Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL CALLED WORKSHOP
Thursday, May 10, 2012

DISCLAIMER:

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.


10:58:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: City Council is called to order.

10:59:01 Roll call.

10:59:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

10:59:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Here.

10:59:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

10:59:08 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

10:59:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

10:59:10 Need a motion to open the workshop.

10:59:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So moved.

10:59:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mrs.

10:59:17 Mulhern.

10:59:17 All in favor?

10:59:19 Opposed?

10:59:21 All cell phones and other electronic paraphernalia, please

10:59:27 turn them off.

10:59:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: City Council attorney.

10:59:30 I just want to thank council for continuing this item to

10:59:35 this special called meeting.

10:59:36 And I apologize for my absence at the workshop two weeks

10:59:39 ago.

10:59:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me one second.

10:59:42 All cell phones, please turn them off.

10:59:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, in preparation for your

10:59:52 discussion today, I have prepared for you and distributed a

10:59:56 copy of portions of the city charter and the entirety of

11:00:03 your council rules of procedure.

11:00:07 Would you wish to discuss the amendments to council's rules

11:00:09 of procedure in the order in which they appear on the

11:00:12 agenda?

11:00:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Attorney, you take them the way you

11:00:17 feel fit.

11:00:18 You are right now at the podium.

11:00:20 Or you can take them like they are on the agenda or you can

11:00:23 skip.

11:00:24 If you want to take it in the way we have it on the agenda,

11:00:26 I think there's a lot of apprehension of people that think

11:00:29 they won't be able to speak.

11:00:30 I think that's the first one that we ought to take care of.

11:00:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, council, just as I said to you in

11:00:37 the past, these are not my rules, these are your rules of




11:00:40 procedure.

11:00:41 These rules have been amended many times over the course of

11:00:45 many years to allow the City Council to conduct the business

11:00:50 the way it sees fit.

11:00:53 In the charter, it does say in section 2.03 that you may

11:00:58 adopt such bylaws and regulations and rules of procedure for

11:01:01 your own guidance and government as you may deem expedient.

11:01:05 And in that regard, if City Council now being as a whole

11:01:15 together for a full year, you have had the opportunity to

11:01:17 work within the constraints of the agenda as it has been.

11:01:22 If council sees to give some sort of direction to me in the

11:01:28 way you wish to amend your rules of procedure, I certainly

11:01:31 would be very happy to take direction from you as long as

11:01:34 there's a consensus of council and bring back something.

11:01:37 My point is, I would like to know where City Council wishes

11:01:41 to go on these items so I can help you get there, if that's

11:01:44 your desire.

11:01:47 The first item is the way in which citizens sign in and

11:01:50 speak before council.

11:01:51 There is a sign-in sheet, that as you know is at the podium,

11:01:56 the lectern outside City Council chambers, and we ask people

11:02:00 to sign in.

11:02:01 That is done primarily for the purpose of assisting the

11:02:05 clerk in preparation of a record and the minutes.

11:02:09 There was a point in time when there was an attempt made to




11:02:15 actually read from the sign-in sheet.

11:02:17 Some people are under the misunderstanding that the sign-in

11:02:21 sheet as is being presently used creates the order of the

11:02:26 speakers.

11:02:27 That is not the case.

11:02:28 It just indicates that they do want to speak.

11:02:30 And sometimes, I guess people have a misunderstanding that

11:02:34 because they get there early and put their names first on

11:02:36 the list that they are called in that order.

11:02:38 And obviously in practice that has not been the case.

11:02:42 So I would like to know if council wishes to change the

11:02:45 process, or if there are any issues that you have with the

11:02:48 process to express those issues and see how we can make the

11:02:51 process better, if these council's desire.

11:02:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any council suggestions at this time?

11:02:57 Mr. Reddick?

11:02:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

11:03:03 You know, hearing what you are saying, it basically doesn't

11:03:08 much sense to even have them out there, the form out there,

11:03:10 if they are not going to be utilized properly.

11:03:13 I mean, I don't think it's fair, since I have been here, I

11:03:15 don't think it's fair we have certain items that are time

11:03:20 certain on the agenda, people sign up thinking they are

11:03:22 going to come and speak, we go longer.

11:03:27 Sometimes we extend into the afternoon session, for example.




11:03:30 And those people don't get a chance to speak because they

11:03:34 came that morning and not available in the afternoon.

11:03:38 We have a process, and I think it's a process over in the

11:03:44 county where people sign up and they set up for or five

11:03:47 minutes for discussion and they can speak to those items.

11:03:49 And then the chair calls those individuals names, they come

11:03:52 up together, they have three minutes, and they go about

11:03:56 their business.

11:03:57 But we are not going to utilize that but we using one form

11:04:03 where somebody signs up, gets an extra minute like we have

11:04:07 seen this morning but we are not going to use the form that

11:04:11 they are thinking that they are signing up, they have a

11:04:14 chance to come speak.

11:04:15 And then in line and they don't get a chance to speak unless

11:04:19 we extend the time.

11:04:22 I think we need to do one of two things. We need to put a

11:04:26 knolls place to utilize those forms similar to like we are

11:04:30 doing at Hillsborough County government board of county

11:04:34 commission and their procedure of calling people based on

11:04:36 name, the way they sign up, or we need to just eliminate

11:04:41 those forms out there and just do what we are doing now.

11:04:44 But we need to give preference to individuals who come here

11:04:49 and speak on an item, and they are denied that opportunity

11:04:54 because we don't get to that item and we have to wait until

11:04:58 the afternoon session, we have an afternoon session, can't




11:05:02 come in the afternoon, they have to wait, or these people

11:05:05 who take time off from their job to come out here at 9:00,

11:05:10 and we don't get to it till 1:30, it's not fair to those

11:05:14 individuals.

11:05:16 And I think we need to make a decision or have some

11:05:20 discussion about how can we best utilize the people who are

11:05:25 coming out here, their time and effort to come and speak to

11:05:27 an item, and give them that due process.

11:05:31 And I think that's what a lot of those individuals, the time

11:05:36 they speak.

11:05:39 And I don't know, but we need to make some changes in that

11:05:46 respect.

11:05:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Reddick, I agree with you that

11:05:53 it makes sense, and I know they do do that at the county,

11:05:57 that they have their sign-in sheet, and then call public

11:06:02 speakers in the order that they signed in.

11:06:04 So it seems like a fair thing to do.

11:06:06 I don't think it's going to address a lot of the problem is

11:06:08 that people come to speak on items that are public hearings,

11:06:14 and I guess they could speak -- or can they?

11:06:20 If somebody comes for a public hearing and it looks like we

11:06:23 are not going get to it, they can't speak on it as public

11:06:26 comment.

11:06:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No.

11:06:29 Normally the time for them to speak is during the time the




11:06:32 public hearing is open.

11:06:33 >>MARY MULHERN: So I don't think it's for people who come

11:06:38 for those things.

11:06:39 That's another question.

11:06:40 But I think it seems like a fair thing to do.

11:06:42 If the chair has the sign-in list of the public speakers and

11:06:47 calls them out, and if someone isn't here at the time you go

11:06:51 to the next person, and by the time we are done, everyone

11:06:54 who is here to speak should have an opportunity to speak.

11:06:57 They have to go to the end of the line if they are not here

11:07:00 when their name is called.

11:07:01 But that makes stones me.

11:07:05 We might need to look at moving ways to make our meeting

11:07:11 move more quickly, to answer the question better or changing

11:07:16 the order on the agenda.

11:07:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen?

11:07:21 >>HARRY COHEN: Just to add to what Councilwoman Mulhern and

11:07:25 Councilman Reddick just said.

11:07:27 I think the biggest issue is really item number 2, which is

11:07:31 making the time certain item more precise.

11:07:34 We tend to set everything for either 9:00 or 10:00.

11:07:40 And the reason we do that is because we are basically

11:07:43 assuming that if we are more precise we are going to end up

11:07:46 with gaps in the agenda, and what ends up happening is we

11:07:50 end going much longer.




11:07:52 So it seems to me that if there was more certainty about

11:07:55 when the time for certain items were going to occur, people

11:07:58 could plan much their day around our agenda being actually

11:08:04 an accurate guide to what it is that we are about to do.

11:08:07 That's number one.

11:08:08 And number two, it's not just a burden on people in the

11:08:14 public that want to speak.

11:08:15 It's not just a burden on neighborhoods that want to speak.

11:08:18 It's also a burden on people that are paying representatives

11:08:22 to be here, because they often may have to pay for a full

11:08:25 day, because that person can't depend on the time certain

11:08:30 occurring when we say it's going to.

11:08:32 So I think that by looking at that, we would help our

11:08:37 situation.

11:08:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

11:08:40 Mr. Suarez.

11:08:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Your point is well taken, Mr. Cohen, because

11:08:44 there's a couple things.

11:08:46 I think that following what Mr. Reddick and Ms. Mulhern said

11:08:51 about the sign-in sheet, I think it's important to know that

11:08:55 if we have those, we can actually plan for the time frame in

11:09:00 which public comment is presented to us.

11:09:03 I think that it's the more orderly process.

11:09:05 So many times that we have been sitting here, and there will

11:09:08 be ten people and then all of a sudden another ten people




11:09:12 get up to do public comments.

11:09:13 So there's no way for us to really know who is out there

11:09:16 waiting to make a public comment.

11:09:20 Secondly, it does help the clerk immensely in knowing what

11:09:22 the person's name and address is.

11:09:25 I think we have a problem a lot of times with people not

11:09:28 wanting to give their name, not wanting to give their

11:09:31 address, not knowing whether or not someone is here,

11:09:34 primarily as an off shoot of some other discussion.

11:09:40 I think it's a way to kind of tighten how we have the public

11:09:44 speak.

11:09:45 But on the time certain aspect of it, what makes it

11:09:48 difficult is the public comment portion of it and our own

11:09:52 comments.

11:09:53 You know, we do not reign ourselves in a lot of times and

11:09:57 that's also part of our rules of order in terms of how much

11:10:02 we take per item.

11:10:05 Again, you know, I don't want to make this a discussion

11:10:10 either from the public or from the dais, but there is a

11:10:13 sense of how much time do we take to make comments and ask

11:10:18 questions?

11:10:19 How much time do we have in relation to public comments?

11:10:23 I think having the chair have a list of those people that

11:10:26 are about to speak, have them called up, and maybe even make

11:10:31 an announcement saying please be prepared to speak if you




11:10:33 have written your name on the list, have them line up at

11:10:37 some point, and each name is called out, I think it's much

11:10:41 easier.

11:10:41 As a member of Hart and the MPO, we do it there.

11:10:45 Typically we do not have the kind of public comment that

11:10:48 wave at City Council.

11:10:49 But at those times when we did have a lot of people come up

11:10:54 it does make it easier, because the chair and this clerk

11:11:00 have a foreknowledge of how many people are going to be

11:11:02 speaking.

11:11:03 Time certain items, we may want to think about when we put

11:11:09 some of the items on here, because I think if we look at our

11:11:13 calendar we can see this will maybe have a little more, you

11:11:16 know, time to take, some may take less.

11:11:19 It's never -- it's not an exact science as we all know.

11:11:23 But I think that maybe we ought to start looking at putting

11:11:27 items at 11 a.m., you know, other items at 9:30. We don't

11:11:31 do it as often as we like to.

11:11:33 Items at 9:45.

11:11:35 So it gives some people some leeway.

11:11:38 And Mr. Shelby, I don't think there's any limitation as to

11:11:41 the time frame in which we set agenda items, correct?

11:11:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Actually, there is in one sense.

11:11:48 With regard to advertised public hearings, what time you set

11:11:54 is advertised in the newspaper.




11:11:57 A and as you heard me say, legally, you cannot take up that

11:12:00 item which is why, for instance, in your rule --

11:12:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me interrupt you, Mr. Shelby. My point

11:12:06 is not those things that we have not already said in a

11:12:08 public hearing as to when they are set, meaning the time

11:12:11 frame that we can make it 9:15, 9:20, 9:30, 9:45, 10, 10:15,

11:12:17 so on.

11:12:18 It doesn't have to be typically what we have seen which is

11:12:23 9, 9:30 10:30, there are no rules that say it has to be on

11:12:28 the half hour.

11:12:29 >> Actually if I can direct your attention to page 3 of

11:12:32 council's rules of procedure under regular meetings, you

11:12:34 have an order of business.

11:12:36 And mind you, that has been amended repeatedly over the

11:12:40 years, even the time since I have been City Council

11:12:44 attorney.

11:12:44 For instance, alcoholic beverages used to only be set for

11:12:49 1:30 in the afternoon.

11:12:51 So the lawyers and the people could come back, knowing they

11:12:54 can come back after lunch and not have to waste the entire

11:12:58 morning.

11:12:58 What would happen is sometimes council would wrap up at,

11:13:02 say, 11:00 in the morning and realize they have to come back

11:13:04 for a public hearing at 1:30.

11:13:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me rephrase, Mr. Shelby. Again, it's




11:13:10 within those specific time frames, meaning if you look at

11:13:16 public hearings on second reading or public hearings on

11:13:20 legislative matters -- and I'm looks at more those things

11:13:22 that are not quasi-judicial, that within that set time set

11:13:27 for 9:30 meaning that's a set time to begin, not necessarily

11:13:30 a set time for a specific agenda item, we can set a time for

11:13:35 specific agenda item, correct?

11:13:37 As long as it's publicly --

11:13:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Absolutely.

11:13:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That was my point.

11:13:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you notice on the 3-B, the order of

11:13:48 business, if you see letter J, staff reports and unfinished

11:13:53 business, it just says set for 10 a.m.

11:13:56 It doesn't say time certain.

11:13:58 If you notice, it doesn't say time certain.

11:14:03 The way the time certain came about was an agreement for

11:14:07 staff reports was an agreement with the previous chairman

11:14:09 and previous chief of staff where they made an agreement

11:14:11 that rather than have staff have to spend the morning, have

11:14:18 administrators spend the morning waiting to be called, there

11:14:21 was an agreement that City Council would stop whatever they

11:14:22 were doing and take up the staff reports at 10:00 to move

11:14:26 staff items along so they can get back to work.

11:14:29 That appears on your agenda.

11:14:31 But as you say, Mr. Suarez, all this is flexible, and




11:14:36 council can control the agenda as it sees fit.

11:14:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.

11:14:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mrs. Montelione?

11:14:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, chair.

11:14:45 You know, I agree that the process of the sign-in sheet

11:14:52 similar to what board of county commissioners does, the

11:15:01 habitual way of doing things in different areas, but I agree

11:15:05 with that, and having that sign-in sheet really mean

11:15:08 something would be good.

11:15:13 I had noticed back when we were given our council books a

11:15:19 year ago, when we all took office, that we had public

11:15:25 comments scheduled for 30 minutes, three minutes a speaker,

11:15:28 and that is also in council's rules of procedures in rule 4,

11:15:33 parliamentary policies, letter D, council members should

11:15:37 refrain from engaging in speaker diagonal during public

11:15:41 comment.

11:15:42 After a year being here at the pleasure of the chair, there

11:15:45 have been times when each of us has asked a follow-up

11:15:48 question of someone speaking at the podium.

11:15:51 So that in essence gives that particular person a little

11:15:54 more time than the initial three minutes allotted, and it

11:15:58 also causes the 30 minutes allotted for public comment to be

11:16:04 expanded, and many times especially with the seriousness of

11:16:10 items that have come up recently, have requested, made a

11:16:14 motion to expand the public comment until the last speaker




11:16:17 has spoken.

11:16:21 There's also a limit which we saw today for speakers of

11:16:27 three minutes to have someone give their time adding one

11:16:34 minute, and there's a limit of ten minutes, maximum of ten

11:16:37 minutes. So looking at rule 5, potentially if you have a

11:16:43 30-minute public comment time frame, and you have three

11:16:48 speakers who all have gotten people who give up their

11:16:54 minutes, we are only going to have three speakers because

11:16:57 each of them, three minutes, 30 minutes, there you go.

11:17:00 So I would entertain that we expand the time allotted,

11:17:06 because we often go over it anyway, for public comment to

11:17:11 accommodate everyone who wishes to speak.

11:17:17 In this day and age there's a lot of talk about governments

11:17:21 limiting the voices of the people.

11:17:23 And I would be remiss if I didn't want to hear from everyone

11:17:30 because time out of their day to come here and speak to us

11:17:34 and encourage people to come down here and speak to us.

11:17:36 And by using the sign-up sheet, one of my concerns is that

11:17:40 people who get here late because of traffic, or because of

11:17:43 their work schedule, didn't get to sign in on that sign-in

11:17:47 sheet, are they not going to be able to speak at all because

11:17:50 they didn't get on that sign-in sheet?

11:17:53 It's also been asked of me to propose that presidents or

11:17:59 those designated by neighborhood associations be afforded an

11:18:04 a lot of time greater than the three minutes because they




11:18:07 are representing larger body of people.

11:18:12 Now, everyone in the neighborhood associations may not be

11:18:14 able to come down here and sign the speaker waiver form to

11:18:18 add to the one minute, but they elect add president,

11:18:22 vice-president and board to represent their neighborhood.

11:18:25 So subpoena there a process we could put in place to allow

11:18:29 neighborhood associations to maybe get official members of

11:18:33 their association affidavits handing over their one minute

11:18:38 of time even though they are not present and in the room?

11:18:41 So those are my three questions.

11:18:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Let's start with the last one first.

11:18:51 The answer is, if that's the desire of council, we can look

11:18:53 into that.

11:18:54 We also have toking cognizant of due process rules when you

11:18:59 afford an additional length of time to a speaker, what

11:19:07 implications it has on the petitioner, what implications it

11:19:10 has on the rest of the interested parties.

11:19:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Leaving quasi-judicial out of it.

11:19:17 We are talking about just regular meetings and workshops.

11:19:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay, so the legislative matters.

11:19:23 If that's council's desires, then that can be done however

11:19:27 council wishes.

11:19:28 Just to clarify, the speaker waiver form. I don't know how

11:19:31 it's done at CRA but at City Council you cannot use a

11:19:34 speaker waiver form unless it is specifically a public




11:19:36 hearing.

11:19:37 Cannot using speaker waiver form during agenda public

11:19:40 comment.

11:19:40 That's not an available option. If council wishes to make

11:19:43 an exception and waive its own rules and give that speaker

11:19:46 that much more time, the council can do that.

11:19:48 But they don't have a right under your rules to use a

11:19:52 speaker waiver form for anything other than something that's

11:19:55 set for public hearing.

11:19:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Then that's something that I would

11:19:59 support that we allow speaker waiver forms during regular

11:20:02 council meetings and workshops.

11:20:07 I'm all for consistent rules.

11:20:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin.

11:20:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I also would support the sign-in priority

11:20:21 simply because it lends to consistency.

11:20:25 But when you have the speaker waiver form and you are

11:20:28 talking about three speakers, that you could take up 307

11:20:32 minutes, each speaker is representing seven other people.

11:20:36 That's 21.

11:20:37 You have 24 people or speakers being represented.

11:20:43 There so it's not three people.

11:20:45 It's actually 24 people.

11:20:49 So, yeah, it could take up to 30 minutes.

11:20:53 21 for seven less three that are speaking so that would be




11:20:58 the ten minutes.

11:20:59 So it's 24.

11:21:02 But at any rate, that part of it, I looked at and thought,

11:21:09 yeah, it would take up the 30 minutes but it is representing

11:21:12 quite a few speakers.

11:21:21 On extending the time, I'm glad that you brought up of that

11:21:25 cot only be done during the public hearing as opposed to --

11:21:31 but during the public comment, it cannot be extended.

11:21:40 Only if there's a public hearing.

11:21:42 If they are speaking on the public hearing.

11:21:47 Minutes could be added under your rules now.

11:21:50 So a waiver form is not used.

11:21:57 And now it's set up with the 30 minutes time limit.

11:22:01 And preference given to those for people who have an agenda

11:22:05 item.

11:22:09 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I also want to look at comments or questions

11:22:12 from the dais, adding minutes, that is correct, because we

11:22:16 wind up with the same 30 minutes, and we have taken up

11:22:19 public time by speaking.

11:22:21 So I don't know, it's on the rules so I think we should

11:22:25 adhere to it.

11:22:26 If we have any questions, wait till after the 30 minutes to

11:22:29 ask the question of the public.

11:22:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second go around if council wishes to

11:22:37 speak.




11:22:37 Any others?

11:22:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Public comment on the matter which is a

11:22:53 subject shall be taken up for a total of 30 minutes at the

11:22:56 end of each workshop agenda item, three minutes per speaker.

11:23:00 No official action on the matter which is the subject the

11:23:02 workshop shall be taken during or after a workshop unless

11:23:05 the public is afforded an opportunity prior to action.

11:23:08 If you put the motion on the floor my recommendation would

11:23:10 be to open the floor for comment before taking a vote.

11:23:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Before we go forward, I think there are

11:23:16 three items on the workshop agenda.

11:23:20 I would prefer of that we go through all three items before

11:23:23 we make any motions.

11:23:27 Because then we can open it up to public comment.

11:23:30 Correct, Mr. Shelby?

11:23:31 After the workshop is over and then we can go forward.

11:23:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's fine.

11:23:36 Item number 2.

11:23:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I apologize, Mr. Chair.

11:23:42 We discussed 2 also, unless there are other members that

11:23:45 want to talk about that.

11:23:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone wish to speak on item 2?

11:23:50 I see no one.

11:23:51 Mr. Shelby.

11:23:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just with regard to item 2, so we are




11:23:58 clear, nothing on your agenda is set for time certain right

11:24:02 now except for what appears on the agenda under staff

11:24:05 reports, and that's by agreement with the clerk.

11:24:07 That could be taken off.

11:24:09 Or that could be left on.

11:24:10 Either way.

11:24:11 But right now you do not have anything set as time certain

11:24:16 unless you make your motion you have an agreement that you

11:24:18 will stop whatever you are doing and take it up at that

11:24:19 time.

11:24:20 So it's council's pleasure if they want to be more precise

11:24:24 when they set meetings, it's again the pleasure of the chair

11:24:28 and the pleasure of council how you wish to conduct your

11:24:30 meeting.

11:24:32 But an observation is that when you set something that says

11:24:34 time certain, you are creating an expectation on the part of

11:24:37 the public.

11:24:39 And they come to rely on that expectation.

11:24:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez?

11:24:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I apologize, Mr. Chair.

11:24:50 We are talking about time certain and when we plan to take

11:24:53 things up, the problem has always been us and public

11:24:56 comment.

11:24:57 I think I made that point prior.

11:25:00 To get folks here for a particular hearing, whether it's




11:25:04 quasi-judicial or legislative, it's a difficult part of it

11:25:09 which is we tend to try and do the best we can to get things

11:25:13 rolling.

11:25:14 I think that the first process, which is announcing each

11:25:18 person that is going forward on public comment, will help.

11:25:22 I think the second thing, my suggestion, I did not make it

11:25:26 as a motion and I am not going to now, in terms of making

11:25:30 specific pieces within the agenda at a specific time within

11:25:35 that set parameter.

11:25:37 Probably will help, too.

11:25:39 And that's the only suggestion I have to offer about that.

11:25:42 Because I think that if you are coming here for agenda item

11:25:45 15 or 25 or whatever else, it's a good way to say, well, we

11:25:50 are going to take that up at 10:15 that day as opposed to,

11:25:54 you know, 10:00, 10:30.

11:25:56 And it might give us some wiggle room in terms of making

11:26:00 sure that people have an idea that we can't take it up until

11:26:04 10:15.

11:26:04 So I don't know if that's going to help or not.

11:26:07 Whether or not we codify and put it into our own rules is up

11:26:12 to us.

11:26:12 But my whole point was I think if we use some discretion in

11:26:18 that way, I think we might have a better flowing council

11:26:22 meeting.

11:26:22 At least that's what I'm hoping.




11:26:24 Thank you, chair.

11:26:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other council members on 2?

11:26:28 Now we go to 3.

11:26:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:26:30 I am going direct council's attention to your charter.

11:26:40 Your charter has a statement in section 2.03 that you can

11:26:49 adopt such bylaws, regulations and rulings of procedure for

11:26:52 your own guidance as I said, and obviously as long as it

11:26:56 does not conflict with the charter or with state law or with

11:27:01 case law.

11:27:03 That being the case, the charter has one requirement with

11:27:08 regard if something you experience add year ago this past

11:27:11 April, and that is immediately upon taking office, the City

11:27:14 Council member shall meet for the purpose of organization,

11:27:18 and at such meeting shall, one, choose a chairman to preside

11:27:23 at all meetings and from time to time appoint committees,

11:27:26 deemed necessary to the conduct of the affairs of the

11:27:28 council, and, two, choose a chairman pro tem shall preside

11:27:32 in the absence of the chairman.

11:27:34 The chairman and the chairman pro tem shall be council

11:27:36 members representing any council district.

11:27:39 And again it goes ton say that you can adopt bylaws to do

11:27:45 your business, your rules of procedure, which you do have.

11:27:50 It's within your rules of procedure that your present

11:27:54 process is in place, and that's found early on in rule 1,




11:28:05 under rule A, which is the office of the City Council shall

11:28:09 be the chair of the City Council and chair pro tem.

11:28:12 The chair and chair pro tem shall serve at the pleasure of

11:28:15 the council.

11:28:15 And, B, the election that you shall elect -- and using the

11:28:22 word in that, elect a chair, and chair pro tem at the first

11:28:25 regular meeting on or after April 1st of each year.

11:28:29 However, in an election year -- and this is referencing back

11:28:31 to the charter -- City Council shall hold an organizational

11:28:34 meeting for the purpose on April 1st.

11:28:38 And it also states a separate election shall be held for

11:28:41 each council and the election done within rule 1-C are the

11:28:48 duties of the chair.

11:28:51 And I point out that the chair shall preside over all

11:28:55 regular meetings, and shall serve as the administrative head

11:28:58 of council.

11:28:59 And I just want to remind council that obviously from your

11:29:02 experience you know that the role of chairman is just not

11:29:06 presiding over the meetings, the chairman is the ceremonial

11:29:08 head of the City Council, and also very importantly the

11:29:13 chair is the administrative head of this city department

11:29:17 known takes City Council, responsible for the budget, and

11:29:20 the administrative rung of the office of City Council.

11:29:24 I bring that to your attention, and I make reference to the

11:29:29 charter because there is one other and very important role




11:29:34 of the chairman that I would like to bring to your

11:29:35 attention, and that is in the related laws of the charter,

11:29:39 section 8.21, which is the last page of the sections that I

11:29:46 supplied you of the charter.

11:29:47 And that's the filling of vacancy of council.

11:29:51 It's important to remember in this process that the

11:29:54 chairman, should a vacancy occur in the office of the mayor,

11:29:59 serves as acting mayor, and that has been invoked in the

11:30:05 past, and the chairman of the City Council has in fact

11:30:09 become an acting mayor.

11:30:10 So I bring that to council's attention just as a reminder

11:30:15 again that the roll of chairman goes well beyond presiding

11:30:20 over meetings, and plays an important role in the process.

11:30:26 I think that's all that I really wish to say about that at

11:30:28 this time.

11:30:29 And I turn it back to you, Mr. Chairman.

11:30:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:30:34 Okay, council, we have heard some very good positions from

11:30:40 each and every one of you and we heard the direction from

11:30:43 our legal staff, so we go to Mrs. Montelione.

11:30:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

11:30:50 We have already spoken on one and two.

11:30:53 Just speaking to item three that we just heard about, the

11:30:56 chair and chair pro tem, I would not support a rotating

11:31:02 chair or a chair pro tem, because there are particular




11:31:12 qualities that one looks for in leadership, and as an

11:31:16 administrator.

11:31:17 And as you point out, it's not just sitting here in a

11:31:20 ceremonial duties that the chair has, but as an

11:31:25 administrator, and there are individuals who are great

11:31:28 leaders who are not great administrators, and there are

11:31:31 great administrators who are not great leaders.

11:31:33 And what we need here at council is someone who embodies

11:31:37 both.

11:31:37 And not all of us are both of those roles simultaneously.

11:31:45 So there is, however, a change that I would like to see in

11:31:50 how our elections are conducted thanked is the process as it

11:31:56 is now relies on our city clerk to call upon someone to get

11:32:03 that first nomination, and we vote on that nomination.

11:32:08 I would prefer a system that we already use when we are

11:32:14 filling vacancies on boards of council, or appointments to

11:32:19 boards of council, and I would like to put forth the

11:32:28 procedure that whoever is interested in becoming chair would

11:32:34 enter their name with the clerk and express their interest

11:32:38 in becoming the chair, or the chair pro tem, and then

11:32:42 council is given a slate of potential candidates, and we

11:32:48 vote by filling out the form as we do with other boards, and

11:32:55 whoever receives the most votes of our body would then take

11:33:01 the chair position and the second highest getting person

11:33:05 would get the chair pro tem position.




11:33:07 I think that's a much more democratic way of doing things.

11:33:11 I think it would bring a fairness to the procedure rather

11:33:16 than it falling to whoever happens to be nominated first.

11:33:24 That's all I have to say on that issue.

11:33:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have Mr. Reddick, Ms. Capin, and Mr.

11:33:30 Suarez in, that order.

11:33:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Chair, I will just make one comment

11:33:35 because I think it's a procedural comment, and then I will

11:33:39 yield to Mrs. Capin, and I want to make my general comment,

11:33:45 and this is I'm disappointed to hear my colleague make the

11:33:49 comment just made, because as the maker of the motion, she

11:33:55 seconded that motion, and for the maker to second the motion

11:34:02 and now to make the comment, then this could have been

11:34:06 avoided if you had not seconded it.

11:34:11 I don't know if you had second thoughts or if you had

11:34:15 discussion that led to you make the comments you are making

11:34:17 now I think is totally, totally inappropriate, and as the

11:34:23 maker of the motion, but I will make my general comments

11:34:26 about this later.

11:34:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin and Mr. Suarez.

11:34:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: My comment is also to the comments that was

11:34:35 made by Councilwoman Montelione.

11:34:39 The comment that the seven people signature on not he can

11:34:48 equally qualified to be chair -- people sitting on that,

11:34:55 that bar was lowered incredibly.




11:34:57 Incredibly.

11:34:58 I cannot tell you how everyone here, everyone sitting at

11:35:04 this dais, is a proven leader, or they would not be sitting

11:35:12 at this dais.

11:35:13 Therefore, again, I am very, very surprised at the comment.

11:35:22 Everyone sitting here is qualified to be chair.

11:35:28 Everyone sitting here is qualified to be chair, chair pro

11:35:32 tem, and any other position that is available to this City

11:35:37 Council.

11:35:40 With that --

11:35:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez?

11:35:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.

11:35:49 Concerning rotation of chair and vice chair, there are a

11:35:51 couple of things that I started to think about.

11:35:53 I looked at -- and before I go forward, let me just ask Mr.

11:35:57 Shelby a quick question. Did you do any research as to what

11:36:00 other councils or commissions in the State of Florida do or

11:36:04 any other part of the country?

11:36:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No, I was not directed to do that.

11:36:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.

11:36:11 I looked at some of the other counties and cities.

11:36:13 I don't think I found any that have a rotating chair.

11:36:17 Having said that, there may be some other areas that I

11:36:20 missed.

11:36:21 Here is why I don't support a rotating chair.




11:36:23 I think that we are already, as a board, capable of chairing

11:36:32 these meetings.

11:36:33 I respect each and every one of the people here.

11:36:35 We have had the opportunity to have three people that sit on

11:36:38 this dais that have chaired meetings.

11:36:40 We have a fourth that has chaired our CRA for four years.

11:36:46 And -- excuse me, four years for a year.

11:36:51 I may have given you a little longer time frame there, Mr.

11:36:54 Reddick.

11:36:54 And I do think we are all capable of chairing these

11:36:57 meetings.

11:36:57 Having said that, the reason why I don't like a rotation is

11:37:00 because I think it takes power away from each individual

11:37:04 member to allow them to nominate and put forward their own

11:37:11 nominee to become chair, or chair pro tem.

11:37:15 And in the case of CRA, chair and vice chair.

11:37:18 I think that term limits are a problem and have always been.

11:37:23 We serve under term limits it's not something that I am

11:37:26 pleased with.

11:37:26 But it's something that I accept.

11:37:29 I am not in favor of term limits most of the time, and I

11:37:33 have not seen anything in this particular type of discussion

11:37:38 that would make me want to give up my right to say who I

11:37:42 would like as chair at that particular time.

11:37:45 There may be circumstances in the course of this year, next




11:37:49 year, and the next that I may think that one person is more

11:37:54 willing to serve as chair and some people may not be more

11:37:57 willing or more able to serve at any particular time.

11:38:01 Rotation does not take that into consideration.

11:38:04 I know that we could write rules that says that they have

11:38:07 the first right of refusal or some other thing.

11:38:09 I just don't think that as a practical matter it's better to

11:38:13 allow something to be automatic as opposed to voted on and

11:38:18 shown publicly.

11:38:21 To Ms. Montelione's point about the way that we select, I

11:38:26 think that it's the same effect as what she is mentioning

11:38:30 which is if we have a ballot with everyone's name on it and

11:38:34 someone picks who they want for chair and vice chair, they

11:38:37 used to do that at the very beginning of this country.

11:38:40 We had a president, a vice-president, chosen based on the

11:38:43 number of votes they received.

11:38:44 So whoever received the most was president and who received

11:38:47 the second most became vice-president.

11:38:50 It tended to lend itself, in the case of the national

11:38:54 government, a lot of disarray and back biting.

11:38:57 I'm not saying that's going happen here, but I will say that

11:39:00 I think the way we have it now, if I am not mistaken, Mr.

11:39:03 Shelby, is that one person is recognized, they can nominate,

11:39:07 there has to be a second on the nomination, and then a vote,

11:39:10 and whoever has gotten four votes at that time becomes the




11:39:14 chair or chair pro tem and so on.

11:39:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It does not require a second.

11:39:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It does not require a second so, the first

11:39:25 of four wins essentially, sort of like the way the old NFL

11:39:29 sudden death worked which is you score first, you win.

11:39:32 That's it.

11:39:33 They tweaked their rules but I don't think we necessarily

11:39:35 have to tweak our rules.

11:39:37 Again, I think that rotation is a bad idea only because I

11:39:40 think it takes power from us individually as council people,

11:39:43 and that we always have the light to say hop we want to be

11:39:47 our chair, who we want to be our chair pro tem hand we want

11:39:50 to be chair of CRA and the vice chair.

11:39:52 So I will not like to support anything that concerns AP

11:39:56 rotation of those two positions.

11:40:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern.

11:40:02 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) I was curious how, if we

11:40:13 were to rotate chairs, how you would see that working,

11:40:17 because there are seven members and only four years.

11:40:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: And I have a proposal for that.

11:40:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen yield to whoever wants to go

11:40:30 first.

11:40:30 Mr. Reddick.

11:40:34 Whoever wants to go again.

11:40:41 >>YVONNE CAPIN: As far as a rotation, I hope we are all in




11:40:44 agreement that every member here is qualified to sit as

11:40:48 chair.

11:40:49 And that being said, you could actually put the names in a

11:40:56 hat and pull it out, and that person would be qualified to

11:40:59 be chair.

11:41:01 This whole process is very formidable, and it lends itself

11:41:09 to otherwise a very congenial and cooperative council to

11:41:18 start looking at getting ready and getting their side ready

11:41:29 to vote.

11:41:30 That is not part of what we should be doing here.

11:41:32 We are all qualified.

11:41:34 Put the names in the hat.

11:41:35 Pull the name out. If that person doesn't want to be chair,

11:41:39 pull out the next name.

11:41:42 And if you don't agree that each person is qualified, then

11:41:44 go on with whatever else you think should be done.

11:41:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

11:41:54 And I am going to be very, very clear why I made the motion

11:41:59 to put this on the -- to bring this as a workshop.

11:42:05 I decided to make this motion to discuss by B rotating the

11:42:10 chair because of the political game manship that took place

11:42:14 during the April 1st organization meeting.

11:42:19 We have people playing political games.

11:42:22 There are people who are meeting in closed session, making

11:42:27 decisions, people who are making comments, that they will




11:42:30 never vote for certain members of this council to be chair,

11:42:33 people who are having dinners, having lunch, and they are

11:42:38 playing political gamemanship about a chair and a vice

11:42:41 chair.

11:42:42 A chair receives no more money than I do.

11:42:46 And I'm not the chair.

11:42:50 and the vice chair receives no additional salary as any

11:42:54 other member of this council.

11:42:57 We are all elected body of seven individuals on this

11:43:01 council.

11:43:02 You have a right to represent your constituents.

11:43:06 Your constituent has the right to have you serve in a

11:43:09 capacity of chair or vice chair.

11:43:12 And before we even get into the rotation process, no one

11:43:16 heard my proposals.

11:43:20 "I don't believe in rotation."

11:43:23 But the same body sat here last week and said we are going

11:43:27 to modernize, come up to date, and modernize the city code

11:43:34 to put chickens in the backyard.

11:43:37 And you don't elect chickens.

11:43:40 We are elected officials, but no roosters.

11:43:43 There are in a roosters.

11:43:44 But you still want chickens.

11:43:50 The president of the United States modernized his position.

11:43:55 The same seconds marriages yesterday.




11:43:57 This council cannot modernize its own rules of procedure to

11:44:04 do what's right.

11:44:04 And that is the problem, because of the political

11:44:09 gamesmanship.

11:44:10 That is what has been played out on this board.

11:44:12 And I know it's been played out.

11:44:14 And if that's the game we want to play, I can play the same

11:44:19 political games.

11:44:19 But these are supposed to be a nonpartisan board.

11:44:24 Everyone has a duty and responsibility to our constituents.

11:44:28 And for anyone to sit here and say somebody is not

11:44:32 qualified, it's a disservice to those individuals.

11:44:38 If you are not authorized, why in the hell did they elect

11:44:41 you?

11:44:44 And that's what needs to be made known.

11:44:47 And it disturbs me to sit here and hear these people, oh,

11:44:52 he's not qualified.

11:44:57 The attorney just told us, I mean, just sit here and run an

11:45:09 agenda, meet with staff, but I might be mayor if something

11:45:20 happened to the mayor.

11:45:22 Why do you think the mayor got a chief of staff?

11:45:25 Why have you got all these department heads?

11:45:31 In Washington, who do you think runs it?

11:45:35 And we are going to sit here and make it so simple?

11:45:40 These people are not qualified to serve?




11:45:43 If you feel that way about you sit here every week, then you

11:45:49 have got a personal problem.

11:45:51 Because if you think no one is capable to sit in a chair, I

11:45:59 sit next to the chair every week.

11:46:03 You don't think I can hit this?

11:46:06 I can call a meeting to order?

11:46:08 I can meet with staff.

11:46:13 I want run a statewide organization as the president and

11:46:16 CEO, and you don't think I am capable of being chair?

11:46:24 And everyone has professional responsibility.

11:46:28 But to sit here and say we don't want to rotate.

11:46:31 Well, my proposal is going to be, you didn't give me a

11:46:37 chance to do it, and rotate it by district.

11:46:45 And you rotate by the chair and the vice chair by district.

11:46:49 And anyone who has to serve at least one year, be on a

11:46:55 council one year before you become eligible for the chair or

11:46:59 the vice chair.

11:47:01 And no one even gave me an opportunity to discuss that.

11:47:05 But all the backyard talking, all the back door talking, we

11:47:11 are not going to do this.

11:47:14 I heard all the feedback.

11:47:16 And if that's the political gamesmanship everybody wants to

11:47:24 play, then let's play it.

11:47:27 Because I have great respect for every member of this body,

11:47:34 and I don't want to lose it.




11:47:36 But I tell you what, I am not going to play the political

11:47:39 game.

11:47:40 And if that's what you all want to play, then we can all

11:47:43 play it.

11:47:44 Because you don't discredit anyone thatch they are not

11:47:50 capable of serving in the capacity.

11:47:53 And just because you might not personally be able to do it,

11:47:57 don't denigrate anyone EMS because they don't have that

11:48:02 opportunity.

11:48:02 So that's all I want to say.

11:48:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Reddick.

11:48:07 Mr. Cohen has not spoken so he's got the floor.

11:48:09 >>HARRY COHEN: It seems to me that the guidance on this

11:48:15 issue really comes from the charter.

11:48:17 And if you go to section 2.03 of the charter, it makes very

11:48:22 clear that any member of the City Council is eligible to be

11:48:27 chair, because any member is eligible to be chair .

11:48:32 I would submit that under the current charter rules, the

11:48:37 furthest we could go to a rotation would only bind this

11:48:41 council.

11:48:41 We could never bind the next council to buy into whatever

11:48:48 rule we set up because they would be back in square one

11:48:51 guided by the language in the charter saying at their first

11:48:54 meeting they were going to choose a chair and chair pro tem

11:48:57 from among all seven members.




11:48:59 So that's my reading of it.

11:49:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would agree that organizational

11:49:05 meeting -- and you do reference operational language

11:49:08 there -- that means that you cannot in effect bind a

11:49:13 subsequent term of incoming council.

11:49:18 >>HARRY COHEN: In other words could you say one and two are

11:49:20 going to have it next year and three and four the year after

11:49:23 that, but could you never go beyond that because you are

11:49:25 right back at the charter again when the next council starts

11:49:28 meeting.

11:49:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Exactly.

11:49:30 I would workshop meeting say that is the case that operative

11:49:33 language, that is true.

11:49:34 How you do it on an annual basis or subsequent to that,

11:49:36 again that does not show up in the charter.

11:49:38 >>HARRY COHEN: And theoretically we could adopt something

11:49:42 to change our rules within this council, but under the

11:49:47 charter at any time, a vote of four theoretically could

11:49:51 override that.

11:49:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Absolutely. A vote of four.

11:49:57 And I want to bring that could to council's attention, and

11:50:02 the only way the council can take action is by a vote of at

11:50:07 least four members of council which is why sometimes you do

11:50:10 something and then you have to affirm it or ratify it by

11:50:12 make it a motion and a second and a vote.




11:50:14 So that would be required, ultimately whatever your process

11:50:18 would be.

11:50:19 Also, just as an aside, it was raised, the process by which

11:50:28 you nominate and vote.

11:50:29 That you notice is not in your council's rules.

11:50:32 And it's my understanding talking with the clerk, that has

11:50:34 been done, and it was devised many years ago by a previous

11:50:38 clerk, and this has been continued by custom from what I

11:50:42 understand, but there is nothing in council's rules as to

11:50:45 how your election is conducted.

11:50:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I have Mrs. Montelione and Mrs.

11:50:50 Mulhern in that order.

11:50:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

11:50:54 Mr. Reddick, I seconded the motion because I felt that you

11:51:01 had a valid point to bring up and thought that we should

11:51:06 discuss it.

11:51:10 But there is a period of time between when a motion is made

11:51:16 to bring something up for, you know, a future council

11:51:19 meeting, whereas Mr. Suarez indicated he did some research

11:51:25 and took a look and studied other councils in other cities

11:51:30 to see how they did things.

11:51:32 So in between the time of seconding a motion for discussion,

11:51:38 which I thought was a valid discussion, we should have that

11:51:42 opportunity.

11:51:45 You shouldn't automatically assume that I am agreeing with




11:51:51 and going to vote for what that issue is.

11:51:56 It's that I felt it's a valid point to bring up, and that we

11:52:01 should discuss it as a council, and because of the sunshine

11:52:04 we can't discuss it any other place.

11:52:07 So I'm sorry that you were disappointed that I said I would

11:52:14 not second the rotation idea because I seconded the motion.

11:52:17 When people second my motion, for various things, I don't

11:52:21 automatically assume that they are going to vote my way.

11:52:24 I adjustment assume that they think it's a valid idea and

11:52:27 that we should discuss that idea.

11:52:31 People are entitled to do research in between, and that's

11:52:34 the whole point, and find out how other places do things,

11:52:38 and bring factual evidence to the discussion they want to

11:52:42 have.

11:52:44 So I'm sorry that you took the tact that you did, because I

11:52:52 feel I'm sitting here feeling that I was attacked for

11:52:55 everything I said by people.

11:53:01 Now I'm glad that Mr. Cohen pointed out that we may not be

11:53:04 able to bind future councils because that was my concern

11:53:07 when I said that some are leaders, and some are

11:53:10 administrators, and not everyone is suited by personality to

11:53:14 be both.

11:53:16 Apparently members of council thought I was talking about

11:53:18 them.

11:53:19 I was thinking about people who are elected to City Council




11:53:23 today, tomorrow, next year, five years from now, 20 years

11:53:27 from now.

11:53:28 You don't know who is going to be elected.

11:53:30 And how they are going to be able to be a leader and

11:53:36 administrator at the same time.

11:53:37 Some might want to be.

11:53:38 Some might not want to be.

11:53:39 And just because we are elected in our district, for those

11:53:43 of us who are district specific, maybe that person might

11:53:49 want to be.

11:53:49 Maybe they might not want to be.

11:53:51 Maybe the folks who elected in the future are good

11:53:57 candidates for being an administrator and chair or chair pro

11:54:00 tem.

11:54:01 But to say that I was, you know, making personal statements

11:54:05 about any one of the seven members elected here is

11:54:10 preposterous.

11:54:11 We all get along.

11:54:12 We all enjoy a Cuban coffee together, or Cuban sandwich, or

11:54:23 we are a group who up until today have gotten along really

11:54:27 well.

11:54:28 And it's been said by many members of the public how they

11:54:31 are really impressed that we seem to all respect one another

11:54:37 and we do.

11:54:39 So the idea that I was attacking anybody and think that




11:54:43 anybody is sitting here not worthy or not able -- and I'm

11:54:48 sorry I'm taking a long time but I sat here listening to

11:54:51 more than one member attack me personally, and I am going to

11:54:54 respond to that.

11:54:55 So I'm sorry if you think that I'm taking too much time to

11:55:00 defend myself.

11:55:00 But I'm not --

11:55:03 >> Whoa, whoa, whoa.

11:55:05 Let's just have a little calmness, take a deep breath, and

11:55:09 I'm speak at the end in a few minutes here when Mrs. Mulhern

11:55:12 finishes.

11:55:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, chair.

11:55:16 So if anyone takes what I said personally, I apologize.

11:55:19 I was thinking in the future we don't know who is going to

11:55:21 be elected, we can't speak for people who are coming after

11:55:25 us, and thank you, Mr. Cohen, for pointing out that we are

11:55:28 back to square one at the election of a new term and new

11:55:32 members.

11:55:34 And as far as the political process and being lobbied, I

11:55:38 received, before our vote for deciding the next chair, I

11:55:46 received one phone call from a personal friend of mine who

11:55:48 is not even located within the City of Tampa city limits,

11:55:53 who expressed to me some concerns about who are or not

11:56:00 expressed as chairs so anybody playing political games know

11:56:07 not to call me because I am either not going to hear them or




11:56:12 maybe they don't think that I have to be lobbied, I don't

11:56:18 know what the situation is.

11:56:19 But if there are political games going on, I personally as I

11:56:23 said received one phone call from a friend of mine who lives

11:56:27 in the unincorporated area of Hillsborough County.

11:56:29 So that person, you know, just felt that they wanted their

11:56:35 voice heard within the city.

11:56:37 I don't know why.

11:56:38 But political games?

11:56:44 I guess maybe because I'm a newby or this is my first term,

11:56:47 I don't participant.

11:56:49 Thank you.

11:56:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

11:56:50 Mrs. Mulhern.

11:56:51 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess I wanted to speak earlier because I

11:56:59 wanted to point out to Councilman Cohen that the first

11:57:07 organizational meeting that each council has after an

11:57:10 election, we are going by whatever the rules of procedure of

11:57:13 the former council is so you have already got a year

11:57:16 following those rules.

11:57:17 So I don't really think that's an argument against changing

11:57:21 our process of nomination or doing a rotation process, and

11:57:30 Councilman Reddick, I did want to hear your proposal and I

11:57:33 did ask for it.

11:57:34 I just want you to know.




11:57:35 I think we are and were interested in hearing what you had

11:57:40 to say.

11:57:40 But I love the idea.

11:57:42 And I think maybe the hat, picking the names out of the hat,

11:57:47 I think if you really want to depoliticize it, a lottery

11:57:53 system would be perfect.

11:57:53 So I support either one of those rotating by district, or

11:57:58 out of the hat.

11:57:59 We are already a year behind in the process.

11:58:02 So -- no, we are two years.

11:58:04 We only have two more years to elect a chair and chair pro

11:58:08 tem.

11:58:09 And so we are not going to be able to be as democratic as

11:58:16 possible if we were going to do that.

11:58:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me just say this.

11:58:23 First of all, I don't believe that anyone is saying anything

11:58:28 against anyone here.

11:58:31 Second of all, the opportunity, or the way it's written, or

11:58:38 the fact is that whoever the chairperson is two acting mayor

11:58:44 till there was an election, if it was 15 months out.

11:58:50 Fountain was 15 months in, that person two mayor.

11:58:53 Some of you don't know me very well.

11:58:56 I've never taken anything I never earned.

11:58:59 If that was to happen -- I hope it never does happen, I am

11:59:02 going say that again, I hope it never does happen -- I would




11:59:06 be a ceremonial mayor for one day because I didn't earn the

11:59:10 damn thing.

11:59:11 Somebody else elected somebody to be mayor.

11:59:13 So therefore I assume under the rules of procedure the vice

11:59:17 chair would be chairman for a day and mayor the next day.

11:59:23 Because I don't take anything I never earned.

11:59:27 I wasn't on the ballot for mayor.

11:59:28 I am only speaking for me.

11:59:30 That's number one.

11:59:31 Number two, let's talk about rotation.

11:59:36 It wasn't till the '70s that you had to be a member of the

11:59:41 city-wide election process to be the chairperson.

11:59:44 No district could be chairperson.

11:59:54 That was a fact.

11:59:54 Now what's more discriminatory than that?

11:59:57 Let me talk about rotation.

11:59:59 You are not going to have a person sitting here if you

12:00:01 really want a rotation so that all seven have an opportunity

12:00:04 but once a year because that leaves three of them out.

12:00:09 If you do it by alphabet, it's the same thing.

12:00:11 Three may never serve.

12:00:13 If you do it by the rotation, and you want seven of them

12:00:16 there, it would be 6.8 months and a few days.

12:00:20 So that everybody has a chance to be chairperson.

12:00:25 That sounds so logical.




12:00:26 But at what expense?

12:00:29 How many letterheads are you going to make?

12:00:31 How many changes are you going to make?

12:00:33 In fact, when you talk about change, if this council really

12:00:38 feels that strongly about it, why don't you let the public

12:00:40 decide? And ask for a charter amendment.

12:00:45 That's happened before. It could happen again.

12:00:49 Nothing is given forever in life.

12:00:52 Including serving and including serving as chair.

12:00:58 Me or anyone else is not immune from being immune. I can't

12:01:03 put it any other way.

12:01:06 I don't take this personally at all.

12:01:09 It makes no difference to me who the chair is, as long as

12:01:14 the process is legitimatized and if the process is the one

12:01:20 that we have now.

12:01:21 There is a difference maybe in the way you want to run for

12:01:25 chair, put your name up and you have an election.

12:01:27 There's nothing wrong with that.

12:01:28 Somebody nominates you to be chair and you get four votes,

12:01:33 how is the next person be chair when you already have four

12:01:36 votes?

12:01:37 So legally that's where you gentlemen come in.

12:01:40 That's what you have in front of you today.

12:01:42 So it's a mannerism, a fact.

12:01:50 It's very difficult to answer which is the purest way, and




12:01:55 which is not the purest way.

12:01:58 It's an issue that should be finally settled.

12:02:06 As you see, we never had this type of debate, and I don't

12:02:09 like finger pointing.

12:02:10 And let me go further.

12:02:11 I never asked anyone to vote for me for chair.

12:02:14 I never asked anyone to ask anyone here to ask me roar vote

12:02:21 for me for chair.

12:02:22 If that happened it happened without me knowing about it so

12:02:25 I can only tell you what I know.

12:02:26 And that's the way it is.

12:02:30 That's the way -- life is not fair in all respects.

12:02:34 But if you want to rotate you have got to make it 6.8 months

12:02:40 to have a rotating chair because that equals a 47.6 months

12:02:44 and four years is 48 months.

12:02:46 So 47.6 versus 48 is the closest that I can come to.

12:02:51 So that's the way if you want you can do that.

12:02:56 Do whatever you want to do.

12:03:00 But that's the way I see it.

12:03:02 Okay.

12:03:02 Anyone else?

12:03:04 Ms. Capin.

12:03:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (off microphone) I just wanted to comment.

12:03:12 When they come in they set new rules.

12:03:14 That's U.S. Senate.




12:03:17 Apparently there was a change in 1970.

12:03:20 So changes are possible.

12:03:23 Here.

12:03:26 One of the things I would like to note is can there be term

12:03:34 limits on the chairs?

12:03:36 In other words, you serve one year, it's up to someone

12:03:40 else -- that's what I am asking.

12:03:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The short answer is yes, but I also have

12:03:48 to look at it in context of section 2.03 which is what

12:03:52 happens if that chairman comes back and it's a new term.

12:03:56 That's a question I have to work through.

12:03:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.

12:03:58 There are a lot of questions.

12:04:02 The 6.8 months, not a problem with me.

12:04:10 At all.

12:04:13 I really would like to see different councilmen lead this

12:04:23 body at different times.

12:04:28 I would volunteer, if it was rotating, I would volunteer to

12:04:31 be last if that were the case.

12:04:33 I really think that we are not -- it's not the full service.

12:04:39 And maybe we should -- and maybe we should put forth for the

12:04:47 public to vote to separate, to separate the terms of the

12:04:52 mayor as the chair being the mayor in the absence of the

12:04:59 mayor and separate that from this whole section, and bring

12:05:09 it to the public vote for charter.




12:05:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, Mr. Chairman, respectfully, I

12:05:18 had the opportunity to discuss this with Mr. Shimberg who is

12:05:22 the city attorney.

12:05:22 Obviously, things that would involve an ordinance and a

12:05:27 charter change would have to involve the city attorney.

12:05:29 That is his role, and if that is council's desire

12:05:32 ultimately, it would be my recommendation to do that at a

12:05:37 future date and certainly it would be the role of the city

12:05:39 attorney to be involved in that.

12:05:42 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.

12:05:43 I'm just bringing up different options that, you know, as I

12:05:49 listened to bring forth, and the fact that we are working

12:05:56 under those rules of the last council, when the new council

12:06:00 comes in, negates -- and please clarify that because you

12:06:12 thought we were under the charter rules and then Ms. Mulhern

12:06:16 pointed out that we are working under the rules of the last

12:06:21 body that was here.

12:06:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me for interrupting but it's past

12:06:27 12:00.

12:06:27 I need an extension of time.

12:06:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Motion to continue for another 15

12:06:32 minutes.

12:06:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Mrs. Capin for an additional 15

12:06:35 minutes to 12:17.

12:06:37 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.




12:06:39 Opposed nay.

12:06:40 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:06:42 Yes, sir.

12:06:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The organizational meeting that takes

12:06:47 place when you are ordinance? Is governed by the charter.

12:06:49 The nomination and election process has been conducted by

12:06:52 the clerk as it has been for many years.

12:06:54 That is not set forth in your rules of procedure.

12:06:58 Your rules of procedure, if council wishes to have it such

12:07:01 that a new council upon being sworn in needs to adopt its

12:07:06 rules of procedure and a vote on that, we can address that.

12:07:10 Normally, your resumes are in existence subject to rule 9.

12:07:14 You always have the opportunity to make amendments.

12:07:17 It does require it having been read A at two consecutive

12:07:21 regular council meetings.

12:07:22 So it is a process, and I guess that predates me but that

12:07:26 gives the public obviously the opportunity to be aware of it

12:07:29 as they chime in to you individually or as a body.

12:07:32 But other than that, these rules have been amended.

12:07:37 As a matter of fact, they were recently amended to add the

12:07:44 most participation, this council has amended its rules of

12:07:47 procedure if somebody is ill, council has already also

12:07:51 changed when the election is.

12:07:53 We clarified that, did not say on or after April 1st of

12:07:58 this year, would say after April 1st of each year, one




12:08:02 year it fell after April 1st and had to put it off to

12:08:05 the next council meeting so council does have the

12:08:08 opportunity amend its rules.

12:08:09 Normally I'm of the opinion especially considering this

12:08:12 council has been for more than a year, you are well versed

12:08:16 in what your desire is.

12:08:17 So I would just ask you to give direction, and again these

12:08:21 rules should be a reflection of what this body wants and how

12:08:24 it wishes to conduct its meetings.

12:08:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

12:08:29 I want to move this item one way or the other.

12:08:35 It makes sense to get this going.

12:08:37 Do you want to go one, two, three, vote on them?

12:08:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you wish, perhaps you can take comment

12:08:42 from the public if you wish.

12:08:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We wish to do that.

12:08:46 Any comments from the public at this time?

12:08:48 Three minutes each on items we are discussion.

12:08:59 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.

12:09:01 The issue that I would like to speak on regards the time in

12:09:06 which you speak.

12:09:08 I have been coming to council meetings since Mr. Copeland

12:09:11 was chair so it's been a long time.

12:09:13 And one of the problems that I have seen, that caused

12:09:20 meetings to go so long because you have so much business,




12:09:22 having only two regular meetings, so that's part of also

12:09:25 what has, you know, caused the extension of your meetings,

12:09:30 and part of the problems.

12:09:33 But I do understand that if someone is coming here to speak

12:09:39 on an issue that is quasi-judicial, and it is not brought up

12:09:46 when it basically is on the agenda, is a problem, and they

12:09:50 do sign those sheets outside.

12:09:53 So just to have one sheet would not work.

12:09:55 You have to have different sheets as to what they are

12:09:59 planning to speak on.

12:10:01 I know it's marked on there.

12:10:03 It's very difficult for anyone to separate it out.

12:10:06 They have to do it as they sign in.

12:10:09 The issue of people who don't sign so you could read it, you

12:10:14 have them print it.

12:10:16 And if they don't print legibly, that person doesn't speak.

12:10:19 And they should identify who is speaking, especially at the

12:10:24 quasi-judicial that could be part of the legal issues that

12:10:31 come up.

12:10:33 But as far as I am see it, many people who come to speak on

12:10:39 the agenda item beginning of the meeting do get here early,

12:10:44 and they understand they will be speaking.

12:10:46 You might not take it up then, but at least they can make

12:10:51 their comments at least.

12:10:53 So personally, I feel that those who sign in, because what




12:10:57 happens, they get here early, they sign in, and those who

12:11:00 come in late stand to the side and they get to be first.

12:11:04 And as you say, if you limit them to 30 minutes, it's like

12:11:08 limiting the amount of time that they have to speak, then

12:11:13 because at the end of the line, that does not give them as

12:11:15 much opportunity to say everything they would like to say.

12:11:18 So I know it's a major issue.

12:11:21 I hope of that council in some way can have some issues that

12:11:24 would be p time certain, because there are some issues that

12:11:29 people do want to speak on, and I hope downtown change your

12:11:33 workshop the way you are rung it now because at least we do

12:11:36 have some input at that time, and usually the workshops are

12:11:42 not as crowded with people who want to speak, but those who

12:11:45 are here at least get to say something.

12:11:49 My time is up.

12:11:50 But that's all I have time for.

12:11:52 Thank you.

12:11:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thanks very much.

12:11:54 Next, please.

12:11:55 >> Donny rode, 412 Madison street.

12:12:02 Hello again, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Shelby.

12:12:04 And thank you for catching Mr. Shelby before they made the

12:12:07 motion and before we have a chance to talk.

12:12:12 I mainly came for subitem number 1, the way which citizens

12:12:18 sign in to speak before council.




12:12:21 I was fearful that you guys were going to do something to

12:12:24 restrict this where it would be harder for a person to

12:12:26 speak.

12:12:27 So I'm relieved that that wasn't what it was about.

12:12:32 One thing that I wanted to do was make a couple of

12:12:34 suggestions, as a consumer that sits out here, that when

12:12:37 council notices a large number of potential speakers, rather

12:12:42 than allowing the front end of the line to take the entire

12:12:45 three minutes to consider a motion right then, to limit

12:12:49 everybody time at the Mike to two minutes.

12:12:52 That way the people at the very, very end who may have

12:12:54 gotten here before the folks at the front end got here don't

12:12:58 get limited to just one minute.

12:13:01 Because oftentimes when you extend the speaker's time, do

12:13:06 you so by, okay, from here on out you only speak for one

12:13:09 minute.

12:13:09 That can be crippling to somebody who has a few things to

12:13:12 say or needs to develop their thoughts as they relay them to

12:13:15 you guys.

12:13:16 Also, as far as the sign-in thing goes, if you are going set

12:13:19 an agenda by people who sign in to speak, because it sounded

12:13:24 like that was one of the things you discussed, how are you

12:13:27 going to make adjustments to the agenda as more people pile

12:13:30 into the room to speak on items?

12:13:32 That happens too sometimes.




12:13:34 I sat here and watched the population of this room change

12:13:38 considerably while I sat here.

12:13:40 The other thing is subitem 3, the rotation of the chair and

12:13:44 the vice chair.

12:13:45 It's a more organic matter.

12:13:48 I think you ought to separate in your further

12:13:51 considerations.

12:13:52 It's also kind of a hot button with almost all of you. I

12:13:54 don't think it relates as cleanly to the other two items

12:14:00 that are on this item number.

12:14:02 And in reference to that, I was going to suggest that when

12:14:06 it comes time to nominate a chair that you don't accept

12:14:11 nominations from anyone on council until everyone on council

12:14:15 has had an opportunity to speak for some amount of time on

12:14:20 the issue of who is going to be the next chair, even if it's

12:14:24 to remove their name from nomination.

12:14:28 You assume initially that everybody -- because I again that

12:14:30 everybody here is qualified to chair.

12:14:33 And I don't think anybody said that anybody wasn't qualified

12:14:36 to serve as chair.

12:14:37 But there are duties that go beyond just chairing the

12:14:41 meeting.

12:14:42 So in terms of how you select a chairman is one thing.

12:14:47 How you rotate chairing at a meeting is a little different.

12:14:50 That could be done, I believe, under your rules, merely by




12:14:54 just saying, hey, I don't want to chair this more than, are

12:14:57 you interested in chairing or something like that?

12:14:59 And could you do it much more easily.

12:15:01 (Bell sounds).

12:15:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

12:15:05 Next, please.

12:15:05 >>STEVE MICHELINI: A couple of issues.

12:15:09 One of them is, when you have a noticed public hearing, we

12:15:15 are talking about time certain.

12:15:17 It causes difficulty in notice.

12:15:20 And if we are prepared to present, or whatever the petition

12:15:25 is, I mean, I sat here all day with you all, and it's quite

12:15:33 honestly, I mean, that's part of the process. If you are

12:15:35 scheduled to be heard at 9:30 and you are not heard until

12:15:38 3:30, that's just part of the deal.

12:15:42 And I don't think it's particularly a hardship, except for

12:15:44 the fact that I have got to commit an entire day to be here.

12:15:48 And again, you know, if somebody wants to speak about it,

12:15:53 that's just part of the process.

12:15:56 The same things happen in other jurisdictions.

12:15:59 And the other part, you know, giving a neighborhood

12:16:04 association an extended period of time, what happens when

12:16:06 you have conflicting representation about who the

12:16:09 neighborhood representatives are?

12:16:11 And we have had had that case show up.




12:16:16 I just think that everyone plays by the same rules.

12:16:18 If you want to come in and speak, you come in and speak.

12:16:21 And you get your allotted time.

12:16:23 And nobody should be given preferential treatment in terms

12:16:27 of their amount of time that's provided to them.

12:16:32 Those are the main things that I have a concern about.

12:16:34 And I think you ought to consider that.

12:16:35 I think when you publish a notice, your time, and then you

12:16:42 want to sub-identify a time as a time certain, it causes

12:16:47 other agenda issues.

12:16:49 And I understand your objective.

12:16:52 But if it's not a noticed public hearing, you can do that

12:16:54 however you wish.

12:16:55 But noticed public hearing creates a big problem.

12:17:01 Thank you.

12:17:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

12:17:02 Anyone else in the audience who has not spoken who would

12:17:05 care to speak?

12:17:06 Mr. Shelby, we only have four minutes left so let's make it

12:17:11 quick.

12:17:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I look to City Council for direction.

12:17:15 Thank you.

12:17:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: How would council like to have some

12:17:18 suggestions, votes, whatever you want to do, let's do them.

12:17:21 Mrs. Montelione.




12:17:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

12:17:24 I would like to motion that we do it, the speaker sign-in

12:17:30 sheet allowing those who appear in order on that sign-in

12:17:35 sheet to be heard in the order in which they signed in.

12:17:40 I would also include in that motion that those in the

12:17:46 audience who did not sign in, because they arrived late or

12:17:53 the sheet had already been taken up, allowed to be heard

12:17:58 after those who have signed in.

12:18:00 >> Second.

12:18:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione,

12:18:06 second by Mrs. Capin.

12:18:07 Does that mean it has to be printed out like we said earlier

12:18:11 all uniformly across before they are recognized? Give me a

12:18:14 little direction.

12:18:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, the chair would receive the sign-in

12:18:17 sheet, and then call by name the persons who appear on that

12:18:23 sheet.

12:18:25 Say the third person is not in the room at the time steps

12:18:29 outs for a moment, you would go on to the next person, and

12:18:34 then at the end call those who were skipped over.

12:18:37 So then person number three may be heard last because they

12:18:42 missed their chance, they were out in the hall.

12:18:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mrs. Montelione, second by Mrs.

12:18:47 Capin.

12:18:48 Any further discussion by council members?




12:18:50 Council members first.

12:18:53 Mr. City Council attorney.

12:18:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Originally when this was put in place, we

12:18:58 initially had binders out front because each sign-in sheet,

12:19:05 in order to be able to expedite things, required people to

12:19:08 sign in for multiple items because when it came time for the

12:19:11 clerk or the chair, if you were to call it in, you would

12:19:14 have one sign-in sheet to go that way rather than look

12:19:17 through individual numbers.

12:19:18 It became a logistical night mayor for the chair, and what

12:19:21 happened is when he put the binder out it became a

12:19:25 logistical nightmare for the public to work with a binder.

12:19:28 The county uses cards from what I understand, and the cards

12:19:31 are sorted by the aide or the clerk or the attorney.

12:19:35 I don't know how it works.

12:19:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think it's the attorney.

12:19:40 [ Laughter ]

12:19:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to share with you that

12:19:43 somebody signing a sheet might have a sign-in sheet might

12:19:46 have multiple items, and for the chairman or whoever is

12:19:49 responsible for actually sorting out who you call and in

12:19:53 what order was one master sheet out front.

12:19:55 We experienced problems with that.

12:19:57 And that's why actually one of the reasons why it was

12:20:01 stopped being used that way.




12:20:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Shelby, I think I am at a loss.

12:20:05 Because I don't think that is the maker of the motion's

12:20:08 idea, if I am incorrect, you know, not to itemize the

12:20:13 speakers, but to have it written so that we can then have

12:20:17 those speakers come forward, not as a per-agenda item basis,

12:20:23 if that's what you are saying.

12:20:24 Because maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, sir.

12:20:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question is if somebody wants to

12:20:29 address an item that's on the agenda but not September for

12:20:32 public here, you could have one sheet for agendaed public

12:20:35 comment. If they are here for a public hearing, they need

12:20:39 to be able to put that down someplace, but they are also

12:20:42 there to speak for a public hearing so when the public

12:20:44 hearing is up and the chairman has been going through that

12:20:46 list he's able to recall those names, and let those people

12:20:49 know they have the opportunity to speak.

12:20:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think you like so many lawyers, you are

12:20:55 thinking more complicated than it actually has to be.

12:20:59 I think the basis of the maker was I think to do public

12:21:06 comment part of it, if that's correct.

12:21:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would just entertain an amendment that

12:21:14 listening to what Mr. Shelby is saying, would two sheets

12:21:21 solve the problem?

12:21:22 We have a sheet for public comment and we have one for if

12:21:26 you are here for a quasi-judicial, and then that would




12:21:30 separate out the two, so the chair would then know who is

12:21:34 here for general public comment and who was here for a

12:21:41 quasi-judicial hearing.

12:21:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can also share, council,

12:21:46 respectfully, the one department or person missing from this

12:21:49 discussion is the city clerk, and obviously the city clerk

12:21:51 plays a crucial role in all of this.

12:21:53 So I would respectfully request that if you would make the

12:21:57 motion to allow us to work towards implementing what your

12:22:00 spendings is, work with the city clerk, bringing it back to

12:22:03 council for approval before implementation.

12:22:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern?

12:22:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

12:22:09 I think that if you are going separate out, determine what

12:22:15 agenda item people are here to speak for and whether it's a

12:22:17 public hearing, you have to have an individual there, and it

12:22:20 would seem that it would be someone from the clerk's office.

12:22:22 So I think we could ask them to do that.

12:22:26 They would maybe have spend half an hour to 45 minutes out

12:22:33 there as people were signing in to help people determine

12:22:36 what they were signing in for and whether they are signing

12:22:39 in for general public comment or for public hearing.

12:22:48 The other alternative which would be most simple is you just

12:22:51 sign up as you want to speak, and as the chair reads off the

12:22:54 names, and the person says what they are here for, if they




12:22:58 are here for a public hearing, and they don't wish to speak

12:23:01 at general public comment, then they sit down.

12:23:05 Which is really what tends to happen anyway.

12:23:07 A lot of people will stand in line to speak at the beginning

12:23:10 of the meeting and then when they come up we'll find out

12:23:12 what they are here inform.

12:23:13 So I think people don't know -- I think we could even work

12:23:20 with just signing up.

12:23:22 And having the chair ask for individual speaker, if they

12:23:27 come up, if they are here for, you know, public hearing, and

12:23:31 explain to them that that would be later.

12:23:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, and

12:23:38 seconded by Ms. Capin as amended, and you accept the

12:23:42 amendment by Mr. Suarez to work with the clerk's office, the

12:23:47 chair, and yourself to bring it back to council for review

12:23:52 for the changes to those recommendations.

12:23:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, sir.

12:23:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All in favor of the motion please

12:23:58 indicate by saying aye.

12:24:00 Opposed nay.

12:24:00 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:24:02 Item number 2, the time certain.

12:24:05 Now, when you have three items at the same time, unless you

12:24:09 split that podium into three ways at three different

12:24:12 microphones, is impossible.




12:24:13 So we have got to make some adjustments there, and we have

12:24:17 got to be cognizant of the fact that get in the subject

12:24:21 matter and get out.

12:24:23 Us.

12:24:24 All of us including myself.

12:24:27 With the public's comments coming in so contribute digested

12:24:30 and that can be done.

12:24:32 I think that could be tweaked and met the requirements.

12:24:35 But to set that he items at the same time doesn't lend to

12:24:40 helping it out.

12:24:41 If you set them up at 9, 9:10, 9:20, you might be a minute

12:24:47 or two, and if you need some filler time you go into the

12:24:50 department of City Council members for passage or denial of

12:24:54 those subject matters on the chairmanships of those

12:24:58 different committees.

12:25:00 You fill that time by doing that.

12:25:02 And it might be a little more taxing on whoever is

12:25:06 chairperson is, but I think it would solve the problem of

12:25:08 time to some degree.

12:25:11 Mrs. Montelione.

12:25:13 Month Montelione I would motion that we direct our city

12:25:19 clerk to -- as we are making or setting items for the

12:25:24 agenda, in 15-minute increments, so that each item would be

12:25:30 called on the quarter hour.

12:25:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione.




12:25:36 Any seconds?

12:25:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No, not yet.

12:25:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any seconded?

12:25:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would second if it were not just quarter

12:25:46 hour but even a five-minute time frame so that we can maybe

12:25:50 even make sure that as we set it up we can do that.

12:25:54 >> If we set it for five minutes we are back at square one

12:26:02 setting all for the same hour.

12:26:04 If you want to make it to ten minutes, 9:00, 9:10, 9:20,

12:26:11 9:30 and so on.

12:26:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The motion is amended by the maker to ten

12:26:18 minutes.

12:26:18 Do I hear a second on that?

12:26:20 I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

12:26:21 Discussion, Mrs. Capin?

12:26:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.

12:26:24 I am in agreement of setting them in increments.

12:26:27 But I also am in agreement with Mrs. Vizzi when she said

12:26:32 sometimes we just have too much business, and we should

12:26:35 actually -- our regular meeting should be an AM meeting and

12:26:42 PM meeting, that being from nine to noon and then 1:30 to 5,

12:26:45 because if you are setting it at 15 minute increments you

12:26:48 are going see that it's going go over the noon, and we

12:26:53 always have to ask to come back.

12:26:54 Whereas if we already know if we start to set it in




12:26:57 increments that we are going to go over, so we will have an

12:27:00 arch meeting automatically, and it will be on publicly

12:27:05 noticed.

12:27:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Is that asking for an amendment?

12:27:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, ma'am much.

12:27:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I accept that amendment that we have

12:27:17 meetings set AM and PM sessions is what I understood you

12:27:20 are -- sessions is what I understand you are asking for.

12:27:24 So we would meet from nine to noon.

12:27:27 And then from 1:30 to five or whenever our session would end

12:27:35 as items are scheduled.

12:27:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

12:27:38 I have a motion.

12:27:39 I have a second on that.

12:27:42 Moss originally made by Mrs. Montelione, seconded by Mr.

12:27:46 Suarez.

12:27:46 Discussion was made, an amendment to the original motion.

12:27:51 You want the floor, and -- I have already passed by 15

12:27:56 minute limit.

12:27:57 I need another five minutes.

12:28:00 Add ten, please.

12:28:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move to ten minutes.

12:28:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second bid Mrs. Capin.

12:28:07 All in favor?

12:28:09 Opposed?




12:28:09 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:28:11 Okay.

12:28:11 Who wants the floor?

12:28:13 On item number 2.

12:28:14 >>MARY MULHERN: I was going to say, I think in a practical

12:28:19 way none of this is really going to make any difference as

12:28:21 far as the time certain because what happens -- and I think

12:28:25 the only way to stay more on schedule is for us to talk

12:28:28 less.

12:28:31 And that's basically the only thing, you know.

12:28:34 So the one rule we haven't talked about in here is the one

12:28:38 that Chairman Miranda has been so lenient about, was how

12:28:43 much time each of us has to speak and how many times we get

12:28:47 to speak.

12:28:47 But I think, you know, it is completely according to what is

12:28:54 happening on that day, that council meeting, how many people

12:28:57 are here to speak, and what the individual council members

12:29:02 have to say that determines how long we take on all of this

12:29:05 stuff.

12:29:05 So I think I just don't think -- I think it will be just as

12:29:10 hard even if you do more of the splitting up on the time

12:29:14 certain to stay on the schedule.

12:29:18 I think the order of the agenda.

12:29:20 So I'm not going to support that motion because I don't

12:29:23 think -- it's workable or effective.




12:29:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen, then Mr. Suarez.

12:29:28 >>HARRY COHEN: While I again with what some of what

12:29:31 Councilwoman Mulhern just said, I do think that by dividing

12:29:34 it up this way it will give us the opportunity to better

12:29:37 estimate how much time we think things are going take,

12:29:40 number one.

12:29:41 And number two, by going to this system of having the

12:29:44 speakers sign in, that will also give us a little more

12:29:48 certainty as to what time we think things are going take

12:29:50 place through the morning.

12:29:52 So the chair will have the ability to juggle the schedule a

12:29:56 little bit more as we move through the meeting.

12:29:59 So I am going to support it.

12:30:01 I think the key here is that every council member, we have a

12:30:05 calendar that the clerk gives us at the beginning. Meeting,

12:30:07 and we need to scrutinize that.

12:30:09 And when we set things, we need to be very precise and we

12:30:12 need to think through how long we think the items set before

12:30:16 and after are going to take and at least try to estimate it.

12:30:20 We are not always going to be right.

12:30:21 But if we try, we will probably do better Wan we are doing

12:30:24 now which is throwing it all in at the same time and then

12:30:27 just sort of watching it play out.

12:30:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One last comment.

12:30:33 Mrs. Mulhern, you are absolutely correct.




12:30:35 I think it's all than us, truly, in terms.

12:30:38 This the only reason that I wanted to make sure that we can

12:30:40 set it within the agenda is that to give the public so I --

12:30:44 some idea of when they are going to be.

12:30:46 I think it's more of some way that we can give people a

12:30:49 little bit more time to be able to get here at a certain

12:30:52 time and that their agenda item will be set different time

12:30:58 frames so they are not sitting here from 9:30 or so on.

12:31:02 That's the only reason I think enters in terms of my mind as

12:31:05 to why I am supporting it and how we can make this go

12:31:07 forward.

12:31:07 So thank you, chair.

12:31:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I go back to the original motion.

12:31:13 Does the clerk have it all?

12:31:15 In fine order, I'm sure by Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr.

12:31:19 Suarez as amended to ten minutes instead of 15.

12:31:23 All in favor?

12:31:24 Opposed? Motion carries unanimously.

12:31:27 Item number 3.

12:31:31 What's the pleasure of the council?

12:31:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Chair, if I can be recognized.

12:31:44 I don't think at this time there's a need to go to rotation

12:31:48 of chair and vice chair.

12:31:55 I don't think it's necessary, and I go back to my comments

12:31:57 earlier.




12:31:58 Thank you.

12:31:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think it should be taken to a vote.

12:32:01 Is that a motion or not?

12:32:04 >> Not a motion because it would be a negative motion.

12:32:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's not a motion.

12:32:08 So what's the direction?

12:32:09 What do we do here?

12:32:11 Mr. Counselor?

12:32:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council can take no action, just receive

12:32:17 and file.

12:32:18 >> Motion to receive and file.

12:32:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr.

12:32:23 Suarez to receive and file number 3.

12:32:25 All in favor of the motion?

12:32:26 Opposed?

12:32:26 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:32:29 Information.

12:32:30 It passed 6 to 1, sir.

12:32:33 5 to 2.

12:32:35 All right.

12:32:35 We go now to the information reports from right to left Mr.

12:32:39 Suarez.

12:32:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: None at this time.

12:32:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN: None at this time.

12:32:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: None.




12:32:48 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

12:32:50 >>HARRY COHEN: No.

12:32:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, sir.

12:32:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, Frank, you and I had unanimous.

12:33:02 It moves much fast they are way.

12:33:04 By understand.

12:33:04 Receive and file all the documents?

12:33:06 The documents will be received and filed by Mrs. Montelione,

12:33:10 second by Mr. Suarez.

12:33:11 All in favor?

12:33:12 Opposed?

12:33:12 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:33:13 Anyone in the audience care to speak?

12:33:28

12:33:32 (City Council meeting adjourned at 12:34)

12:34:43



DISCLAIMER:

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.