

10:07:50 of spaces through what has been told you in the previous

10:07:53 hearing versus today, I think they have said they were going

10:07:56 to try to get 43 spaces, and through their lease agreement

10:08:00 they were able to obtain 27 leases.

10:08:03 Or 27 parking spaces.

10:08:05 But the waiver on the site plan, I think, is correct.

10:08:07 I do think what I heard, there is still a conflict with

10:08:11 hours of operation that needs to be resolved, voted on, and

10:08:16 then that would need to -- second reading would need to be

10:08:20 continued out two weeks to make sure that is clear on the

10:08:23 site plan.

10:08:23 >>MARY MULHERN: So you are saying the leases are okay.

10:08:28 Okay.

10:08:29 So the off-site parking.

10:08:32 So the thing that we would need to continue this for the

10:08:36 hours of operation, the parking --

10:08:41 >> I might be able to answer a little better.

10:08:43 So the waiver as we stated on the site plan is down to the

10:08:46 four on-site spaces.

10:08:48 And then we did not know what this final count was going to

10:08:51 be.

10:08:51 So we used approximately 43 additional off-site spaces.

10:08:56 If you use their legal count, you get 31 total spaces.

10:09:01 If you use the practical count, and it's Pipo's that could

10:09:06 change, 15 legal versus 33 practical, you get 50 spaces

10:09:11 which is above the 43 that we approximated on the site plan.

10:09:16 But the waiver is actually down to four.

10:09:17 So anything over and above that was the subject of the

10:09:23 leases and the subject of what this final count would be.

10:09:26 Then that's the intersection between legal spaces as defined

10:09:29 by this aerial versus practical spaces that are out there

10:09:32 today.

10:09:34 And then even on top of that, 75 spaces.

10:09:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Feeley, did you have something you

10:09:46 wanted to say?

10:09:47 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.

10:09:52 This is just like a rezoning.

10:09:54 When you get that waiver for the parking, justification for

10:09:59 the waiver is those agreements.

10:10:00 Those agreements at some point in time go away.

10:10:06 That is why the waiver is for 64 spaces down to four spaces,

10:10:09 because if those agreements are ever terminated, he's in

10:10:12 violation, unless he waives all the parking that he needs to

10:10:16 actually function on his site.

10:10:18 That's the reality of the waiver.

10:10:20 The reality of the off-site agreement per our department's

10:10:25 review is that we review legal spaces when we review for

10:10:31 off-site agreements.

10:10:32 Legal spaces are spaces that meet and function by the

10:10:35 technical standards of code.

10:10:37 What Mr. Cotton has reviewed per our department, there were

10:10:42 27 legal spaces between Pipo's and the mortgage company that

10:10:47 can be approved through the design exception.

10:10:50 So that is where land development stands.

10:10:53 So in his agreement, yes, the 27 plus the four on-site, 31

10:10:58 spaces on a property that requires 64.

10:11:02 The question is before you as to whether you feel that that

10:11:05 waiver is appropriate.

10:11:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other?

10:11:15 Ms. Mulhern?

10:11:16 Mr. Suarez?

10:11:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You had mentioned the conflict between what

10:11:20 the discussion was on the motion, so we have two different

10:11:24 site plans -- excuse me, two different hours of operation on

10:11:26 the site plan.

10:11:28 What was the other one?

10:11:29 We heard from Mr. Gardner on what the ordinance allows.

10:11:34 What is it that we had discussed?

10:11:36 And what is the second one?

10:11:38 >> The second one is opening up at 3 p.m. seven days a week.

10:11:45 >> I will try to answer.

10:11:48 I believe what you were after was you were worried that in

10:11:50 the future, the code could be relaxed greater than how it's

10:11:54 currently stated today.

10:11:57 So even two weeks ago, the site plan stated codes, existing

10:12:03 hours of operation.

10:12:04 We went one step further on and there's that reference to

10:12:08 what the code requires.

10:12:09 And in our site data table we became even more restrictive,

10:12:13 and instead of the 7 a.m. opening time through Saturday we

10:12:18 went with 3 p.m. which actually does kind of gel with Pipo's

10:12:24 because they are more of a breakfast-lunch crowd, so we

10:12:27 wanted those to sync with that.

10:12:29 But what you had stated with code, and we are hope with code

10:12:34 but we went one step further and had later hours.

10:12:38 >> Because if I recall the exchange in the conversation was

10:12:40 about the 3 p.m. time frame.

10:12:45 And based on all the other information you have provided

10:12:47 from the neighborhood and everything else, it seemed like it

10:12:50 was a use that folks had no problem having, and that folks

10:12:55 wanted to have a neighborhood location for this type of

10:13:00 operation.

10:13:00 >> I think we probably should -- Ms. Kert, please come

10:13:08 forward.

10:13:10 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

10:13:11 Again, this has to be continued and I would just ask --

10:13:16 >> That's what I will try to do.

10:13:17 I will try to clarify this issue so that we can go forward

10:13:20 for the continuance so that we can get it settled for the

10:13:23 next time.

10:13:23 So I would say, I guess we'll put on the transcript -- I

10:13:28 don't think we need a motion for this.

10:13:30 Do we need another motion?

10:13:31 Or can we just clarify what we had originally said?

10:13:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you prefer a motion?

10:13:37 Yes, please.

10:13:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would like to make a motion on the site

10:13:41 plan it lists that the opening times for this facility be 3

10:13:46 p.m.

10:13:49 Is that clear enough?

10:13:56 Looking for seven-day a week, so 3 p.m. doesn't have to --

10:14:01 >> Well, our site is opening Monday through Friday 3 p.m. to

10:14:07 3 a.m., Saturday and Sunday 11 a.m. to 3 a.m.

10:14:10 Code allows for Saturday opening to 7 a.m.

10:14:14 And four hours.

10:14:15 >> Oh, you are asking for 3 p.m. all seven days?

10:14:19 >> No, Saturday and Sunday, 11 a.m.

10:14:23 3 p.m. Monday through Friday opening.

10:14:27 Tracks with code.

10:14:27 Saturday and Sunday opening at 11 a.m., which is four hours

10:14:33 more restrictive than code.

10:14:35 >> Well, I am making a motion, Mr. Chair, to allow for

10:14:42 opening Monday through Friday at 3 p.m., and closing

10:14:47 following code 3 a.m., Saturday and Sunday, 11 a.m., closing

10:14:52 at 3 a.m., also.

10:14:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We are not going to vote on this today.

10:14:58 This has not been certified.

10:15:00 Right?

10:15:01 And what we are doing, it's not about this location.

10:15:05 I have said trying to learn something every day.

10:15:09 And what happens is not this location again, if the parking

10:15:17 goes away, what happens to the license?

10:15:19 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

10:15:23 If the additional parking agreements were to go away, and

10:15:27 this would pass, it would still be able to continue to sell

10:15:30 alcohol and the waiver would -- and they would be able to do

10:15:33 that legally with four spots.

10:15:35 >> Let me ask you this.

10:15:36 Let me ask you this.

10:15:39 Is there any way in the future that this is based on

10:15:44 whatever information -- and talking about this -- not

10:15:51 talking about this -- anyone that comes in and that license

10:15:56 is based on the waivers, fanned the waivers go away the

10:15:58 license goes away?

10:16:00 I want to put the burden back on their back, not the

10:16:04 neighborhoods and the city's.

10:16:05 That's in essence what we are doing.

10:16:09 You don't have to answer me now.

10:16:10 I know that's a tough question.

10:16:11 I have a motion by Mr. Suarez.

10:16:13 Yes, ma'am?

10:16:13 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.

10:16:18 If you could direct in that motion that that general

10:16:20 language about code be stricken and that these hours replace

10:16:27 that language, that's what the conflict is today, that both

10:16:29 of these are on here.

10:16:32 They are saying, we have these other hours that are more

10:16:35 restrictive, but the general hours a load by code are on the

10:16:38 plan also which would then entitle them to be able to open

10:16:41 at 7 a.m.

10:16:41 That's part of what's on the plan today.

10:16:44 Your motion would access that other language please be

10:16:46 removed, and the hours as stated by yourself in that motion

10:16:49 be the hours, those hours would become restrictive hours of

10:16:55 the alcohol.

10:16:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I thought that's what I did.

10:16:59 But every time we make motions we are asking for a waiver

10:17:02 and a change from the ordinance, and my assumption was that

10:17:07 by stating the hours that have to be on the site plan, then

10:17:11 that would go forward as to what it would continuously be

10:17:15 until another waiver is asked for by this group or any other

10:17:19 group that is at that location.

10:17:20 >> I want to make it clear --

10:17:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am not going to spend two days on

10:17:27 something we aren't even going to vote on.

10:17:28 >> But in order --

10:17:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand that, I understand that.

10:17:31 I understand that.

10:17:33 Mr. Suarez clearly explained it, that's what he wants on the

10:17:38 site plan, what he just said, if I remember what he said,

10:17:41 was from 3 p.m., 3 a.m., Monday through Friday, from 11 a.m.

10:17:51 to 3 a.m. weekends.

10:17:57 That's what he said.

10:17:58 That's what I remember.

10:18:00 Maybe I stand corrected.

10:18:01 I have a motion by Mr. Suarez on the site plan change to

10:18:05 clarify the total items of operation of hours.

10:18:09 Who was the second?

10:18:10 I'm sorry, I apologize.

10:18:12 I have a second by Mr. Reddick.

10:18:14 >>THE CLERK: Did you want to set a date for the continuance

10:18:18 with this?

10:18:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What day is preferable for you folks to

10:18:21 come back?

10:18:23 >> As soon as possible.

10:18:25 We can turn these changes around today, if we can be heard a

10:18:28 week from today.

10:18:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We'll put it for the 16th.

10:18:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's up to the legal department.

10:18:34 Can you do all these changes?

10:18:36 Come on up because next week is not a council meeting.

10:18:39 >>REBECCA KERT: Maybe two weeks to certify the plan.

10:18:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Two weeks.

10:18:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's vote on the motion first.

10:18:48 Motion by Suarez, seconded by Reddick.

10:18:51 All in favor?

10:18:52 Opposed?

10:18:54 The ayes have it 6 to 1.

10:19:00 5 to 1, excuse me.

10:19:03 Now we go to the two weeks.

10:19:06 What day is that?

10:19:10 February 16th at same hour.

10:19:13 9:30.

10:19:14 The year 2012.

10:19:16 So we don't miss out on the year.

10:19:18 Anything else?

10:19:23 Yes, sir.

10:19:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Also a reminder that the transportation

10:19:25 notes also need to be done in addition to all of that.

10:19:28 Thank you.

10:19:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

10:19:31 That's set for February 16th at 9:30.

10:19:33 >> Could I ask for one more clarification?

10:19:40 I don't want to belabor this point but -- we are more than

10:19:44 happy to state it, legally determined knowing what the

10:19:48 practical side is, but I want some direction there --

10:19:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One party says one thing.

10:19:57 For every action there's a reaction.

10:20:03 I guess other council members will do the same.

10:20:06 Any other things?

10:20:11 Thank you very much.

10:20:12 See you on the 16th.

10:20:16 Item number 47.

10:20:17 Anyone here to speak on item 47?

10:20:24 >> My name is Juan Carlos, and petitioner on this case.

10:20:30 So we tried to comply with all the City of Tampa ordinance.

10:20:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:20:34 Hold on one second.

10:20:36 I heard yours.

10:20:37 And second reading.

10:20:39 Anyone in the audience care to speak for or against item 47?

10:20:43 Anyone who cares to speak on 47 at all?

10:20:45 47?

10:20:48 I see no one.

10:20:49 I need a motion to close.

10:20:52 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Suarez.

10:20:55 All in favor of that motion?

10:20:57 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:20:59 Need a motion, moss Montelione.

10:21:03 Will you kindly take 47?

10:21:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I present an ordinance for second

10:21:09 reading and adoption, an ordinance rezoning property in the

10:21:12 general vicinity of 2910 west frierson Avenue in the city of

10:21:15 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1

10:21:17 from zoning district classification RS-50 residential

10:21:22 single-family and RM-24 residential multifamily to PD,

10:21:27 planned development, residential, multifamily, providing an

10:21:30 effective date.

10:21:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, a

10:21:34 second by Mr. Suarez.

10:21:35 Roll call vote.

10:21:37 Vote and record.

10:21:37 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.

10:21:47 >> Item 48.

10:21:57 Anyone on item 48?

10:22:13 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza here on

10:22:16 behalf of petitioner requesting approval this morning on

10:22:19 second reading.

10:22:20 >> Thank you very much.

10:22:21 Anyone in the audience care to speak on item 48?

10:22:24 I see no one.

10:22:25 Need a motion to close.

10:22:27 If you are going to speak on 48, come forward.

10:22:29 You spoke last time.

10:22:31 And the time before.

10:22:31 I remember you, sir.

10:22:33 You live in the house next door to the property where the

10:22:36 vacant lot is in between.

10:22:37 >> Yes, sir.

10:22:40 I don't know if it's appropriate at this point because I am

10:22:43 really not too familiar with all these procedures.

10:22:47 At the very initial rezoning a couple of years ago, it was

10:22:54 emphasized that we wouldn't have traffic through Santiago to

10:22:59 Bay to Bay.

10:23:03 Through the lot.

10:23:04 Right now, if we remove some of the barriers and we are

10:23:07 getting people driving back and forth through the middle of

10:23:09 the block.

10:23:13 I hope this is an appropriate place to bring that up.

10:23:15 I don't know.

10:23:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Is transportation here?

10:23:19 >> Transportation.

10:23:23 >> The gentleman brought up a concern about the traffic

10:23:27 pattern.

10:23:28 There's nothing there now.

10:23:30 I don't know where the traffic is coming from but it's not

10:23:33 coming from there.

10:23:40 Talking about the development.

10:23:40 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.

10:23:50 Once this project is built, that will no longer be able to

10:23:54 happen because that is going to be closed off and curbed.

10:23:58 There's going to be a building there.

10:23:59 There will no longer be access on Bay to Bay through this

10:24:03 property once this property is approved.

10:24:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am real happy you came down.

10:24:11 You have been very consistent in protecting the

10:24:12 neighborhood.

10:24:13 Thank you very much.

10:24:16 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, seconded by Mr. Suarez.

10:24:19 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

10:24:22 Opposed, nay.

10:24:22 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:24:24 Item 48.

10:24:26 Mr. Suarez.

10:24:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move an ordinance for second reading and

10:24:31 adoption, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

10:24:33 vicinity of 3516 west Bay to Bay Boulevard in the city of

10:24:37 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1

10:24:40 from zoning district classification PD planned development,

10:24:43 office, business, professional, to PD, planned development,

10:24:46 office, business professional, and medical including all

10:24:50 commercial and general uses except restaurant, providing an

10:24:52 effective date.

10:24:52 >> I have a second by Mr. Reddick.

10:24:57 Roll call vote.

10:24:59 Vote and record.

10:25:06 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.

10:25:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 49.

10:25:13 49.

10:25:13 49.

10:25:15 Is petitioner here?

10:25:16 >> Pickett Engineering out of Bartow, Florida. I'm here

10:25:27 representing the petitioner and see if there's any questions

10:25:27 that you might have.

10:25:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any questions on item 49?

10:25:34 49?

10:25:35 I see no one.

10:25:37 Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Suarez.

10:25:40 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:25:41 Mr. Reddick, would you kindly take 49?

10:25:45 >> For second reading and adoption, an ordinance rezoning

10:25:48 property in the general vicinity of 3101 and 3103 East Ida

10:25:58 Street, 3011 North Bay Street and 4200 North 31st Street

10:26:03 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly

10:26:04 described in section 1 from zoning district classifications

10:26:07 PD planned development, and RS-50 residential,

10:26:11 single-family, to PD, planned development, place of

10:26:15 religious assembly, providing an effective date.

10:26:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.

10:26:22 Suarez.

10:26:22 Roll call vote.

10:26:24 Vote and record.

10:26:24 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.

10:26:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I open items 50 and 51.

10:26:38 These are nonjudicial proceedings.

10:26:41 Need a motion to open those two hearings.

10:26:44 Motion by Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr. Cohen.

10:26:46 All in favor of that motion?

10:26:48 Opposed?

10:26:48 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:26:51 This is the second public hearing for consideration of a

10:26:53 development agreement on item 50.

10:26:56 Anyone here?

10:26:56 Andrea Zelman, Fowler White, 501 East Kennedy for the

10:27:04 applicant MCRT Investments.

10:27:06 This is obviously your second hearing on this development

10:27:09 agreement.

10:27:09 I believe Ms. Cole explained it last time I.want to thank

10:27:13 her for all her help and also Abbye Feeley, and I appreciate

10:27:17 your consideration.

10:27:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:27:19 Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 50?

10:27:23 I see no one.

10:27:24 I need a motion to close.

10:27:25 >>HARRY COHEN: So moved.

10:27:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.

10:27:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All in favor of that motion please

10:27:31 indicate by saying aye.

10:27:33 Opposed nay.

10:27:33 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:27:34 >>HARRY COHEN: I move to adopt the resolution on item

10:27:49 number 50.

10:27:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr.

10:27:52 Reddick.

10:27:52 All in favor of the motion?

10:27:54 Opposed?

10:27:55 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:27:56 We go now to 51.

10:27:58 Item 51.

10:28:01 Anyone representing item number 51?

10:28:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This resolution has to be adopted during

10:28:18 the motion.

10:28:18 >> Anyone to speak on item 51?

10:28:28 51?

10:28:29 I need to move the resolution.

10:28:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move item 51.

10:28:32 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

10:28:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All in favor of that motion indicate by

10:28:38 saying aye.

10:28:39 Opposed, nay.

10:28:40 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:28:42 Now need a motion to close the hearing. Motion by Mr.

10:28:44 Reddick, seconded by Mr. Cohen on 51.

10:28:49 The ayes have it by one.

10:28:53 Thank you.

10:28:57 We now go to the staff reports.

10:29:02 Unfinished business 51 through 55.

10:29:08 Excuse me, 52 through 55.

10:29:17 We are down to five council members.

10:29:18 We need almost unanimous votes.

10:29:21 52.

10:29:29 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.

10:29:29 We are asking that item 27 be substituted to clarify the

10:29:35 issues that came up the last hearing and you wanted to

10:29:37 continue this to today because of the discussion that you

10:29:41 had on item 52.

10:29:42 So substituted item number 57 to give you more clarification

10:29:47 on how that worked.

10:29:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This is the one that was carried over

10:30:01 from 27?

10:30:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's 27 and item number 52 that are

10:30:07 companions items.

10:30:10 And these are the items that I had raised concerns with

10:30:16 because the resolution that we were provided with at the

10:30:21 last meeting was incorrect in identifying funds and where

10:30:26 the funds were coming from.

10:30:28 And there were a couple of inconsistencies at the time the

10:30:35 agenda item was presented to us previously as well as the

10:30:37 contract that was proposed.

10:30:39 I do have questions, and I don't see anyone here from

10:30:47 budget.

10:30:48 I may be mistaken.

10:30:52 But the $37,000 that's coming from the budget is identified

10:30:57 in item 27 as index code PW, which I believe stands for

10:31:04 public works, 05352 HM-06100.

10:31:12 So I pulled the budget book that is the budget we recently

10:31:23 passed and looked up that under capital budget in public

10:31:28 works, and that line item 06100 is titled land under capital

10:31:34 expenditures in the public works budget.

10:31:39 We have zero dollars in fiscal year 12 recommended in that

10:31:44 line item budget.

10:31:47 And in previous years, looking at year 11 projected zero,

10:31:53 fiscal year 11 current zero, 10 actual was zero, and fiscal

10:31:58 year 09 there was a $75,000 actual number, actual dollars

10:32:05 spent in fiscal year 09.

10:32:09 So my question is, if there is zero dollars recommended in

10:32:16 our fiscal year 12 budget and we approve that fiscal year 12

10:32:21 budget, where are these funds coming from?

10:32:25 $37,000.

10:32:26 Anybody know?

10:32:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say this.

10:32:32 I don't know -- I don't think -- the city budget is just

10:32:36 like anyone's checkbook, just with a lot more zeros.

10:32:39 And I would assume -- and this is an assumption on my

10:32:42 part -- that they are smart enough to find the $37,000

10:32:47 somewhere, and in that $760 million budget to move around to

10:32:53 put in there, whether it's there now or not, I don't know.

10:32:56 I didn't do that research today.

10:32:58 But I'm sure that if this is passed, that budget will be

10:33:02 moved to that account number.

10:33:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, I understand that.

10:33:10 But usually in my checkbook I usually know where the money

10:33:13 is coming from before I make the expenditure, because that

10:33:16 means that I am not going to be able to buy something else,

10:33:19 and that usually means that there is a project that isn't

10:33:23 going to get done or there's a project that's going to be

10:33:29 late listed.

10:33:30 Again, I mean, my concern, not just with this purchase of

10:33:35 property, but I have brought it up in previous sessions on

10:33:40 previous purchases of other property, consistently, my issue

10:33:45 is how much money we are spending to buy property, and where

10:33:49 that money is coming from, because we have a very tight

10:33:54 budget, that a $37 million hole that the mayor has to fill,

10:33:59 and he's very adeptly filled that hole, and it was probably

10:34:08 after a lot of discussion and suggestions and a lot of

10:34:11 research and a lot of work by the administration, and by the

10:34:14 staff, to get us out of that deficit position and only leave

10:34:20 us with a -- I think it was $6 million that weighed to

10:34:24 borrow from our cushion that Mayor Iorio left us with in

10:34:29 reserve funds.

10:34:30 And I just want to be a good steward of every penny of this

10:34:37 budget and of our city attacks pair dollars to know that

10:34:40 when we are spending money, we have a very well thought-out

10:34:47 and very sure that we are spending each penny wisely and

10:34:54 spending double -- maybe a little more than double, but I

10:34:59 don't remember exactly what the multiplier is, percentage

10:35:05 wise.

10:35:05 But when we are spending money over and above what the

10:35:09 appraised value is, it concerns me.

10:35:12 And I believe the 28,000 coming from the CRA funds is what

10:35:18 the appraised value was, and that's how they approved it.

10:35:21 So the 28,000 was the appraised value and we are spending

10:35:28 635 plus 3,000 in clogs costs, and spending more money for

10:35:34 properties than the appraised value concerns me.

10:35:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I yield to Mr. Territo.

10:35:44 >>SAL TERRITO: The money is already in the budget.

10:35:45 We are not talking about the budget that was approved by you

10:35:48 in October.

10:35:48 Anytime there's an item that comes up before you, there's an

10:35:51 approval, that then puts money in that budget to appropriate

10:35:56 it for this particular fund.

10:35:57 When it was done in the budget document that you are looking

10:36:00 at, you do budget resolutions all the time.

10:36:03 This project has already been funded.

10:36:05 The money for this project is already there.

10:36:07 So it wasn't necessary to move it there.

10:36:09 It's been moved on a previous appropriation by this council

10:36:12 when you move money around for this project.

10:36:14 This project has the money in it already for this item.

10:36:17 That's why you didn't see it in the original budget because

10:36:20 the original budget didn't have this project in the original

10:36:22 budget, as it comes before you, then the money gets moved as

10:36:26 it does with any other item.

10:36:27 This council has already appropriated the funds for this

10:36:30 item.

10:36:31 I couldn't tell you where.

10:36:33 Budget could tell you.

10:36:33 That I can't tell you when it got moved but I know -- we

10:36:37 couldn't have brought it forward to you and identified that

10:36:40 account for this project.

10:36:41 >> I just got a note from my aide that finance is on their

10:36:45 way here to answer my question.

10:36:47 Thank you.

10:36:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

10:36:54 I'm just at the point where I want to vote it up or down,

10:36:59 because I get more calls from people who are watching this,

10:37:03 and they keep saying, why are you spending all this much

10:37:07 time?

10:37:09 You have got a $700 million budget and you are talking about

10:37:12 $37,000.

10:37:14 Peanuts.

10:37:15 And why are you spending all this time?

10:37:18 I was on the elevator come here this morning, and the lady

10:37:21 asked me on the elevator, I hope you aren't getting in that

10:37:25 discussion over $37,000.

10:37:26 I said, ma'am, I hope we close it today, whether we vote it

10:37:30 our down.

10:37:30 It's all we got to do, say "yes" or "no" and move on.

10:37:33 I think we have been dealing with this for almost a month,

10:37:38 more than a month, and if we don't support it, say no.

10:37:44 If we support it, move on.

10:37:47 This is to a point now where it's just to a point where we

10:37:52 need to say "yes" or "no" and move on.

10:37:54 There are many items on this agenda.

10:37:56 I am sure there are going to be many more budget items that

10:37:59 we will be talking about.

10:38:00 So I would call for the question, Mr. Chairman, and say

10:38:09 let's vote.

10:38:10 But if finance is coming with a clarification where this

10:38:17 money is coming from.

10:38:18 If not I think we vote.

10:38:19 >> I think if we do that we are going to end up with a p

10:38:24 3rd-3 tie.

10:38:25 Last time it was a 4-3 vote.

10:38:27 I am not trying to count heads or votes or tell anybody what

10:38:30 to do.

10:38:30 That's your prerogative to do whatever you want.

10:38:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:38:37 I want to thank Councilwoman Montelione for doing her

10:38:40 homework on this.

10:38:40 And I know how hard it is to figure out.

10:38:46 Yes, our staff is very smart, and they can figure out where

10:38:51 to stash the money and move it around.

10:38:54 And it's hard to follow that process.

10:38:58 And I really appreciate you doing that.

10:39:01 For me this comes down to spending $65,000 of taxpayer

10:39:05 money, some of it from -- we are not sure.

10:39:10 I guess we'll hear when finance shows up, what fund the

10:39:15 37,000 is coming from.

10:39:17 The 28,000 is coming from the East Tampa TIF dollars.

10:39:26 It comes down to whether we are going to spend $65,000 plus

10:39:31 another 3,000 in closing costs on a property that has been

10:39:34 appraised at $28,000.

10:39:37 I am not going to support either item number 27 or item

10:39:39 number 52 in doing that.

10:39:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to make a statement.

10:39:45 I have heard closing costs.

10:39:47 I'm not a realtor, not an attorney.

10:39:51 I'm not as smart as a realtor or smart as an attorney.

10:39:56 And all of you know that when you buy something, there are

10:39:59 closing costs.

10:40:00 What happens if you don't have closing costs?

10:40:02 What happens if you don't have a survey done?

10:40:07 What happens if the lot line is two inches one way or two

10:40:10 inches the other way?

10:40:11 That $3,000 is going to turn out to be $300,000 and a

10:40:15 lawsuit unlawful taking of a property.

10:40:19 Like I said, I'm not in real estate and I'm not a lawyer,

10:40:22 but I'm smart enough to understand what the risks are.

10:40:27 And I'm not taking that risk for $3,000.

10:40:30 Yes, sir, counselor.

10:40:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:40:34 Just to clarify what you have before you, item 27 is really

10:40:38 in effect a substitute for item number 52.

10:40:41 So the proper action would be to take up item 27 and then

10:40:48 strike item 52 from the agenda.

10:40:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 27 ahead of 52.

10:40:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you so much.

10:40:55 Anyone else who has not spoken?

10:41:01 Mr. Cohen or Mr. Suarez?

10:41:03 All right.

10:41:04 Budget.

10:41:04 >> Dennis O'Hara, finance.

10:41:13 What kind of questions can I answer?

10:41:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I speak?

10:41:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You are allowed to speak.

10:41:21 I will say one thing, starting today.

10:41:24 If these things are not pulled 24 hours like the record

10:41:27 says, they will not be allowed.

10:41:29 Council counsel, am I correct or not?

10:41:33 Tell me if I am incorrect.

10:41:34 I have been incorrect before.

10:41:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The rule is not a hard fast rule,

10:41:38 Mr. Chairman.

10:41:38 I can read it to you.

10:41:58 If you just give me a minute.

10:42:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: For clarification I did not pull.

10:42:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I do have it in front of me.

10:42:08 It's rule 7-C.

10:42:11 And I will read it to you exactly as it's stated.

10:42:14 An individual member of City Council who wants to remove an

10:42:17 item from the committee report consent agenda should attempt

10:42:21 to do so a day or more in advance of the meeting by

10:42:23 notifying the members of council, the clerk, and the chief

10:42:27 of staff by memorandum or e-mail stating whether the member

10:42:31 of council wishes staff to be present to discuss the item.

10:42:35 Again, that's the way --

10:42:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Change that to one second before and I

10:42:39 have no problem with it either way.

10:42:42 Okay, Mrs. Montelione. I'm sorry, you have got floor.

10:42:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, Mr. O'Hara, I was looking at the

10:42:49 budget that we passed not too long ago, and I looked up line

10:42:56 items 6100 from the public works budget under capital

10:43:01 expenditures, and saw that in fiscal year 2009 it was a

10:43:06 $75,000 actual expenditure out of that line item, and 2010,

10:43:13 and 2011, there were zero dollars spent out of that line

10:43:16 item, and we had budgeted in fiscal year 12 zero dollars out

10:43:21 of that line item.

10:43:22 So my question was that we have got $37,000 coming from that

10:43:30 line item for this purchase of property and it would be the

10:43:35 first time since 2009 it appears that we will be spending

10:43:38 money out of that line item account.

10:43:40 So that, I would ask for a clarification or an explanation

10:43:46 of why we have to go all the way back to 2009 to find that

10:43:50 we have used that account for funds.

10:43:53 And if there's a zero dollar amount budgeted in fiscal year

10:44:00 12, I know there will be money transferred into that

10:44:02 account, if it has not already, I don't recall an item

10:44:08 coming before us, but we hear a lot of budget transfer

10:44:11 items.

10:44:11 And where that $37,000 is coming from, a line item in our

10:44:18 budget will be reduced by $37,000 to pay nor piece of

10:44:22 property.

10:44:23 >>> Yes, I have an answer to that and I completely

10:44:26 understand the discrepancy that you are referencing.

10:44:29 You are correct, fiscal year 12 we have not budgeted nor

10:44:33 have we transferred any funding into that line item.

10:44:35 The 37,000 --

10:44:37 >> I'm sorry, can you speak up?

10:44:41 >>> We have particular line items for that fiscal year and

10:44:44 we have not transferred any funding into that line item.

10:44:46 The budget document you are looking at is correct.

10:44:49 This $37,000 originates in a previous appropriation that

10:44:53 would not appear in that budget book but will appear in

10:44:57 preceding budget books.

10:45:01 We don't necessarily reappropriate everything every year as

10:45:03 the funding and the project continues from year to year.

10:45:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The previous appropriation was?

10:45:14 >> I haven't had time to find the amount nor the initial

10:45:16 fiscal year but I can follow up with you on that, but it's a

10:45:20 previous appropriation.

10:45:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

10:45:26 That just puzzles me.

10:45:29 I know the budget is very complicated.

10:45:31 And we have previous appropriations, maybe you can provide

10:45:34 my office with that information, not just where previous

10:45:40 appropriations are made for properties, because we have been

10:45:46 looking for money to create a site for -- what did we name

10:45:56 it?

10:45:58 The homeless assistance center, I think, something like

10:46:01 that.

10:46:02 We were calling it.

10:46:03 And we have been looking for money to put towards the

10:46:07 project, to help those that are amongst if poorest of our

10:46:13 community, and are in need of the most help in our

10:46:16 community.

10:46:17 We have lad for money for other such noble causes, and we

10:46:22 have been consistently told that there isn't any money.

10:46:24 So this previous appropriation money that we can move around

10:46:29 at the last minute, to buy a piece of property for what I

10:46:33 believe is an overvalued piece of property, then we should

10:46:36 be able to find money in previous appropriations to do some

10:46:40 of the other things that we want to do.

10:46:42 And that I believe are benefiting of vast majority of the

10:46:48 poor and indigent in our community.

10:46:51 So I am very concerned when money just appears to fulfill

10:46:59 one particular need, but it does not appear where we were

10:47:03 trying to fulfill another very great need in our community.

10:47:08 And Mr. Reddick, just to speak to your point, this is

10:47:13 $37,000 this time, it was nearly $100,000 last time we

10:47:19 bought property that was overvalued.

10:47:21 We had a property value for a stormwater purchase that

10:47:23 was -- and again the numbers don't come to my head right

10:47:27 now, but I do remember we paid $70,000 for a piece of

10:47:31 property that was probably only worth about 20, and we paid

10:47:38 $80,000 or $60,000 for an adjacent piece of property.

10:47:42 So we are not just looking at this one $37,000 expenditure.

10:47:50 If we consistently do this we are looking at hundreds of

10:47:52 thousands of dollars going out the door for properties that

10:47:58 are valued way above appraisal price, the appraised value.

10:48:04 So this is not one property that I am objecting to for

10:48:08 $37,000 over the appraised value.

10:48:11 This is a consistent pattern, and we are watching this money

10:48:15 that we are struggling to dig up from our down economy and

10:48:21 our tax dollars, and we are watching it fly out the door.

10:48:27 So I just want -- not one grandstand I'm making on $37,000.

10:48:33 This is a consistent pattern of overspending on property.

10:48:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No one wants to grandstand anything.

10:48:40 Not I.

10:48:41 Not any council member I ever heard of.

10:48:43 Mr. Suarez.

10:48:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Sir, I just want to clarify in terms of

10:48:53 budgetary process.

10:48:54 I think I understand in terms of what you are talking about,

10:48:57 and this comes down from Congress, state legislature, and

10:49:01 the way that we both appropriate and authorize projects,

10:49:06 meaning that if there is something that a previous council

10:49:12 has already authorized, as a project that they want to go

10:49:14 forward, and we know this project has been going on at least

10:49:17 since 2005, if I recall correctly, that if a previous

10:49:22 council comes in and says, we approve this, and this is what

10:49:25 we want to go forward, at that time when they say we want to

10:49:28 appropriate money, we know that the project is on the radar.

10:49:31 We put money away.

10:49:33 It doesn't appear in future budgets because we have already

10:49:37 appropriated that money for that particular purpose.

10:49:40 Correct?

10:49:42 >>> Correct, sir.

10:49:43 To give you an example, we would not -- a previous council

10:49:46 would not have appropriated this funding years ago, for

10:49:49 instance, for police vehicles.

10:49:50 It would have been for this particular purpose.

10:49:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And I guess the confusion is that our budget

10:49:56 is never a year to year document.

10:50:00 Budgeting is a long-term processwhere you might have a

10:50:05 project that is authorized to be done and the appropriation

10:50:09 may be there saying this is something that we have agreed to

10:50:12 as a council, and as a mayoral administration to do, but we

10:50:18 may not be able to complete it until we have those dollars

10:50:23 stocked in there or put away or anything else.

10:50:26 But for the most part when we are looking at budgeting, we

10:50:29 keep that money away saying, we are not going to use this X

10:50:33 number of dollars for any future projects because we have

10:50:35 already said we are going to do this, at a previous council.

10:50:40 We can always go back and change anything that a council

10:50:43 does, previously.

10:50:46 We can go back and look at every project that we have ever a

10:50:48 propose rated or -- appropriated or authorized to go

10:50:53 forward.

10:50:54 Theoretically we can kill anything we want to kill.

10:50:56 >> There would be restrictions associated with contracts.

10:50:59 >> Sure.

10:51:00 And I know that because the budget specifically not only we

10:51:05 are a little different than the federal government in terms

10:51:07 of -- and one of the things that myself and Mr. Cohen had

10:51:11 talked about was a project concerning dredging in the South

10:51:15 Tampa area, where Congress had authorized a project, but had

10:51:24 not appropriate moneys.

10:51:25 We had expended moneys to the city to try to get this

10:51:28 project done and then they killed it this past year.

10:51:31 So we have that same power theoretically dealing with the

10:51:35 particular project.

10:51:36 I for one -- and I appreciate you straightening me out on

10:51:41 the budget because it does become a complicated piece of

10:51:49 political craft work, and for us, on council, we can go back

10:51:54 and we can change anything we want on any position that's

10:51:57 been made.

10:51:58 And as Councilman Reddick mentioned we can vote it up or

10:52:02 down at any time, and stop the wheels wherever it's at.

10:52:06 So in terms of your point, Ms. Montelione, about the budget,

10:52:10 there's lots of things that have already been put away that

10:52:13 we don't see in terms of other than new contracts or work

10:52:17 orders or anything else.

10:52:18 So I don't really have a problem with it not being in a

10:52:21 budget line item.

10:52:22 I understand what he's saying.

10:52:24 And unfortunately we have to deal with this on a day to day,

10:52:28 week to week basis in terms of what we are going to provide.

10:52:31 So I wanted to make sure that we understood how that

10:52:33 budgetary process worked, because it really can become

10:52:37 complicated when someone is here and looks at the budget,

10:52:40 and it says zero, how the heck are we going to pay out of

10:52:43 this line item if there's nothing there and nothing shown

10:52:46 where we are getting that money from.

10:52:51 So I appreciate you explaining to me about how that works,

10:52:53 and helping us along in that.

10:52:55 >>> Thank you.

10:52:57 I appreciate it.

10:53:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There's a member missing.

10:53:04 Unless somebody changed their mind from last time, I don't

10:53:08 know how the mind are, item 27, which would be if 52 goes

10:53:21 away, there's not enough votes to deny it, there's not

10:53:24 enough votes to pass it.

10:53:26 So --

10:53:29 >> May we continue it?

10:53:33 I was going to suggest that we just take a vote at the end

10:53:36 of the meeting when we have seven council members here.

10:53:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We will hold it till the end of the

10:53:41 meeting but I will not be back at 1:30.

10:53:43 I have a close family member that had bypass surgery and I

10:53:46 am going to go visit that member of the family.

10:53:50 So there's where we are at.

10:53:51 If we don't do it by the time we finish here at 11:30 for

10:53:55 those council members that have a prior engagement, I

10:53:58 understand.

10:53:58 So we are going to hold 27 and 52.

10:54:04 We go now to 53.

10:54:16 >>THE CLERK: On 53 we do have a request for continuance.

10:54:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I need a motion to continue 353 to

10:54:23 February 16th, 2012 under staff reports.

10:54:27 I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mr. Reddick.

10:54:32 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

10:54:35 Opposed, nay.

10:54:36 Eyes have it unanimously.

10:54:38 It's held to February 16th.

10:54:41 Item 54.

10:54:49 Transportation.

10:54:49 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Chair, I asked for that to be continued.

10:54:53 And the reason, this is the second continuance.

10:54:55 But the reason I asked for it to be continued is that it's

10:54:57 going to be taken up by the Board of County Commissioners,

10:55:00 and their discussion has direct impact on our discussion,

10:55:03 and so we are going to discuss it February 16th.

10:55:07 They are scheduled to discuss it on February 8th, I

10:55:10 believe.

10:55:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So you want it continued to the 16th?

10:55:16 >>HARRY COHEN: It's already continued.

10:55:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't believe it has.

10:55:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, we have to continue it.

10:55:20 >> It's on the agenda.

10:55:34 The clerk tells me it's already continued.

10:55:36 Item number 55.

10:55:37 Mr. Spicola.

10:55:39 >> Rus Spicola, fire marshal here to speak on item number

10:55:43 55.

10:55:45 And I think we are here for the crowd manager safety class.

10:56:00 As it stands now, the crowd management safety class, I tray

10:56:04 to offer it as often as I can.

10:56:07 Four times a year, every quarter.

10:56:09 And I have had good participation.

10:56:12 So the folks that have attended are getting the message

10:56:16 about occupant loads.

10:56:18 I think that is one of the issues that we were worried

10:56:20 about.

10:56:20 And I haven't had too many problems since then.

10:56:30 So do you have any questions for me?

10:56:32 >> This was put on by Mrs. Mulhern, second bid Mrs.

10:56:35 Montelione, and I imagine this is about the attendance and

10:56:39 the ways of making it better, and the fines and so forth.

10:56:46 I yield to those council members.

10:56:48 Mrs. Mulhern?

10:56:53 >>MARY MULHERN: What number are we on?

10:56:57 Is.

10:56:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 55.

10:56:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't remember making that motion.

10:57:04 I yield to Councilwoman Montelione, because honestly, I

10:57:07 think this might have been noted incorrectly, because I

10:57:11 don't remember asking for this.

10:57:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It may have been as stated here, but I

10:57:22 know Councilwoman Capin had also weighed in on this, because

10:57:27 it has to do with some of the establishments that we have

10:57:33 selling alcoholic beverages in nightclubs, and those types

10:57:37 of establishments, because we don't want to have a repeat of

10:57:44 other incidences that have happened because where there are

10:57:50 fire regulations that are not being followed, that managers

10:57:54 of clubs, orthos owners of clubs are not attending or -- not

10:58:03 attending the class specifically but are not attending to

10:58:05 the safety of their patrons by having -- or not having the

10:58:13 ingress and egress we need to have in the case of an

10:58:16 emergency.

10:58:17 So what we had asked, although you have these classes on a

10:58:21 regular basis, that we somehow make it more attractive for

10:58:27 people to attend, let's say, and in some ways, the carat is

10:58:36 not the way to get -- carrot is not the way to get them to

10:58:41 attend.

10:58:41 I don't believe if we serve cookies and ice cream that she

10:58:44 will show up but if we make it some mandatory instead of

10:58:47 voluntary that they attend these classes, that would be an

10:58:51 answer to having a well educated ownership and management of

10:58:58 public establishments.

10:58:59 >> We tie that if possible to the assembly program for the

10:59:05 establishments.

10:59:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, has there been any work or

10:59:12 suggestion as to language that we would need to craft in

10:59:14 order to add that to a permit requirement, or what a fee, a

10:59:20 typical fee would be charged?

10:59:24 >>MORRIS MASSEY: Legal department.

10:59:25 One suggestion we are going to have a workshop on nightclub

10:59:30 regulations.

10:59:31 One requirement of a permit would be to attend the crowd

10:59:36 management safety classes.

10:59:37 So we would tie that into a permit and it would be

10:59:40 mandatory.

10:59:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I guess what we need to see, and what I

10:59:43 was hoping that we would hear now, is some draft language,

10:59:50 or a proposal of the dollar amount of fee that would be

10:59:56 tacked on so that we can we don't want to make it

11:00:11 prohibitive for someone to attend.

11:00:14 We are about prompting businesses to open and new businesses

11:00:17 to expand, new businesses to open and existing businesses to

11:00:20 expand.

11:00:20 So we don't want to make it cost prohibitive.

11:00:24 So that's why I guess part of what I am looking for is, you

11:00:28 know, a target dollar amount that would be in addition to

11:00:33 the fees that we are charging currently, and language that

11:00:39 we could entertain adding here as a council, as a procedure.

11:00:43 >> Well, one option for council would go down the road as a

11:00:47 civil citation process for violating the fire code, and the

11:00:51 fines for that can be up to $450 per violation, which brings

11:00:57 the possibility of multiple violations for a number of days.

11:01:00 But that suggestion about tying the crowd management safety

11:01:03 class to a nightclub regulation, that would be kind of a

11:01:06 low-cost way to do that because they wouldn't get their

11:01:09 permit or license unless they attended that meeting.

11:01:12 It would also allow the fire marshal to educate the

11:01:15 nightclub owners on occupancy levels and things like that.

11:01:18 So that would be two suggestions to go down the road of

11:01:23 civil citation, and we can make the nightclub regulations a

11:01:27 requirement for the crowd management course.

11:01:30 >> So do you want to come back when we discuss this for the

11:01:33 alcoholic beverage workshop?

11:01:35 >> Rebecca Kert made that suggestion and she has the

11:01:39 workshop at 1:30 so we can discuss it more then.

11:01:44 >> And then council member Capin would be here.

11:01:47 Because I know this is an important subject.

11:01:51 Could we entertain --

11:01:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We can hold it till then.

11:01:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Till the 1:30 workshop.

11:01:57 >> But the 1:30 workshop is for alcohol and we are talking

11:02:02 about fire code violations in terms of the fine.

11:02:04 In terms of the nightclub regulations, sure, we would be

11:02:07 tying the crowd management safety class, but in terms of

11:02:12 violating for fire code, we need a little bit of direction

11:02:15 on that.

11:02:15 >> Then we'll have a partial discussion then at 1:30 under

11:02:22 the workshop as it relates to alcoholic beverage permitting,

11:02:25 and I guess I'm not hearing from either of you what I was

11:02:34 intending or asking the first time.

11:02:35 So maybe we need to continue this item and you can come back

11:02:38 prepared with actual language that we would be entertaining

11:02:43 to a permit, or a suggestion of fees that would be incurred

11:02:49 that the public could weigh in on it.

11:02:51 >> We would get out of the realm, if we have a few

11:02:55 resolutions for reinspection, go down the direction for

11:02:58 fines, the amendment code.

11:03:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Talking about the fees that would be

11:03:05 associated with adding the requirement for attending the

11:03:07 class to the permit.

11:03:10 >> That number we don't have at this point.

11:03:11 >> I want to make sure that we are not making it cost

11:03:18 prohibitive for somebody to get the permit.

11:03:22 I sit on the economic competitiveness committee and part of

11:03:26 what we are doing is trying to make our city open for

11:03:29 business.

11:03:31 That would be an important thing for me to know.

11:03:37 >> Seventy dollars.

11:03:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: What would we be adding to it for the

11:03:46 mandatory --

11:03:47 >> There is no cost for attending class.

11:03:51 Free of charge.

11:03:51 I do it on my own time.

11:03:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Really?

11:03:55 That is even better news.

11:03:57 At least for us, not for your family.

11:04:01 Okay.

11:04:01 So the permit is $70 and the class is no charge.

11:04:05 Then I guess I need to ask legal to come back with language

11:04:08 that we would add the requirement of somebody attending this

11:04:13 class to that permit process.

11:04:23 So I would motion to have legal come back with language that

11:04:27 we would require attendance at a fire safety class, crowd

11:04:36 management safety class to the application of a permit.

11:04:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Mr. Cohen. Further discussion?

11:04:46 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:04:48 Opposed, nay.

11:04:51 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:04:52 This is coming back when now?

11:04:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: March 1st.

11:05:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: March 1st.

11:05:03 Mr. Suarez, before --

11:05:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Spicola, quick question.

11:05:14 You are obviously following this discussion about clubs and

11:05:17 violence and some other issues that have happened, underage

11:05:21 dripping and other things.

11:05:23 Out of your knowledge, any of the clubs that were mentioned

11:05:25 in these incidences ever go to your classes?

11:05:29 >> I don't have the names of the clubs.

11:05:31 >> One was Club Manila.

11:05:37 They did?

11:05:38 >> They were the first ones to attend.

11:05:40 >> They were the first one there is.

11:05:42 Thank you.

11:05:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I know council members have to be

11:05:46 somewhere at 11:30 so I have been told.

11:05:49 So I have only a few items more.

11:05:52 I want you to know at 11:30 I will still be here but I know

11:05:55 you have to leave and I appreciate it very much.

11:05:57 Next is number 56.

11:05:58 >> Good morning.

11:06:02 Irvin Lee, public works director, here to provide you a

11:06:07 report regarding options for funding the previously

11:06:11 rescinded funds that were provided by EPA for our waterways,

11:06:17 dredging project.

11:06:19 One thing I wanted to just mention up front, one of the

11:06:23 benefits, and again all of the angst and concern has been

11:06:30 expressed by the fund.

11:06:34 One of the benefits is the fact that if we do institute this

11:06:39 project, the Tampa funding or funds that are not federal

11:06:43 source, we realize the significant time savings due to not

11:06:49 having to have the reviews that are associated with the

11:06:56 national environmental policy act, NEPA.

11:07:02 What was mentioned in the motion is just to address the Port

11:07:07 Authority issue.

11:07:08 And that's the fact that even though the Port Authority does

11:07:11 have regulatory jurisdiction, they have no obligation for

11:07:15 maintenance outside of harbor and shipping facilities.

11:07:19 There is a 2007 policy from our legal department which

11:07:26 addresses this issue.

11:07:27 And I believe they can provide additional feedback on that.

11:07:31 When we look at both the Southwest Florida Water Management

11:07:33 District, their policy states that maintenance dredging

11:07:40 which we are attempting to pursue, did not fit within the

11:07:43 water quality grant program that they administer.

11:07:47 We have talked to both FDOT and Hillsborough County.

11:07:51 They have no legal authority or regulatory obligation to

11:07:56 participate in the program, and the county does have a

11:08:00 separate canal maintenance program, but again, it's totally

11:08:04 separate from the action that we are pursuing at this point.

11:08:07 >>HARRY COHEN: What about the fact that county and state

11:08:17 roads are running off into the water supply that is clogging

11:08:23 up these canals?

11:08:26 Westshore Boulevard is a county road, and it's the run-off

11:08:30 from Westshore that's been a great deal of the problem with

11:08:33 creating all of the refuge.

11:08:39 >>> Councilman, there have been studies that have debated

11:08:43 this issue on both sides, whether it's the title influence

11:08:46 or whether it's the run-off from the roads.

11:08:49 It would be very difficult to parcel out the responsibility

11:08:54 based on just that fact.

11:09:00 Again, there's equal discussion on both sides.

11:09:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Lee, any discussion from DEP?

11:09:18 We are not get anything money from the corps of engineers

11:09:21 which is where we thought we would get authorized money.

11:09:24 It was the EPA, okay.

11:09:26 Then I think we are trying to get money from the corps at

11:09:29 some point.

11:09:29 >> Florida power boat association, there have been a number

11:09:41 of folks, and I guess maybe to me, the biggest issue is

11:09:44 this.

11:09:45 I think to Mr. Cohen's point about what the runoff is, we

11:09:49 are now working on and will approve probably this year a

11:09:55 bill that talks about runoff of fertilizer.

11:09:58 Okay.

11:10:00 If we do not dredge these canals, in these areas, we are

11:10:03 going to find we are going to have even more effluent in the

11:10:07 water right there by people's homes to make it even worse

11:10:10 than it is already.

11:10:13 And meaning that we are only doing one step which is

11:10:16 stopping the runoff.

11:10:17 We can't stop it year round.

11:10:19 How are we going to get this stuff out of here without doing

11:10:24 it?

11:10:24 Any other suggestions you have?

11:10:25 And I know the legal department is supposed to be talking,

11:10:28 too, so I am not going to ask you any legal questions.

11:10:30 But is there anything else, any other place that we can go

11:10:32 to, to try to get this money to finish this dredging?

11:10:35 >> Again, we will pursue all potential sources.

11:10:41 What we may find ourselves having to do is to -- one of the

11:10:49 challenges with the federal grant, typically funds that

11:10:52 require some type of research or innovative method which we

11:10:57 have not had the opportunity to even figure out how we might

11:11:01 apply something like that, that we could then continue on a

11:11:06 long-term basis.

11:11:07 Because maintenance is the real crux of what we are trying

11:11:10 to do.

11:11:12 This is something that's going to continue.

11:11:13 So what we will probably find ourselves having to do, that

11:11:20 we may find a federal source, the EPA may come back, and

11:11:28 have additional opportunity in the future, but the permits

11:11:32 that we have in place as a result of this initial project

11:11:36 may extend over a period of time which will allow us to

11:11:41 bring in those additional funds.

11:11:42 So I don't have a particular grant that we can apply at this

11:11:47 point.

11:11:48 But we are still continuing to look.

11:11:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One last question.

11:11:51 I apologize, Mr. Chair.

11:11:53 We have expended about $950,000.

11:11:56 Am I correct?

11:11:57 Or somewhere in that neighborhood?

11:11:59 >> Somewhere north of 900,000.

11:12:01 I think the total project was how much?

11:12:04 >> Our budget was about 2.3 million.

11:12:06 >> So now we have that differential.

11:12:09 We really don't know where that money is coming from.

11:12:11 We have seen that.

11:12:12 We can be pretty creative on the budget.

11:12:14 But that's a big number.

11:12:18 Has there been discussions already as to where that money

11:12:21 might come from in order to complete the work?

11:12:25 >> I am focusing at this point on trying to develop the cost

11:12:30 so we can award our contract.

11:12:31 Once we have the contract awarded, we know what any cost is,

11:12:35 we'll know how far funding that we had today will go.

11:12:39 And that points to potential phasing opportunities as we

11:12:43 find additional funding.

11:12:44 >> Thanks, Mr. Lee.

11:12:47 I appreciate it.

11:12:47 >>HARRY COHEN: Just to follow up on that, how much money is

11:12:50 actually designated to get this project today, assuming you

11:12:56 get no money from anyone else?

11:12:57 How much money is the city still committed to spending to do

11:13:01 this project?

11:13:03 >> I would have to --

11:13:05 >> I mean, is it a million dollar difference between the 1.3

11:13:09 and 2.3?

11:13:10 >> That was what was budgeted.

11:13:13 Internal City of Tampa funding, yes.

11:13:15 But I would have to get with our folks to find out what the

11:13:20 actual --

11:13:21 >> What the balance is in the account.

11:13:23 >> Exactly.

11:13:24 >>HARRY COHEN: When we met on this project earlier in the

11:13:28 week, you told me that the city is going forward, that we

11:13:31 are moving forward with the permitting, getting a

11:13:34 contractor, and you expected the dredging to actually begin

11:13:38 sometime this year.

11:13:39 >> Yes.

11:13:40 >> Is that still the case?

11:13:41 >> That is still the case.

11:13:42 >> And is the scope of the project going to be dictated by

11:13:49 how much money is available?

11:13:50 >> True, yes.

11:13:51 That's correct.

11:13:52 >> But there is some money available.

11:13:54 So there will be a project, and we just don't know exactly

11:13:58 how large it will be and whether it will encompass all of

11:14:01 the canals that have been identified, or not, correct?

11:14:06 >> I emphasize the key, the canals that we are permitting

11:14:11 give us the opportunity, if we don't have funding now, the

11:14:17 permits will allow us at some future date to go back and as

11:14:22 we find money, to go back and address some of those areas.

11:14:25 >> The issue here is that the neighbors in this particular

11:14:31 area of the city, for those that are not familiar with this

11:14:34 issue, have been working with the city for upwards of 15

11:14:39 years to try to get these canals dredged.

11:14:41 And through no fault of their own and through no fault of

11:14:46 the current administration, they have really been stymied at

11:14:50 every turn in trying to get this work done.

11:14:52 And when we met with the neighbors at the Jan Platt library

11:14:58 they were very concerned that the withdrawal of the EPA

11:15:01 grants was going to mean that the project was just going to

11:15:03 stop in its tracks.

11:15:05 And so I just want to be clear that the project is moving

11:15:09 forward, and that there is going to be city money expended,

11:15:15 we just don't know what exactly that's going to be able to

11:15:18 cover because we don't know what the unit cost is actually

11:15:22 going to be in dredging the canals.

11:15:24 >> Yes, sir.

11:15:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

11:15:28 I think we got the picture.

11:15:38 I go to item 57.

11:15:47 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Mr. Miranda, may I be heard on item 56

11:15:50 briefly?

11:15:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, what is it you are going to ask

11:15:53 that wee we don't already know?

11:15:56 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I was going to explain my client's point of

11:15:58 view on this funding issue and follow up with Ms. McLean's

11:16:04 memorandum.

11:16:05 >> You understand I have 15 minutes to close this meeting

11:16:08 because I am losing four council members.

11:16:11 Not one, not two, but four.

11:16:12 >> May we continue this item for public discussion at a

11:16:15 future date?

11:16:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This item has been discussed like Mr.

11:16:20 Cohen said for 20 years or more.

11:16:21 It was started by one lady, and she did an admirable job,

11:16:25 and we are going to get it done sooner or later.

11:16:28 But he said was 100 percent correct.

11:16:30 You have to get the permitting.

11:16:31 You have to get the costs.

11:16:32 We have already spent over $9, 000,000 to get this done.

11:16:35 >> I have no quarrel with Mr. Lee's approach to the project.

11:16:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What is it you want me to do?

11:16:42 >> There are other agencies that are responsible for this

11:16:44 problem.

11:16:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Then write a letter to me, please, and

11:16:47 we'll get them done.

11:16:48 Thank you very much.

11:16:49 Write a letter to this council and we'll get them done.

11:16:52 All right?

11:16:52 Thank you very much.

11:16:54 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: All right, and --

11:16:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: But not right now.

11:16:57 Thank you.

11:16:58 57.

11:16:59 Continued public hearing.

11:17:02 Vacating an alley.

11:17:04 >>THE CLERK: Swear in the witnesses.

11:17:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This is quasi-judicial.

11:17:08 Anybody to speak on item 57 should and will be sworn in.

11:17:12 >>BARBARA LYNCH: Land Development Coordination.

11:17:27 A request to vacate an alley generally located in Centro

11:17:31 Tampa and I have a map showing the location.

11:17:35 Petitioner's property is shown in red and the alley to be

11:17:40 vacated is shown in yellow.

11:17:43 The alley lies between North Boulevard and Woodrow, and runs

11:17:48 from Alfred to Braddock.

11:17:49 I have some photos.

11:17:51 The first photo is the alleyway looking north on Albert

11:17:54 street

11:17:58 The next photo is alleyway looking south of Braddock and is

11:18:06 blocked by overgrowth.

11:18:07 The next photo is petitioner's property.

11:18:11 And then the next photo, there's an alleyway running north

11:18:18 of this alley, north of Braddock, and it's not vacated but

11:18:25 not improved either.

11:18:27 The next is a drawing just of the plat showing the alley has

11:18:32 been vacated, the alley to the north of this one is still

11:18:35 open.

11:18:38 This is the alley.

11:18:40 Staff has no objection to the request.

11:18:41 And there's no request for easements.

11:18:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Is petitioner here?

11:18:45 >>

11:18:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:18:54 Anyone to speak on item 57?

11:18:56 57?

11:18:56 57?

11:18:57 I see no one.

11:18:58 I need a motion to close.

11:19:00 Motion by Mr. Reddick.

11:19:01 Seconded by Mrs. Montelione.

11:19:03 All in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye.

11:19:06 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:19:08 I need somebody to read this ordinance.

11:19:11 Item 57.

11:19:12 Mr. Cohen.

11:19:13 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for

11:19:16 first reading consideration.

11:19:17 An ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing, abandoning an

11:19:21 alleyway lying east of North Boulevard, west of north

11:19:24 Woodrow Avenue, south of west Braddock street and north of

11:19:27 west Alfred street in excels your subdivision, a subdivision

11:19:32 in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the same

11:19:34 being more fully described in section 1 hereof providing an

11:19:36 effective date.

11:19:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mrs. Montelione.

11:19:40 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:19:43 Opposed, nay.

11:19:44 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:19:45 Yes, ma'am.

11:19:46 >>THE CLERK: Second reading and adoption will be held on

11:19:49 February 15, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.

11:19:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 58.

11:19:57 Cannot be heard.

11:19:58 No affidavit filed.

11:19:59 Is this going to be removed or coming back at a late date?

11:20:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't know.

11:20:07 >> I'm the agent for this project.

11:20:10 It will come back.

11:20:11 I respectfully request another hearing date once we comply

11:20:14 with the affidavit.

11:20:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What time do you need?

11:20:20 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Sandy, the affidavit requires how much

11:20:22 time?

11:20:22 >>THE CLERK: Affidavit requires 30 days notice.

11:20:24 >>STEVE MICHELINI: So it will be 45 days or so.

11:20:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right, clerk, give me a 45-day out

11:20:31 calendar date, please.

11:20:32 >> The March 15th agenda.

11:20:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Cohen, March

11:20:48 15th.

11:20:49 >>STEVE MICHELINI: The next week, please.

11:20:50 >>THE CLERK: April 5th.

11:20:55 >> April 5th.

11:20:57 I have a motion by Mr. Cohen on April 5th.

11:21:01 Second by Mrs. Mulhern.

11:21:02 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:21:05 Opposed nay.

11:21:05 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:21:07 Thank you.

11:21:08 Item 59.

11:21:18 Have you been sworn in?

11:21:22 This is nonquasi-

11:21:24 Go on.

11:21:25 >> Richard Calabia, 1721 North Howard Avenue Tampa, Florida

11:21:30 33607.

11:21:31 We made this presentation last time.

11:21:34 I don't know if you need to hear it again.

11:21:35 I will answer any questions you have.

11:21:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone in the audience care to speak on

11:21:39 item 59?

11:21:41 Anyone for or against or in between?

11:21:48 Motion to close by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr. Suarez.

11:21:52 All in favor?

11:21:53 Opposed?

11:21:54 It's closed.

11:21:56 Mr. Suarez, will you kindly take 59, the ordinance presented

11:21:59 for second reading and adoption?

11:22:01 >> An ordinance being presented, sed second reading and

11:22:05 adoption, amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, land use

11:22:08 map for the property located in the general vicinity of 2133

11:22:12 through 2135 west union street from residential-20 to R-22

11:22:19 community commercial-35 or CC-35 providing for repeal of all

11:22:24 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,

11:22:27 providing an effective date.

11:22:27 >> Second.

11:22:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, second by

11:22:31 Mr. Cohen.

11:22:32 Roll call vote and record.

11:22:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

11:22:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:22:47 We still have three unfinished items.

11:22:49 27, 34 and 35.

11:22:52 We go back to 27.

11:22:54 We still have 52 dangling out there which will be taken care

11:22:58 of once 27 is taken care of one way or the other.

11:23:02 I need some movement on 27 one way or the other.

11:23:08 We are either going to move the resolution or deny the

11:23:11 resolution but we are going to do something today.

11:23:14 Yes, sir, Mr. Reddick.

11:23:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: I move item 27.

11:23:18 >> Second.

11:23:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick.

11:23:20 I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

11:23:21 Any further discussion on this item?

11:23:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

11:23:28 Very shortly.

11:23:29 I know I wasn't here at the beginning but I have been here

11:23:31 every other time.

11:23:33 And we need to consider.

11:23:36 I understand the money. I truly appreciate all the

11:23:41 investigation that was done to follow up with this purchase

11:23:44 and all the other purchases.

11:23:46 Again, when there is a purchase that benefits the community,

11:23:53 whether it's state or local or federal, once it is

11:24:01 determined that that property is to be used, it becomes --

11:24:06 it can become eminent domain and it is a right-of-way, and

11:24:10 it is again, it is not an arm's length transaction.

11:24:22 All the power of the government is behind that eminent

11:24:24 domain.

11:24:24 Therefore, there are -- we put in place remedies for people

11:24:34 whose private property is being taken by government.

11:24:38 And that is where they are entitled to hire an attorney, and

11:24:45 we, taxpayer, pay for that attorney, and all the legal fees,

11:24:51 and/or if it is deemed that they are entitled to more, we

11:24:55 pay that also.

11:24:59 So with that said, again, a transaction between government

11:25:04 and private property is not an arm's length transaction,

11:25:08 therefore, I will be supporting this purchase.

11:25:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion on the floor for

11:25:16 resolution.

11:25:17 I believe it's moved by Mr. Reddick, seconded by Mr. Suarez.

11:25:21 All in favor of the resolution being approved, please

11:25:24 signify by saying aye.

11:25:28 All in favor of it being denied, please say aye now.

11:25:32 All right.

11:25:32 We have three nays, I believe.

11:25:34 Clerk, would you clarify?

11:25:36 >> Motion carried with Mulhern, Cohen and Montelione voting

11:25:40 no.

11:25:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

11:25:41 We go to item number 34.

11:25:50 The proposal on Lee H. Combs Consulting Services.

11:26:02 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management development services.

11:26:05 Item 34, we are here seeking your support to enter into a

11:26:09 contract with Lee H. Combs who would be the lead consultant

11:26:14 to the agency to complete the five year consolidated action

11:26:21 plan.

11:26:23 Basically, the administration, if we move forward to decide

11:26:27 to go with the consultant on this particular project, we

11:26:31 base that decision looking at our current staffing,

11:26:34 expertise and resources and felt that we are aren't in a

11:26:40 position to execute this plan as strongly as it needs to be.

11:26:43 The process this year is a bit more complicated than it was

11:26:47 the previous five year program.

11:26:49 There's a software requirement, more in-depth, more

11:26:54 difficult to comply with.

11:26:58 There's also a sense of timeliness to this, that the matter

11:27:04 has to be completed by August of 2012, so we felt that

11:27:07 having a consultant would be in the best position to make

11:27:10 sure we met those time requirements as well.

11:27:15 Also, council wanted a great deal of input into this

11:27:18 particular plan.

11:27:18 We had that conversation when we presented the final year of

11:27:22 the previous plan, and we wanted to make sure that we

11:27:25 provided council with as many opportunities to participate

11:27:29 and provide input into the creation of this plan.

11:27:33 So basically, we are asking your support to move forward and

11:27:35 get started with this project in a timely fashion.

11:27:38 So if you have other questions that I can answer.

11:27:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any further questions at this time?

11:27:44 Mrs. Montelione, Mrs. Mulhern?

11:27:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I had asked these items to be pulled.

11:27:53 And sometimes the reason for their being items pulled late

11:27:59 in the day is because I tray to reach out to the staff

11:28:02 member or members, departments, to discuss with them the

11:28:08 items before they are being pulled.

11:28:10 So I give staff all of the time that I could possibly give

11:28:15 them and eking out the last moment to have that discussion

11:28:19 with them.

11:28:19 So if you see items being pulled late in the day, it's

11:28:22 because I tried and tried and tried, and have those

11:28:27 discussions before actually pulling the item.

11:28:29 In this case, there's a few questions that I have.

11:28:33 I have the consolidated -- the action plan and projected use

11:28:38 of funds, that we were provided by staff for our review

11:28:46 because we have had a lot of questions about how these funds

11:28:48 are used.

11:28:50 The CDBG funds is what this document addresses, and how we

11:28:55 are going to use them, is that correct?

11:28:59 >> That's correct.

11:29:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And how the use of the CDBG --

11:29:05 >> It's virtually all the grants that are operating that we

11:29:07 have in the programs.

11:29:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.

11:29:10 It's my understanding that a lot of that money is going to

11:29:12 be going away.

11:29:14 We had talked before a 40% decrease, and projected expenses.

11:29:20 >>THOM SNELLING: And still hopeful.

11:29:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, we can be hopeful.

11:29:24 30% one and 40% in the other.

11:29:26 Is it percentages or dollars?

11:29:28 >> It's percentages and that's approximately correct.

11:29:30 I think it was 28% for the CDBG and upwards of 38 to 40% for

11:29:35 the home, yes, ma'am.

11:29:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's a lot of funds we are going to be

11:29:42 looking, combining 70% of the funding we currently receive.

11:29:48 And we also discussed during the CDBG discussions we have

11:29:52 had on council perhaps looking at how we spend those funds

11:30:00 through a different set of glasses.

11:30:04 I didn't think that would mean that we would be using a set

11:30:07 of glasses that we borrowed from somebody else, and it would

11:30:10 mean our staff and our philosophy would be looking at this,

11:30:16 not an outside consultant.

11:30:17 So I have a couple of concerns.

11:30:21 The consultants that we are using, I saw the list that was

11:30:25 provided by our purchasing department, and we had three that

11:30:30 were short listed.

11:30:32 And then after interviews with those three firms, the

11:30:35 ranking came out a little bit different.

11:30:38 What I didn't see and what was provided by our purchasing

11:30:43 department is typically what we get is the big proposal

11:30:46 tabulation sheet that went along with the agenda item, and

11:30:51 in this case, it's blank.

11:30:57 It has the names at the top, and doesn't have any

11:31:00 information in the body of the form.

11:31:05 I didn't get a chance to see what the dollar amounts were

11:31:08 being proposed by the three short listed companies.

11:31:13 We don't have information on whether they are local

11:31:15 companies, because I do have a preference even if it's only

11:31:19 in my own mind for using folks that contribute to our local

11:31:22 economy and are familiar with our city, and what we have

11:31:30 been struggling with here on council and how we spend these

11:31:33 funds.

11:31:35 The other concern or question that I had is who was on the

11:31:39 evaluation committee to decide which of these firms or how

11:31:44 the short listed firms, how the ranking got turned around a

11:31:48 little bit.

11:31:52 And it's my understanding that this report that I have here

11:31:56 was prepared by our own staff.

11:32:00 I don't know who prepared the one previous to that.

11:32:05 >> That report was prepared by members of the housing

11:32:07 community development division with some assistance of

11:32:11 budget.

11:32:11 And we also used graduate students from the University of

11:32:15 South Florida to help prepare the document as well.

11:32:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The one before that?

11:32:21 >> Ten years ago?

11:32:23 No, ma'am, I don't know.

11:32:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So this would be perhaps setting a

11:32:30 precedent that we are using, a consultant to prepare this

11:32:32 report, and not doing it in-house?

11:32:35 >> Setting a precedent, I don't know that it would set a

11:32:39 precedent.

11:32:40 >>MARY MULHERN: It would be the first time?

11:32:42 >> I don't know if that's an accurate statement or not.

11:32:45 I don't know who did it five years ago or ten years ago or

11:32:47 15 years ago when they initially started but other

11:32:50 municipalities, Hillsborough County, Lee County, Fort Myers,

11:32:54 Cape Coral, they have all used consultants.

11:32:57 Some of them use the same consultant that we are using to

11:32:59 prepare their five year plans.

11:33:05 So a precedent --

11:33:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't know if that's a blessing or a

11:33:10 curse.

11:33:11 >> I think it's good.

11:33:12 I think consultant is exceptionally qualified to do this.

11:33:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But it also might mean that our plan

11:33:18 ends up looking like every other plan in the area and not

11:33:22 have the direction of where the City of Tampa --

11:33:27 >>THOM SNELLING: There's a difference of demo grams.

11:33:29 There's different public workshop requirements.

11:33:31 There's different analyses requirements that are unique to

11:33:34 our community.

11:33:34 And not part of Fort Myers or Cape Coral or the others.

11:33:40 Just that they have gone through the process, is my point.

11:33:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Is the charge of the consultant who

11:33:51 determined the content and substance of the report, or just

11:33:55 to fill out the forms in the formats required, and staff the

11:34:02 hearings and make sure that the targeted date and deadlines

11:34:07 are met, the public workshops are held?

11:34:10 Or --

11:34:13 >> The consultant will take making sure all those things

11:34:17 take place in a timely fashion.

11:34:19 The substantive part, in terms of how our dollars are to be

11:34:23 spent and what particular programs our community will follow

11:34:27 to answer the substantive programmatic type requirements of

11:34:34 the document are entirely controlled by our local -- our

11:34:39 local community, City Council, the administration, who

11:34:43 decide this is what the substantive programs will look like.

11:34:45 The consultant helps you prepare the document, just if you

11:34:48 were going to hire consultants to assist with your

11:34:51 comprehensive plan or any other planning document, you are

11:34:55 hiring their expertise to see us through the rigorous

11:34:58 requirements that are dealing with the HUD that is dealing

11:35:00 with the HUD documents, is to help you get through those

11:35:03 types of things.

11:35:04 Because it is a more complex.

11:35:06 And as you know, if you miss a step at any time along the

11:35:11 way, you find yourself fighting against being noncompliant

11:35:16 with meeting the requirements of a particular program, I

11:35:19 think that's probably where some of the value really comes

11:35:21 in for the consultant.

11:35:24 Again, the substantive issues are entirely our own

11:35:28 programmatic issues are our own.

11:35:29 >> Okay.

11:35:32 It just concerns me where we are taking a process that was

11:35:38 totally our own and sending it out to a consultant who is

11:35:49 working for many other municipalities and jurisdictions in

11:35:52 the area.

11:35:53 Maybe it's just me, but I have that concern.

11:35:55 And I do have another technical specific question.

11:35:59 Who is on the evaluation committee?

11:36:01 For --

11:36:03 >> Members of my staff and housing community development,

11:36:05 members of the city's budget staff.

11:36:08 >> And 91,500 is the dollar amount that we are going to be

11:36:13 spending, and that's going to be coming out of the grant

11:36:17 funds that we already have, hope and SHIP?

11:36:21 >> Yes, that money is from previous fiscal years 10, 11, and

11:36:25 money that had been not expended, that was identified for

11:36:29 administrative purposes.

11:36:30 So it's not like we are dipping into programmatic dollars to

11:36:35 pay for this grant.

11:36:36 >> I'm sorry, say that again?

11:36:38 >>THOM SNELLING: It's not as if we are dipping into

11:36:40 programmatic dollars.

11:36:41 These are dollars earmarked in fiscal years 10 and 11 and a

11:36:45 small amount in fiscal year 12, I guess 18,000, that were

11:36:48 earmarked already for administrative purposes, for

11:36:51 administrative uses.

11:36:52 >> So what are we -- whether we do it in-house or whether we

11:36:56 do it through the work of a consultant, it still costs us

11:36:59 $91,000?

11:37:02 Or we are in that ballpark?

11:37:05 Somewhere in that ballpark?

11:37:06 I mean, if there were administrative dollars that we send

11:37:11 set aside for that, then I am guessing how much it costs

11:37:16 each department to perform this task, it's going to be close

11:37:19 to what we are spending outside?

11:37:21 >> I don't have figures on that, ma'am, I'm sorry.

11:37:24 I don't know what it would actually cost --

11:37:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's probably a wise idea when we pull

11:37:29 items that we have finance and budget to answer these

11:37:31 questions, because it comes down to the money for me.

11:37:35 >>THOM SNELLING: And I will remember that.

11:37:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think that's outlining most of the

11:37:45 concerns that I had.

11:37:45 Thank you.

11:37:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern.

11:37:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

11:37:49 Since this was on the consent agenda, I haven't had the

11:37:57 opportunity to see the backup on this.

11:37:59 I think since this is a major investment and a major change

11:38:04 from what we did before, I would just like -- and I am not

11:38:08 saying that this is a bad idea or questioning whether this

11:38:11 is a good consultant to do this.

11:38:13 I just want some time to look at it.

11:38:16 So I don't know if other council people feel this way.

11:38:20 But I think Councilman Montelione asked a lot of questions

11:38:23 that I don't feel like I have answers to.

11:38:25 I have some of my own.

11:38:27 So I make a motion to continue this.

11:38:35 I guess for two weeks.

11:38:38 What do we have next week if we could maybe come back with

11:38:41 it next week?

11:38:43 >> Next week is CRA and night meeting.

11:38:47 Next regular is the 15th.

11:38:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Does that look like a busy night meeting

11:38:52 agenda?

11:38:57 >> 5:01.

11:39:00 You have recognition at 6:00.

11:39:04 You also have --

11:39:12 >>MARY MULHERN: It's not really a stretch to do it at the

11:39:14 CRA meeting either.

11:39:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to go to Mr. Suarez on this

11:39:21 item, and then we'll find out what we are going to do.

11:39:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: A quick question.

11:39:26 You have already stated that these are federal dollars, and

11:39:29 that we get in a normal process of getting CDBG grants.

11:39:34 It can only be used administratively.

11:39:36 And I don't know if the -- that's what he said.

11:39:40 The question is, the money we are using for this, we have

11:39:42 identified as administrative dollars.

11:39:45 It's administrative dollars only.

11:39:47 Or is it administrative dollars that they have already

11:39:49 identified in previous FY years, so there's administrative

11:39:54 dollars previously identified in fiscal year, that when they

11:39:57 broke that out they said, you are going to use programmatic

11:40:01 dollars for something else, right?

11:40:04 >> 80% of it. You've got 80% or 12% or whatever that

11:40:07 percentage is for administrative dollars.

11:40:08 That's what we are allowed to charge.

11:40:12 I suppose there may be some line item budgets which can move

11:40:16 it back.

11:40:17 That I don't know.

11:40:18 >> Typically that's not how it's done.

11:40:22 Once that grant is awarded, it has been appropriated in that

11:40:25 way, there's specific language as to what we are supposed to

11:40:30 use money for.

11:40:32 So I don't know, the questions that come in from

11:40:35 Councilwoman Montelione or from the answers that Ms. Mulhern

11:40:38 is looking for is, if that money can be used for some other

11:40:42 purpose -- and that's the only question I would have, is

11:40:44 that can it be used for other purposes?

11:40:46 I assume that the direction that the discussion is going,

11:40:49 because we are adjust, again, this is a pass-through amount

11:40:53 that we have already approved, and some other earlier date,

11:40:57 and now we are using it for consultants for our purposes

11:41:01 now.

11:41:02 Correct?

11:41:02 This is something that's already been approved.

11:41:04 We already have the money.

11:41:05 All we are doing is we are going to hire a consultant.

11:41:07 >> For administrative purposes.

11:41:13 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I guess if we can't spend for the anything

11:41:15 else but we are going to spend it anyway.

11:41:17 That's the only question I would have.

11:41:19 Because the question didn't make sense to me.

11:41:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Spearman, would you like to speak on

11:41:27 this item?

11:41:34 Mr. Spearman?

11:41:37 Side bars?

11:41:41 >>THOM SNELLING: No, just finding out -- I have an August

11:41:44 deadline.

11:41:45 And there's a substantial amount of work to be done in

11:41:49 January and February.

11:41:50 With public meetings.

11:41:51 And it has to happen.

11:41:54 The other thing I was asking Mr. Spearman was if there was a

11:41:59 time frame which he needed to execute the contract, like a

11:42:03 construction, you get an estimate, it gad for 30 days or

11:42:06 whatever.

11:42:06 The proposal we have from this consultant is for the 90,000.

11:42:09 I don't know if there's a two'-week window that that

11:42:13 proposal would go null and void, I am going to pull the

11:42:16 proposal off or not.

11:42:17 I don't know.

11:42:18 >> I don't think so.

11:42:19 But I am more into the timing of the whole scheme.

11:42:22 There's two -- is two weeks going to hinder you or not?

11:42:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I was trying to say a week.

11:42:31 We could do it at our CRA meeting.

11:42:33 >>THE CLERK: This would have to be done in council session,

11:42:39 not CRA.

11:42:39 >>> The August deadline is not set by the contract.

11:42:43 The deadline is set by legislation.

11:42:45 If you don't meet the August plan, the city is in trouble.

11:42:49 So, yes, it is important whether it's two days, three days,

11:42:52 five days.

11:42:54 If you are going to use a consultant, starting as early as

11:42:58 possible, it's going to be crucial.

11:43:01 Otherwise, you are not going to make an August deadline.

11:43:05 >> From what I am hearing from at least two members, the

11:43:09 next meeting which is a council meeting will be two weeks.

11:43:12 Now, if we can kiss bye-bye $91,000 whichever way he wants

11:43:20 to government that's his or hers or their prerogative.

11:43:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I wanted to make a motion.

11:43:29 I was trying to do it for a week.

11:43:31 So I am going to make a motion to continue this for one week

11:43:35 till our night meeting next week.

11:43:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.

11:43:44 Clerk 5:01?

11:43:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

11:43:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mrs. Mulhern for a

11:43:49 continuation for one week at 5:01.

11:43:51 That will be item 5, I believe, 5:01.

11:43:55 >>THE CLERK: That's item --

11:43:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One is a motion for a contract.

11:43:59 The other is the funding so we have to keep them together.

11:44:02 Like a marriage.

11:44:05 Okay.

11:44:06 Ms. Mulhern made a motion.

11:44:07 I have a second from Mrs. Montelione.

11:44:09 Any further discussion of that motion?

11:44:11 Please signify by saying aye.

11:44:14 Opposed nay.

11:44:14 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:44:16 Thank you all very much.

11:44:18 We go to new business.

11:44:23 I believe there's a request that was requested asked of us

11:44:29 earlier on billboards, chickens, and illegal drugs.

11:44:40 Talk about billboards, eggs and drugs.

11:44:44 Sounds like an omelet to me.

11:44:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I will motion that we have legal staff

11:44:51 come back with analysis report of the electronic billboards.

11:44:57 I believe what I heard this morning from Mr. Pressman was

11:45:01 that the previous council had said in two years we'll see

11:45:08 how it's going.

11:45:09 And then we'll come back and consider it.

11:45:11 So I think we need staff to formally report to us to,

11:45:17 quote-unquote, see how it's going and so that's probably

11:45:21 planning and zoning staff and have the legal department come

11:45:24 back with ba what we would be considering on adding

11:45:32 additional faces to what our ordinance currently states.

11:45:35 >> Second.

11:45:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione on the

11:45:39 billboard brought up yearly -- earlier, second by Mr. Cohen.

11:45:44 Further discussion on the motion?

11:45:46 Give me a date and time.

11:45:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: March 1st seems to be a popular

11:45:51 date.

11:45:51 I don't know with legal department if that's enough time or

11:45:55 if they would like to bring that back.

11:45:57 March 15th.

11:45:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: March 15th.

11:46:00 >>MARY MULHERN: March 15th.

11:46:02 Okay.

11:46:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: At staff reports.

11:46:04 Thank you very much.

11:46:05 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:46:08 Opposed nay.

11:46:09 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:46:12 Now talk anybody want to talk about chickens at this time?

11:46:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I will motion again planning zoning and

11:46:23 legal department -- code enforcement probably should be here

11:46:27 as well because I am sure they have dealt with the issues.

11:46:30 And have that come back to us as a staff report on what

11:46:36 complaints we have received, what language they would

11:46:39 propose in comparison to we were provided with information

11:46:43 from Pinellas County already, other counties dealing with

11:46:46 it.

11:46:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:46:46 I agree with you, we do have complaints in my office about

11:46:51 roosters.

11:46:51 >> I can hear one in the morning at my house.

11:46:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I need a second to that motion.

11:46:56 >> Second.

11:46:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: When do you want it to come back?

11:46:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Again on the 15th.

11:47:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mrs. Montelione --

11:47:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The 15th of March.

11:47:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion for the 15th of

11:47:10 March.

11:47:10 All in favor of that motion?

11:47:13 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:47:15 Artificial drugs.

11:47:16 These are the drugs being sold under the auspices of making

11:47:20 money and killing people.

11:47:22 Mr. Suarez.

11:47:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We have talked about something similar to

11:47:26 this in terms of tobacco that's marketed towards children.

11:47:29 This comes along those same lines which is that in these

11:47:33 smaller grocery stores, predominantly poor areas, there are

11:47:40 purveyors that are lag for money from children for these

11:47:44 types of drugs and tobacco and other things.

11:47:47 I think that we should, now, have someone make a

11:47:49 presentation concerning it, probably from the legal

11:47:52 department concerning what our rights are in terms of being

11:47:58 able to regulate it.

11:47:59 And the police department.

11:48:00 >> Second it.

11:48:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Give me a date.

11:48:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let's make it for our first regularly

11:48:08 scheduled which would be February 16th.

11:48:12 Actually, we could do it on a workshop day on the 23rd

11:48:15 of February.

11:48:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: I would like clarification.

11:48:20 The original motion done earlier today specified a time

11:48:23 frame, I think -- (overlapping conversations).

11:48:39 >> I was going to ask about -- in the essence of time I need

11:48:45 a motion to talk about reclaimed the next two weeks.

11:48:49 I have a motion by Mr. Suarez.

11:48:50 I am not going to second that.

11:48:54 You only have one or two minutes.

11:48:57 In two weeks.

11:48:58 I have a motion by Mr. Suarez.

11:48:59 Second by Mr. Cohen. All in favor of that motion to come in

11:49:02 two weeks under staff reports and discuss reclaimed with the

11:49:05 city.

11:49:06 By the legal department.

11:49:07 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:49:10 Opposed nay.

11:49:10 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:49:15 Anyone in the audience to speak to this council for three

11:49:18 minutes, please come forward.

11:49:19 I see no one.

11:49:20 I need a motion to receive and file all the documents.

11:49:25 Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by --

11:49:30 >> Me.

11:49:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Me.

11:49:32 Mr. Suarez.

11:49:33 All in favor of that?

11:49:35 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:49:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Chairman, I just want to bring up -- I

11:49:40 have one business item and just want to bring it to the

11:49:43 attention of council, and then I want you all to see this.

11:49:47 Even though we got a report from legal, that this particular

11:49:56 place is not a strip club.

11:49:58 I want you to see this club advertising strip club on the

11:50:04 building.

11:50:04 Strip club.

11:50:05 And what you can't see in that body red is dancers are

11:50:11 wanted.

11:50:12 That's the red part.

11:50:14 We can't see it.

11:50:16 Now, I want legal to come to this council and tell us --

11:50:20 this is false advertising.

11:50:22 And if this is not a strip club, why are we advertising a

11:50:26 strip club?

11:50:27 And I just want to see if legal can review this, see how

11:50:31 they can have it removed from the building, because this is

11:50:35 false advertising, and if they are not a strip club and

11:50:40 people in this community pass by this every day.

11:50:43 You see Cleo's strip club, dancers are wanted.

11:50:47 You can't see in the that bold print, in red.

11:50:50 That's a concern to not only me but this is a concern to

11:50:55 people in the East Tampa community.

11:50:57 And this is why I wanted to bring this up, because it went

11:51:03 in the newspaper, and so I am just asking that legal come

11:51:07 back and inform us in two weeks if this can be removed as

11:51:12 false advertising.

11:51:13 >> Second.

11:51:14 >> I have a motion by Mr. Reddick, seconded by the whole

11:51:17 rest of the council, I give it on a close vote with Mr.

11:51:21 Suarez.

11:51:24 I am not going to mention no last names because it's on

11:51:27 television.

11:51:27 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:51:30 Opposed, nay.

11:51:31 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:51:32 >> With regards to the artificial drugs there was no motion

11:51:36 on that usual you.

11:51:37 >> Which one?

11:51:41 >>THE CLERK: On the issue of illegal drugs sold in the

11:51:43 neighborhood.

11:51:44 I don't recall a motion being made.

11:51:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick on the artificial

11:51:48 drugs earlier today.

11:51:50 We took that one off the council floor because it was done

11:51:54 early but we will do it again to clarify the record.

11:51:56 Second by Mr. Cohen.

11:51:57 And state that motion again.

11:51:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: The motion was to ask the legal department

11:52:04 to review if there's any way of -- anything we can draft --

11:52:18 >> Any sale of these items of artificial drugs pushed on

11:52:24 young people.

11:52:25 >> And I believe when I seconded it, Mr. Miranda spoke about

11:52:28 the fact that the whole issue here is that the manufacturers

11:52:32 have skirted with the original law intended to prohibit, and

11:52:35 they have sort of found a way around the original

11:52:37 prohibition.

11:52:42 I think it whats March 1st.

11:52:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern?

11:52:46 >>MARY MULHERN: I was going to say that's the same time I

11:52:49 think you mentioned there had been some legislation passed,

11:52:53 or look at current legislation to what we can do.

11:52:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

11:52:57 Anything else to come?

11:52:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm not sure whether you struck item 52

11:53:00 from the agenda.

11:53:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, we have not.

11:53:07 I have a motion on the table. All in favor of that motion

11:53:10 indicate by saying aye.

11:53:11 Opposed?

11:53:13 Motion passes unanimously. We have to strike 52.

11:53:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to strike 352.

11:53:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Seconded by Mrs. Capin.

11:53:22 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:53:25 Opposed nay.

11:53:26 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:53:27 Anything else to come before this council?

11:53:30 Ms. Mulhern?

11:53:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I have two pieces of new business.

11:53:34 One, that more March 1st that the planning committee

11:53:38 chair for the women's history month celebration appear on

11:53:40 March 1st at 9:00 a.m. to extend a formal invitation to

11:53:44 council to attend women's history month celebration.

11:53:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Second.

11:53:54 >>MARY MULHERN: We can pass these at the same time.

11:53:56 That council prepare a commendation recognizing the City of

11:53:59 Tampa women history month celebration for that presentation

11:54:02 on March 6th.

11:54:04 >> I have one motion in three second.

11:54:06 Motion by Ms. Mulhern on the continuation.

11:54:08 Second by Mr. Suarez on a close vote with Ms. Capin.

11:54:11 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

11:54:14 Opposed nay.

11:54:14 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:54:16 Another one?

11:54:19 Mr. Reddick?

11:54:21 Ms. Capin?

11:54:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Nothing

11:54:26 Oh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to make a motion

11:54:35 on March 22nd we are going to have a presentation on just

11:54:43 the 500th anniversary 2013 of the first European

11:54:47 settlement in Florida, 500 years.

11:54:49 And with that, I would like to -- it's two part -- span I

11:54:56 can achievers council members to appear on March 22 and make

11:55:00 a presentation on Hispanic achievers license plate, the

11:55:03 first in the nation.

11:55:04 And I would like to present a commendation to the Hispanic

11:55:08 achievers grant council.

11:55:10 >> Second.

11:55:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mrs. Capin, second by Mr.

11:55:14 Suarez.

11:55:14 All in favor of the motion?

11:55:16 Opposed?

11:55:17 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:55:18 Anything else?

11:55:20 Mr. Suarez?

11:55:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Happy groundhog day.

11:55:25 Six more weeks of winter for those people up there that are

11:55:28 suffering.

11:55:28 And we are enjoying --

11:55:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I guess we are going to end it that way.

11:55:34 Anything else?

11:55:36 We stand adjourned till 1:30.



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.


Thursday, February 2, 2012
1:30 p.m. Workshops


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.

01:22:08 >>HARRY COHEN: Good afternoon.

01:39:20 Welcome to our afternoon workshop.

01:39:23 We are going to take public comments at the end of the

01:39:28 meeting today.

01:39:29 But we need to do roll call.

01:39:30 [Roll Call]

01:39:36 (Clerk off microphone)

01:39:40 >>HARRY COHEN: Item number 60 on our agenda is a discussion

01:39:48 of alcoholic beverage permitting and that was a result of a

01:39:51 motion initiated by Councilwoman Capin.

01:39:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

01:39:56 I would like to make a statement, and then I am going to ask

01:39:59 for 61 to be presented first because I think it would be

01:40:05 very helpful to hear that, although the workshop is before

01:40:08 that.

01:40:08 But I think it would be very helpful so we are not actually

01:40:14 trying to cover what is already being taken care of.

01:40:20 But I would like to make this statement, because some have

01:40:22 been asking why I have brought back this issue of alcohol

01:40:25 you can beverage regulation again for the third time.

01:40:28 And the answer is really simple.

01:40:30 It's a continuing problem and ignoring it won't make it go

01:40:33 away, as we all know.

01:40:35 When I was appointed to City Council, alcoholic sales and

01:40:37 regulation was not on my radar screen, but after the first

01:40:40 meeting, it was clear that it was a contentious problem.

01:40:45 Business owners were concerned that requests for even minor

01:40:50 changes raised opposition from their neighbors and

01:40:53 neighborhood associations opposed any change because the

01:40:58 city has a very difficult time enforcing conditions they

01:41:01 set.

01:41:04 And the neighborhood were stressful and the business owners

01:41:11 were frustrated.

01:41:12 If we can go back a few weeks when we had an establishment

01:41:16 in Ybor, and a subsequent shooting at other places, this

01:41:20 chamber was filled with residents and business owners asking

01:41:23 us to address this issue.

01:41:26 To be clear, this issue is the sale and consumption of

01:41:29 alcoholic beverages, must be properly regulated, and the

01:41:34 failure to properly regulate these establishments leads to

01:41:37 chaos.

01:41:38 It hurts the neighborhoods.

01:41:39 It hurts legitimate businesses.

01:41:41 And it damages the image of our city.

01:41:43 I have brought this before council not because this is an

01:41:46 issue that I want to visit and that I have an affinity for.

01:41:50 I would much rather than spending my time on cultural assets

01:41:54 and economic engine.

01:41:55 But it is an issue that must be addressed, and we can do it

01:41:59 now or we can expect it to be back before us again.

01:42:02 So let's hope that this third time is the charm.

01:42:07 And I would like to move if it's approved by council to hear

01:42:16 61 first and then have our workshop, because I feel after

01:42:20 being briefed that there may be issues that are being

01:42:25 addressed that wee would be discussed and not necessarily

01:42:28 have much more discussion.

01:42:29 >> Let's move on to item number 61.

01:42:32 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

01:42:34 I'm here this afternoon based upon a request from City

01:42:38 Council for the legal department to meet with TPD and have

01:42:42 the police department investigate what option it is city has

01:42:45 to regulate clubs, nightclubs, throughout the city,

01:42:48 including an option related to allowing people 18 years of

01:42:53 age and whether or not we can have different roles in those

01:42:57 establishments or have them close early.

01:43:01 What I did initially is I looked at regulations across the

01:43:03 State of Florida as well as nationally, because there aren't

01:43:06 many other places that have downtown areas and entertainment

01:43:10 districts that have the concentration of nightclubs, to see

01:43:13 what regulations we have.

01:43:15 And I can come up here and tell you that I do believe that

01:43:17 we can create a regulation that will regulate nightclubs

01:43:20 per se.

01:43:21 My recommendation to you on how to do that would be that we

01:43:25 do it as a business regulation, not as a land use

01:43:27 regulation.

01:43:28 If it is a business regulation, then that will be a license

01:43:32 or permit that people would have to come in for annually.

01:43:35 The permit could also not be renewed potentially be revoked

01:43:42 if it did not meet requirements.

01:43:43 I think that in and of itself will help with some of the

01:43:47 issues that have previously come up.

01:43:50 When you regulate it from the land use perspective, once

01:43:54 someone has that permit, they have that permit and you can't

01:43:56 add additional requirements onto that permit.

01:43:58 But this will be a business regulation that they will have

01:44:00 to come in for annually.

01:44:04 So there are many different options to how you can do this.

01:44:07 And those will be policy decisions.

01:44:09 What I would like to do is run through some of the things

01:44:11 that I found in my discussion was TPD and ask to come back

01:44:15 in 45 to 60 days, potentially a workshop where I can present

01:44:22 some options to you in writing.

01:44:23 And I know you heard from a lot of people already, which is

01:44:26 what brought this forward, but I'm sure the communities

01:44:28 would also like to see -- I think it's important at that

01:44:31 time that you hear from your public safety experts, as well

01:44:34 as the businesses that would potentially be regulated.

01:44:37 I'm not comfortable making the policy decisions in advance.

01:44:40 I would rather put the options to you based on what I found.

01:44:43 But I did want to let you know that I did meet with the

01:44:47 Tampa Police Department and based upon early conversations

01:44:50 that I had with them, the number one thing they would like

01:44:52 to see as part of this regulation is a way to expand upon

01:44:58 the requirement that nightclubs have extra duty officers on

01:45:02 their premises at certain times.

01:45:04 As you may be aware, back in 1995, City Council amended

01:45:10 their land use regulations to require any new special use

01:45:13 permits or wet zoning.

01:45:16 If you were in downtown, Channelside, or Ybor City, and you

01:45:20 had on premises consumption, to have extra duty officers

01:45:25 when you reached an occupancy of 250.

01:45:29 There are a couple of things that didn't really seem to work

01:45:32 with that, and one is because of the land use regulation, it

01:45:35 grandfathered in everyone prior to 1995.

01:45:37 So there's a number of establishments that aren't required

01:45:40 at this time to have any extra duty officers whatsoever.

01:45:44 In addition, despite the fact that this problem, or the need

01:45:46 for these types of establishments is city-wide, it was only

01:45:50 limited to certificates areas.

01:45:52 In addition, the requirement is that you have a two extra

01:45:56 duty officers with when you hit 250 occupant load but when

01:46:00 you have 1,000 occupant load there was no requirement for

01:46:02 any additional officers to be on your premises.

01:46:06 So that was what TPD related to me, was their number one

01:46:13 concern.

01:46:14 They did think some of the other things would be helpful but

01:46:17 that is one thing they really felt was a priority and would

01:46:19 like to move forward without too much delay.

01:46:22 As I stated earlier, there are many other options that you

01:46:25 can consider and it will be up to you to put the burden on

01:46:30 the business with the benefit given to the community as a

01:46:34 whole, but for example some places in Florida and some

01:46:36 places in other states require those people that are inside

01:46:42 actually -- we don't have a state bouncer category but there

01:46:48 are categories for security officers which would mean that

01:46:50 they would be vetted to the state for background check which

01:46:54 is something we don't currently have.

01:46:56 One of the things we asked officers to look at is nature

01:47:00 clubs that allow people under 21 into the establishment.

01:47:04 There are approximately 20 communities across the State of

01:47:07 Florida who have actually -- not on a statewide level but

01:47:12 individual communities -- regulations that prohibit anyone

01:47:16 under the age of 21 from being in these establishments.

01:47:21 They take slightly different approaches.

01:47:22 Gainesville only applies that if you have a certain number

01:47:25 of underage drinking establishments.

01:47:27 Most of the places just have it uniformly.

01:47:30 A nightclub is not an appropriate place for someone under

01:47:33 the age of 21 to be.

01:47:36 There's a couple different mechanisms to move that forward

01:47:39 and I would be happy to provide the options and see which

01:47:42 ones you felt was the best fit for the City of Tampa.

01:47:45 One thing that I did want to talk about is contained of

01:47:48 related to 60, is the probability to encompass in this

01:47:55 business permit for actually enforcing the regulations.

01:47:59 I know that's something that Councilwoman Capin has been

01:48:01 championing for a long time.

01:48:03 And since this will be an annual sort of permit that they

01:48:05 will have to go to, much like your pain management clinics,

01:48:09 we can look at the ability to build into the annual fee the

01:48:13 cost for what will be important in these regulations.

01:48:17 And I think this may not be all encompassing as some might

01:48:22 hope but I think it would be a good way to step forward on

01:48:25 that issue and see how that works.

01:48:32 Other requirements that there be a manager on duty, so if

01:48:34 there are any violations you have someone to enforce

01:48:37 against.

01:48:39 We had discussed earlier the fire marshal's requirement for

01:48:44 crowd management training.

01:48:45 This had is potentially a good -- you would have to have a

01:48:51 crowd management, people who had been trained on premises as

01:48:54 required by the fire code.

01:48:58 The fire marshals won't be back till later this afternoon

01:49:04 but we'll have an opportunity to hear from him again, but I

01:49:07 did want to call City Council's attention based upon your

01:49:10 earlier motion that all assembly permits be tied to this

01:49:14 crowd management training, for any employees that have more

01:49:17 than 50 people, and you don't even have to have a crowd

01:49:21 manager unless you have 250.

01:49:22 So you may want to -- you may want to reconsider your

01:49:26 earlier motion or not.

01:49:29 This may be another alternative Avenue for you to move

01:49:32 forward on that.

01:49:34 Another option that we have would be to require the clubs to

01:49:38 provide TPD with trespass authority.

01:49:41 Some of these I'm still studying.

01:49:44 I have about -- I'm trying to pull various and sundry

01:49:48 options for you.

01:49:49 But that again is where I would like to come back with the

01:49:51 opportunity to put some of these in writing, and to make a

01:49:55 final determination about which ones are appropriate for the

01:49:58 City of Tampa if any, and that we could come back with a

01:50:01 final work plan.

01:50:03 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Reddick.

01:50:06 >>FRANK REDDICK: If we went the route with the business

01:50:09 regulations, and I understand that you are speaking about

01:50:18 renewal, if they violate the process, what are some of the

01:50:24 penalties, legally some of the penalties that we can impose

01:50:27 on them?

01:50:29 >>REBECCA KERT: Well, that's one of the things that we are

01:50:31 still investigating.

01:50:34 One is directly related to the permit that they have.

01:50:36 And then can we also make it an ordinance violation such

01:50:40 that they could either have a notice to appear in court, or

01:50:43 be issued a civil citation for the violation?

01:50:46 And I think we can do both.

01:50:48 But that would be on one side of it.

01:50:50 But as far as what you can do with the permit, as I said,

01:50:53 this is different than a land use permit.

01:50:55 But that doesn't mean that the people who are issued the

01:50:58 permit have no rights.

01:51:00 But the courts have said it may not be a property rights but

01:51:02 it's like a property rights, and that we can't take it away

01:51:05 without due process, notice, due process and a hearing.

01:51:09 That being said, we could take it away.

01:51:11 It's not something that somebody is entitled to have

01:51:15 forever.

01:51:16 And in addition if there are violations we also would have

01:51:18 the opportunity not to renew the following year.

01:51:20 >>HARRY COHEN: Anyone else?

01:51:29 Mr. Suarez.

01:51:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.

01:51:32 When we are talking about -- what I was thinking about, when

01:51:37 you were reiterating some of the things that we can or may

01:51:40 not do or can do, one of the things I wanted to ask you is,

01:51:46 one of the last questions I asked to fire marshal Spicola

01:51:50 was two clubs that we had talked about before, both went

01:51:54 through training.

01:51:55 The training itself is not necessarily an entry point for

01:51:59 some kind of issue in which some of these problems that

01:52:04 exist.

01:52:05 I think that a previous motion by Councilman Cohen about the

01:52:09 age group, I think that's much more of a significant portion

01:52:13 of the problems that they had at those clubs.

01:52:16 You had the mixture of folks that were able to drink legally

01:52:20 and those that are not able to drink legally.

01:52:22 Based on what you said to us, do you think that we can

01:52:26 produce some type of ordinance that says for nightclubs, 21

01:52:31 and over only, and be able to pass Constitutional muster for

01:52:37 that?

01:52:38 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, I do.

01:52:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And where could we have fines on that?

01:52:43 Is that also a business regulation?

01:52:46 Or is that a civil citation?

01:52:48 Where does that fall on something like that?

01:52:51 >>REBECCA KERT: There's a number of different ways you can

01:52:53 do that.

01:52:54 You could have one as a stand-alone regulation and not do

01:52:57 anything with nightclubs.

01:53:00 One of the ways that I was envisioning it, if you are going

01:53:03 to enact a nature club regulation, you could have that be a

01:53:07 requirement of it.

01:53:08 And what we are looking at right now is both the

01:53:10 nonrenewal/revocation of the permit, and whether or not we

01:53:14 can additionally have these requirements be either be cited

01:53:18 for or arrested or provided a notice to appear in court.

01:53:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And can we make it as one part of a process

01:53:26 meaning we do have to go the crowd manager -- crowd control

01:53:31 manager class, also have to make sure that those people

01:53:33 under 21 are not allowed in, and make those as part of the

01:53:38 entire ordinance?

01:53:41 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.

01:53:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.

01:53:44 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Capin.

01:53:53 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (off microphone) ... allowing people under

01:53:56 21 serving alcohol?

01:53:59 >>REBECCA KERT: Typically, the regulations in place aren't

01:54:03 nightclub regulations.

01:54:05 The under 21 regulations that I looked at across the state

01:54:08 happen to be very similar but what they tend to do is you

01:54:11 can't have anyone under 21 in places that sell alcohol and

01:54:15 then they have exemptions.

01:54:16 They usually have exemptions for restaurants.

01:54:18 They usually have exemptions for military -- for people who

01:54:21 are in the military and for people who are directly employed

01:54:24 there.

01:54:26 >>YVONNE CAPIN: When we talk about fees, what I was looking

01:54:28 for are a mechanism to enforce conditions that council

01:54:33 places, which is one of the things, and placard is one step

01:54:38 in that tool box for enforcement.

01:54:44 Again, having law enforcement, or requiring law enforcement

01:54:48 at an establishment, that's a fee.

01:54:51 >>REBECCA KERT: It actually is a requirement.

01:54:54 And yes, they do have to pay for the extra duty officer but

01:54:59 they don't necessarily have to go to TPD.

01:55:01 They can have any sworn law enforcement officer.

01:55:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I appreciate that.

01:55:06 Thank you.

01:55:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

01:55:11 You know, we have one of the owners of an establishment

01:55:18 sitting here.

01:55:18 And I would just like to hear his perspective of what he has

01:55:23 heard already.

01:55:24 Do you want to come up?

01:55:29 Owner of one of the clubs.

01:55:30 I would appreciate if he can give his perspective as a club

01:55:33 owner.

01:55:34 >>> Good afternoon.

01:55:39 Club Manilla.

01:55:44 He owns the business at Club Manilla.

01:55:49 >> You heard what was presented to us by the legal

01:55:51 department.

01:55:51 >> My feelings are, we deal exclusively with

01:55:57 African-Americans and low income African-Americans.

01:56:01 They usually don't have a place to go.

01:56:04 We have been towing with the idea, Mr. Gonzalez and I, when

01:56:10 the police department forced Empire out of business, we got

01:56:14 an influx of a lot of young people.

01:56:18 Our crowd is usually 30, 35, and most of the problems come

01:56:23 from the young males who feel they have to prove something.

01:56:29 The females don't give any trouble.

01:56:32 So I would be against anything that would prevent young

01:56:38 people from coming into the club.

01:56:42 We have our compliance.

01:56:44 There's a course you go through.

01:56:46 >> Keep young people from coming to the club?

01:56:52 >> Yes.

01:56:53 Would I be against that.

01:56:54 I would be against that.

01:56:56 I think they need a place to go to hang -- than hang out on

01:57:00 the corner.

01:57:02 But we deal with low income African-Americans.

01:57:09 Who want to be with other African-Americans.

01:57:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm very familiar with Manilla nightclub.

01:57:21 And, yes, the majority of your clientele are

01:57:25 African-Americans.

01:57:25 >> All of them.

01:57:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: All of them are African-Americans, okay.

01:57:32 And what nights related to young folks, what nights?

01:57:39 >> 7 p.m. Friday and Monday.

01:57:42 >> It's my understanding on Friday nights --

01:57:46 >> Folks in the earlier portion of the evening from six to

01:57:50 eleven.

01:57:50 But then we have -- we had a request from major Honeywell

01:58:00 for Monday night and make it another night so we did that at

01:58:03 his request.

01:58:04 We now open on Friday for that same crowd that goes on

01:58:08 Monday, and we thinned the Monday out and they come on

01:58:13 Friday as well.

01:58:14 >> One last thing.

01:58:15 What is the average age of the young folks that come in

01:58:19 after eleven?

01:58:20 >> Like I said, before they went out of business we did not

01:58:26 get a lot of 18-year-olds, 19-year-olds.

01:58:29 Our problem was 30, 35, and was a much older crowd.

01:58:34 But now that the Empire is closed, that was more of a

01:58:36 college -- now it's more of a college crowd.

01:58:39 And we were turning away people at the door.

01:58:41 I remember the first night that they had closed down, they

01:58:45 looked like there were 12, 13, 14.

01:58:51 >> Are you selling alcohol in your establishments after

01:58:58 11:00?

01:58:59 >> Yes, sir, yes, sir.

01:59:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: How do you verify whether they are 18 or

01:59:03 14?

01:59:03 >> If you are underage, they band you one way.

01:59:07 If you are over 21, they band you another way.

01:59:10 So when you go to the bar you have to show your band.

01:59:13 >> But you also have fake identification.

01:59:20 Are you aware of that?

01:59:21 >> Yes, they have to show identification.

01:59:22 >> And there are 12 and they look 21.

01:59:31 >> When the Empire was closed, I had a slew of those that

01:59:36 dressed up, looked like they were older, but we could tell

01:59:40 that they were kids.

01:59:43 We turned them away.

01:59:45 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.

01:59:46 Mr. Chair, I think this is an example of the problems that

01:59:52 we have, because you cannot control -- if you serve alcohol

01:59:58 after 11:00, you cannot control the crowd's age limit

02:00:02 because there will be some who will slip in the door, and

02:00:08 what I have seen in the past is that you are going to have

02:00:12 someone 21 -- I started in -- saw it in a convenience store

02:00:16 the other day, someone over 21 went in and bought a case of

02:00:21 beer, and there were some teenagers sitting outside, and

02:00:25 they hand it over to them.

02:00:27 So I'm pretty sure in an establishment at that time of

02:00:30 night, because you don't have enough security to maintain a

02:00:34 crowd of maybe 200 or 300 people, someone over 18 or 21 can

02:00:39 go back, and then hand one over to somebody that's 18,

02:00:47 somebody that might be under 18.

02:00:49 It's hard to control that.

02:00:50 So I think this is a fine example of some of the problems we

02:00:53 have.

02:00:53 I just want to put that on the record.

02:00:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Do you charge a cover on those nights in

02:01:03 which 18 and undergo?

02:01:05 >> On some nights we do.

02:01:10 On Monday night we charge.

02:01:12 >> Okay.

02:01:13 On those nights, and when you do charge a cover it's usually

02:01:17 ten bucks?

02:01:18 >> It's ten dollars.

02:01:22 >> So it's ten dollars.

02:01:24 Do you know how much you make on alcohol versus people that

02:01:30 enter a distinction in terms of what you make on that?

02:01:33 >> It's 11.25 per person.

02:01:36 >> Okay.

02:01:37 So let me rephrase.

02:01:42 Do you know how much you do on a good night on liquor on a

02:01:45 Monday night when you have a cover charge for those kids

02:01:50 that are able to come in, those 18-year-old kids?

02:01:53 >> As I said before, having younger people is a new thing

02:01:58 for us.

02:02:00 So when Empire was forced out of business.

02:02:08 They had that younger crowd.

02:02:09 >> And is it you had a policy that you did not allow people

02:02:12 under 21 into your club?

02:02:15 >> They were just going to the Empire.

02:02:18 >> So your sums is you did not have it because you carded

02:02:24 every single person that came through there, and everybody

02:02:26 was over 21?

02:02:28 >> Correct.

02:02:30 That's the way it was.

02:02:31 >> So let me ask you the question.

02:02:32 I know the club Empire has closed down.

02:02:34 Why are you allowing 18-year-olds or people under 21 to come

02:02:38 in when your business model before was 21 and over, people

02:02:41 to drink, people that come to the club?

02:02:45 >> Like I said, we are contemplating that now.

02:02:49 Mr. Gonzalez had discussion about the males. I don't mind

02:02:54 the females but the males cause problems.

02:02:56 So --

02:03:01 >>HARRY COHEN: Let me have Mrs. Kert jump in here.

02:03:04 >>REBECCA KERT: I think it's a workshop.

02:03:06 You will be able to hear from a broad range of people.

02:03:09 And just one business owner here is making me a little

02:03:13 uncomfortable.

02:03:14 And if we could have a conversation when all the business

02:03:16 owners are here, I would feel better.

02:03:18 >>HARRY COHEN: Mrs. Kert, I would like to ask you some

02:03:21 additional questions.

02:03:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Before you go, Ms. Kert, this is not -- and

02:03:28 I know that you are trying to make a clean record here.

02:03:31 And I think that I have been on pretty good sound ground

02:03:34 just asking specific questions of his club, not asking

02:03:37 whether or not he has broken any law or ordinance.

02:03:40 And I just want to make sure that that's on the record, too,

02:03:44 that I'm trying to elicit what the business plan is for

02:03:47 someone that has 21-year-old people in addition to

02:03:53 18-year-olds in the club.

02:03:55 And to me I think that's a legitimate public purpose.

02:03:59 >>REBECCA KERT: I don't find any of the questions to be

02:04:01 problematic on any level.

02:04:02 As we are continuing on with this one person here, I think

02:04:06 it would be better to hear from everyone.

02:04:08 But there wasn't anything inappropriate about anything --

02:04:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just want to make sure that was clear,

02:04:14 that that was not an inappropriate question.

02:04:16 >>HARRY COHEN: Mrs. Kert, if you were to come back to us --

02:04:21 and looking at the calendar we have a fairly light workshop

02:04:24 schedule on April 26th, which is about two months away,

02:04:30 we might be able to explore some of the options that you

02:04:33 mentioned earlier.

02:04:34 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.

02:04:38 >>HARRY COHEN: You talked about a civil citation program.

02:04:41 If we were to enter into a civil citation program, would

02:04:45 that mean that if the owner of an establishment wanted to

02:04:50 challenge a citation, that they would actually go to court

02:04:53 in order to do that?

02:04:57 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, I do believe if you challenge a civil

02:05:01 citation it does go to court.

02:05:03 It's civil but it does go to court.

02:05:04 >> Would we be able to construct a program with a graduated

02:05:07 schedule of fines so that the first time an establishment

02:05:11 was fined, the fine was X, and then if there were continued

02:05:16 violations that the fines could rise?

02:05:19 >>REBECCA KERT: It's my understanding that's how it's

02:05:22 structured right now.

02:05:23 Off civil citation in place.

02:05:25 What we would need to do is plug this in.

02:05:28 And we really need to reference our new code section into

02:05:30 your currents --

02:05:31 >> Our existing civil citation program.

02:05:33 >> Yes.

02:05:36 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilwoman Montelione.

02:05:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I do want to also have that discussion

02:05:44 that Councilman Suarez brought up about the staff attending

02:05:49 the assembly safety training so we are going to have another

02:05:57 discussion about that when they bring that back.

02:06:01 I think it would be helpful if we rolled it together because

02:06:04 they are seemingly related, although the permit discussion

02:06:07 referred to other uses other than alcoholic beverage

02:06:11 establishments.

02:06:12 So I think that would be helpful to have those conversations

02:06:17 together even though they are not in sync 100 percent.

02:06:24 I agree with you, people 18 years old need somewhere to go.

02:06:29 No matter what race or ethnic background or socioeconomic,

02:06:36 demographic people belong to, yes, people who are of like

02:06:41 mind and characteristics want to assemble together.

02:06:46 It occurs to me any of the business owners out there who

02:06:49 want to open a club for 18-year-olds, 18 to 21-year-olds,

02:06:53 would probably get a fine business going.

02:06:57 I don't think that mingling 18, 19-year-olds in an

02:07:03 establishment meant for 21 and over is a good idea.

02:07:08 It's inviting trouble.

02:07:10 And people with those wristbands, you can go to party city

02:07:20 and buy wristbands in a rainbow of colors, and band yourself

02:07:24 when you enter an establishment.

02:07:26 So I don't know that the banding is really --

02:07:31 >> We change the color of the band every night.

02:07:33 We have about 15 different colors.

02:07:34 >> So you buy rainbow colors, you stick them in your back

02:07:38 pocket, whatever the color is that night you happen to have

02:07:40 one with you.

02:07:41 >> Mr. Gonzalez -- we change the color every evening so you

02:07:49 are never going to know what color we use.

02:07:51 But there's one other thing I want to say.

02:07:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Let me finish.

02:07:57 Whatever rules and regulations are established, there are

02:08:00 ways around them.

02:08:03 There are crafty individuals who can figure out how to get

02:08:06 around that rule so there's never any fail-safe method of

02:08:11 protecting our youth from themselves.

02:08:19 The concern is that we have the opportunity to place

02:08:26 regulations that would better the community that would help

02:08:32 individuals find ways of providing services and providing

02:08:38 entertainment venues for certain age groups.

02:08:42 I agree.

02:08:43 I mean, I don't think that having 18-year-olds,

02:08:47 19-year-olds, 20-year-olds in an establishment after 11:00

02:08:51 at night where alcohol is being served is a good idea.

02:08:56 But I think when we talk about bringing this workshop back,

02:09:00 that we bring it as one of the versatile tools in the tool

02:09:08 box, we bring them back one time.

02:09:10 And April 26th is the date when -- and I don't think

02:09:13 this is shown up by the schedule yet with the clerk's

02:09:17 office, but that's the date that the recommendations for

02:09:21 code changes, by the economic competitiveness committee are

02:09:24 coming here, or discussion of that.

02:09:27 Ms. Coyle, are you back there?

02:09:33 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

02:09:33 Yes, April 26th was the workshop we were hoping to look

02:09:37 for, for the January cycle itself, which includes a very

02:09:40 wide range of code amendments.

02:09:42 Some from the entire overhaul which could be a very lengthy

02:09:49 discussion.

02:09:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Since these are also code amendments

02:09:54 when it pertains to alcoholic beverage permits --

02:09:57 >> This particular one would not be necessarily in chapter

02:10:00 27.

02:10:01 It more than likely would be chapter 6.

02:10:05 The business regulations.

02:10:06 So it's a business operating permit.

02:10:11 But you can move it at any time.

02:10:14 It doesn't have to follow the cycle.

02:10:15 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, we'll entertain a motion to --

02:10:20 Councilman Capin.

02:10:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (off microphone) we don't know who would be

02:10:44 doing the annual review?

02:10:46 >>REBECCA KERT: Not at this time.

02:10:47 In chapter 6, you have some of them that are issued, input

02:10:52 from different entities, some of them are issued from the

02:10:54 police department, and that's one of the many, many

02:10:58 different decision points that would need to be --

02:11:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So that's when you were asking for the time

02:11:05 to come back with more specifics on the ideas?

02:11:11 >> Yes.

02:11:12 And I would like to have it not in ordinance form so we can

02:11:15 have option but to make in the writing so that you can look

02:11:17 at and evaluate.

02:11:20 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Chair, I am going to move that you

02:11:26 bring back to the council at our May 24th workshop

02:11:33 recommendations on how we can move forward with this agenda

02:11:40 item.

02:11:40 >> Second.

02:11:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion on the floor by Councilman Reddick.

02:11:44 We --

02:11:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: At 9:00.

02:11:47 >> Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

02:11:50 Any discussion on the motion?

02:11:52 All those in favor?

02:11:54 Opposed?

02:11:56 Okay.

02:11:56 So we will come back to that in May.

02:12:00 Are we going to move now back to item number 60?

02:12:03 Because that is the last remaining thing on the agenda.

02:12:11 Councilman Capin?

02:12:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (off microphone) I forget to turn this on.

02:12:22 One of the things we asked was to supply us with the permit

02:12:26 criteria for administrative alcoholic permits.

02:12:30 And she did.

02:12:34 And, you know, I have heard that it is efficient, but I

02:12:43 heard from council members that may or may not be here that

02:12:47 anything that we pass, we can always review and look at.

02:12:52 And I believe that four council members -- and they are here

02:12:57 today -- were not present when this was passed, that to

02:13:01 really follow what has been done in almost a year, a short

02:13:07 couple of months of a year, and Ms. Coyle supplied us with

02:13:12 what has taken place in the last six months.

02:13:18 One of the things that when it did come up -- and I looked

02:13:23 at the criteria -- I kept looking for distance separation,

02:13:27 and I noticed that there was none, because it's not a

02:13:31 requirement.

02:13:32 That is not part of the administrative requirement.

02:13:35 And alcoholic beverage establishments can be 1,000 feet or

02:13:40 can be zero or 10 inches.

02:13:42 But it's not -- it doesn't matter as far as the S-1 process.

02:13:51 And to address maybe the outdoor amplification, I know

02:13:56 several spots there's no outdoor amplification after 11 p.m.

02:14:01 and I think that is excellent.

02:14:03 One of the things I would like to look at, there's been a

02:14:05 lot of complaints about outdoor amplification.

02:14:09 I have gotten them.

02:14:10 I'm sure others have received them.

02:14:16 And maybe we need to look at the decibel levels as a

02:14:20 council.

02:14:20 Or maybe we need to look at the permitting of outdoor

02:14:25 amplification, period, and how they may have to come to ask

02:14:29 for that.

02:14:30 There's no reason, indoor amplification, to have outdoor

02:14:36 amplification at 11, 1 a.m., and 2 a.m., and that is

02:14:42 happening now.

02:14:43 And so S-1 covers that.

02:14:47 But there is no distance separation.

02:14:49 It's zero.

02:14:51 From residential.

02:14:52 So there's no requirement.

02:14:54 There's no -- there doesn't have to be a waiver because

02:14:58 there is none.

02:14:59 That's one of the issues.

02:15:00 We also included, in the business districts Westshore.

02:15:05 The business district.

02:15:06 Westshore district goes all the way to Drew Park.

02:15:10 There's a lot of residential.

02:15:12 It is not -- downtown has a lot of residential.

02:15:15 Downtown is urban.

02:15:18 Westshore has neighborhoods.

02:15:20 And I will be at one of those this evening in that district.

02:15:24 So maybe more specific.

02:15:28 But let's have p Mrs. Coyle come up, explain the criteria,

02:15:34 and how this criteria came about.

02:15:37 I know that there were public meetings before.

02:15:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I want to ask before I forget because we

02:15:50 are going to move on, when you talk about amplification.

02:15:53 The City of Tampa has an emerging local music scene.

02:15:59 And when we talk about the creative class and the ability

02:16:02 for our young people to have a place that they want to stay,

02:16:08 and prevent the brain drain that we have from our university

02:16:13 and community colleges here, we need to keep in mind that

02:16:18 young people like to have places to go.

02:16:20 And we just talked about that a minute ago with having

02:16:23 places for, you know, 18 to 20-year-olds to gather.

02:16:28 And music is a big part of that.

02:16:30 And there's a couple of establishments that I can think of

02:16:34 that have life music that are outdoor venues.

02:16:37 I am not going to name them because we get into trouble with

02:16:40 Rebecca Kert when we start name establishments, but they

02:16:44 have been around for quite a number of years.

02:16:47 And they are responsible businesses.

02:16:49 They don't have, as far as I know, a lot of complaints about

02:16:53 them.

02:16:54 One of them has had to curtail the hour at which the music

02:17:00 stops.

02:17:02 And I just want this council to really be mindful that we

02:17:12 are not putting regulations where we are going to be

02:17:17 stifling the exact same philosophy that on the other hand we

02:17:24 are trying to promote.

02:17:25 So if we are trying to promote a creative, vibrant city for

02:17:34 young people to want to stay and call home, we have to be

02:17:40 mindful that the regulations we put in place don't

02:17:45 overshadow that mind-set.

02:17:47 And that's all I want to say.

02:17:52 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I agree with Councilwoman Montelione,

02:17:55 absolutely.

02:17:55 I would like to see our city be a 24-7 city.

02:17:59 One of the things I look at and have studied is when we at

02:18:06 3 a.m. shoo everyone out into the street is when we have

02:18:10 problems.

02:18:12 A 24/7 city, that may not be the case.

02:18:16 So the fact that -- or the impression is that I am trying to

02:18:23 regulator stop the sale of alcoholic beverage in any shape,

02:18:28 way or form is not.

02:18:30 It's the condition that this council has placed in order for

02:18:33 those permits to go forward.

02:18:35 And when those conditions are placed, there is very little

02:18:39 mechanism in order to enforce those conditions.

02:18:46 And it comes back as it did a few months ago.

02:18:53 Again I am going to go ahead and hear the administrative

02:18:59 process.

02:19:00 And then we'll get back to the rest of what I want to bring

02:19:04 up.

02:19:04 >>HARRY COHEN: Ms. Coyle.

02:19:11 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.

02:19:24 Let me start with -- where do I start?

02:19:26 [ Laughter ]

02:19:27 I am obviously not prepared.

02:19:28 We spent a very long time working on these regulations.

02:19:33 The first motion council made to start discussing alcoholic

02:19:36 beverage permitting that led to the regulation we have today

02:19:40 was in August of 2009.

02:19:42 It was continued to October.

02:19:44 Then January of 2010.

02:19:46 And then it started a series of workshops.

02:19:49 March 25th, 2010 was the first workshop we had with City

02:19:51 Council where we presented a series of concepts that we had

02:19:58 from the comprehensive plan, and the way the city is broken

02:20:03 up.

02:20:05 And I focused on the center area, in particular Mrs. Capin

02:20:13 mentioned the Westshore business district.

02:20:15 The Westshore business district, as are the other two

02:20:18 business districts, USF and downtown, are shown in dark

02:20:22 blue.

02:20:23 And this map is the very large GIS-based map and it's

02:20:30 searchable.

02:20:30 You can see the street names as you zoom in.

02:20:34 This is just the paper version of it.

02:20:35 But the business district itself is actually just where the

02:20:39 commercial components are.

02:20:40 The residential pieces are actually not within the business

02:20:43 district.

02:20:46 In Westshore.

02:20:47 Downtown is just a CBD, central business district zoning

02:20:51 classifications.

02:20:52 And then USF and the golf course area.

02:20:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay, name the streets at Westshore.

02:21:01 You have got lines.

02:21:02 But there is no names on there.

02:21:06 What are the street names there?

02:21:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: As I said, this is a paper copy of it.

02:21:12 I could certainly blow this up so we have west show --

02:21:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So we have Westshore, and Dale Mabry?

02:21:19 >> This particular one is Westshore.

02:21:20 This one, I believe, this is Dale Mabry.

02:21:27 This is 275 right here.

02:21:28 >> The one above 275, what street is that?

02:21:36 >> Boy Scout.

02:21:38 >>CATHERINE COYLE: This one here is Boy Scout.

02:21:40 That's International Plaza right there.

02:21:41 And that's the airport.

02:21:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Carver City, Lincoln Gardens?

02:21:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That's part of this piece. That's not

02:21:55 the business district.

02:21:57 So, you know, I feel somewhat at a disadvantage to try to

02:22:00 give you a full year and a half explanation of how we got to

02:22:03 where we are today.

02:22:05 But as I said, we held a workshop March 25th, 2010.

02:22:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay, I asked for this back in September,

02:22:20 October, November, whenever, and I have consistently asked

02:22:25 for this, so a disadvantage, I don't understand.

02:22:29 The disadvantage of us not being prepared to be able to

02:22:35 explain the process.

02:22:36 >>CATHERINE COYLE: As I understood the motion, the original

02:22:41 one was to prepare the spreadsheet the ones we had approved

02:22:45 administratively which I provided, and then the general

02:22:48 motion was dealing with alcoholic beverage permitting and

02:22:50 compliance with a request for council to hold a workshop.

02:22:54 I was simply going to be in attendance in case you had

02:22:57 questions.

02:23:00 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And I personally asked -- so I will not

02:23:02 personally ask again.

02:23:03 It will be a motion or e-mail.

02:23:07 Thank you.

02:23:08 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No problem.

02:23:10 I am obviously willing to provide any information that you

02:23:12 need.

02:23:15 We had workshops in 2010, March, May and June -- I'm sorry,

02:23:20 March, June.

02:23:22 There were two workshops in May and June, public information

02:23:25 workshops.

02:23:25 They were city staff led where we invited members from the

02:23:30 different associations, different business interests, the

02:23:32 business district, the urban villages, whoever wanted to

02:23:37 come to talk about the issues with permitting, alcohol.

02:23:42 What it boils down to is April of 2008 is when we changed

02:23:46 from what used to be known as a wet zoning, which processed

02:23:50 simply as a survey that came before City Council, with an

02:23:54 application, and the general criteria in the code was 1 that

02:23:58 you foot separation for every type of alcohol request that

02:24:02 there was in the city.

02:24:06 What Ms. Kert and I basically highlighted for City Council

02:24:10 through the workshop 2010, as well as many members of the

02:24:13 public that had come forward that have to deal with

02:24:16 alcoholic beverage on a regular basis, is for many, many

02:24:21 decades, almost sixty decades, because that's when beverage

02:24:28 permitting essentially became effective in 1945, the

02:24:33 criteria has consistently been waived by City Council.

02:24:35 There were year after year after year, you know, I can

02:24:39 certainly go to those calculations, but there were dozens,

02:24:43 if not 50, 60, 70 approvals per year, over many, many years,

02:24:48 decades, years, where the criteria were consistently waived

02:24:51 across the city regardless of the underlying use, and

02:24:55 ultimately what we highlighted to council is that when you

02:24:59 have a specific type of use, and you are consistently

02:25:03 waiving criteria over and over and over again, it renders

02:25:08 that criteria somewhat meaningless, or can, you fall into

02:25:12 criteria whether that means anything.

02:25:14 In 2008 we went from special use permit, Mrs. Kert and I

02:25:19 attempted to hone in on what are the criteria, if you have a

02:25:23 specific use, what are the criteria for those specific uses?

02:25:26 What is it that certain business interests, what are those

02:25:31 things that we can lock in that can be enforceable and we'll

02:25:36 go from there?

02:25:37 We got to 2010 and we started really having that

02:25:40 conversation.

02:25:41 Ms. Kert did a lot of research to look at, actually direct

02:25:47 Id by City Council, to look at what other jurisdiction does

02:25:51 around the state, and she went through it, and I think that

02:25:53 30-plus jurisdictions, and looked at, if anybody does it

02:25:59 like we do, or like we have in the past, or what are the

02:26:03 criteria that people use in general?

02:26:05 Everything from Alachua County which is Gainesville to

02:26:08 Sarasota County, Jacksonville, Broward, Pinellas, all across

02:26:12 the state.

02:26:14 The reality is, to date, neither of us have found any

02:26:18 jurisdiction did it the way we do it.

02:26:20 We required every single permit for alcohol to come before a

02:26:24 public board.

02:26:25 There was no other jurisdiction that we could find in the

02:26:27 entire state that did it that way.

02:26:30 It is reasonable to assume, and it is done this way, in most

02:26:34 other places, that there are certain types of uses, be it a

02:26:38 grocery store or a hotel of a certain size, or anything, any

02:26:44 certain types of uses that would necessarily more or less

02:26:49 have potential accessory uses.

02:26:52 Those are uses we started to hone in on.

02:26:55 We also tried to PARE it up with city law, because as we

02:27:01 explained to City Council through those workshops, there was

02:27:03 always kind of a conflict between what we can do with a

02:27:05 license and calling our use permit with a license, what we

02:27:10 can do with a permit, so we pulled the licensing

02:27:13 requirements on the state level, and we went through to find

02:27:16 out what restrictive licenses they have at the state level

02:27:18 that they enforce as well.

02:27:20 And see if we can kind of -- kind of match up our

02:27:24 regulations as much as possible so there's dual enforcement

02:27:27 of those things.

02:27:28 One in particular, the special use 1 is a special hotel,

02:27:33 which has by state law to get a license from the state as an

02:27:41 license for on-site consumption, beer wine and liquor, you

02:27:47 have to have at least 100 plus rooms, one of their main

02:27:51 criteria. We embedded that as a special with us one.

02:27:54 So you have to have 100 plus rooms.

02:27:56 You have to have an X class lay sense from the state.

02:27:59 In a waivers can be permitted from the city.

02:28:01 In a amplified music.

02:28:02 No sales in the parking lot.

02:28:06 You can see how that kind of matches up with the state law.

02:28:08 What we did is we went through, I think there's five

02:28:14 particular uses that were added to the special use 1

02:28:17 classification that were essentially agreed upon through all

02:28:21 the workshops, and public hearings, and most of them if not

02:28:26 all are tied to some type of special state license as well,

02:28:30 and then there's also other criteria included.

02:28:33 The hotel with 100 plus rooms as I mentioned.

02:28:38 A bowling alley with 12-plus lanes.

02:28:40 And that one actually has an SDX license from the state and

02:28:44 has to have 12-plus lanes in order to get that lay sense.

02:28:47 The shoppers' goods, convenience, gasoline, specialty

02:28:51 retail, package only, and that has a 1(APS) or 2(APS) which

02:28:57 is beer, for beer and wine package only sales, state

02:29:01 license.

02:29:01 And then you can get a 3 PS which is liquor.

02:29:05 Buff you can only get that -- I'm sorry, you can get that

02:29:08 state license with this particular special use approval

02:29:10 administratively.

02:29:11 But only if it's incidental to shoppers' goods.

02:29:15 That is only allowed by state law, and by city permit, if

02:29:20 that is incidental and accessory to a Sweetbay with a liquor

02:29:24 store.

02:29:25 They actually have specific requirement was their state

02:29:27 license in that 3 PS.

02:29:29 It requires they are separated by wall and two separate

02:29:31 answers but they have to be immediately adjacent.

02:29:34 There's a list of criteria there.

02:29:35 If they can enforce, we will only give you this permit.

02:29:38 If you actually meet that criteria.

02:29:40 So we have tied it directly to that.

02:29:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Ms. Coyle, just a movement Councilwoman

02:29:48 Montelione.

02:29:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's fine.

02:29:52 That might be interesting to just break it up.

02:29:58 Rather than engaging in conversation.

02:30:02 I just want to go back, because it's the amplification of

02:30:05 sound that I picked up on when you were talking about hotels

02:30:10 with 100 plus rooms, they are limited.

02:30:12 They can't have outdoor amplification?

02:30:14 >> If you want an administrative permit, the answer is no.

02:30:18 If you want a waiver to that, you are going to City Council.

02:30:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, I find that an onerous

02:30:26 requirement because if you are a hotel and you have 100 plus

02:30:28 rooms, you are going to have a lot of land area around you,

02:30:32 typically, so that the sound -- I mean at a decibel level,

02:30:38 it has to be totally obnoxious.

02:30:40 >> The amplified music criteria as well as the no sales in

02:30:44 the parking or loading area, those were the last two pieces

02:30:47 that were essentially kind of added in.

02:30:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: In a place where vehicular traffic is.

02:30:54 >> The two concepts came up through those workshops and were

02:31:00 embedded in almost all the criteria, administrative.

02:31:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I guess not selling alcohol in a place

02:31:05 where there's moving vehicular traffic is, I think, a good

02:31:10 idea.

02:31:10 >> We have some applications that were coming before council

02:31:13 at the time that wanted the ability to sell in their entire

02:31:17 parking lot because they wanted special events.

02:31:19 >> Right.

02:31:23 Well, live music, 100-plus room hotel, and --

02:31:30 >> Councilwoman Capin --

02:31:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Or a wedding outside at a hotel, you

02:31:34 like to have music at your wedding, because --

02:31:42 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Those are the types of things you can

02:31:43 certainly -- that criteria for a hotel is onerous and

02:31:48 unreasonable, and council wants to move it that way, that

02:31:51 can happen.

02:31:53 So anyway, the only bar-lounge-nightclub that we can approve

02:31:59 administratively are specifically in only downtown.

02:32:04 We can't approve them anywhere else.

02:32:09 They cannot sell in their parking or loading areas.

02:32:13 They can't have outdoor amplified music after 1 a.m.

02:32:16 And there can be no more than three of those uses per city

02:32:20 block.

02:32:21 The special restaurant -- and we called that the because the

02:32:26 restaurant lay sense from the state is a special restaurant.

02:32:29 Hillsborough County has a special act over it from the

02:32:31 1970s, which if you want a special restaurant license, FRX

02:32:37 license, you have to have at least 4,000 square feet and 100

02:32:40 feet.

02:32:40 Just to give you an example.

02:32:42 If you come to our office and you wanted a might have permit

02:32:44 for a restaurant, you are going to meet the definition that

02:32:47 says you are going to sell 51-49% sales, food, alcohol, and

02:32:52 you are going to always have your kitchen open and ready to

02:32:55 go, lights on, ready to cook food, you are going to have

02:33:02 ready-made meals served by a menu, however that's written.

02:33:06 But if you want administratively, you have to close at

02:33:10 11 p.m. Sunday through Wednesday, and you have to close at

02:33:12 1 a.m. Thursday through Saturday.

02:33:15 There's two exempt areas for that.

02:33:17 One is central business district.

02:33:19 And the second one is Westshore business district.

02:33:22 The Westshore business district was added at the end.

02:33:27 We actually didn't have it in there.

02:33:29 The Westshore Alliance came forward and asked for that.

02:33:32 That was to be treated the same as central business district

02:33:35 and council moved to treat them.

02:33:37 And then that was added in prayer to the second reading.

02:33:44 By council's direction.

02:33:48 Sales of alcoholic beverages can only be with the SRX, and

02:33:52 the only way that you are going sell liquor for a restaurant

02:33:55 approved administratively is if you close at 11 and 1, if

02:34:00 you have that state license, that is for liquor, that you

02:34:04 have no outdoor amplified music after 11, and that you don't

02:34:11 sell in your parking area or loading areas.

02:34:16 And then those are the only uses that council approved

02:34:20 administratively.

02:34:20 Short of the ones we had before for temporary special

02:34:24 events, and sidewalk cafes, to do that as sidewalk cafes a

02:34:29 few years ago because those are just extensions.

02:34:33 So basically what that boils down to is we tried as hard as

02:34:37 we could to tie to the state licensing because they have

02:34:41 their enforcement staff as well, so we tried to steer that

02:34:44 criteria as much as possible.

02:34:45 We won't be issuing any permits from our office

02:34:48 administratively, nor through City Council for uses that

02:34:53 don't match those licenses, because there are no waivers for

02:34:55 those licenses.

02:34:56 So the one that are ultimately going to come before council

02:34:59 are the ones that don't want to meet this criteria or can't

02:35:03 meet this criteria.

02:35:04 You will have restaurants come before you that are

02:35:11 restaurants that either don't meet the size requirement for

02:35:14 the outdoor act, want a full quota license that want to sell

02:35:21 on their parking lot or have outdoor music until 11 or open

02:35:26 till 3 a.m.

02:35:27 So anything specifically not listed in the S-1 will come

02:35:30 before you.

02:35:32 The special use 2 criteria that do come before you, those

02:35:36 have the distance separation requirements.

02:35:38 And the distance separation requirements were put in based

02:35:42 on the city components.

02:35:46 Fur coming before you as a bar venue, bar, restaurant,

02:35:50 lounge that doesn't meet this criteria, something else, you

02:35:53 want a waiver, that we can't give you administratively, or

02:35:56 you just have some on the use, something off the wall that

02:36:03 is not specifically listed and we come through for special

02:36:07 use 2, the distance separation requirements are within

02:36:11 Westshore and business centers, business centers only, the

02:36:15 blue, Westshore and USF, 250 feet from residential.

02:36:19 The urban villages which are all these other multicolored

02:36:23 areas, there's Seminole Heights, West Tampa, Davis Islands,

02:36:26 Hyde Park, Ballast Point down here, there's actually nine of

02:36:31 them.

02:36:32 If you look at an urban village 250 feet from other alcohol

02:36:36 beverage establishments, along the mixed use corridors,

02:36:39 which are all the brown lines, those are the major arterials

02:36:44 in the city.

02:36:45 Those are 250 feet from residential, 250 feet from alcoholic

02:36:48 beverage establishments, and then anywhere else in the city,

02:36:53 any part of the yellow is anywhere else in the city, be it

02:36:58 City of Tampa, anything in the yellow, this is Forest Hills,

02:37:03 this is university square, basically the entire peninsula of

02:37:09 South Tampa minus Ballast Point, Dale Mabry and Gandy, the

02:37:13 entire peninsula of South Tampa, you would be 1 that you

02:37:17 feet from all other alcoholic beverage establishments.

02:37:20 So the 1,000 feet criteria was locked in for all of those

02:37:23 uses that were not targeted to what is called as Rosemary,

02:37:32 those areas in the comp plan that call out very specifically

02:37:34 in the policies, that's where the growth is targeted to, and

02:37:38 that type of growth will naturally be and should be either

02:37:42 vertically or horizontally mixed in use, very clearly could

02:37:49 have commercial below residential.

02:37:51 Behind that where we went from these regulations is if you

02:37:55 have naturally and required by the comp plan, or encouraged

02:37:59 by the comp plan vertical mixed uses having a 1 that you

02:38:03 foot separation to residential or even a 10-foot separation

02:38:05 to residential from your corner store on the first floor,

02:38:08 doesn't make any sense.

02:38:09 The comp plan does one thing, and you won't be encouraging

02:38:14 those types of uses, because not every -- it's like we

02:38:21 always talk about City Council is people are coming in to

02:38:25 try to do a valid business.

02:38:27 And what are those criteria that they can meet and still be

02:38:31 enforceable?

02:38:34 And as Ms. Capin mentioned with enforcement, an idea of what

02:38:38 the progress is and we move forward with that, and we are

02:38:41 documenting them and those are going to be a great tool for

02:38:44 TPD, and fire marshal and the like, to make sure those items

02:38:48 are enforced.

02:38:50 But it's a real broad overview.

02:38:53 I'm here to answer any questions.

02:38:56 >>MIKE COHEN: Councilwoman Capin has a question.

02:38:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I appreciate that because it does inform new

02:39:00 council members what was passed right before they came into

02:39:03 office.

02:39:05 And the purpose of the zero distance separation, as you

02:39:09 explained it, because of the urban -- where there could very

02:39:13 well be commercial, or residential above commercial, where

02:39:16 we have that.

02:39:19 That's the explanation.

02:39:20 The other thing, what happens is that we are hearing it.

02:39:27 But the ones that really hear about the noise, 2:00 in the

02:39:33 morning, are the law enforcement.

02:39:38 And that's taxpayer money going out there.

02:39:43 That's what is happening with the noise level.

02:39:46 So maybe the decibels need to be looked at.

02:39:51 I agree there's certain areas that ultimately call for.

02:39:56 But there are areas that residents are very close, and

02:39:59 amplification is an issue.

02:40:03 Even throwing the garbage out is an issue because it makes

02:40:07 noise.

02:40:07 People have to get up in the morning to go to work.

02:40:09 And the places are open at all hours.

02:40:13 Those are things -- and we don't have here at City Council

02:40:17 the opportunity to hear them from the residents on this.

02:40:22 And there are residents in that Westshore area, district,

02:40:26 that is outlined as a business.

02:40:28 I live now in that area.

02:40:32 And very close to it.

02:40:34 On north "B."

02:40:36 So I understand what's happening there.

02:40:40 So the only reason I wanted to bring this forth was because

02:40:45 council member Chairman Miranda said meantimes, if we pass

02:40:51 something, we can always revisit it and look at it, tweak

02:40:54 it, do we need more, do we need less?

02:40:57 Or leave it?

02:40:58 Is it working perfectly fine?

02:40:59 And if council members feel this is working perfectly fine,

02:41:02 then that's what it is.

02:41:05 But I wanted it to be very clear, what was passed right

02:41:08 before new council members came in.

02:41:14 So I appreciate your explanation.

02:41:19 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Some of the things that I have been

02:41:20 hearing, and it's almost akin to what Ms. Kert was talking

02:41:23 about the business regulation.

02:41:25 If you are talking about decibel levels and talking about

02:41:27 solid waste issues, and trash cans or something else, we

02:41:32 have a whole broad range of regulations that actually could

02:41:35 control operational aspects that you might not want to tie

02:41:38 to a specific permit.

02:41:40 Because I think what we learned, and even what Ms. Kert said

02:41:42 is when you have those specific criteria by permits as rules

02:41:46 change, potentially, that you have old ones locked in, and

02:41:49 then new ones that either have to follow something or don't

02:41:51 have to follow something, so I guess what I am saying is we

02:41:55 have other codes that you potentially could apply those

02:41:58 broader concepts to that are enforceable.

02:42:02 The utilities, solid waste operational aspects are.

02:42:06 The chapter 14 has the noise pieces, where the decibel

02:42:12 levels are listed.

02:42:13 There are other pieces out there that could be used.

02:42:16 They wouldn't necessarily tie individual special use permits

02:42:19 because they are much harder to track.

02:42:22 We do mail them to one peeves property, property by

02:42:24 property.

02:42:25 We can certainly work with you all figuring out the best

02:42:28 places to put those things to make sure they are workable.

02:42:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I for one would like to look at those

02:42:34 decibel levels.

02:42:35 And the other thing that I would like to look at is the

02:42:37 way -- it is now from the complaint.

02:42:44 For instance, the apartment is complaining about the noise.

02:42:47 So the officers comes up and checks it from where the

02:42:52 complaint came from.

02:42:59 Okay, explain it to us better.

02:43:00 >> Captain O'Connor, TPD.

02:43:03 There's two different ways we do it based on the district.

02:43:07 In the business district, which is Ybor, Channelside, and

02:43:11 the business district that we just mentioned, we take those

02:43:14 noise readings from the source of the noise, at the

02:43:16 business, creating noise.

02:43:18 Everywhere else in the city, you go to the complainant,

02:43:23 whoever hears the noise that thinks it's too loud and go to

02:43:26 their property.

02:43:26 And you measure the noise from there.

02:43:29 In other words, in the business areas, we already know

02:43:32 there's going to be noise.

02:43:33 That's a given.

02:43:34 And we set levels for how loud it can be.

02:43:38 And if there's a complaint we go out and measure from the

02:43:40 distance.

02:43:42 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.

02:43:48 And before we moved on -- we move on to anything else, which

02:43:52 is what happened with the placard, we had the code

02:43:56 enforcement, law enforcement and fire marshal come together

02:43:59 and our legal in order to come up with what we would require

02:44:06 on those placards, or what would benefit law enforcement

02:44:11 when they went in.

02:44:12 Maybe that would be something that we could look at on the

02:44:18 decibels.

02:44:22 Part of it.

02:44:26 From the people that are out there and telling us where they

02:44:29 feel, what should be measured, where it should be measured

02:44:32 from, what would be an acceptable noise level, and work with

02:44:39 that.

02:44:40 Because it is extremely disturbing.

02:44:46 I heard in the West Tampa.

02:44:47 I heard it, and tonight I'm sure I am going to be hearing it

02:44:52 again.

02:44:52 I have heard it everywhere I go that has a business, that

02:44:56 has outdoor amplification.

02:44:58 Could you do something?

02:44:59 Is there anything we can, you know, that we can do?

02:45:03 And so that's why I bring it forth.

02:45:06 It's not just, you know, poof, it came out of no where.

02:45:14 If everything else is complaint driven.

02:45:15 >>> Right.

02:45:16 There are levels, and I guess legal can tell you that's one

02:45:19 of the things you can tweak whenever you want.

02:45:20 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilman Suarez.

02:45:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Speaking of legal, Ms. Kert, I know we had a

02:45:27 discussion earlier in the year about noise ordinances,

02:45:32 decibel levels, primarily on moving vehicles, not

02:45:37 necessarily -- stationery places like homes, apartments.

02:45:43 I think that Councilwoman's Capin's point is well taken.

02:45:46 One of the complaints we get a lot of is the noise coming

02:45:49 from a specific place, usually a place of entertainment of

02:45:52 some type, that is too loud or loud enough that anyone can

02:45:56 hear.

02:45:57 I know we cannot use a reasonable person type of standard

02:46:02 anymore.

02:46:03 We are supposed to measure it.

02:46:05 And it puts some pressure on police to go out and get -- I

02:46:09 think we have, what, two machines that can measure decibel

02:46:12 levels or just one now?

02:46:15 How many?

02:46:18 The captain says two.

02:46:19 >>REBECCA KERT: Two in his district and then one.

02:46:24 >> You are the loudest district it is, is what it comes down

02:46:26 to, captain.

02:46:29 And this happened to me when I was in the Westshore business

02:46:34 district, coming home.

02:46:35 And the Green Iguana stadium was having a concert there.

02:46:41 And I just thought to myself, that place is next to where

02:46:46 you are going to tonight, which is the Carver City Lincoln

02:46:50 Gardens area.

02:46:51 And I just thought, that's incredibly loud.

02:46:55 Now, I don't remember getting any complaints about that, but

02:46:57 I know that other people did.

02:46:58 Some of our other council people.

02:47:03 And there's got to be a measurable amount, whether decibels

02:47:07 or some other measurement that we can look at so we can go

02:47:10 forward and say, all right, when you have a nightclub and

02:47:12 you do have live entertainment -- and I agree with

02:47:15 Councilwoman Montelione, we want to make this a vibrant

02:47:18 city, entertainment for young folks and everything else, but

02:47:21 at the same time we have to balance that fun with people who

02:47:25 are actually working the next day, need to sleep and got

02:47:31 kids and everything else.

02:47:35 What has the court said?

02:47:36 Because I know we were all twisted up with the moving part.

02:47:40 Now what happened?

02:47:41 I know we have not revisited that lately in terms of what

02:47:44 the appeals court has.

02:47:45 I know we had two conflicting appeal court decisions.

02:47:49 Has it gone to the Supreme Court yet?

02:47:51 Is there another decision?

02:47:53 Is there something else that happened?

02:47:54 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

02:47:55 The case you are talking about is State versus Catalano,

02:47:58 scheduled for oral argument next week.

02:48:01 We are following it.

02:48:01 >> I know you are.

02:48:03 >>REBECCA KERT: Council, to step back a little bit, several

02:48:09 years ago, six or seven years ago when the city changed what

02:48:14 was the previous ordinance into a decibel ordinance, it took

02:48:17 three years.

02:48:18 And to justify the numbers that we had, we had an expert

02:48:20 from the university, I believe University of Florida, but

02:48:23 you have to have a sound expert who can testify this decibel

02:48:27 is what sounds like this, and this is why any noise louder

02:48:30 than that is unreasonable.

02:48:32 And we had that testimony.

02:48:34 I think that what we heard, what Ms. Capin has brought up,

02:48:39 I'm sure what you have all heard, which is there are certain

02:48:42 situation where is the decibel rating, although very clear,

02:48:47 is tough to argue about, we have some of the best machines

02:48:49 on the market, that drives every single situation you have,

02:48:55 and since we have such nice machines we don't have that many

02:48:58 of them.

02:48:59 Sometimes when you have neighbors who are complaining about

02:49:01 really loud thunderous music coming, by the time the officer

02:49:04 gets out there, goes back to the district and comes back,

02:49:09 it's not that workable.

02:49:10 So prior to the Second District Court of Appeals ruling in

02:49:15 the Catalano case which is not favorable to the State of

02:49:18 Florida, and their music coming from motor vehicles, was

02:49:22 changing our ordinance to keep the decibels working in

02:49:26 places like Ybor, it's working very well, because you are

02:49:30 measuring from the property line.

02:49:31 It's on the property line.

02:49:32 And you know exactly where the sound is and exactly how loud

02:49:36 it is.

02:49:36 But there are other parts of the city, that I totally agree,

02:49:39 I not working that well.

02:49:40 So we have come up with someplace where is you have some

02:49:45 standard but it would also allow more of a balancing test.

02:49:50 You have a little more flexibility and wouldn't necessarily

02:49:53 have to have the machines in those cases.

02:49:57 We have to have that set for you to bring to you, and in the

02:50:00 meantime we got a negative case out of the DCA.

02:50:04 We knew that case was pending.

02:50:06 We thought that our ordinance that we were presenting was

02:50:08 distinguishable.

02:50:09 But then that Second DCA case went far beyond what weighed

02:50:13 hoped it would not say.

02:50:15 It went even further and said made us suspect.

02:50:19 So we do have something that we would like to bring to you

02:50:21 to address your concerns, but right now, we are waiting on

02:50:25 the Florida Supreme Court to see whether or not it's

02:50:27 actually workable.

02:50:28 And we are tracking that, action I said.

02:50:31 I believe it's February 9th.

02:50:32 I have it on my calendar.

02:50:34 I'm hoping I don't have anything scheduled so I can actually

02:50:36 watch it.

02:50:37 But we are tracking.

02:50:38 That and we already have language written.

02:50:40 We are just waiting for an opportunity where we can come

02:50:42 back and say, yes, we believe this is legally defensible

02:50:45 because right now we can't.

02:50:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You have to see where it fits into what our

02:50:50 ordinance is going to say.

02:50:51 And I understand you have to wait.

02:50:53 And that's why when she brought it up, it made me remember

02:50:56 we are dealing with these noise ordinances, and we are still

02:51:00 kind of in limbo because you have to go through the Supreme

02:51:02 Court.

02:51:03 I wasn't sure if it had already and you were just looking at

02:51:07 how you drafted, what the Supreme Court said, or in this

02:51:11 case it's got to go before the Supreme Court so we are ready

02:51:14 to know what the next steps are going to be.

02:51:16 >>REBECCA KERT: What you said is correct, and I want to say

02:51:20 we do realize that there are certainly places, there are

02:51:25 tough situations that our current regulations don't meet our

02:51:29 citizens expectations, and we would like to come back.

02:51:32 >> Councilwoman Montelione, then Councilwoman a Capin, then

02:51:37 Councilman Reddick.

02:51:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. Chair, the mayor always mentions --

02:51:44 I probably heard it a hundred times -- that we are losing

02:51:47 our young people to Austin, Nashville and Charlotte.

02:51:51 I think anybody who heard the mayor speaker more than once

02:51:54 heard those three cities mentioned repeatedly.

02:51:57 And can we look, pending the Supreme Court decision, can we

02:52:03 look at the amplification and noise ordinances in those

02:52:08 three cities specifically?

02:52:10 Because Austin and Nashville are known to be music centers,

02:52:16 and birth places of original local grassroots, American

02:52:22 music.

02:52:24 Charlotte is a community that may not be as well-known for

02:52:27 their music scene, but it is somewhere that from a

02:52:33 standpoint of competing -- for economic incentives, we are

02:52:41 continually looking at Charlotte when the EDC or chamber are

02:52:47 working on our own economic development staff are working on

02:52:51 getting companies to relocate here.

02:52:58 Charlotte, or generally in the southeast when they are

02:53:00 competing along cities out in Texas.

02:53:02 So I want to make sure that those regulations where those

02:53:07 cities are, are taken into consideration, because if we are

02:53:10 going to compete with them, we need to be on an even keel.

02:53:13 And I would like to see what they are doing.

02:53:16 I'm sure they care just as much of their neighborhoods and

02:53:20 citizens who want to sleep at nature.

02:53:22 >>HARRY COHEN: I am going skip to Councilwoman Capin but I

02:53:26 have no idea why anyone would wants to live in any of those

02:53:29 places other than Tampa.

02:53:30 Councilwoman Capin.

02:53:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

02:53:33 I would like to ask Councilman Reddick if he would not mind

02:53:40 to add to his motion that he made that the criteria for the

02:53:46 business regulation, try to bring back a mechanism for

02:53:52 enforcement of those regulations, because we can pile

02:53:57 regulations up, but enforcement is the key.

02:54:02 >> I accept.

02:54:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

02:54:07 That would be a friendly amendment.

02:54:08 >>HARRY COHEN: New motion on the floor.

02:54:12 Is there a second?

02:54:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

02:54:15 >>HARRY COHEN: It's your motion.

02:54:19 If Councilwoman Capin will second it.

02:54:21 Any discussion?

02:54:22 All those in favor?

02:54:24 Okay.

02:54:25 Opposed?

02:54:26 Okay.

02:54:26 So that passes.

02:54:28 When is that coming back to us?

02:54:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: May 24th.

02:54:32 >>HARRY COHEN: May 24th.

02:54:34 Okay.

02:54:35 Mr. Reddick, do you have something additional?

02:54:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes, I just wanted to say to Ms. Kert that

02:54:42 you might want to check with the legal staff, with

02:54:47 Hillsborough County, because Board of County Commissioners

02:54:49 just two weeks ago recommended to the legal department to

02:54:55 come back with draft ordinance that is legally defensible

02:55:00 about the noise ordinance.

02:55:01 So you might want to do something with them.

02:55:04 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, sir, I talked with them.

02:55:06 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay.

02:55:09 So I think that concludes our discussion.

02:55:11 We are going to move to public comment.

02:55:14 Three minutes per person.

02:55:15 Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address

02:55:17 council?

02:55:20 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.

02:55:30 We followed this whole alcoholic beverage ordinance all the

02:55:34 way through.

02:55:36 Very interesting.

02:55:37 And Mrs. Ms. Capin is bringing up the issue of Westshore.

02:55:41 Because I stood at this podium and asked that Westshore not

02:55:44 be included.

02:55:47 And it's very recent that you said, because there are six

02:55:52 neighborhoods that are right there, and these are

02:55:55 residential single-family neighborhoods.

02:55:57 So there was concern about what did happen ultimately that

02:56:03 Westshore was considered in this.

02:56:05 And also in their overlay, that they can just -- they don't

02:56:09 have to come to council for any alcoholic beverage.

02:56:12 And that's a big concern to us.

02:56:15 And I'm saying Beach Park, too, because we can hear what

02:56:19 happens.

02:56:20 Kennedy Boulevard is part of Westshore district. We live

02:56:25 immediately behind it.

02:56:26 Some people forget that.

02:56:27 They think of Westshore starting and going north.

02:56:32 So we are immediately abut it.

02:56:36 There are six neighborhoods around there that a butt it as

02:56:39 well.

02:56:40 Lincoln Gardens, Carver City.

02:56:43 It's interesting because I had thought maybe at some point I

02:56:49 could come up here and explain to you what the residential

02:56:51 neighborhood improvement committee in Westshore is, because

02:56:55 that is part of the Westshore DRI, and that committee

02:57:01 watched all of this very closely when it was going through,

02:57:03 and our recommendation to the council at the time was that

02:57:07 that not be allowed.

02:57:08 But to get off that subject very quickly, yes, we hear at

02:57:16 T.H.A.N. from residents, with the fact that suddenly the

02:57:24 place has an alcoholic permit.

02:57:27 Cathy has agreed to put those S-1 approvals in the Tampa

02:57:32 care so that's going to make a big difference for at least

02:57:35 the neighborhood will know about some of these.

02:57:37 For example, the small grocery store that wants to sell it,

02:57:43 and now they would at least be on the list.

02:57:46 When they went to council, you all heard from the

02:57:48 neighborhood.

02:57:52 If that little grocery store was a problem, as I heard

02:57:56 recently on 22nd street, I think.

02:57:59 (Bell sounds)

02:58:00 Council denied that.

02:58:02 So that's where there's a problem.

02:58:04 When it doesn't come to council, and admission didn't give

02:58:11 an eight foot.

02:58:12 So please be very aware that there are people who need

02:58:16 sleep.

02:58:19 True, young adults can go to a closed-in area for their

02:58:22 music, don't have to have it where people are trying to

02:58:26 sleep to go to work the next day and children to school.

02:58:28 (Bell sounds)

02:58:29 Anyway, it's ongoing situation, and we will be back when you

02:58:32 bring it forward again.

02:58:34 Thanks.

02:58:34 >>HARRY COHEN: Anyone else?

02:58:37 Yes?

02:58:40 >> Jerry Frankhouser, 4601 west -- president of T.H.A.N.,

02:58:50 and we have a lot of people who have mentioned to me that

02:58:53 because of the S-1 change they are not getting notice.

02:58:58 Because of the notice, they are not getting notified that

02:59:01 things are changing in their neighborhood.

02:59:03 So I'm thankful that Cathy is going to put some things in

02:59:08 the cares so we know what has been changed in our

02:59:13 neighborhood.

02:59:14 Thanks.

02:59:14 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.

02:59:17 Is there anyone else that wishes the --

02:59:27 >> Vince Pardo, manager Ybor City.

02:59:31 Representing your official advisory committee to the CRA,

02:59:35 Ybor Development Corporation board.

02:59:37 I'm passing around to you now a motion that was passed at

02:59:41 last meeting with a series of recommendations, preparing for

02:59:44 this particular workshop, and discussions.

02:59:47 Some of these things I have already gone into.

02:59:51 I want to make sure this is part of the record.

02:59:53 This comes to you as an entire community representing

02:59:56 residents.

02:59:57 Several barrio people as well as other members that you are

03:00:02 aware through your appointees.

03:00:04 So this is well-rounded at least for the Ybor community in

03:00:07 doing that.

03:00:07 Very highly, highly want to recommend that we have unanimous

03:00:11 support for these approvals.

03:00:16 Sometimes it's difficult to do.

03:00:17 But support for the seven entities you have in front of you.

03:00:23 But having this as far as chapter 6, the regulated business

03:00:26 was confirmed by everyone as the way to go.

03:00:34 It allows a level playing field, and of course the issue is

03:00:39 just very generically, there are definitions in different

03:00:42 codes safe to deal with, but what they consider high risk

03:00:47 being clubs, not restaurants but clubs, that are open past

03:00:51 midnight, that serve 18 to 21-year-olds and are large

03:00:56 establishments.

03:00:57 And I think this kind of lays that out.

03:00:58 So the entire industry, and where we are really concerned

03:01:03 about, where the problem is happening, it's not the small

03:01:10 clubs, not restaurants serving alcohol, it's large clubs, 18

03:01:14 and 21, after midnight.

03:01:17 So I hope you will entertain this as partly of your

03:01:22 deliberations.

03:01:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Pardo, looking at the business name,

03:01:27 what is the business dirty shame?

03:01:30 >> The dirty shame is a neighborhood pub, 7th Avenue and

03:01:34 20th street, about a half block from my office.

03:01:37 >> I just wondered, the name sounds, you know --

03:01:43 [ Laughter ]

03:01:44 Shameful.

03:01:44 >> A lot of conversation about the name.

03:01:47 The proprietor there is actually a long-term pioneer,

03:01:51 Richard Boone, had the oak barrel in Ybor Square years ago,

03:01:55 and had the Irish pub on the block, and this is a new

03:02:05 establishment.

03:02:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was going to say, Councilman Reddick,

03:02:10 there's a lot of names on here that can be different things.

03:02:13 Let's not pick on poor dirty shame.

03:02:17 I saw taboo and I thought, okay, that's another one.

03:02:20 Anyway.

03:02:22 >>HARRY COHEN: You ought to see the names of the clubs in

03:02:25 Austin, Charlotte.

03:02:28 Is there anyone else?

03:02:30 Councilwoman Montelione.

03:02:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Looking over the recommendations that

03:02:37 you have from the YCDC, number 5, is particularly, I think,

03:02:44 important and something that I'm sure Ms. Kert has on her

03:02:48 radar because she's very good at these things, but

03:02:51 establishing an enforcement system that relates directly

03:02:54 with the owners and operators of the businesses, not

03:02:58 necessarily the land owners tore building owners, because

03:03:10 you lease your building to a company, downtown have much

03:03:14 control over what that company does once they open for

03:03:16 business.

03:03:16 They can make all kinds of promises and have an

03:03:19 understanding before they actually move in and start

03:03:21 operating, and then all of a sudden you find yourself in a

03:03:25 totally different situation.

03:03:27 So that would be particularly of interest to me to make sure

03:03:32 that the owner operators are the ones being held responsible

03:03:35 and not necessarily the land owner or building owner.

03:03:38 >> It really is key to this recommendation.

03:03:41 Time and time again, let me take a -- Club Fuel, we

03:03:46 repeatedly and finally were able to get a rest on the noise

03:03:50 ordinance.

03:03:50 Who do we bring here?

03:03:51 The property owner, not owner of the business.

03:03:55 It was the landlord.

03:03:56 Most everything we deal with was alcohol, noise.

03:03:59 Go back to that.

03:04:00 That's why the business operating permit is so key, is

03:04:03 getting to exactly who caused the problem, the operator of

03:04:06 the business, who may or may not be the owner of the

03:04:08 building.

03:04:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

03:04:14 >>HARRY COHEN: Is there anyone else?

03:04:19 Councilwoman Capin.

03:04:21 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I just thought of it, we didn't ask for

03:04:26 anything to come back on the noise.

03:04:29 And I am wondering within seven days -- I don't know if Ms.

03:04:33 Kert would like to bring forth -- I don't remember, but we

03:04:38 didn't ask for it.

03:04:40 Right?

03:04:40 >> I would have to go back and check my notes whether or not

03:04:45 there's a pending motion.

03:04:47 I believe the understanding is after we have something from

03:04:49 the Supreme Court we will come back to you.

03:04:54 I don't remember the motion.

03:04:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think we did have a pending motion because

03:05:03 they did present to us prayer those two conflicting Court of

03:05:06 Appeals decisions, and we were waiting for that, and that's

03:05:11 why I asked because I thought it might help with this other

03:05:13 portion of it, too.

03:05:14 So I think that's actually a pending motion.

03:05:21 >>HARRY COHEN: Ms. Kert, we are expecting you are going to

03:05:23 report to us on the outcome of the litigation that's going

03:05:25 on.

03:05:26 You will do that, correct?

03:05:27 >>REBECCA KERT: I will do that.

03:05:29 Whether there's a motion or not.

03:05:30 I just don't remember.

03:05:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

03:05:38 That clears it up.

03:05:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to receive and file.

03:05:42 >> Second.

03:05:42 >>HARRY COHEN: All those in favor?

03:05:45 Opposed?

03:05:46 All right.

03:05:47 We stand adjourned.

03:05:48 Thank you.

03:05:51 (City Council meeting adjourned)


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.