Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL

Thursday, August 2, 2012
9:00 a.m. Session

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.


08:57:06

09:07:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: City Council is called to order.

09:07:24 The chair yields to Mr. Frank Reddick.

09:07:26 >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

09:07:29 It's an honor for me to introduce our guest minister here to

09:07:34 provide our invocation.

09:07:36 We have the honorable Reverend Dr. Henry J. Lyons who was

09:07:41 born and raised in Gainesville, Florida.

09:07:44 He is a graduate of Moorhead college and located at 405

09:07:51 north Oregon Avenue.

09:07:52 In 1994, Rev. Lyons was elected president of the National

09:07:56 Baptist Convention of the USA, the largest African-American

09:08:00 religious organization in the country, and 8.2 million

09:08:05 members, perhaps the most powerful institutional

09:08:10 African-American community.


09:08:11 It's an honor to present Dr. Henry Lyons for the invocation.

09:08:16 >> Let us pray.

09:08:22 Our Father God, we thank you, Lord, for this wonderful and

09:08:25 blessed beautiful day.

09:08:27 We thank you for the life, health and strength.

09:08:30 We thank you for the opportunity that lies ahead of us, the

09:08:36 blessings that you overflowed in our lives, and even in this

09:08:40 great community in which we live.

09:08:42 We thank you for the beauty of it.

09:08:43 We thank you for life, health and strength.

09:08:46 Bless us now in our deliberations.

09:08:49 Bless us as we go through this day with Thanksgiving in our

09:08:52 heart. We thank you. We praise you. And we do love you.

09:08:56 This is our prayer. Amen.

09:08:58 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]

09:09:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Roll call.

09:09:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

09:09:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.

09:09:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

09:09:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

09:09:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

09:09:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

09:09:38 I need a motion for adoption of the minutes of the special

09:09:40 called meeting on July 18th, regular session of July

09:09:44 19th, and minutes of the special called budget workshop




09:09:48 on July 26th.

09:09:52 I have a motion by Mr. Reddick, seconded by Mr. Suarez.

09:09:56 All in favor?

09:09:58 Opposed?

09:09:58 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:10:00 Also, at this time, I would like to put into the record a

09:10:03 memorandum sent by council member Cohen due to medical

09:10:07 emergency regarding immediate family member, I will be

09:10:10 traveling out of the state and will be unavailable for the

09:10:14 Thursday, August 2nd meeting of the City Council.

09:10:20 I have arranged with the clerk to be available by phone and

09:10:22 respectfully request permission to vote remotely should my

09:10:26 vote be necessary to avoid a deadlock on any nonjudicial

09:10:30 matters.

09:10:30 I need a motion to allow that.

09:10:33 >> Move to allow that.

09:10:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, second by

09:10:36 Mrs. Montelione.

09:10:38 Further discussion by council members?

09:10:39 All in favor?

09:10:40 Opposed?

09:10:41 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:10:44 Ceremonial activity, I have a memorandum that on Mr. Cohen's

09:10:50 absence is, the Judy Lisi commendation will be delayed to

09:10:56 another meeting.




09:10:57 And so now we go to item number 2 commendation by Ms. Capin

09:11:06 to the purchasing department.

09:11:07 >> It's my pleasure to recognize the purchasing department

09:11:27 of the City of Tampa, Mr. Greg Spearman is here with me.

09:11:33 I am going to read the commendation.

09:11:35 City of Tampa council recognizes the achievement of

09:11:38 excellence procurement award presented by the national

09:11:42 purchasing institute for purchasing department.

09:11:48 The City of Tampa has received this prestigious award

09:11:51 designed to recognize organizational excellence in public

09:11:56 procurement for six consecutive years.

09:11:59 The award is earned by organizations that demonstrate

09:12:03 excellence in procurement by obtaining a high score on the

09:12:06 ranking benchmark criteria. City Council recognizes the

09:12:10 singular achievements and congratulates the purchasing

09:12:14 department receiving this award.

09:12:17 [ Applause ]

09:12:23 >>GREG SPEARMAN: Thank you, City Council, for recognizing

09:12:28 us having achieved this award. I would like for the men and

09:12:30 women of the purchasing department to come up.

09:12:32 Just come around.

09:12:37 So you can see who these guys are, every day, that serve the

09:12:41 citizens of the City of Tampa, and of course City Council

09:12:45 and the administration.

09:12:46 I want to introduce my leadership team very quickly so YOU




09:12:49 Know who these guys are that actually get work done every

09:12:52 day to keep the city running.

09:12:54 Nelson is our group and services manager. He manages the

09:12:59 buyers. I will ask him to speak in a moment.

09:12:59 We have Kevin Frye, our purchasing systems administration

09:13:04 manager.

09:13:04 And we have Kita Armstrong, our inventory manager.

09:13:08 And we have Michelle Blizard, our executive assistant

09:13:12 administrative aide who keeps the department running.

09:13:15 So Nelson, if you want to introduce your teams very quickly.

09:13:20 >> Most of my team is here. For the administrative staff, I

09:13:22 would like to introduce Sharon Hartman and Acquanetta Grant.

09:13:31 Buyers, they are all here.

09:13:32 Linda Johnson. Linda.

09:13:33 Tony McGee. Karon Johnson back there.

09:13:37 Celeste Gibbons.

09:13:42 And I have Michelle Rivera and Ivette Rosario.

09:13:47 That's my team.

09:13:48 >> Good morning. Kevin Frye, purchasing systems manager.

09:13:51 In my group I have Penny Hammock, who oversees our insurance

09:13:57 requirements for all our purchases. Amanda Yaksic, our

09:14:00 methods analyst, our P-card administrator. You have seen

09:14:04 her name in some e-mails back and forth to you.

09:14:04 Also, Kita works in my group. Kita oversees the inventory

09:14:05 locations. We have nine locations, and 16, 17 employees.




09:14:13 Thank you.

09:14:13 >>GREG SPEARMAN: Thank you, council, for this commendation.

09:14:20 Thank you very much.

09:14:26 [ Applause ]

09:14:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:14:33 On behalf of City Council we are very appreciative of all

09:14:35 the work you do.

09:14:38 Appreciate it very much.

09:14:43 Going back to the agenda, the addendum, I need an approval

09:14:46 of the agenda.

09:14:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So moved.

09:14:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez.

09:14:52 I have a second by Mr. Reddick.

09:14:53 Further discussion by council members?

09:14:54 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:14:57 Opposed nay.

09:14:58 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:15:03 We have public comments.

09:15:04 We have set aside for public comments for any item that is

09:15:07 on the agenda first, any item that's on the agenda first.

09:15:11 And after that any item that is not on the agenda.

09:15:15 Come on up, sir.

09:15:16 >> Joe Redner, 3924 West Spruce Street.

09:15:24 I'm here because I don't want you wasting your time with

09:15:28 that park.




09:15:31 I know your departments have a lot better things to do.

09:15:35 I have given occupy until September 15th to vacate the

09:15:38 park.

09:15:41 I have talked to Kelly Benjamin and he said he talked to a

09:15:44 few people from occupy and had no problem with leaving by

09:15:47 then and probably sooner.

09:15:49 In fact, right after the RNC.

09:15:52 I went down to the park yesterday, and there's only a few

09:15:56 pup tents there now.

09:15:58 I talked to the guy with the bus.

09:16:01 And by the way, not on my property.

09:16:04 And he said he would have no problem leaving there by

09:16:08 September 15th either.

09:16:10 The property the bus is on belongs to March anyone knight

09:16:14 who owns a fish market on 15th and Blake, I believe.

09:16:19 The last time I heard -- and I'm not sure he still owns it.

09:16:23 The last time I heard he did.

09:16:25 Occupy has no contract or lease, so I have no problem

09:16:28 getting them to leave the park.

09:16:31 And they are not going to resist anyway.

09:16:34 I think during the RNC, the park protestors that sleep there

09:16:41 would benefit the city by keeping them away from sleeping in

09:16:44 city parks and other places like that.

09:16:47 Hanging around downtown.

09:16:48 I guess they are going to be there any way.




09:16:51 Anyway, I promise occupy will be gone by September 15th

09:16:55 and the park will be restored to its old maintained shape

09:16:59 and even better.

09:17:00 And I have letters that I am going to be passing out to

09:17:03 anybody on the park telling them to vacate.

09:17:08 There was nobody there yesterday from occupy.

09:17:11 So I couldn't talk to anybody.

09:17:13 Thank you.

09:17:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, Mr. Redner.

09:17:17 Anyone else care to speak at this time?

09:17:19 >> My name is Krista Bertelson and I am the local manager of

09:17:25 PeddlePub over in St. Petersburg, and I have some

09:17:33 information to pass out so you can see a picture and

09:17:35 understand better.

09:17:42 The PeddlePub is a 16-person bicycle that operates in

09:17:48 downtown St. Petersburg right now, and we do everything from

09:17:51 food tours to picnics to family reunions to pub calls, all

09:17:56 kinds of different things.

09:17:57 And the majority of our renters actually are coming over

09:18:00 from Tampa, asking several times when we would be able to

09:18:06 expand into Tampa.

09:18:07 So I have been talking with Jay Song, Ernie Mueller, other

09:18:13 folks here about the process and how to move forward, and we

09:18:15 are basically to the point where we need approval from City

09:18:18 Council to begin to assign the city staff to review the




09:18:24 ordinance and to get licensing and permitting.

09:18:28 So I'm basically to the point write would like to ask for

09:18:32 you all to consider learning more and talking with us.

09:18:35 We are operating smoothly in St. Petersburg.

09:18:41 We have a copy, a model, so to speak, and would love to get

09:18:44 going in Tampa as well.

09:18:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:18:46 My suggestion would be that you send your proposal to the

09:18:48 city attorney's office to the administration first.

09:18:51 >> I have done that.

09:18:53 I sent it through and talked to Ernie Mueller, and Jay song

09:18:57 over in traffic, and they said because we are asking to

09:19:02 functionally classify roadways that I would need to talk to

09:19:05 you guys to see about amending --

09:19:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We have in Hillsborough County, City of

09:19:12 Tampa, I don't know if this falls under their jurisdiction

09:19:16 or ours, the taxicab commission.

09:19:19 They have some issues here in the past with electrical, you

09:19:24 might call them, larger types of golf carts that are moving

09:19:28 people around, and got into a conflict with the cab

09:19:30 commission and so forth.

09:19:31 I'm just trying to be helpful, and you should cover those

09:19:34 bases first.

09:19:35 >> Sure.

09:19:36 I appreciate that.




09:19:37 And I will do that as well.

09:19:39 Hopefully we can move forward from there.

09:19:42 Thank you.

09:19:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else?

09:19:44 Next.

09:19:45 >> Good morning.

09:20:10 I have been here before.

09:20:11 I live at 1311 South Moody Avenue.

09:20:13 I was here about six weeks ago regarding concerns about

09:20:17 safety along Bayshore.

09:20:20 What started with palm trees in the medians, now there are

09:20:25 even more trees as well as landscaping on the waterside of

09:20:29 Bayshore.

09:20:30 This morning as I whats driving here, I counted 14 trees

09:20:34 planted on the waterside, and 10 new landscape areas on the

09:20:41 waterside.

09:20:42 It appears that much of the new landscaping, are not native

09:20:49 trees and bushes.

09:20:50 I was told by the Parks Department that the trees have

09:20:52 limited resistance to water intrusion, they are not

09:20:58 tolerant, I believe the city should only be planting

09:21:02 indigenous trees and these nonnative are knot not

09:21:06 sustainable and will have maintenance costs.

09:21:08 Another issue, who is going to pay for maintaining all this

09:21:11 beautiful landscaping?




09:21:14 Before it was grass.

09:21:15 It was mowed.

09:21:18 Now we have city, weeding, pruning, fertilizing, and the

09:21:23 Parks Department budget has already been cut significantly.

09:21:27 I have been asked and I am trying to find out where in the

09:21:30 city this budget was found to plant a significant amount of

09:21:35 landscaping.

09:21:35 I want my city to look pretty for the RNC, but this is way

09:21:39 over the top in looking pretty.

09:21:42 I don't know if you have driven down Bayshore the last few

09:21:45 weeks but there is significant new vegetation.

09:21:47 Also, there's a historical component of Bayshore.

09:21:51 It's open vistas.

09:21:53 It's not supposed to be a lush, green park-like environment.

09:21:57 We have the place of activities for walkers.

09:22:02 Bayshore gets closed regularly for events.

09:22:05 These people regularly walk on the grass.

09:22:08 We have trees and thorny bushes in these circles.

09:22:12 What's going to happen?

09:22:17 On the median side, this is just going to push the people

09:22:22 back farther from the parade route.

09:22:24 On the park side, that's where the corporate tents and seats

09:22:28 are.

09:22:29 (Bell sounds)

09:22:30 All these trees and landscaping are just going to take up




09:22:35 more money.

09:22:35 I finally and most importantly, how does this new

09:22:44 landscaping top safety?

09:22:47 When you are in that median as you drive down you cannot see

09:22:51 pedestrians that are waiting in the medians to use the brand

09:22:54 new safe crosswalks.

09:22:56 The trees block the driver's vision of them.

09:23:07 The Bayshore task force, and a lot of times landscaping have

09:23:13 increased or decreased accidents.

09:23:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm sorry, we have gone over the allotted

09:23:18 time: I'll give you another 30 seconds.

09:23:21 >> Thank you, sir.

09:23:22 It's one thing to landscape and beautify our city.

09:23:25 This is landscaping on steroids, in my humble opinion, and

09:23:32 it's all about having citizen input with council approval

09:23:36 and I'm very concerned.

09:23:37 >> Thank you very much for coming.

09:23:39 Appreciate it very much.

09:23:40 Next, please.

09:23:40 >> Ms. Briley, the gateway project revenue, the funding to

09:23:49 pay for that came from the Parks and Recreation Department,

09:23:52 half million dollars came from, I believe, as I remember

09:23:56 correctly, three different line items.

09:23:58 One was -- I think they were all maintenance account.

09:24:03 One was fencing.




09:24:04 One was field and surfacing.

09:24:09 And I can't remember what the third one was.

09:24:12 >> It was several meetings ago, but the items -- I'm just

09:24:25 concerned of the tree funding.

09:24:31 Some of it may have come from there but there were more than

09:24:34 just trees that were planted but the gateway project was

09:24:36 funded by that.

09:24:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:24:38 Anyone else care to speak at this time?

09:24:42 I see no one.

09:24:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Vicki, at new business I'll ask for reports

09:25:04 from the departments on this.

09:25:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any items that we passed at previous

09:25:15 council?

09:25:15 I see no one.

09:25:16 We go to committee reports.

09:25:19 Mr. Frank Reddick.

09:25:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: After review we vote on all of the consent

09:25:31 items.

09:25:32 I would like to make a statement on item number 25.

09:25:36 May I?

09:25:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move 3 through 7.

09:25:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.

09:25:46 Suarez.

09:25:46 All in favor of the motion?




09:25:48 Opposed?

09:25:49 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:25:53 Parks, recreation, culture, committee chair Mary Mulhern.

09:25:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I move through 15.

09:26:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Seconded by Mr. Reddick.

09:26:06 All in favor?

09:26:07 Opposed?

09:26:08 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:26:10 Public Works Committee chair Mr. Suarez.

09:26:13 >> Move items 17 through 23.

09:26:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

09:26:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Reddick.

09:26:20 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:26:23 Opposed nay.

09:26:24 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:26:26 Finance Committee, Mr. Harry Cohen's absence, I'm sure he's

09:26:32 listening, but Mike Suarez will handle that.

09:26:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move items 24 through 30.

09:26:38 >> And Mr. Suarez, I believe.

09:26:43 >> Second.

09:26:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN: After the vote.

09:26:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, seconded

09:26:55 by Mr. Reddick on Finance Committee.

09:26:57 All in favor of the motion?

09:26:58 Opposed?




09:26:59 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:27:01 Ms. Capin.

09:27:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

09:27:05 This is a statement by Ali Griffin, to the media.

09:27:12 A prior City Council blatantly ignored the advice of city

09:27:17 and had we lost the case the potential exposure of the city

09:27:20 was over 16 million.

09:27:22 This resolution closes a case had they listened to legal

09:27:27 counsel we never would have found ourselves in.

09:27:29 Well, that council is not here to explain the response, but

09:27:33 the message is clear.

09:27:35 I have to speak for myself as do my colleagues.

09:27:39 Since we at council do not have a spokesperson.

09:27:42 Council has often been dismissed as a lesser entity.

09:27:46 What this indicates, incident proves, is that what goes on

09:27:52 here is a consequence.

09:27:54 City Council can do much good, but it can also do much harm.

09:27:58 We sit at this dais -- we who sit at this dais is very

09:28:07 important, and it must be recognized.

09:28:09 We must not allow this body to become a mere rubber stamp.

09:28:14 We need to analyze, digest, independently verify and

09:28:18 evaluate the information, and in some cases the lack of

09:28:21 information to receive.

09:28:22 And for that we must have time and resources to do our job.

09:28:26 From my perspective this is not a part-time work.




09:28:30 And as I found, it is not classified as part-time, but

09:28:33 neither is it classified as full-time.

09:28:35 It is a sort of bureaucratic limbo, undefined and

09:28:40 unclassified.

09:28:42 In this -- this incident opens the door to examine our role

09:28:46 and how we can better serve those that elected us to be

09:28:49 here.

09:28:50 This is something we can all ponder and evaluate.

09:28:52 We need to better define our role and those here that plan

09:28:57 to attend, I will bring this up at our next City Council

09:29:01 retreat.

09:29:03 Thank you.

09:29:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else?

09:29:07 Thank you very much.

09:29:07 We go to building and zoning preservation committee.

09:29:11 Lisa Montelione.

09:29:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I love 31 through 46.

09:29:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Ms. Mulhern.

09:29:18 All in favor of that motion?

09:29:21 Opposed nay?

09:29:22 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:29:24 Transportation committee chair Yvonne Yolie Capin.

09:29:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move 47 through 52.

09:29:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Mr. Suarez.

09:29:35 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.




09:29:38 Opposed nay.

09:29:39 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:29:43 Items being set for public hearing.

09:29:44 I need a motion for items 53 through 57.

09:29:47 >> So moved.

09:29:48 >> Second.

09:29:49 >> Second by Mr. Suarez.

09:29:51 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

09:29:54 Opposed nay.

09:29:55 The ayes have it unanimously

09:29:57 Open items 58.

09:30:05 Motion by Mrs. Mulhern, second by Mr. Suarez.

09:30:08 All in favor?

09:30:09 Opposed?

09:30:09 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:30:11 Item 58 is now open.

09:30:18 Anyone in the audience care to speak on 58?

09:30:20 This is second reading and adoption of item number 58, file

09:30:25 2012-8-15.

09:30:28 I see no one.

09:30:29 I have a motion to close by Mr. Reddick, seconded by Mrs.

09:30:34 Mulhern.

09:30:35 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:30:36 Mr. Suarez, would you kindly take number 58, please?

09:30:42 >> An ordinance for second reading and adoption, an




09:30:44 ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida making revisions to

09:30:47 the City of Tampa code of ordinances chapter 15, parking,

09:30:50 amending chapter 15-104, regs residential parking permit

09:30:54 only area, repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances

09:30:56 in conflict therewith, providing for severability, providing

09:31:00 an effective date.

09:31:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez.

09:31:05 I have a second by Mrs. Ms. Montelione.

09:31:09 Roll call vote.

09:31:10 Vote and record.

09:31:10 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

09:31:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Need a motion to open public hearing 59

09:31:29 through 62, jaws quasi-judicial.

09:31:32 Anyone wishing to speak should be sworn N.I have a motion by

09:31:36 Mr. Suarez to open 59 through 62 seconded by Mr. Reddick.

09:31:39 All in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye.

09:31:42 Opposed nay.

09:31:43 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:31:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I had sent an e-mail to the clerk's

09:31:52 office yesterday and Mr. Shelby can elaborate.

09:31:55 I was not present for the July 19th meeting, and

09:31:59 therefore did not vote on items 59, 60 or 61.

09:32:06 And in item 59 incorrectly states that the motion at first

09:32:13 reading was passed unanimously with Councilwoman Mulhern

09:32:17 absent.




09:32:19 Mr. Shelby, would you like to clarify, please?

09:32:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, council.

09:32:26 You had brought this to my attention.

09:32:28 I had actually -- deputy clerk Marshall brought your e-mail

09:32:32 to my attention.

09:32:35 Item 59 is actually recorded correctly, and let me explain

09:32:38 why, because item 59 originally appeared on the consent

09:32:41 docket under ordinances being presented for first reading.

09:32:44 And it brings up an interesting point which we would

09:32:47 probably want to address when we discuss reviewing the

09:32:50 council's rules, because it points out that the fact that

09:32:54 you cannot vote in quasi-judicial matters.

09:32:57 It really specifically means quasi-judicial hearings is more

09:33:00 appropriate because the reason you can't is because of the

09:33:04 due process issue.

09:33:06 Because this is on the consent there is no due process.

09:33:09 Your tape voice is actually audible on the tape voting so

09:33:14 there is no error.

09:33:15 >> I wanted to clarify that for the record.

09:33:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Kind of like the Rays playing ball.

09:33:23 Mrs. Mulhern.

09:33:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question since I was absent at

09:33:26 this vote.

09:33:27 This was just an amendment to a vacation?

09:33:35 This was an actual vacating?




09:33:38 >> Good morning.

09:33:46 Kate Taylor, City attorney's office.

09:33:47 This is an amendment to a prior vacation ordinance.

09:33:49 This is not an actual vacating.

09:33:52 To explain further --

09:33:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Give me a brief description of what that

09:33:55 amendment is.

09:33:56 >> So the original vacating ordinance had an additional

09:34:00 condition that required the petitioner, within a year of the

09:34:10 effective date.

09:34:11 Petitioner asked for more time to construct that sidewalk.

09:34:14 So this amendment then gives them six more months to comply

09:34:20 with that condition.

09:34:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Shelby, is that normally the sort of

09:34:25 thing that's on the consent agenda?

09:34:27 It seems like it should come to council.

09:34:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, it does not require, per your code,

09:34:34 two public hearings, as I recall, because this is the first

09:34:43 time it showed up on the consent and the second is a noticed

09:34:45 public hearing which is where you are right now.

09:34:48 >>MARY MULHERN: So this is the first time we have actually

09:34:51 discussed it, to have the opportunity -- it was a noticed

09:34:59 public hearing.

09:34:59 What is the extension we are giving?

09:35:03 >> Six months.




09:35:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

09:35:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any further comments?

09:35:09 Anyone in the audience on item 59?

09:35:13 I see no one.

09:35:14 I need a motion to close.

09:35:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to close.

09:35:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.

09:35:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All in favor?

09:35:22 Opposed?

09:35:22 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:35:24 This is second reading and adoption.

09:35:26 Ms. Capin, would you kindly take number at, please?

09:35:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Ordinance being presented for second reading

09:35:32 and adoption, an ordinance amending ordinance 2011-92

09:35:36 vacating, closing, discontinuing, and abandoning a certain

09:35:40 right-of-way all that portion of Sterling Avenue lying south

09:35:42 of West Kennedy Boulevard, north of Roland street, east of

09:35:47 Dale Mabry and west of Himes Avenue in Bon Air subdivision,

09:35:50 a subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County

09:35:52 Florida amending section 3 of said ordinance to allow the

09:35:56 petitioner additional time to comply with ordinance

09:36:00 conditions, providing an effective date.

09:36:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion for approval by Ms.

09:36:05 Capin, second by Mr. Reddick.

09:36:07 Roll call vote.




09:36:08 Vote and record.

09:36:08 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Cohen being absent at

09:36:22 vote.

09:36:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 60.

09:36:27 Anyone in the audience care to speak on item number 60?

09:36:33 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Suarez.

09:36:36 All in five of the motion?

09:36:37 Opposed?

09:36:38 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:36:40 Mr. Reddick, would you kindly take number 60, please?

09:36:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an ordinance being presented for

09:36:45 second reading and adoption, an ordinance approving a

09:36:48 special use permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales,

09:36:51 restaurant on premises only and making lawful the sale of

09:36:54 beverages regardless of alcoholic content, beer, wine and

09:36:57 liquor, on that certain lot, plot or tract of land located

09:37:01 at 1625 East 7th Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more

09:37:05 particularly described in section 2, imposing certain

09:37:08 conditions based upon the location of the property, that all

09:37:11 ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict are repealed,

09:37:15 providing an effective date.

09:37:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

09:37:19 Roll call vote.

09:37:20 Vote and record vote and record.

09:37:25 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Cohen being absent at




09:37:33 vote.

09:37:48 Item number 61.

09:37:50 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.

09:37:51 The site plan has been certified and I have it here if

09:37:55 council would like to see it.

09:37:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:37:58 Anyone else to speak on item 61?

09:38:00 I see no one.

09:38:02 Need a motion to close.

09:38:04 Motion by Ms. Capin, second by Mr. Suarez on item 61.

09:38:09 All in favor?

09:38:09 Opposed?

09:38:10 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:38:11 Ms. Mulhern, would you kindly take number 61, please?

09:38:14 >> Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general

09:38:21 vicinity of 3005 west Columbus drive in the city of Tampa,

09:38:25 Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from

09:38:27 zoning district classifications CG commercial general and

09:38:31 RS-50 residential, single-family, to PD, planned

09:38:35 development, strip shopping center, retail sales and all

09:38:42 commercial general uses providing an effective date.

09:38:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

09:38:46 Roll call vote.

09:38:48 Vote and record.

09:38:48 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Cohen being absent at




09:38:59 vote.

09:39:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 62. Anyone in the audience

09:39:04 care to speak on item number 62?

09:39:07 62.

09:39:09 I see no one on 62.

09:39:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to close.

09:39:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion to close by Mr. Suarez, seconded

09:39:15 by Ms. Capin.

09:39:16 All in favor of that motion indicate by saying aye.

09:39:20 Opposed nay.

09:39:20 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:39:23 Mrs. Montelione, would you kindly take number 62, please?

09:39:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move an ordinance presented for second

09:39:33 reading and adoption, an ordinance rezoning property in the

09:39:36 general vicinity of 3610 east 10th Avenue in the city of

09:39:39 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1

09:39:41 from zoning district classifications RM-16 residential

09:39:45 multifamily to IG, industrial general, providing an

09:39:49 effective date.

09:39:49 >> Second.

09:39:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a second by Mr. Suarez.

09:39:54 Roll call vote.

09:39:55 Vote and record.

09:39:55 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Cohen being absent at

09:40:09 vote.




09:40:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We are doing such great work that items

09:40:13 63 and 64 are set for time certain public hearings.

09:40:19 So staff reports, I think we can handle those without the

09:40:28 proper time on the docket.

09:40:31 We go to item number 65.

09:40:39 Staff reports.

09:40:44 Maybe we are too early for the staff.

09:40:50 We go to 64.

09:40:51 Maybe that staff person is here.

09:40:56 It's a resolution.

09:40:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, that is a continuation of an

09:41:01 item.

09:41:01 The reason it's on unfinished business is because council

09:41:04 had asked it to be continued.

09:41:20 Number 64 was an item --

09:41:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Excuse me.

09:41:28 They said they would be here but they are not here. Can you

09:41:31 speak on this item?

09:41:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Certainly.

09:41:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Item 64 is actually a correction.

09:41:38 What happened was in 2011 -- they are here, Mr. Ruggiero.

09:41:47 I asked for the balance of my fund to be rolled over.

09:41:53 And it was agreed that it could be done, but it was not

09:41:57 done, and it slipped through the cracks, and I'm asking for

09:42:00 it to come back.




09:42:07 To district 3.

09:42:08 >> Dennis O'Hara, finance department.

09:42:13 Moving a little faster this morning.

09:42:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, we just caught up to speed.

09:42:17 >> Ms. Capin already explained we are requesting funding

09:42:25 from last year be carried forward into this year from Ms.

09:42:29 Capin's account.

09:42:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

09:42:33 My question is, is it a common practice?

09:42:36 Because I have a balance in mine as well.

09:42:39 >> I do as well.

09:42:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: If it's common practice then I think it

09:42:46 should roll over for everyone.

09:42:47 >> Generally, we deter the departments from doing this,

09:42:56 although depending upon request and the justification and

09:42:59 the decision by the administration, departments can do it.

09:43:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: No one, when I inquired about that some

09:43:06 time ago, last year, I was told that couldn't be done, that

09:43:09 it doesn't roll over, that you have a new budget, but nobody

09:43:14 told me it would roll over.

09:43:16 So I am asking you what is the proper procedure for

09:43:20 requesting that?

09:43:22 Because I had a balance because I barely used mine and the

09:43:28 only time I used it is when I went to the legal cities

09:43:35 conference.




09:43:35 So I think there's a balance.

09:43:38 So if that's the case, then I request mine to roll over as

09:43:42 well.

09:43:43 Is that right?

09:43:44 >> Yes, that's correct.

09:43:45 And maybe if I can back up a second.

09:43:49 What happens at the end of the year, September 30th, any

09:43:51 unused funding is automatically placed into fund balance.

09:43:55 And it stays there, absent a request to utilize it.

09:44:02 And typically there are no requests to utilize it anymore.

09:44:04 And this has changed over time.

09:44:06 It used to be relatively standard to carry forward the

09:44:08 funding in the department.

09:44:11 In department A, for instance, if they had funding left

09:44:14 over, it used to be pretty standard that they can carry

09:44:16 forward and use it again.

09:44:18 That was before the economic environment we are in now,

09:44:20 et cetera.

09:44:21 So we have gotten much more strict in the last couple of

09:44:24 years, and by default, all funding goes into fund balance.

09:44:27 >> Let me just ask a question then.

09:44:32 What do I need to do to go back and request my 2011 balance

09:44:38 to be carried over to 2012?

09:44:41 >> Exactly what Ms. Capin is doing.

09:44:44 Asking the City Council to appropriate from fund balance the




09:44:46 leftover amount from the preceding fiscal year.

09:44:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Chair, I am going to make a motion, if I

09:44:57 am in order, that all fund balances for each council member

09:45:00 be carried over from 2011 to 2012 as common practice.

09:45:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez, then Ms. Mulhern.

09:45:20 And Mrs. Montelione chose to speak.

09:45:22 But Mr. Reddick has a motion that he suggested, and state

09:45:28 your motion again?

09:45:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: That all 2011 balance for each council

09:45:32 member be carried over to 2012 fiscal year.

09:45:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick. Do I hear a

09:45:40 second?

09:45:41 Second by Mrs. Montelione.

09:45:43 Speak to the motion on the floor.

09:45:45 Or Mr. Suarez has the floor.

09:45:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think it all comes back together in terms

09:45:50 of what he's discussing.

09:45:51 Thank you, chair.

09:45:52 Mr. O'Hara, we are being treated just like any other

09:45:58 department within the city, okay.

09:46:02 The council itself has to ask for moneys from the general

09:46:06 fund.

09:46:06 And typically, you know, when you are talking about public

09:46:10 works, some other department, they have funds ongoing

09:46:12 because they have projects ongoing, and there are other




09:46:15 things going on.

09:46:16 Obviously we have to continue to pay people and, you know,

09:46:20 every year, we approve the budget.

09:46:23 We are looking at each one of those line items in

09:46:26 determining, you know, how much are we going to need to run

09:46:28 each department.

09:46:29 In our case, because we are not really a department, except

09:46:35 that we get paid for the same general fund.

09:46:39 And I don't know -- and maybe we can find out from our

09:46:42 council, from the city attorney's office, as to what our

09:46:46 rights are in terms of how we control our own budget,

09:46:49 meaning that if in the case of Mr. Reddick's motion that

09:46:53 those moneys are a continuing operational expense that come

09:46:57 to us each and every year, and that amount carries over each

09:47:01 and every year, and it actually can reduce some of the

09:47:05 moneys that we get budgeted for each and every year.

09:47:07 So as an example, we decide that we are going to get $2,000

09:47:18 for our expenses, those expenses would be carried over.

09:47:20 If one individual member has not spent much of anything and

09:47:24 it just carries over, that has to be reappropriated from

09:47:27 that fund each year, that general fund to us each year.

09:47:34 Typically, what have you seen?

09:47:36 I know you have worked at other governments besides ours.

09:47:39 What have you seen in terms of what other governments do

09:47:42 concerning that?




09:47:44 >> Again, my experience with the county, the majority of the

09:47:50 individual commissioners who may want to ask that funding

09:47:53 over a number of years.

09:47:54 >> Now, the question I would have, what role or what power

09:48:01 do we have over our own budget in terms of the amount of

09:48:03 money that we can carry over from the general fund?

09:48:09 Because we are essentially acting like any other department

09:48:12 in asking for funding.

09:48:14 Can we just say, look, we are going to have our fund is

09:48:17 going to be based on X number of dollars each and every

09:48:20 year, and roll over automatically for all of us each and

09:48:23 every year?

09:48:25 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.

09:48:27 You have total control over your budget.

09:48:29 What Mr. O'Hara was explaining is that the administration

09:48:31 does not let departments carry over from year to year unless

09:48:34 they can justify it.

09:48:37 You as a separate branch of government can make that

09:48:39 determination for yourselves.

09:48:40 >> We are being treated like any other administrative

09:48:43 department as opposed to a separate branch that has control

09:48:46 over --

09:48:48 >> To the extent -- that's correct, it's automatically done

09:48:55 every year unless you take a position that you want to do it

09:48:57 differently.




09:48:57 >> And I wanted to make that point, chair, because

09:49:01 obviously, I think for all of us, especially the folks that

09:49:05 are new here like myself and Ms. Montelione, we came in, we

09:49:09 had a certain amount of money that was already allocated in

09:49:12 there, and we were essentially in the middle of the budget

09:49:16 cycle that, you know, wow, we have got money for expenses

09:49:21 for our cell phones, for some other expenses like myself,

09:49:24 Mr. Reddick, and Ms. Montelione, we were at the League of

09:49:29 Cities last year and that came out of our budget.

09:49:32 Not knowing what the total budget was until -- last year

09:49:37 after September 30th found out what our total amount was

09:49:40 that was allocated, I think for me, I think we have to have

09:49:45 control of our own budget.

09:49:46 And whether we want to spend it or roll it over or whatever

09:49:49 we are going to do, I think that's something that we should

09:49:52 control as opposed to it being just a line item and part of

09:49:55 the budget.

09:49:55 I think that that's something that was never brought up or

09:50:00 talked about, because I think a lot of us, we don't really

09:50:03 spend our money from our budgets for the most part.

09:50:06 I think we are all pretty frugal people.

09:50:08 We are not taking any junkets or extravagant trips anywhere.

09:50:12 So I think that's something we never really discussed.

09:50:15 Not a lot of us spend any money up here, I don't think.

09:50:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Before I go to Ms. Mulhern, counsel.




09:50:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To follow up on the discussion, there's

09:50:28 also, I guess, a question in this case -- and I don't know

09:50:31 the answer to it, and Mr. O'Hara can discuss it -- from one

09:50:39 particular fiscal year, to use it in a subsequent fiscal

09:50:41 year, sometimes we do that as an encumbered amount that you

09:50:47 use in the following fiscal year.

09:50:50 That's available to your departments, is that correct?

09:50:52 >> That is primarily associated with capital improvement

09:50:55 projects.

09:50:55 We have gone away from that practice in operating

09:50:57 expenditures.

09:50:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The other thing, council -- and of course

09:51:01 obviously this is council's prerogative and solely council's

09:51:07 role to make the determination -- but you bring up an

09:51:09 interesting point, council member Suarez.

09:51:11 You came in as a new council member in the middle of a

09:51:15 fiscal year to a particular district and you had to rely on

09:51:18 the district's budget.

09:51:19 And just to put this in perspective, each council member has

09:51:25 a district budget.

09:51:27 Therefore, if your term limited, let's say, and you leave

09:51:31 your district, and you continue to roll over things, and a

09:51:35 new council member coming in would have a different amount,

09:51:37 let's say, of the council member in an adjoining district or

09:51:41 at-large district so there would be perhaps, depending on




09:51:46 how the previous council spent their money differently in

09:51:49 the amount of the budget.

09:51:51 But what I wanted to bring to your attention -- and Mr.

09:51:53 Territo did say this -- is your period of control over which

09:51:58 you have to budget, particularly your own budget, is during

09:52:03 the passage of the budget during the period coming up now.

09:52:09 It's section 7.07 of the charter budget changes, after you

09:52:14 already adopted your budget, the City Council upon the

09:52:19 recommendation of the mayor shall have the power from time

09:52:21 to time during any fiscal year after adoption of the annual

09:52:25 budget, therefore by resolution to reappropriate to any

09:52:29 municipal purpose any fund not needed for the purpose

09:52:32 originally appropriated or to appropriate any cash surplus

09:52:38 to any municipal surface.

09:52:40 So in effect the charter limits City Council's ability to

09:52:43 change the budget of a it has been adopted and gives that

09:52:47 power to make the recommendation by the mayor to do that.

09:52:51 And bring it to you.

09:52:52 So I wanted to make that distinction clear.

09:52:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you. We go to Ms. Mulhern, then

09:52:58 Ms. Capin.

09:52:58 >>MARY MULHERN: That's the budget in general.

09:53:07 Here is what I would like to say.

09:53:09 Some years, maybe one year, my budget didn't cover all the

09:53:17 expenses that I wanted to cover, so I did cover some of them




09:53:20 myself.

09:53:20 Most years, I didn't need all of it.

09:53:23 And it's totally dependent on what, you know, individual

09:53:28 council members and what we do.

09:53:29 So I would support that.

09:53:31 If a council member wants to roll over their unused budget

09:53:34 to the next year, they should be able to do that.

09:53:39 I think we should incorporate that into our budget process.

09:53:44 As Mr. Shelby said.

09:53:45 So I think today we could vote on it today, or we could

09:53:49 decide today how to vote on it at budget time, either way

09:53:55 would be fine.

09:53:56 But my point is really that it should be, out of respect for

09:54:05 each on the, I think, we should be able to do what we want

09:54:08 with our budget.

09:54:09 But I don't want to vote to he have year roll it over

09:54:14 unless -- I guess it doesn't matter.

09:54:16 We could vote to role it over he have year and then

09:54:21 individuals could at the time of budget say, I don't need to

09:54:24 do that, or we could just say if we need to do that.

09:54:27 So is that what you want to do?

09:54:30 Councilwoman Capin -- or Councilman Reddick, you are the one

09:54:35 that brought it up.

09:54:37 So maybe we would vote now to roll over unused budgets to

09:54:43 the following year.




09:54:45 And then if individual council members don't want to do

09:54:49 that, we can agree not to do that.

09:54:53 I don't know if that has to happen by motion or during the

09:55:00 budget period?

09:55:00 How does that work?

09:55:02 It's kind of odd, because --

09:55:07 >>> Well, the protocol as I understand it is as we are doing

09:55:10 for Councilwoman Capin is bring it before the body as an

09:55:13 agenda item.

09:55:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

09:55:16 >> If there's another way, I would --

09:55:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What council member Mulhern is suggesting

09:55:25 is do it as part of the FY 13 budget and I believe that's

09:55:29 what Councilman Reddick's request is, his motion, when you

09:55:32 do the budget presentation and council wishes to make some

09:55:38 changes before the second adoption that you do make that

09:55:41 change.

09:55:45 >>MARY MULHERN: So today I think we can vote on this item

09:55:47 for Councilwoman Capin.

09:55:54 It on the agenda.

09:55:54 We should vote on it.

09:55:56 And then during the budget period, you know, I guess I'll

09:56:03 make another motion after we vote on this.

09:56:06 Or come upman Reddick.

09:56:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Reddick has a motion on the floor,




09:56:13 seconded by Montelione.

09:56:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we do that as a separate motion?

09:56:17 Should we do them together?

09:56:18 What do you recommend, Mr. Shelby?

09:56:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member Reddick's motion is to have

09:56:23 every district budget for FY 11 roll into FY 12.

09:56:27 Then what you can do is you can also make a separate motion,

09:56:33 the same for FY 13, during the preparation, if that's what

09:56:36 council's pleasure is.

09:56:37 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, wait, so you're asking -- you want to

09:56:48 vote on the following year's?

09:56:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member, what you have before you,

09:56:56 number 64, which is not the motion on the floor, but the

09:56:58 item number 64 is appropriating money from last year's

09:57:03 budget that did not roll over, to put into this year's

09:57:08 present budget.

09:57:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, it's the present budget.

09:57:12 Okay.

09:57:13 All right.

09:57:14 Then I think we should just vote on that.

09:57:17 And if anyone else wants -- any other council members want

09:57:22 to include doing that with their budget, they should say so

09:57:26 now and we can add it.

09:57:27 Can we do that?

09:57:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Into this year's FY 12.




09:57:36 >>MARY MULHERN: So we have the budget from the previous

09:57:38 year into this year's budget before this fiscal year is

09:57:41 over?

09:57:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And then the other issue is whether

09:57:44 council wants to continue that practice, because you have

09:57:46 another FY 13 budget coming up before you.

09:57:48 >> It would seem the simplest way is either pull this

09:57:56 resolution to add this or approve this resolution and then

09:57:58 come back with a second resolution for the second motion.

09:58:01 >>MARY MULHERN: That makes sense.

09:58:05 So amend your resolution.

09:58:09 >>SAL TERRITO: To include all of those or approve hers now

09:58:14 and come back with second resolution to approve whoever else

09:58:17 wants to have theirs rolled over.

09:58:21 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I understood Mr. Reddick's motion and it was

09:58:23 to roll over '11 to '12.

09:58:26 Also, discussion here was to -- and you are talking about 12

09:58:32 to 13.

09:58:32 I would amend that to roll over all the time, unless a

09:58:41 council member does not want to be rolled over and sends it

09:58:46 back.

09:58:46 But it's automatically rolls over.

09:58:50 And I would add that as a friendly amendment, not just '13

09:58:54 but continuously rolls over until the council member decides

09:58:59 to put it back in the general fund.




09:59:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other comments at this time?

09:59:06 This is why this was changed some years back.

09:59:09 It used to be years back that whoever the chair was had to

09:59:14 be responsible for the auditing or the expense travel of the

09:59:18 council members.

09:59:19 We changed that many years ago because everybody gets

09:59:23 elected just like everybody else does.

09:59:25 In fact, I'm the one who changed it.

09:59:27 I said you guys handle your own budget.

09:59:29 It's like handling your own checkbook.

09:59:31 So this council can vote whatever they like to do.

09:59:34 But I will not be supporting any changes in any budget.

09:59:37 You know what it is.

09:59:39 You maintain it just like your own checkbook.

09:59:42 That's all I am going to say.

09:59:44 I have a motion by Mr. Reddick.

09:59:46 It was amended various times.

09:59:47 Would you read the motion?

09:59:55 I believe Mr. Reddick had the motion on the floor.

09:59:58 Then you had an amendment to Mr. Reddick's motion.

10:00:00 He accepted it.

10:00:01 And that's where I think we are at.

10:00:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Mr. Reddick's resolution --

10:00:14 >>SAL TERRITO: Pull this resolution and we'll come back

10:00:17 with an amended resolution approaching whatever you pass.




10:00:20 That's the cleanest way to do it.

10:00:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move to pull resolution B-2012-2.

10:00:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Mr. Reddick.

10:00:33 All in favor?

10:00:35 Opposed nay?

10:00:36 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:00:37 Mr. Reddick will a motion on the floor with calm of

10:00:39 amendments including the last one by Mrs. Capin.

10:00:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Now the motion is an amendment to have

10:00:46 staff come back with a resolution stating that unused funds

10:00:54 of council members, each council member, be carried over,

10:00:57 and based on Capin's amendment be based on perpetuity.

10:01:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Second.

10:01:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion bring Mr. Reddick on that

10:01:08 motion.

10:01:11 >>YVONNE CAPIN: This is going forward.

10:01:13 We have to bring '11 to '12.

10:01:18 11 through 12 and then in perpetuity.

10:01:20 >>SAL TERRITO: The resolution will have two provisions.

10:01:23 One is you are rolling over 11 to 12.

10:01:25 And from this point forward all City Council leftover money

10:01:28 will roll over to the next year automatically.

10:01:32 That's the resolution that will be in effect.

10:01:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Reddick.

10:01:37 Seconded originally by Mrs. Montelione with various




10:01:40 amendments.

10:01:41 I believe clarified from '11 to 12 and through perpetuity.

10:01:48 All in favor of that motion?

10:01:50 Opposed?

10:01:52 Motion passes 5 to 1.

10:01:55 Or 4 to 2.

10:01:59 Okay.

10:01:59 We go to item number -- it is now 9:57.

10:02:09 Another two minutes and I could have done the 10:00.

10:02:17 Let's see what we have here that we can do time certain.

10:02:22 Public hearings.

10:02:27 Any other item that you want to discuss?

10:02:29 I am just trying to get --

10:02:32 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Council, it says 10:01 sir.

10:02:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We go by that one.

10:02:38 This one says 9:58.

10:02:40 We are going to use that.

10:02:42 We go to item number 63.

10:02:44 It's a public hearing.

10:02:46 Item number 63.

10:02:53 Second motion by -- seconded by Mr. Reddick.

10:02:59 That is now open.

10:03:00 63, the first public hearing.

10:03:05 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Relating to the revocation of the 2006

10:03:13 Tampa Heights riverfront agreement.




10:03:16 The general location which is bounded by Ross on the north,

10:03:19 center line of Hillsborough River on the west, south

10:03:23 extending to, North Boulevard, and Tampa street on the east.

10:03:33 The development agreement has been in place since 2006.

10:03:36 And we are formally following the process for the

10:03:40 development agreement between the city and the Tampa

10:03:42 Heights.

10:03:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

10:03:53 This is the first public hearing.

10:03:55 We are going to allow public comment, even though we

10:03:58 normally don't on first reading.

10:03:59 But go on.

10:04:00 >> My name is Lena Young-Green, 3406 north Evan Avenue.

10:04:09 Regarding this item, in the community, we have not had a lot

10:04:12 of discussion.

10:04:13 We have requested and we expect between now and the second

10:04:17 hearing to have more conversation.

10:04:18 But some of the leadership in our neighborhood has been that

10:04:25 this area has been vacant, and to be developed for quite

10:04:31 awhile.

10:04:32 We are excited about the funds being generated into this

10:04:34 five acres, including the funds that you approved recent lit

10:04:42 for the 4.7 million.

10:04:45 The 700,000 for the restoration of the springs, the grant

10:04:51 that was received to complete the Riverwalk up to 7th




10:04:55 Avenue and the discussion that's on the table now regarding

10:04:57 the possible $2 million for the restaurant.

10:05:03 We have been waiting a long time to see something happen in

10:05:05 this area.

10:05:06 And this number of dollars are going to be focused on at

10:05:14 least five acres.

10:05:21 We are also concerned about the removal of the development

10:05:24 agreement because, as you know, it was many years to create

10:05:28 that agreement, and with your help having be designed in a

10:05:33 way that could complement the historic districts of all of

10:05:37 Tampa Heights, and be used as an anchor to help build the

10:05:44 rest of the neighborhood.

10:05:44 On the other hand, we do see that if there is some

10:05:46 significant investment in that area, that then cot help to

10:05:52 guide the rest of the area.

10:05:53 So we are going to have more discussion in between the two,

10:05:57 but again we just want to be sure that -- we encourage the

10:06:02 development and the investment in one area, but at any

10:06:09 opportunity that comes along, if you decide to terminate the

10:06:13 development agreement, that the first opportunity comes, we

10:06:17 could recreate an umbrella that again uses the same design,

10:06:22 or similar design to ensure that what we discussed and

10:06:27 agreed upon previously could bring this under this umbrella

10:06:29 of complementary to the historic district as well as Tampa

10:06:34 Heights that it be put in place.




10:06:37 Thank you.

10:06:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, ma'am.

10:06:38 Next, please.

10:06:39 >> Andrea Zellman, Fowler White Boggs, and today I am

10:06:45 honored to be representing the Columbia restaurant group and

10:06:47 the Gonzmart family.

10:06:49 I would like to read into the record a letter from Richard

10:06:53 Gonzmart who could not be here today, and also provide

10:06:56 copies for the record.

10:06:58 Dear Chairman Miranda and members of the City Council.

10:07:01 As you know, Columbia restaurant group together with metro

10:07:04 bay real estate LLC was honored to be selected by the City

10:07:08 of Tampa after the city issued a request for proposals to

10:07:12 engage in a privately financed renovation of the historic

10:07:15 water works building.

10:07:16 As outlined in our successful proposal we intend to renovate

10:07:21 this beautiful historic structure and build a new eatery in

10:07:24 the Tampa Heights riverfront area that will be a signature

10:07:27 dining destination and a focal point along Tampa's

10:07:30 riverfront.

10:07:31 We will do so with significant private investment.

10:07:34 However, we have grave concerns about moving forward with

10:07:38 our project while it is under the cloud of the existing 2006

10:07:43 amended and restated Tampa Heights riverfront development

10:07:46 agreement.




10:07:46 Both the city and we have been advised that there are

10:07:49 parties claiming development interest in the Heights future

10:07:53 development who may attempt to assert rights under that 2006

10:07:57 development agreement and are claiming further that it is

10:08:00 they and not the City of Tampa who should be parties to a

10:08:03 lease for our renovation and use of the water works

10:08:07 building.

10:08:08 As you might surmise, we are extremely uncomfortable moving

10:08:11 forward with our planned water works building restaurant

10:08:13 redevelopment under this cloud.

10:08:16 Obviously, we cannot make the necessary significant

10:08:18 investment of time, money and energy with the risks that our

10:08:23 goals will be thwarted or delayed or, worse, our project

10:08:26 will be stopped or become embroiled in protracted litigation

10:08:31 related to the 2006 development agreement.

10:08:33 Unfortunately, this is a result that could materially impact

10:08:36 our ability to complete our wonderful project in the manner

10:08:40 and time frame the city and we envision.

10:08:43 Again, we have no reason to believe that all owners of an

10:08:48 interest in the Heights area do not see a common goal of

10:08:51 seeing the Heights area revitalized and approved to its

10:08:54 maximum potential.

10:08:55 We look forward to working with the city, and any ultimate

10:08:59 developers of the Heights area, once they are determined

10:09:01 after the pending litigation and bankruptcy issues are




10:09:04 concluded to make all of that happen.

10:09:07 However, in the meantime, we believe that the determination

10:09:10 of the 2006 development agreement -- I'm almost done -- will

10:09:15 allow the city and eventual Heights developers to enter into

10:09:18 new agreements for the Heights designed vibrant start of

10:09:22 that area's eminent development and prosperity.

10:09:25 Eventually such determination will permit us to proceed

10:09:29 immediately to continue and complete our amazing water works

10:09:31 building restaurant project which the city and we have

10:09:34 already worked so hard to make a reality.

10:09:36 Thank you again for this great opportunity for the Columbia

10:09:39 restaurant group to participate and critical redevelopment

10:09:44 for the city and we look forward to our renovation of the

10:09:46 water works building being the catalyst for a fresh start of

10:09:49 the Heights.

10:09:50 Sincerely, Richard Gonzmart.

10:09:52 And I will provide copies to each of you and to the clerk

10:09:54 for the record.

10:09:55 Thank you.

10:09:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, Ms. Zellman.

10:10:01 Next, please.

10:10:01 >> My name is Carmen Brown Johnson.

10:10:04 I'm here representing Willa Brown, 2003 North Highland

10:10:10 Avenue.

10:10:10 We are one of the few property owners still in the Heights




10:10:14 area.

10:10:16 And I am here to echo what Lena said, what this young lady

10:10:21 said about the area, but I am also here to say that we need

10:10:25 to go on.

10:10:27 This agreement has been in place for six years, working on

10:10:32 for many years, and my family has been an established family

10:10:38 in this community since 1926, and we know what Tampa can do,

10:10:42 and we just want progress.

10:10:44 We want what's best.

10:10:46 I have been on the CRA committee two years, attend meetings

10:10:52 when I can as a property owner, and I don't know how many of

10:10:57 you read the Tampa Bay times, but on July 25th, there

10:11:01 was a front page article in the newspaper featuring my son

10:11:05 who is an entrepreneur, and ready and waiting to come

10:11:11 back -- lives in California now, just started a business --

10:11:13 but eagerly waits for the time to come back to the

10:11:17 community, and work with the City of Tampa for progress.

10:11:20 Thank you.

10:11:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much for coming.

10:11:23 Anyone else care to speak on this item?

10:11:25 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.

10:11:26 Let me address a couple of items.

10:11:28 It looks like maybe a little bit of a disconnect.

10:11:31 We may not be getting enough information.

10:11:33 This process started six years ago when we had the




10:11:35 development agreement.

10:11:36 Before we did the development agreement, we vetted the

10:11:39 people who came to us and said they could develop that

10:11:42 property.

10:11:43 They had to show that they could control the property, they

10:11:46 had to show they had the financial wherewithal to make the

10:11:49 project go forward.

10:11:50 In the six years that has happened because the economy has

10:11:53 interfered, because of other factors, that is no longer

10:11:56 possible.

10:11:57 The people that are come before you, that are going to be

10:12:00 making some discussions, had a discussion with you, asking

10:12:03 you not to revoke this particular development agreement, are

10:12:06 going to be telling you things like we were never required

10:12:10 to control all of those properties.

10:12:12 Well, the requirement on the RFP was that they should

10:12:17 control the properties, the requirement was that they had to

10:12:19 have the financial wherewithal to do that.

10:12:21 We have not had any demonstration that the people that are

10:12:23 going to come before you can do that right now.

10:12:26 They do not control all the properties.

10:12:27 They control one third of the properties, approximately.

10:12:30 The other property is in bankruptcy.

10:12:33 We don't know what's going to happen with that.

10:12:35 This has been in the works for six years.




10:12:36 There has been very little progress.

10:12:38 We are required under Florida statutes to come before you

10:12:40 and demonstrate that this particular organization, the

10:12:44 people that come before you, cannot carry forward.

10:12:46 They are claiming to be the deferral, and that may be so,

10:12:49 but they do not control all the parcels.

10:12:52 Even if they wished to go forward, they can't go forward,

10:12:55 because they do not control the parcels.

10:12:58 The zoning on that property called for a certain

10:13:01 configuration.

10:13:01 We have had discussions for over a year with the parties

10:13:05 that are coming before you, and they do not want to move

10:13:07 forward with the current zoning.

10:13:09 They want changes to be made.

10:13:11 We have a document from them indicating what the changes

10:13:13 would be.

10:13:14 They would have to come back before you to go through

10:13:16 another rezoning process.

10:13:18 It seems to make more sense to us, revoke this document, and

10:13:22 if there's a need to come back before you, to come back

10:13:26 before you with a new document spelling out what it is they

10:13:28 need to do.

10:13:30 There's a requirement that streets be vacated.

10:13:33 The vacation has expired.

10:13:34 The configuration that was necessary at the time can no




10:13:37 longer be done.

10:13:38 If they want to make changes to that street configuration,

10:13:40 then we need to do another development agreement.

10:13:42 We need to be assured that the people coming before us can

10:13:46 have the financial wherewithal to carry this project

10:13:48 forward, and have the projects on the property under their

10:13:52 control.

10:13:53 Ha has not been demonstrated.

10:13:55 Florida statutes require to go through two public hearings.

10:13:58 The first of two public hearings.

10:14:00 The agreement that we have with the developer requires

10:14:02 120-day cure period.

10:14:04 We are running those two concurrently.

10:14:07 If after the second hearing it is the decision of this City

10:14:09 Council to revoke that particular development order, then

10:14:13 we'll have to wait until the 120-day period runs which is

10:14:17 sometime in October.

10:14:18 Until that time, discussions can be had, but we need to have

10:14:22 a demonstration that the people that are coming before you

10:14:25 have the wherewithal to carry this project forward, and they

10:14:28 have not demonstrated that to the administration as of yet.

10:14:31 And that's kind of where we are right now.

10:14:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, Mr. Territo.

10:14:36 Next, please.

10:14:37 >> Just a little bit of background.




10:14:40 >>> Chairman, members of the City Council, my name is Ron

10:14:46 Weaver, 401 East Jackson Street.

10:14:49 And I'm here on behalf of Riverside Heights LLC with respect

10:14:54 to the matter before you.

10:14:56 If I may, we sent a courtesy letter of some of our response

10:15:00 to the claims just made with respect to the assistant city

10:15:07 attorney.

10:15:07 May I offer these for the record and each of you a copy of

10:15:10 the development agreement being discussed if you need one?

10:15:13 Here is an extra.

10:15:13 And a courtesy copy which was sent to you yesterday

10:15:16 afternoon.

10:15:16 Here is another copy if you like.

10:15:31 The Riverside Heights holding LLC is one of the largest

10:15:36 creditors of the Heights of Tampa LLC and its subsidiary and

10:15:41 has extended substantial sums to obtain a $12.5 million note

10:15:48 and mortgage with respect to this property.

10:15:52 This development group, Riverside Heights holdings, is

10:15:56 qualified, it is funded, it is capable, and it is ready and

10:16:01 willing to continue to demonstrate that the whole is often

10:16:06 better than the sum of the parts.

10:16:08 It has relied in good faith.

10:16:10 It has obtained collateral within the assignment of the

10:16:13 development agreement, has relied in good faith upon the

10:16:16 development agreement.




10:16:17 But nevertheless, in the spirit of compromise, would be

10:16:21 willing to recommend that there be a continuance for the

10:16:26 community, the neighborhood, the affected parties today, and

10:16:30 any others to get together and determine if an agreement

10:16:32 should be amended to deal with all of these issues

10:16:36 especially the ones just discussed, if there are such

10:16:38 questions, I would address each if you want me today or

10:16:43 August 16th.

10:16:43 Totally up to you.

10:16:44 We would respectfully reserve the right either day today or

10:16:49 August 16th to demonstrate with respect to the three or

10:16:52 four points -- Mr. Territo is doing a good job for the

10:16:55 city -- but about which we agree for the claims to control

10:17:00 and finance, et cetera.

10:17:01 If this City Council is willing to give us a short period of

10:17:04 time in which to continue to find a way to amend rather than

10:17:09 cancel unnecessarily and disruptively the agreement, we are

10:17:13 here for the best interests of the community.

10:17:15 We are ready, willing and qualified, and after my three

10:17:21 minutes is up, we would be honored to answer each one of Mr.

10:17:24 Territo's questions with respect to all five issues, in my

10:17:29 letter yesterday, today, anytime between now and August

10:17:32 16th, or August 16th which is totally in your

10:17:35 discretion or continue today's hearing and see how we can

10:17:38 salvage for all of these interests which we are aware of and




10:17:40 understand so that we can amend the agreement and not

10:17:43 cancel.

10:17:43 Thank you.

10:17:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Montelione and Ms. Multiple Hearn in,

10:17:47 that order.

10:17:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You tried to contact my office.

10:17:52 I apologize I was not able to get back.

10:17:55 >>> On the, we have been working tirelessly to amend it, not

10:18:01 to cancel it unnecessarily.

10:18:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I remember -- I wasn't here at the time,

10:18:06 but I had knowledge of, of the parties, and I remember when

10:18:10 this development agreement was being hammered out, and it

10:18:13 was quite a lengthy process.

10:18:17 >> Four hours.

10:18:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: A very extensive process.

10:18:21 And I agree with the members of the community who spoke that

10:18:25 we do need to move on.

10:18:28 But I also hate to see all of this work go by the wayside.

10:18:33 So I would be amenable to having that extension to August

10:18:39 16th, to bring the parties together, to discuss.

10:18:45 I would like to hear from our staff, Mr. Territo, even Ms.

10:18:53 Zellman, to find out if there would be any harm done by

10:18:56 waiting to the 16th.

10:18:57 It's only another two weeks.

10:18:58 >>> Thank you very much, Councilwoman.




10:19:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. McDonaugh or Mr. Territo, would

10:19:11 there be any consequence of waiting two weeks?

10:19:15 >>SAL TERRITO: No action is being taken today.

10:19:17 The second hearing will be on the 16th so what happens

10:19:19 between now and then doesn't require any -- you are having

10:19:23 your first hearing right now.

10:19:24 There is a requirement to have a second hearing.

10:19:27 That's all set.

10:19:29 The statute requires two hearings.

10:19:30 There was no action being asked of you today.

10:19:32 Now whether the administration wants to continue having

10:19:35 discussions, that's not for me to say.

10:19:37 I'm saying no action is necessary on your part today.

10:19:41 This will come back to you on the 16th.

10:19:42 So between now and then, if the administration wishes to

10:19:45 have further discussions, that's certainly within their

10:19:48 prerogative.

10:19:49 It doesn't require any action on your part, is what I think

10:19:52 I am trying to say.

10:19:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. McDonaugh, you are going to add to

10:19:57 that?

10:19:59 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Economic development, City of Tampa.

10:20:02 I have spent considerable time attempting to reach some

10:20:04 middle ground and have been unable to do that.

10:20:07 Two weeks is not going to make a difference.




10:20:10 Under the original development agreement the developer had

10:20:12 certain obligations that they had to fulfill.

10:20:15 The extension of the Riverwalk.

10:20:17 The completion of certain improvements in the neighborhood.

10:20:23 CDD bonds to do infrastructure.

10:20:25 The improvements on the park.

10:20:27 None of these things have been done.

10:20:28 The neighborhood has waited patiently.

10:20:30 And the city has gone ahead with some plans to do this, to

10:20:35 get the park completed, working with Mr. Gonzmart to get a

10:20:39 restaurant, to help in the neighborhood.

10:20:44 At some point in the future if they would like to come

10:20:46 forward and come back to the city to see if we could work

10:20:49 out something for the entirety, we would be willing to do

10:20:51 that but right now they own a small parcel of the property.

10:20:54 They do not own all of it.

10:20:55 They are not equipped to do all of it.

10:20:57 And so the administration's position is no.

10:21:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll support continuance of this today but

10:21:15 I am not going to vote to revoke this agreement today.

10:21:21 We heard briefly from an attorney for one party to the

10:21:27 development agreement just now, and from the attorney for

10:21:33 perspective partner, or partner with the city in

10:21:37 development, part of this property.

10:21:39 However, no one from the city's legal department or from




10:21:46 economic development has met with me -- I don't know if they

10:21:51 met with on the council members -- but this is the first

10:21:54 time that I have heard any of this detail of what's

10:21:58 happening with this.

10:21:58 So I don't feel like I have the information to vote on this

10:22:02 today.

10:22:03 So if we could have a continuance for this first reading for

10:22:08 two weeks, I'll support it.

10:22:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez and then Mr. Reddick.

10:22:15 >>SAL TERRITO: There is no motion today.

10:22:19 It's severally a public hearing to hear evidence.

10:22:22 It is not a vote necessary today.

10:22:24 I just wanted to clarify that.

10:22:26 There's no first and second reading.

10:22:28 This is not a resolution in that respect.

10:22:29 All those happening today is that you are required to have a

10:22:32 public hearing to hear evidence being presented to you.

10:22:35 There's no action being required.

10:22:37 I wanted to clarify.

10:22:38 I'm not trying to stop you from doing something.

10:22:40 But no action is necessary today.

10:22:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Which number are we on?

10:22:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We are on 63.

10:22:49 >>MARY MULHERN: This is the first public hearing.

10:22:56 And we would be voting to terminate something, right?




10:23:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, Mr. Chairman.

10:23:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Shelby.

10:23:06 Please tell me what we are being asked to do.

10:23:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This process is not the same as when you

10:23:12 have an ordinance where your code requires a first reading

10:23:17 and a second reading.

10:23:18 This is similar to what you do with brown field

10:23:22 designations, where you are required by law to have two

10:23:24 public hearings.

10:23:26 But your first public hearing as Mr. Territo said is just to

10:23:30 hear from the public, and take evidence into consideration.

10:23:34 You are required to take no action today.

10:23:38 It goes on your agenda automatically as it is set for August

10:23:42 16th.

10:23:43 And at that time you will be presented with the opportunity

10:23:45 to take action.

10:23:46 >>MARY MULHERN: So we are not taking any action.

10:23:48 We are just hearing it.

10:23:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.

10:23:50 >>MARY MULHERN: So I would just like to ask that we have

10:23:53 meetings with legal and with Mr. McDonaugh before, so we can

10:24:02 have a full explanation of what this means.

10:24:05 It's concerning because we are talking about property rights

10:24:07 here, and want to make sure that we are canceling a

10:24:13 development agreement, we need to know everything before we




10:24:16 vote.

10:24:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez.

10:24:19 Then Mr. Reddick.

10:24:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. McDonaugh, I'll ask you first and then

10:24:24 go to Mr. Weaver.

10:24:25 In terms of the agreement itself, it's been six years since

10:24:30 the original agreement.

10:24:31 And I know the development of Riverside Heights homeowners

10:24:34 association board, when this was first proposed as the

10:24:38 Heights, and they made a presentation to us, talked about

10:24:42 what was going to happen.

10:24:45 I have been at Riverside Heights for over eight years and

10:24:48 nothing has ever been done with this piece of property.

10:24:50 When did the current party, Mr. Weaver's client, buy the

10:24:58 loan or --

10:25:00 >> Approximately a year ago.

10:25:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: A year ago.

10:25:03 And of course with our zoning rules, zoned for a certain

10:25:08 thing, they have to do it.

10:25:10 If not they have to come back and get new zoning as you

10:25:13 mentioned.

10:25:13 When you have gone into the sessions with this new party,

10:25:17 they controlled a portion of it.

10:25:19 What was their viewpoint?

10:25:22 Just that we want to change what the development agreement




10:25:24 says and we want a new development agreement?

10:25:26 Because we have taken over this loan and we are going to do

10:25:30 something completely different?

10:25:36 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Again, without putting words in their

10:25:38 mouth.

10:25:39 They would aspire to control all of the property if it's

10:25:41 possible. The other two parcels in the bankruptcy court,

10:25:41 one is controlled by a bank, and so how it ends up we do not

10:25:41 know.

10:25:45 But in conversations, of which there have been many, it's

10:25:48 been stated that the market has changed.

10:25:52 The configuration and densities and proposed land uses, what

10:25:57 were appropriate in 2004, 2005 and 2006 might not

10:26:01 necessarily be appropriate today.

10:26:03 And, again, this has been since 2006.

10:26:07 And the neighborhood is active in the neighborhood.

10:26:13 We would like to see something happen which is why the city

10:26:16 pursued an extension of the Riverwalk themselves, which was

10:26:19 an original obligation of the developer.

10:26:21 The city has pursued the redevelopment of the park, which

10:26:24 was an original obligation of the developer, and put an RFP

10:26:29 out for the water works building which has been sitting

10:26:32 vacant for a long time and wanted to get reutilized as a

10:26:36 restaurant to bring activity to the neighborhood. So we

10:26:38 felt that there was not anything immediately done, there




10:26:43 were not plans to do anything, and it was time to move this

10:26:46 forward.

10:26:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, Mr. McDonaugh.

10:26:50 Mr. Territo?

10:26:52 Excuse me, Mr. Weaver, you were bouncing up and down.

10:26:55 I'll get to you in a second.

10:26:57 Mr. Territo, you stated very clearly this is a first public

10:27:01 hearing and we are ask ass many questions as we want

10:27:04 concerning this particular project and what's going on.

10:27:06 On the second public hearing, we need to vote in order to

10:27:09 revoke the particular development agreement, correct?

10:27:13 >> That's correct.

10:27:15 >> So any information that we gather now and privately is

10:27:18 going to be part of that second vote regardless, correct?

10:27:21 >>SAL TERRITO: That's correct.

10:27:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And the reason I ask is because of course

10:27:25 with this particular -- we have shown, and Ms. Capin

10:27:29 eloquently mentioned about previous councils making

10:27:33 decisions, and now we now have the football.

10:27:38 There is some consequences to what we do in the future and

10:27:41 how we develop land and concerns when we are rezoning or

10:27:47 redoing contract.

10:27:48 And I just need to be clear that we are going in the right

10:27:54 direction so we don't come up with the situation that we had

10:27:56 this morning with the settlement.




10:27:58 Mr. Weaver, if you don't mind, come up here.

10:28:02 A quick question.

10:28:04 And hopefully I will get a quick answer.

10:28:06 Mr. Weaver, in terms of the development agreement, your

10:28:11 client went ahead and bought the rights to the development

10:28:15 agreement, or just the land itself, a parcel of land?

10:28:21 >>> Weaver: Both.

10:28:23 With respect to the development agreement, and a substantial

10:28:25 portion of the property.

10:28:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: There's been some discussion as to the other

10:28:30 parcels of land in terms of what you will need in order to

10:28:32 fulfill the development agreement.

10:28:35 Have you been negotiating with the bank for the other

10:28:39 parcels of land?

10:28:42 >> Yes, sir.

10:28:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: There's been no finalization of any kind --

10:28:49 is there any movement that you have seen in the year in

10:28:52 which your client has owned this development agreement of

10:28:56 this land?

10:28:57 >> Let me clarify.

10:28:58 There have been proceedings going on for the last several

10:29:01 years in bankrupt which are not yet concluded, but stayed

10:29:07 some of the activities that are concentrating the controls

10:29:10 that have been discussed here today, and secondly, with

10:29:12 respect to your question, the council needs to be advised




10:29:17 that 163.3220 has certain requirements in it being alluded

10:29:21 to on several occasions, and they are included in the

10:29:24 development agreement, and they are being asked about.

10:29:28 There are also some other components of some land swaps and

10:29:30 the like with respect to transfer of property and the like.

10:29:34 They may need to be discussed with respect to whether or not

10:29:37 163.3220 development agreement issues which have a unique

10:29:42 way of being addressed, enforced, rescinded or not, and

10:29:45 there are some non-163.3220, other forms of contractuals and

10:29:51 other arrangements that need to be part of this discussion,

10:29:53 but with respect to your question, the client is ready,

10:29:58 willing and able, has been working tirelessly for the past

10:30:01 year to bring together despite bankruptcy -- they are not in

10:30:06 bankruptcy.

10:30:07 They are simply stepping in to try to salvage the situation,

10:30:10 that the whole would be better than the sum of the parts,

10:30:13 and they are more than willing to continue working with the

10:30:14 neighbors, and there have been impediments including the

10:30:17 bankruptcy court, other people's bankruptcies, not ours,

10:30:20 which has created impediments to control, during that year

10:30:24 they worked tirelessly to try to salvage this community's

10:30:28 efforts to get on with its life.

10:30:30 >> Mr. Weaver, I think you overstate a point, because these

10:30:33 development agreements, as you know, are very complicated

10:30:36 documents.




10:30:36 It is complicated even more when we are talking about

10:30:38 bankruptcies and some other issues.

10:30:40 >> Yes, sir.

10:30:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think that your statement that this

10:30:43 developer is ready to move forward is incorrect in the sense

10:30:47 that he can't move forward because other people own on the

10:30:49 parcels of land.

10:30:50 So when we talk about moving forward, we are not talking

10:30:53 about something that's going to quickly happen.

10:30:54 We aren't talking about something that's going to quickly

10:30:55 happen, we're talking about something that may be another

10:30:56 five years down the line, based on whatever is going to

10:31:00 happen with bankruptcy, and other parts of the land.

10:31:02 So I think that -- I think that's a given. I think you

10:31:08 would agree on that.

10:31:11 In terms of what our role is here that we need to go forward

10:31:14 in terms of what the best idea is.

10:31:16 I think when you are talking about the development

10:31:18 agreement, that's a bundle and sold to council as a bundle.

10:31:22 When pieces of it are removed, it is no longer a bundle, and

10:31:26 to me the agreement is null and void in my mind.

10:31:28 Now, I'm not a lawyer.

10:31:30 And I am not pretending to play one here today.

10:31:33 But it does seem to me that when we go back and look at what

10:31:37 the development agreement said, it is specific to that




10:31:41 party, specific to those parcels.

10:31:43 For you to step in now and say that, yes, we are willing to

10:31:47 go forward, except for these other seven things, I think

10:31:51 it's a little bit disingenuous to come to us and say

10:31:55 continue with the agreement that has been in place for six

10:31:57 years -- and I know that you are a late player to this -- it

10:32:00 makes it difficult to say let's go ahead and let this

10:32:03 property lay fallow until everything is put into place.

10:32:08 That's part of the problem.

10:32:09 And I just wanted to state that to you.

10:32:11 And I wanted to give you your statement, because you kept

10:32:15 jumping up and down so I wanted to make sure you had a

10:32:18 chance to speak.

10:32:18 But I really believe with this development agreement it's

10:32:20 better for us as a city, and better for the neighborhood and

10:32:24 better for everyone else, if we make it null and void.

10:32:26 >> And not throw the baby out with the bath water, because I

10:32:35 think the answer to your question awhile ago, you made a

10:32:41 correct clarification.

10:32:41 Control is very big in this morning's situation.

10:32:44 And therefore let's clarify once and for all that controls

10:32:48 that three parts.

10:32:49 Number one is a substantial part of the land is under

10:32:51 control, consistent with the rest of the development

10:32:55 agreement.




10:32:56 That being said I gently but affectionately disagree because

10:33:01 this is held in B and could begun to be developed, so the

10:33:05 rest of the development, to make sure whatever we do with

10:33:07 that part is consistent with the overall fabric that we have

10:33:10 been talking about for the last six years if not 16 years.

10:33:14 Second part of control -- and I appreciate you asking the

10:33:16 question, Councilman.

10:33:17 The second part of control I spoke to briefly, which is the

10:33:20 nature that you are asking me, if we do it in our control at

10:33:23 all.

10:33:23 We have the control I just mentioned, and quite frankly, one

10:33:27 of the reasons we have been unable to proceed to find other

10:33:31 ways of making the whole fabric work is bankruptcy, some

10:33:38 beyond our control, and that as you mentioned affects my

10:33:43 earlier statement that we are ready to go forward.

10:33:45 I meant with respect to our property and getting prompt

10:33:48 control if it's obtainable from those other sources on the

10:33:51 rest of the fact fabric so we can get on with this

10:33:54 neighborhood's life.

10:33:54 >> Sometimes, Mr. Weaver, it's better to salvage as opposed

10:34:00 to trying to sell the entire piece.

10:34:03 So I think that when this development was made, and this

10:34:06 agreement was made, we were in a different situation

10:34:08 financially as a country, and in terms of what banks were

10:34:12 willing to do.




10:34:13 Again we can get into a discussion about economics and where

10:34:17 money is flowing in terms of banks all day long.

10:34:20 But I appreciate your comment.

10:34:21 And I yield the rest of my time.

10:34:23 Thank you, chair.

10:34:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Your time has expired.

10:34:29 [ Laughter ]

10:34:30 >> Thank you.

10:34:35 >> Mr. Reddick and Ms. Capin.

10:34:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

10:34:45 Mr. McDonaugh, it's my understanding from what I have told

10:34:49 us, the developers have not met any of their requirements as

10:34:57 far as the development agreement?

10:35:00 >>BOB McDONAUGH: That is correct.

10:35:02 There is a long list spelled out in the development

10:35:04 agreement, and actually had time limes associated with them,

10:35:08 and none of that has been met.

10:35:09 That is correct.

10:35:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's what I wanted made clear.

10:35:15 Because if this was a Broadway show, Mr. Weaver would be a

10:35:24 good actor because he was putting on a good demonstration of

10:35:28 filly buttering this whole process a few minutes ago.

10:35:33 The problem that I have is that I pass that place all the

10:35:38 time.

10:35:39 And there's that big sign out there saying the Heights




10:35:43 project.

10:35:44 And for six years I haven't seen one plant put out there.

10:35:50 To try to apply anything out there, even to dig up some dirt

10:35:58 or something.

10:36:01 And it bothered me that the good actors can come and pretend

10:36:10 that they are ready to do the work and move forward.

10:36:14 But they had obligation and commitment and time line to do

10:36:17 certain things that has not been done.

10:36:20 So I agree with the neighborhood.

10:36:26 They have been patiently waiting.

10:36:30 And waiting and waiting.

10:36:31 And they are trying to move forward.

10:36:35 And I also agree litigation can go on for years.

10:36:39 And tell me, Mr. McDonaugh, if this process of litigation

10:36:48 would keep going on and on for the next two or three years,

10:36:51 how would that affect I think Mr. Gonzmart and his group

10:36:54 that want to build -- go forward with their project?

10:37:00 >>BOB McDONAUGH: One of the issues that has clouded the

10:37:02 negotiations with Mr. Gonzmart is the fact that the folks

10:37:08 that are here today have asserted that they have the

10:37:11 development rights over the whole project, although they

10:37:14 only own a portion of the land, and as I mentioned, the City

10:37:19 of Tampa has waited patiently.

10:37:21 Nothing has been accomplished.

10:37:22 The neighborhood is very unhappy with the fact that nothing




10:37:25 has been done.

10:37:26 And so hence we chase the Riverwalk, will bring the

10:37:31 Riverwalk to the neighborhood.

10:37:32 We are going to redo Waterworks Park, which was an

10:37:36 obligation in the development agreement.

10:37:39 One of the aspects -- there were some complicated land swaps

10:37:43 within the development agreement, which were tide to the

10:37:49 Riverwalk and also the water works building, some lots owned

10:37:52 by the city.

10:37:53 And it did not appear and does not appear that anything was

10:37:55 going to happen, which is why we issued an RFP on the water

10:38:00 works building.

10:38:01 To again try to activate that site for the neighborhood.

10:38:04 And there have been assertions that, no, you can't do this,

10:38:09 where the developer and -- you have to deal with us and not

10:38:13 the City of Tampa.

10:38:14 So one of the wishes is to dismiss the development

10:38:20 agreement, to clarify this issue, so we can go forward with

10:38:24 the things that the city can control, and the city can

10:38:27 improve, and the city can bring to the neighborhood.

10:38:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Weaver, let me ask you a question.

10:38:38 You are doing a wonderful job of representing your client.

10:38:42 Let me just say that.

10:38:43 >>> Thank you.

10:38:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: But the reality is, can you state why in




10:38:52 six years your client has not put one tree or dug up any

10:39:00 ground on that property if they had a keen interest in

10:39:04 moving forward with this project?

10:39:06 Because I don't need the good rhetoric behind it.

10:39:14 Just a simple response.

10:39:15 >>> Yes, sir.

10:39:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: For six years they had opportunity to meet

10:39:21 the obligation was the city, the time line.

10:39:24 And they haven't moved forward.

10:39:26 >>> I'm out of town and my wife says, why didn't you take

10:39:35 out the trash the other three days?

10:39:37 And we are dealing with that one year tirelessly, and

10:39:41 therefore I respectfully apologize for those previous five

10:39:43 years we were not involved, my client was not involved in

10:39:46 doing the best he can, and there's still pending bankruptcy

10:39:49 proceedings which he's trying to get through and wrestle

10:39:53 through and optimistic about that will soon enable him to

10:39:58 continue this one year attempt to restore the activity that

10:40:00 we all vitally correct and need for this arrive front -- for

10:40:06 this Tampa Heights, and therefore this one year has not seen

10:40:08 a day he didn't try to accomplish what he just did.

10:40:13 I'm sorry for the previous I've fierce but they were not

10:40:15 his.

10:40:16 In fact that's why he's involved, those folks and their

10:40:18 relationship to their vendors, someone new with new money




10:40:22 needed to come along and buy those financial positions and

10:40:24 pay fee title to substantial portions of the property and

10:40:27 get on with developing it.

10:40:29 In concert with the fabric of the rest of the development

10:40:32 agreement, so we didn't have a whole community, with all the

10:40:35 ingredients, innovators for doing it as a community is the

10:40:39 only reason we are here.

10:40:40 That is the only reason that we are here.

10:40:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: When do you plan on participating -- do

10:40:47 you have a time line for finalizing?

10:40:52 >>> As a matter of fact I have the agreement with me.

10:40:54 I have six pages with me.

10:40:56 159 and exhibit A, description of all of the streets to be

10:40:59 vacated.

10:41:00 And in that six--page agreement, ordinance 2006-159, I have

10:41:06 a copy, contains an exhibit that lays out what streets need

10:41:10 to be vacated and thousand improve angular streets, would be

10:41:14 replacing them at the same time by replat in this room.

10:41:19 It's six pages.

10:41:20 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm speaking what is the time line for

10:41:25 finalizing the date roughly?

10:41:27 >> We have already received inquiries, and therefore as soon

10:41:29 as we can factor those inquiries with respect to moving

10:41:32 forward in this recovering economy.

10:41:34 Exhibit I to the entire agreement simply says preliminary




10:41:37 schedules, subject to market conditions.

10:41:40 The entire agreement, exhibit I, is preliminary schedule,

10:41:43 subject to market conditions.

10:41:44 And we are finding in the last year those market conditions

10:41:48 are improving.

10:41:48 Folks are inquiring about the property that we have fee

10:41:51 title to, and therefore the return of the economy, it does

10:41:56 show signs of life for the last six months.

10:41:58 And actual time I wish I could give you.

10:42:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Reddick.

10:42:05 Ms. Capin.

10:42:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (off microphone) Mr. Weaver, there's a

10:42:17 portion of this that is owned by your client?

10:42:21 >> Yes.

10:42:22 12 acres, yes, ma'am.

10:42:24 About 80% of the riverfront from North Boulevard, goes from

10:42:28 North Boulevard all along the river, about 70 or 80% of the

10:42:32 entire frontage from the most ideal property, and it's a

10:42:35 contiguous rectangle, from North Boulevard all the way to

10:42:40 just west of the Tampa Armitage, goes along the river, 12

10:42:45 acres, continuous from North Boulevard to the edge of the

10:42:48 Tampa Armitage.

10:42:52 >> And at this point your client can start to develop or

10:42:56 request zoning to develop that property?

10:42:59 >> It is already zoned under a PDA, approved by this board




10:43:02 in 2006.

10:43:05 >> So he can't, or she, whoever your client is, can begin to

10:43:09 develop this property?

10:43:16 Is there anything to start to develop the property that they

10:43:18 do own?

10:43:20 >> That's a very good question, Councilwoman.

10:43:23 Let me answer it.

10:43:25 The development agreement and the PDA, planned development

10:43:28 alternative A zoning, are integrated.

10:43:32 Therefore, when you pull out the development agreement from

10:43:35 the PDA, to the development agreement, the development

10:43:41 agreement was first, then the PDA was adopted, and in this

10:43:47 room, rather than 20 additional pages of PDA conditions they

10:43:51 adopted some of the agreement.

10:43:52 But technically the ability to continue to go forward does

10:43:56 need the PDA or its replacement of the compromise in the

10:44:00 next week or two to find a way to salvage that which we all

10:44:03 need in order to effectuate this project.

10:44:07 Would you like to add anything to that?

10:44:13 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And to develop that 12 acres, I can pretty

10:44:18 much confidently say that had the petitioner come before us,

10:44:23 for whatever it is that they need to develop that --

10:44:28 >> You would have been there for us.

10:44:30 We know that.

10:44:34 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And the development agreement, right there,




10:44:36 right there, it tells you -- it tells me that it has been

10:44:45 broken, it has been -- it no longer pertains.

10:44:51 >> For the controls being wrestled from the bankruptcy, and

10:44:56 having been in longer than the year that we have done our

10:44:58 best to deal with that one-year period, I understand what

10:45:02 you mean.

10:45:02 And I believe the development agreement is serving a

10:45:04 purpose, integrated with the planned development zoning that

10:45:06 is already there, and together the project works.

10:45:09 But in each of those parts of the project are complementing

10:45:12 and enabling and creating access to the parks, to the other

10:45:16 streets, so that the all the parcels work together, and it's

10:45:20 that working togetherness that I think is what's going on

10:45:22 here, Councilwoman.

10:45:23 >> I cannot see this council or this city not having those

10:45:29 parcels work together if you had three owners.

10:45:32 >> I agree.

10:45:35 We plan to work together.

10:45:36 >> That is what I see our city moving forward.

10:45:41 And I want to say this, while we are looking at this, for a

10:45:48 second reading, two weeks, we cannot have a second reading

10:45:52 in one week?

10:45:54 >> I think there are two hearings required.

10:45:56 >> My question is two weeks.

10:45:59 So we can't delay this for a week.




10:46:03 Then I would like -- Mr. McDonaugh.

10:46:19 >> I misspoke.

10:46:20 I believe they got control of the property in January 2011.

10:46:23 >> My question is, they have been the owners of the property

10:46:26 for 18 months and they have the ability to move forward and

10:46:30 develop in good faith those 12 acres to show we can move

10:46:39 forward orderer we will move forward.

10:46:44 Go ahead, sir.

10:46:44 >>BOB McDONAUGH: It is my assumption if they had come

10:46:51 forward with a proposal on the 12 acres the city would have

10:46:54 listened to accommodate them but again there are a lot of

10:46:56 conditions precedent, a lot of things that should have been

10:46:58 accomplished that have not been, and so it's not just as

10:47:01 simple as putting up a building, but part of -- wanting to

10:47:05 maintain this development agreement comes with a lot of

10:47:07 obligation of which none of them accommodated.

10:47:15 Not without owning the property.

10:47:16 >> Not without owning the property.

10:47:18 Mr. Territo, I think you have something to say.

10:47:21 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department again.

10:47:23 There are some legal impediments as well.

10:47:26 Part of that required streets to be vacated.

10:47:28 That vacation has expired.

10:47:30 So they have to come back and do another vacation in order

10:47:32 to do some of that development.




10:47:34 They do not own the property.

10:47:36 We cannot renegotiate this agreement with them because they

10:47:40 are not all the parties to the original agreement.

10:47:42 We are only dealing with several of the parties.

10:47:44 We have the authority under the statute to unilaterally

10:47:46 revoke.

10:47:47 We do not have the authority to go forward and continue with

10:47:50 negotiations because we don't have all the parties present.

10:47:52 Even if we agreed on he have point we could not renegotiate

10:47:57 this agreement because all the parties are not present to

10:47:59 renegotiate those deals.

10:48:01 So it's not a matter of we are being recalcitrant.

10:48:06 They don't want to move forward, Ms. Montelione.

10:48:08 That's a question, we went through a lot of trouble getting

10:48:10 this development agreement.

10:48:11 They don't want to move forward with the existing

10:48:14 development agreement.

10:48:15 They want to make substantial changes to it.

10:48:17 So the idea that we can move forward, not only do they not

10:48:20 want to move forward with the original plan, they want to

10:48:23 change it substantially, they are not able to move forward

10:48:26 for legal reasons, because of vacations have expired,

10:48:31 because they are not the sole party to this agreement.

10:48:33 Necessity don't have the authority to negotiate this

10:48:35 agreement.




10:48:35 They are not one of the -- they don't control the entire

10:48:38 development agreement.

10:48:40 Of the equation.

10:48:42 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Mr. Territo, that's exactly what we are

10:48:45 doing here today.

10:48:52 We are trying to move the first reading for two weeks.

10:48:56 Is that what the motion is?

10:48:57 >> Let me explain.

10:48:58 Now it's complicated.

10:48:59 I am trying to not make it more complicated.

10:49:01 When do you a development agreement, there's a requirement,

10:49:04 when you do a chapter 163 development agreement, what the

10:49:07 chapter 163 development agreement gives the developer beyond

10:49:10 what you would normally do with a regular development

10:49:12 agreement, it locks in place all of the regulations that

10:49:16 existed at that particular time.

10:49:18 So the city's regulations from six years ago would be the

10:49:22 ones we move forward with.

10:49:23 So in order to take that right away from them, the statute

10:49:27 requires you to do the same process to get the development

10:49:30 agreement which requires two public hearings two weeks apart

10:49:33 with advertising in the newspaper, contacting property

10:49:35 owners.

10:49:36 To revoke that you follow the same process.

10:49:38 You have two public hearings to give the developer, the city




10:49:42 and any other interested parties or the public an

10:49:44 opportunity to vent and come out and tell you what they want

10:49:49 you to hear.

10:49:49 It is the second public hearing that you have where action

10:49:52 is necessary if you want to take that position.

10:49:56 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Are we in the first public hearing?

10:49:59 >>SAL TERRITO: Yes, you are.

10:50:00 >> And the purpose of the first public hearing is to do what

10:50:05 we are doing right now asking the questions, getting the

10:50:07 answers from legal that we need on both sides.

10:50:10 So I'm trying to understand why are we -- delay this.

10:50:15 >> Because the statute requires you to go through if two

10:50:17 public hearings.

10:50:18 >> I know.

10:50:19 The motion to delay for two weeks.

10:50:23 Oh, there is no motion.

10:50:25 Okay.

10:50:25 I'm sorry.

10:50:26 Then --

10:50:27 >>SAL TERRITO: You will be come back on the 16th

10:50:29 because the statute requires you to come back.

10:50:31 If you come back on the 16th then you have more

10:50:33 flexibility on what action you wish to take at that

10:50:35 particular time.

10:50:36 And let me explain the other question.




10:50:39 Mr. Suarez, if we come back on the 16th, that would be

10:50:45 the document prepared for you saying if they don't need the

10:50:48 period which is 120 days, we are running them

10:50:51 simultaneously, the statute requires you to have 200

10:50:54 hearings for revocation.

10:50:55 The agreement we had with the developer gave them 120 days

10:50:58 to cure any impediments.

10:51:01 That is running concurrently.

10:51:04 Actually, you would take, assuming you want to do this,

10:51:06 would be moving to revoke the development agreement,

10:51:09 contingent upon the fact that they could not fix or cure

10:51:13 within that 120-day period of time.

10:51:16 Got provisions in here, it is not improper delegation.

10:51:21 What you would be doing is saying we are authorizing the

10:51:23 administration to revoke this at the end of the 120-day

10:51:26 period, assuming they don't meet the requirements which

10:51:30 would probably be very difficult to meet.

10:51:32 >> Mr. Harden, do you have anything to say to us?

10:51:38 Thank you, because I thought I saw you get up.

10:51:41 >> You have been very patient and kind and Mr. Harden has

10:51:45 been very grateful as long as all the partners.

10:51:48 >> Let us just clarify three of the last points.

10:51:51 Number one, the 70-some acres, 77-some acres, it's always

10:51:59 about 20 owners.

10:52:00 There are three or four development interests some of whom




10:52:03 are in bankruptcy.

10:52:04 If we salvage the baby and not throw the baby out with the

10:52:08 bath water, there would be 19 other owners.

10:52:11 It's 77 acres.

10:52:13 There's a lost owners all over the community, and those 20

10:52:16 owners would have a chance to come and say please salvage

10:52:18 this and please let's bring current over these six years

10:52:22 this part of it, because it's not working or whatever, it's

10:52:26 not working or maybe these bankruptcies have created an

10:52:28 ability and there's consequences of those, but those folks

10:52:32 who are involved and were involved and still may be

10:52:35 involved, they happen to have their trustee in bankruptcy

10:52:37 come to the meeting if they choose to and say, no, please

10:52:39 salvage this and this and this, and please let's find that

10:52:42 this and this and this are not working, are impeding us

10:52:45 getting on with the life of this community.

10:52:49 Thirdly, with respect to the financing, there's always been

10:52:53 a pooling of talent of TIF, CDD, community development

10:53:00 districts, pooling of our future tax revenues in the TIF and

10:53:05 CDD and joint financing, which means if we do better

10:53:08 together -- in fact, the only way we are going to do

10:53:08 anything out there, because we are no happier with that lack

10:53:10 of activity, Councilman, than you are -- would be to pool

10:53:16 the 20 owners, the ones that are still waiting for something

10:53:19 to make this happen, salvage the parts that work, shape the




10:53:22 parts that don't, and get on with the life of this

10:53:24 community, including the shared financing.

10:53:27 And thank you for those excellent questions, Councilwoman

10:53:30 Capin.

10:53:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me just say this, if I may, at this

10:53:34 time.

10:53:36 Through no fault of no one, the petitioner, the city, or

10:53:40 anyone, these things came to what it is today.

10:53:43 There's a couple of words here, status quo isn't acceptable

10:53:47 here anymore.

10:53:48 Bankruptcy.

10:53:49 I, you, the city, the courts, have no control.

10:53:53 This may take five years, ten years.

10:53:55 The city has done everything they could to make this a

10:53:59 realization.

10:54:00 They started with, the city bought, bought the land, sold

10:54:06 the land, do whatever they have to do, way back.

10:54:08 This goes back really more than what -- this goes back to

10:54:12 two prior administrations.

10:54:14 And when you look at this false hopes only brings to the

10:54:21 mind and that's what we have, false hope, not on your part,

10:54:24 it not on your client's part but by the action that's

10:54:28 happened without the parties being involved themselves.

10:54:31 I would venture to say that today we have had more dialogue

10:54:33 than your clients have with the city the last 18 months.




10:54:36 >> They talked constantly.

10:54:39 7 a.m. before the last hearing.

10:54:42 >> And what accomplishment do you have?

10:54:43 None.

10:54:43 >> Attempt to have this agreement, the parts that work.

10:54:47 >> I attempt to comb my hair every morning.

10:54:49 It doesn't work.

10:54:50 But what I am trying to say is that we have to realize what

10:54:54 the facts are.

10:54:55 It's not your fault or the client's fault.

10:54:58 It's the client of the -- climate, the temperature of what

10:55:02 we have to face.

10:55:03 And if we continue with status quo, the city has built and

10:55:09 will continue to build the Riverwalk.

10:55:15 And its completion which would be Tampa Heights, had a great

10:55:18 promise.

10:55:18 That doesn't mean that the dream is dead, but the

10:55:21 realization of that dream within a certain time period is

10:55:24 somewhat dismissed, because it's not happening.

10:55:28 There were owners, there were companies that came in to

10:55:31 develop.

10:55:32 Two of them, I guess, in bankruptcy.

10:55:33 >> Yes, sir.

10:55:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would imagine by the set of evidence

10:55:36 that we have heard, your client came in, bought one of those




10:55:42 companies, I assume.

10:55:43 But I'm not a lawyer.

10:55:45 I would assume that he bought into the development agreement

10:55:47 that somebody else had signed.

10:55:49 I don't know if that's a fact or not.

10:55:50 I'm just assuming that's what happened.

10:55:54 >> He obtained --

10:55:57 >> The agreement development agreement was very specific

10:56:01 throughout the time.

10:56:02 That time has run out, as I understand it but what I have

10:56:05 heard this morning.

10:56:06 So what we are faced with is to have this hearing, without

10:56:10 taking any action, and in the second hearing.

10:56:14 Am I right, Mr. Territo?

10:56:16 Am I right, Mr. Shelby?

10:56:18 That's the text of this hearing?

10:56:20 So it's not for us to vote something up and down today, but

10:56:24 in accordance to the law -- and you all know the law, I

10:56:26 don't -- that this is a preliminary, and this hearing today

10:56:31 will do more for your client, and more for the city that

10:56:34 come to the table within the next two weeks, that if we were

10:56:38 to extend it for one day or two weeks because you say, well,

10:56:40 we get to that time, we'll ask for a compromise and come

10:56:45 together.

10:56:45 So I feel confident that the city, the neighborhood, and the




10:56:48 taxpayers are better served by us having this first hearing

10:56:52 like we are doing today, take no action, set the thing for

10:56:57 second hearing, an within those two weeks it is your job,

10:57:00 sir, and your boss' job, to get together with the city, and

10:57:05 Mr. McDonaugh and work out a possible solution so at the

10:57:09 second hearing it will be null and void, there will be none.

10:57:12 I have heard conflicting interest.

10:57:14 You are talking about building stress.

10:57:16 You are saying how can you build a street when that's

10:57:18 expired?

10:57:20 I mean, that's what I heard.

10:57:22 So I'm just saying, I agree with some of my colleagues today

10:57:26 that this should go to second hearing so you can have those

10:57:29 two weeks to work out these things.

10:57:32 Now Ms. Montelione.

10:57:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I never finished.

10:57:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to hold a five minute rule

10:57:42 from now on.

10:57:43 Go on.

10:57:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN: When you purchased the 12-acre, you

10:57:47 purchased it with all the encumbrances?

10:57:50 >> Yes, sir.

10:57:54 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Is that right?

10:57:54 And those encumbrances are to all of the property or just on

10:58:02 those 12 acres?




10:58:04 >> It's about 60 pages.

10:58:06 I gave you an extra copy.

10:58:08 It has about 50 or 60 different cost obligations and some of

10:58:12 those would affect it and some would not, a short answer,

10:58:16 Councilwoman.

10:58:17 There are about 60 major obligations and you have a copy

10:58:20 before you.

10:58:20 And some of those do in deed affect those 12 acres.

10:58:23 >> That's all I needed to ask.

10:58:27 Thank you.

10:58:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:58:30 Ms. Montelione.

10:58:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, sir.

10:58:33 Okay.

10:58:33 So we have a 77-acre property of which your client Mr.

10:58:37 Harden owns, and partners own 12 of those 77 acres.

10:58:44 This development agreement calls for the development of like

10:58:55 43.

10:58:56 The population estimated to occupy the project at its

10:59:00 completion was 4300 people.

10:59:05 1900 multifamily residential units, it talks about, of

10:59:10 course, the park, it talks about the trolley barn and

10:59:13 several other components.

10:59:15 So owning 12 acres of 77 to accomplish what it talks about

10:59:18 here in this development agreement is not possible, because




10:59:22 the development agreement talks about those 1900 units, some

10:59:29 affordable, talks about other spaces as well.

10:59:35 So here it is, 1900 multifamily units, 100,000 square feet

10:59:40 of commercial retail space, 100 boat slips and approximately

10:59:44 160,000 square feet of office space.

10:59:48 Improvements to the Waterworks Park, pumping station,

10:59:51 stormwater facilities, and all the infrastructure that goes

10:59:54 along with it.

10:59:55 So until your client and his partners obtain the other

11:00:02 acreage necessary to fulfill the plan for this property,

11:00:09 nothing is going to be able to be done.

11:00:13 So when other council members talk about, why haven't you

11:00:16 done this and why haven't you done that?

11:00:18 You can't do those things because you don't have control of

11:00:21 enough of the property to move forward with this plan that's

11:00:26 outlined in your development agreement.

11:00:27 That's how I understood.

11:00:29 >> That's a great question.

11:00:32 >> That's my understanding.

11:00:36 The park improvements, and, you know, we have gone ahead

11:00:42 with some of those, and Mr. McDonaugh, Mr. Territo, the

11:00:50 brownfield designation, has that been done, completed?

11:00:54 There is a requirement in section 5.12 brownfield

11:00:57 designation, the city shall consider designating and area,

11:01:03 located at Tampa armature works brownfield area.




11:01:08 Has that been done?

11:01:09 >> Brownfield rehabilitation agreement about seven years

11:01:13 ago.

11:01:14 >> So that requirement has been completed?

11:01:19 >> To my knowledge.

11:01:20 >> But that's about the only requirement that's been

11:01:22 completed by --

11:01:24 >>> Completed by the City of Tampa.

11:01:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Completed by the City of Tampa. So all

11:01:29 of the provisions that are outlined, that could go forward,

11:01:35 the only way they were completed was that the city completed

11:01:38 them.

11:01:38 The brownfield designation?

11:01:41 >> The completion of the water works, the extension of the

11:01:45 Riverwalk, they are being done by the City of Tampa.

11:01:47 >> I see Mr. Harden shaking his head.

11:01:51 Mr. Harden, I would really love to hear from you, because I

11:01:55 can see you just like exploding with something to say.

11:01:58 >> Bayshore Boulevard, Tampa, Florida 33611.

11:02:08 We do business as a company, LLC, and we control 36

11:02:17 different properties around town.

11:02:19 Some of those include Coleman's court on the west bank, the

11:02:24 Heights, projects that we really have a higher vision for,

11:02:31 apartment out in the suburbs.

11:02:35 We think it's a great project.




11:02:40 I think throws been -- I'm all for rules of order.

11:02:44 I don't know how this proceeding is supposed to go forward.

11:02:47 I can read the statute and the contract between the parties.

11:02:49 You know, 12.5 million, real property first positions and

11:03:00 second positions on the real property and the collateral,

11:03:03 separate 17-page collateral assignment of the collateral

11:03:06 agreement that were discussed today.

11:03:09 So clearly the development agreement is in default.

11:03:11 We have been pursuing it actively and we met with the city

11:03:14 at least a dozen times, been to my office as recently as

11:03:19 last week.

11:03:20 And so it's not through a lack of effort or not wanting to

11:03:25 work it out.

11:03:26 We have had stayed by the bankruptcy proceeding from

11:03:28 basically stepping forward and saying let's cure these

11:03:33 defaults.

11:03:33 So a red line iteration of the right-of-way closure

11:03:39 agreement that I transmitted to them a year ago.

11:03:42 So we want to see this thing go forward.

11:03:47 I think the confusion -- and we have all been in attendance,

11:03:53 I was fortunate to be invited by Mr. McDonaugh, to have some

11:04:00 private meetings with some of those individuals, and we

11:04:02 participated in that, what we see as the reason for not only

11:04:08 the Heights, but also on the west bank.

11:04:12 So I would point out that the development agreement is the




11:04:20 community redevelopment area, 77-acre development agreement,

11:04:23 public-private partnerships just like the ones we have seen

11:04:26 discussed and presented in all the panel discussions that

11:04:31 have been held as to what we need to do in these two areas.

11:04:34 So another point specifically about this development

11:04:42 agreement is that 70 to 80% of the infrastructure that was

11:04:44 necessary, there's a publicly maintained regional lift

11:04:50 station that sits on our private property.

11:04:52 So clearly the city had it there, historic, and it is

11:04:58 actually on private property and --

11:05:02 >> I hate to interrupt, but I was talking about the

11:05:05 brownfield application and the completion of that, and you

11:05:08 were shaking your head.

11:05:09 >> There are two brownfield applications anticipated by the

11:05:13 project.

11:05:14 Both of the applications.

11:05:15 It's more than just having the city vote on it.

11:05:17 You have to go through the --

11:05:21 >> Right.

11:05:21 >> They have both been approved and one of them was complied

11:05:24 and the other is pending compliance.

11:05:26 So the funds that we put into the project, the loan that we

11:05:32 now own put into the project, paid for the consulting

11:05:35 services, and, in fact, that was carried forward.

11:05:39 There's a mitigation plan done, the four-acre property has




11:05:44 not been complied with.

11:05:46 The 12.5-acre property that we hold fee title to has been

11:05:51 complied.

11:05:51 >> So there are two brown field applications.

11:05:57 One of them has been approved, gone through the process.

11:06:00 The other one is still penning?

11:06:01 >> Yes.

11:06:02 There were two --

11:06:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But the disconnect, Mr. McDonaugh says

11:06:08 that the city was the one who pursued the application and

11:06:11 gotten the brownfield designation, and you are saying that's

11:06:15 not correct, that your company has outlaid those funds to

11:06:19 move that brownfield application.

11:06:21 >> Understand we are the creditor.

11:06:23 We purchased the position of a commercial bank because this

11:06:26 is what they do.

11:06:29 So we are trying to get the project back together.

11:06:32 I have all the records for the project.

11:06:33 In fact, the previous developer works for me now.

11:06:40 She's a very competent person but it's hard to understanding

11:06:43 details of the project.

11:06:44 >> But it is true that until you get control of the other

11:06:46 acreage at 65 acres more or less, the project as described

11:06:55 in this development agreement cannot go forward.

11:06:58 >> Well, this is like a Chinese menu.




11:07:04 You put it on the properties to say 100 unit density go,

11:07:09 where the 35 unit density goes where restricted goes.

11:07:13 Those things are designated.

11:07:15 I am involved in several projects.

11:07:16 We are the master developer, portions of the property, not

11:07:20 all of it.

11:07:21 So that's not a -- from inception, disagreement with the

11:07:28 77-acre CRA, the boundaries of the development agreement

11:07:31 were synonymous with the 77-acre CRA, and there's always

11:07:36 been 20 planned owners within this project, and the majority

11:07:42 of the infrastructure required to be put in place, that the

11:07:49 public financing was supposed to pay for, the lift station,

11:07:52 attenuation, stormwater runs unfettered down the streets,

11:08:01 and into the river.

11:08:02 So all these elements were planned, and in fact for that

11:08:11 stuff to take place on our property.

11:08:13 >> One of the questions I think Mr. Reddick had, a time line

11:08:20 for this project to move forward substantially beyond what

11:08:25 the city has already done in the parks and the Riverwalk

11:08:30 could take years, I mean, because you are dealing with a

11:08:33 company who owns -- partners who own the other 65 somewhat

11:08:39 acres, individually some of them have to come out of

11:08:43 bankruptcy, some of the land owners you can deal with

11:08:46 directly, but until you control enough of the projects,

11:08:50 really there's not much going to be done.




11:08:52 So, I mean, that's my point.

11:08:54 >> My hands are tied by the bank.

11:08:57 >> Your hands are tied.

11:09:00 >> We are a creditor of all the parties in the bankruptcy.

11:09:03 >> So this is going take some time to emerge out the other

11:09:07 side, and there be a viable development as foreseen by this

11:09:12 development agreement and as approved in the PDA.

11:09:15 And I have got some other questions maybe for Mr. McDonaugh.

11:09:19 >> Could I make a statement again?

11:09:21 >> Yes.

11:09:21 >> We are very supportive of -- we offered to put the money

11:09:31 in if he needed it.

11:09:32 We would like to see them develop water works.

11:09:34 That's a great idea.

11:09:36 Then I think we don't need to rescind the development

11:09:38 agreement to make that happen.

11:09:39 I think there's a lot of work that's gone into this

11:09:42 agreement.

11:09:42 The framework of what we are all needing at the meetings,

11:09:48 and the best thing to do for the neighborhood, for the

11:09:50 interested parties would be to rework it.

11:09:53 >> Thank you very much.

11:09:58 Mr. McDonaugh, the Waterworks Park, the TECO trolley barn,

11:10:07 what's in jeopardy specifically with those two parcels of

11:10:11 those two buildings?




11:10:13 If this development, if it stays in place.

11:10:16 >> Okay.

11:10:20 Specifically, the water works building, in the development

11:10:24 agreement, if the developer did certain things, the city

11:10:31 would do other things in response.

11:10:32 The vacating of the roads and dedication of the roadways

11:10:35 then to the development would be put into the development.

11:10:37 The city owns certain vacant lots in that area.

11:10:41 They would be part of the development.

11:10:45 The developer was going to have ownership of the water works

11:10:48 building if they fulfilled all of their requirements.

11:10:52 >> Who?

11:10:53 >> The City of Tampa.

11:10:54 >> Okay.

11:10:55 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Mr. Harden has been asserting ownership or

11:11:01 control issues, because of being the master developer, and

11:11:05 one of the reasons that we feel that the dissolution of the

11:11:07 development agreement would be helpful is that then there

11:11:09 would no longer be claims made upon that, we could have a

11:11:13 much easier -- complete the transaction with Mr. Gonzmart

11:11:18 and get the restaurant completed.

11:11:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And that is to the last paragraph,

11:11:25 section 13.12, material default by the developer.

11:11:29 It's short. I'll read it to you.

11:11:30 In the event of a material default by the developer caused




11:11:34 by gross malfeasance, criminal conduct or termination of the

11:11:38 development agreement, which is what we are talking about

11:11:42 now, by virtue of such default, the city shall have the

11:11:43 right to acquire all property owned by the developer within

11:11:47 the CRA plan for fair market value as determined by the

11:11:51 appraisal process.

11:11:52 >>BOB McDONAUGH: This would be talking about buying their

11:11:57 land.

11:11:57 >> Right.

11:11:58 But termination of the development agreement allows the city

11:12:01 to go forward with that, correct?

11:12:03 >>BOB McDONAUGH: We already own it. The only way that the

11:12:06 developer gets ownership of the water works building is if

11:12:08 they went forward with the development and met all of the

11:12:11 agreements within the development.

11:12:14 The CDD is formed.

11:12:16 The extension -- the donation of land for the extension of

11:12:20 the Riverwalk, and some of the other obligations.

11:12:23 >> So it's after the developer owns those things and then is

11:12:27 in default that the city can go back and reacquire the

11:12:30 property?

11:12:31 Maybe somebody could explain that.

11:12:32 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.

11:12:34 That was put in there -- there were scandals going on at the

11:12:37 time and we wanted to make sure --




11:12:40 >> No!

11:12:41 >>SAL TERRITO: So that was put in as a default for very,

11:12:45 very bad misconduct or criminal behavior.

11:12:48 >> I was concerned because it said or termination of the

11:12:51 development agreement.

11:12:51 So if we terminate this development agreement, that

11:12:54 paragraph would then come into play.

11:12:57 >>SAL TERRITO: That was not the intention, I can tell you

11:12:59 that.

11:12:59 >> Whether or not it's there.

11:13:01 >>> I don't think the city is going to assert that part.

11:13:06 Really dealt with the determination because of those

11:13:08 factors, not in addition to that factor.

11:13:10 That was the intention.

11:13:11 Maybe it wasn't artfully as written as you would like to see

11:13:14 it written, but the idea would have been if any of those

11:13:17 three things happened, the agreement will be terminated, and

11:13:19 then the city could take those properties.

11:13:22 It wasn't a stand-alone decision that would terminate.

11:13:25 That wasn't the intention.

11:13:27 I don't think legally we could do that.

11:13:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That was a concern to me because I don't

11:13:33 want to the appear that if someone just reads this

11:13:36 paragraph, because it does say, or termination of the

11:13:38 development agreement, I don't want to the appear that we




11:13:40 are using the termination of this development agreement to

11:13:44 acquire control of this property.

11:13:46 And I understand that we currently have control of the

11:13:48 property, but I'm talking about --

11:13:50 >> This is including every property in the development, not

11:13:52 just that property.

11:13:55 That was not the intention to take those properties, because

11:13:57 we can't take those properties without paying for them.

11:14:00 >> That's a concern to me right there.

11:14:05 >>SAL TERRITO: I don't think the city is going to assert

11:14:09 it.

11:14:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The trolley barn is operating on

11:14:16 compromised site spaces somewhat.

11:14:20 I have attended a couple of things at the trolley barn.

11:14:23 We terminate this agreement, what happens to that building?

11:14:27 >> The trolley barn is one of the pieces of land that is

11:14:35 currently in bankruptcy.

11:14:36 So when that winds its way -- effectively, the building is

11:14:40 condemned and should not be having functions in there.

11:14:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Oh.

11:14:45 >>BOB McDONAUGH: We are having localities of ongoing

11:14:49 conversations between our code enforcement folks, employee

11:14:55 of the owner of the property.

11:14:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

11:15:01 Well, that's all the questions I have.




11:15:05 I mean, I do want to reiterate, I want something to happen

11:15:10 there.

11:15:10 I think all of us do.

11:15:12 We want to see Tampa Heights flourish.

11:15:16 The community, the 20 years that I have been involved in the

11:15:19 Tampa Heights neighborhood, they have always been a very

11:15:22 active group, and I do want to see something happen there in

11:15:29 a positive fashion.

11:15:30 And the Gonzmart family, by the city, by the Riverwalk, and

11:15:36 everyone working --

11:15:39 >>BOB McDONAUGH: That's the city administration's wishing

11:15:41 as well.

11:15:42 The idea is not to act as a an impediment but actually to

11:15:45 free things up so we can get finished because we are taking

11:15:48 positive steps.

11:15:48 >> Thank you for your patience.

11:15:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other council members at this time?

11:15:52 Ms. Capin?

11:15:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: If I could have five minutes.

11:15:59 Mr. Harden, you stated that you managed the Columbus court

11:16:03 apartments?

11:16:04 Do you own them?

11:16:10 >> We acquired the apartments about 90 days ago.

11:16:14 We don't manage them.

11:16:15 We subcontracted to a company, the seventh largest




11:16:23 affordable housing developer in the State of Florida.

11:16:25 >> You acquired them 90 days ago?

11:16:28 >> Yes, ma'am.

11:16:29 >> Okay, thank you.

11:16:30 >> We have been actively meeting to try to alleviate some of

11:16:33 the concerns. We met with law enforcement there yesterday.

11:16:35 >> I was there at 2 a.m.

11:16:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other council members?

11:16:45 Any further questions?

11:16:47 City want to wrap it up?

11:16:49 >>SAL TERRITO: Yes, sir.

11:16:53 We will have the second public meeting on August 16th at

11:16:56 9:30 in the morning in these chambers.

11:16:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

11:17:01 There's no action needed by this council.

11:17:03 Am I correct, counselor?

11:17:05 Hello?

11:17:06 >>SAL TERRITO: I apologize.

11:17:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Restate the motion, please.

11:17:15 >>SAL TERRITO: On August 16th, 2012 at 20th 10 a.m.

11:17:18 in these chambers we will have a second public hearing on

11:17:21 this issue.

11:17:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Again for the record no action needed by

11:17:24 this council at this time?

11:17:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A motion to close the public hearing.




11:17:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else want to speak?

11:17:29 I need a motion to close the public hearing.

11:17:31 >> So moved.

11:17:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Ms. Mulhern, seconded

11:17:35 by Mr. Reddick.

11:17:36 All in favor?

11:17:36 The public hearing is closed.

11:17:38 No action is needed as directed by legal staff.

11:17:42 We go to item 68.

11:17:44 I know that I got 65, but I promised the police department,

11:17:49 if they are still here -- hello?

11:18:09 68.

11:18:10 Yes, ma'am.

11:18:12 >> Good morning, council.

11:18:20 Tampa Police Department.

11:18:20 We are here today to discuss a resolution in reference to

11:18:24 the City of Tampa providing food for first responders during

11:18:28 the RNC.

11:18:33 In excess of $1 million.

11:18:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's item 68.

11:18:36 >> Yes.

11:18:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Questions by council members?

11:18:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have one question.

11:18:46 For this amount of money, what will be the duration?

11:18:49 Is this one week, or two weeks prior to the convention?




11:18:53 Or three days?

11:18:55 >> No, sir, it will be approximately seven days.

11:18:57 >> And that will include breakfast, lunch, dinner, something

11:19:03 like that?

11:19:04 >> Yes, sir.

11:19:05 24 hours a day.

11:19:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move the resolution.

11:19:10 >> Second.

11:19:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick on 68.

11:19:15 Second by Ms. Capin.

11:19:16 Further discussion?

11:19:18 All in favor?

11:19:20 Nay?

11:19:21 Motion passes unanimously. We go back to 65.

11:19:24 I'm sorry to go out of order but I wanted the police

11:19:26 department back at work.

11:19:27 >>JEAN DUNCAN: Jean Duncan, transportation.

11:19:41 I would like to give you AP additional packet to the report

11:19:46 you already have.

11:19:46 It got some additional graphics that I think might be

11:19:49 helpful for you to take a look at.

11:20:03 The transportation division was requested to take a look at

11:20:06 the intersection of Busch Boulevard and 12th street to

11:20:11 look at additional pedestrian improvements in consideration

11:20:14 of the spring hills community center, which has been our




11:20:20 recent activity and expectation of using this facility.

11:20:27 The Busch Boulevard is a State Road, and so the

11:20:30 transportation division coordinated with our local district

11:20:33 7 D.O.T. office to look at some possibilities for making

11:20:37 improvements at this location.

11:20:39 The district 7 office D.O.T. has been extremely supportive

11:20:43 and helpful, and they have come up with a concept which

11:20:48 would allow for improvement to add additional attention to

11:20:55 that intersection.

11:21:01 In your report that I mentioned, at the back of the report

11:21:05 are some visuals.

11:21:07 Basically, the department is proposing to put a crosswalk at

11:21:11 this location.

11:21:14 They are also proposing some denial signage with a

11:21:18 pedestrian flasher.

11:21:19 The flasher would be activated when a pedestrian walks

11:21:22 across the street.

11:21:23 And we feel this is a safety feature in that it won't be

11:21:29 actuated all the time.

11:21:30 So sometimes if you have something flashing constantly the

11:21:33 driver, especially drivers in the area frequently get used

11:21:36 to that and they don't pay attention to it.

11:21:39 So the flasher would go on when a pedestrian walks across

11:21:41 the street.

11:21:43 As you can see from your visual, there will be a flasher




11:21:46 located in the median and also cantilevered over the street

11:21:54 to give more attention.

11:21:55 Because this is an unusual situation in that Busch Boulevard

11:21:59 is a six lane road, our local D.O.T. is having to get an

11:22:02 approval from the central office in Tallahassee.

11:22:06 So at this point in time, they are waiting for that

11:22:09 approval.

11:22:10 They have submitted a request.

11:22:12 We are hopeful they will get a positive back from

11:22:15 Tallahassee.

11:22:17 And once that comes down, D.O.T. will move forward with

11:22:21 seeking any additional right-of-way that might be necessary,

11:22:24 and it's a very tight right-of-way situation, and they would

11:22:29 proceed forward with whatever arrangements need to be made

11:22:33 for the placement of the cantilever structure and then go

11:22:34 forward with construction.

11:22:40 So we are hopeful to get a positive approval from central

11:22:42 office and we can proceed forward with this implementation

11:22:46 for this location.

11:22:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

11:22:50 Any questions by council members?

11:22:54 Ms. Capin?

11:22:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The flasher is cantilevered over the road,

11:23:05 because if you noticed, the stop light, the go light, I

11:23:05 don't know how many feet from that crosswalk and when -- I




11:23:11 was just on the road Monday there, you know, I can just see

11:23:15 them whizzing on down.

11:23:18 >>JEAN DUNCAN: Yes, it will be coordinated with the nearest

11:23:22 traffic signal at the location.

11:23:25 At that location.

11:23:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That was my concern.

11:23:29 Thank you.

11:23:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I just really liked the last rendering

11:23:36 in this packet you gave us, because they are really nice,

11:23:41 pretty trees along the sidewalk that I don't believe exist

11:23:45 today.

11:23:48 And part of what we have been doing with the division plan

11:23:57 for the university square and Terrace Park neighborhood is

11:24:00 asking residents, the effort by the Planning Commission,

11:24:07 that what they would like to see -- and I know that the

11:24:13 partners of the innovation aligns would be very pleased with

11:24:17 enhancements to the streetscapes.

11:24:19 So are those tree landscaping improvements part of this

11:24:23 sidewalk and pedestrian plan?

11:24:25 >> No.

11:24:26 I apologize.

11:24:27 This is just a representative visual to show how the traffic

11:24:32 features will be placed at the location.

11:24:34 I wasn't trying to give an exaggeration of what's out there

11:24:38 today.




11:24:38 >> Well, maybe we can work on that between now and the time

11:24:44 that the construction process might begin, because I would

11:24:47 like to see some beautification of that part of the roadway.

11:24:57 That neighborhood really has an industrial, very commercial

11:25:00 feel, but it is very high density residential one block off

11:25:08 of Busch Boulevard.

11:25:11 So I would love to see some of this come to fruition.

11:25:16 Let me know how I can help when you get to that.

11:25:18 >> We would be glad to have that conversation.

11:25:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

11:25:25 I think it's a wonderful improvement.

11:25:27 I can't tell you, traversing that section of road to and

11:25:30 from work every day for a number of years.

11:25:33 I have sadly seen several fatal and near fatal accidents at

11:25:39 that stretch of roadway.

11:25:41 So it's an enhancement that is long overdue.

11:25:45 Thank you.

11:25:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:25:47 Appreciate it.

11:25:49 Item 66.

11:25:50 Mr. Bob McDonaugh.

11:25:52 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Economic development.

11:25:57 After council's direction, I met with the city Parks

11:26:00 Department.

11:26:02 I met with the friends of Kiley Park.




11:26:05 I met with the downtown partnership's public realm group and

11:26:10 collected information from all three.

11:26:12 The Parks Department is going to come out with a couple of

11:26:16 variations, some ideas, and I will take them back to the

11:26:19 various groups and have them look at it and see if I can't

11:26:23 get a consensus and approval and come back to City Council

11:26:25 with a plan.

11:26:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any on the comments by council members?

11:26:30 Thank you very much.

11:26:31 I appreciate it.

11:26:32 Item number 67.

11:26:35 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:26:50 This was already continued.

11:26:51 My request was continued till September 27th.

11:26:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: September 22nd.

11:26:57 I believe that was part of your approval.

11:27:00 >> All right.

11:27:02 We passed this addendum so that's already done and ordered.

11:27:06 Item 69.

11:27:07 >> Mike HERR, administrator, public works and utility

11:27:26 services.

11:27:28 We have two items for your consideration this morning.

11:27:29 They are companion items.

11:27:31 Item 69 is the first item.

11:27:35 This is a resolution authorizing amendment number 26 to the




11:27:39 agreement between the City of Tampa and CH2M Hill

11:27:45 constructers incorporated in the amount of 6,069,745 for

11:27:52 design build services relating to the capital improvement

11:27:54 project, the duck pond outfall improvements and the donut

11:28:01 pond pump station, authorizing the mayor to execute the task

11:28:07 order on behalf of the City of Tampa.

11:28:11 I'm sure most of you are familiar with this project.

11:28:14 As the VENDEE of the north Tampa area and the remaining

11:28:19 component of this project that needs to be constructed

11:28:23 because the force main is already installed, and this

11:28:26 project will take probably about 15 months.

11:28:32 And we are looking forward to moving forward.

11:28:33 We ask for your consideration of this item this morning.

11:28:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:28:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Are we discussing 68 or 69?

11:28:42 Oh, we passed 68.

11:28:43 I'm sorry.

11:28:44 I was out of the room.

11:28:48 I have a copy of the public works news lent letter that

11:28:53 shows the design of the pumping station.

11:28:56 Excellent job.

11:28:59 For a utilitarian building, it looks just like a house.

11:29:03 It will be a nice asset to that community.

11:29:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:29:08 >>BOB McDONAUGH: Item 70, we are asking the board to




11:29:13 approve this resolution making the appropriate changes in

11:29:16 the budget for the City of Tampa for fiscal year ending

11:29:19 September 30, 2012, asking approval to transfer, reallocate

11:29:23 and appropriate 1,567,168 in the storm grant fund, 2:849,478

11:29:37 in the utility tax fund and 213,099 in the debt service

11:29:42 funds to be able to construct the pumping station.

11:29:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me just have somebody move that

11:29:47 resolution 69.

11:29:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would like to move number 69.

11:29:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Seconded by Mrs. Mulhern on of the.

11:29:55 All in favor?

11:29:56 The ayes have it.

11:30:02 Item 70.

11:30:03 >> I moved item 69.

11:30:09 My apologies.

11:30:10 Item 70 is a resolution making certain changes in the budget

11:30:14 in the City of Tampa for fiscal year ending September 30,

11:30:17 2012, approving the transfer reallocation and appropriation

11:30:22 of 1,567,168, and stormwater grant fund 2,849,478 in the

11:30:33 utility tax fund and 2,133,099 in the debt service funds to

11:30:39 be able to pay for the donut pond pumping station project.

11:30:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I need a motion.

11:30:47 >> Move the resolution.

11:30:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez, seconded by Mrs.

11:30:53 Montelione.




11:30:53 All in favor?

11:30:54 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:30:56 Thank you very much.

11:31:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

11:31:04 10:00, quasi-judicial.

11:31:06 That's 71.

11:31:13 I need to open that hearing.

11:31:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Move to open.

11:31:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.

11:31:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All in favor?

11:31:20 Opposed?

11:31:20 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:31:23 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.

11:31:25 The agent is here.

11:31:26 This is a continued public hearing for the McDonald's at

11:31:29 the 501 east Martin Luther King Boulevard.

11:31:35 The agent has informed me that they are going to withdraw

11:31:38 the waiver related to the signage on the property.

11:31:44 I have got the list of additional changes to the site plan

11:31:48 that Ms. Feeley handed out to council at the July 26th

11:31:52 hearing.

11:31:53 So these changes will still need to be made between second

11:31:57 reading.

11:32:00 The agent is here to clarify any position related to the

11:32:04 signage.




11:32:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Will that person come up?

11:32:07 Mr. Suarez?

11:32:12 This is a quasi-

11:32:13 You have to be sworn in.

11:32:14 (Oath administered by Clerk)

11:32:18 >> Here for McDonald.

11:32:30 This is a follow-up to our meeting last week of which

11:32:34 McDonald's is planning to renovate the location at 501

11:32:39 east Martin Luther King.

11:32:43 One of the things that came up is that we did have a waiver

11:32:47 on the signage, and we have agreed to withdraw that waiver.

11:32:52 So that would leave us really with the waivers that allow

11:32:57 the -- they were very minor.

11:33:01 They were basically to change a drive aisle width instead of

11:33:06 22 feet to 15.7 feet.

11:33:14 This is the location.

11:33:15 They are refurbishing the building as a double

11:33:19 drive-through.

11:33:19 The waivers that remain reflect existing conditions with the

11:33:23 exception of one, and that would be if we use the community

11:33:30 center, one of the waivers would be for the setback on that

11:33:33 building.

11:33:35 And we agreed to the note that the landscaping in that area,

11:33:39 would remain until a building permit was pulled, and that

11:33:42 was absolutely going to happen.




11:33:44 And I'm happy to go through any other detail you may like,

11:33:47 or just wanted to confirm we are withdrawing the signage.

11:33:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any questions by council members?

11:33:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: When we last met, you mention add revision

11:34:06 sheet.

11:34:06 Have you reached out to, as indicate towed last time, to the

11:34:10 Housing Authority, or the residential in Robles Park?

11:34:16 >>> No, sir.

11:34:16 I did note the recommendations of doing that, and that will

11:34:18 be passed on to the people that are doing the research for

11:34:21 the community center, which they are undertaking quite a bit

11:34:29 of the study.

11:34:30 So that has not happened since last Thursday.

11:34:33 But it has been noted to leadership so they know that that

11:34:36 is of special importance for that to be done.

11:34:38 >> Okay.

11:34:40 Thank you.

11:34:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I wasn't here for the hearings.

11:34:46 I apologize.

11:34:47 Dy watch the proceedings on video.

11:34:49 >> It's a different blue dress.

11:34:54 >> I'm sorry?

11:34:56 >> It a different blue dress.

11:34:57 >> It's the same necklace.

11:35:04 That's funny.




11:35:08 Just go over the sign issue one more time for me, because I

11:35:12 know my colleague Mr. Cohen had some questions about the

11:35:15 sign, and there was quite a bit of discussion about that

11:35:18 sign, and I think later on we will be discussing another

11:35:23 sign.

11:35:23 So it says to allow for the retention of the existing free

11:35:29 standing sign with a height of 35 feet, which is an increase

11:35:33 of 15 feet over sign code requirement of 20-foot maximum

11:35:38 height.

11:35:39 And the existing area of -- upside down -- of 100 per square

11:35:46 foot sign pace, an increase of 50 square feet of copy area

11:35:49 per sign code requirement.

11:35:51 So you are looking to go 15 feet over and 50 square feet

11:35:58 larger than what is currently written in the code.

11:36:00 >> The sign -- this is the sign.

11:36:07 We had asked that it be made part of the PD and we have

11:36:11 withdrawn that request.

11:36:19 It is not the one.

11:36:25 There's another one.

11:36:33 That is the one condition that will be stricken from the

11:36:35 site plan.

11:36:38 They are withdrawing their request for the waiver related to

11:36:40 the signage.

11:36:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: (off microphone) so this strikes item

11:36:47 number 2?




11:36:49 >> Correct.

11:36:51 The item in its entirety we are withdrawing.

11:36:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: (off microphone).

11:36:57 >> That's correct.

11:36:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry.

11:37:02 So 1, 3 and 4 are the waivers that will still be requested.

11:37:08 All right.

11:37:09 Thank you very much.

11:37:09 That clears it up to mer.

11:37:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I was questioning item number 2 because I

11:37:14 know that not only Mr. Cohen but myself, because we had this

11:37:19 discussion about the signs.

11:37:21 So the request for the PD has been to include it in the PD

11:37:28 has been removed.

11:37:29 It goes back to what we have as far as -- if the sign were

11:37:40 to come down, it have oh to come back.

11:37:44 It would have to be rebuilt under the specifications that we

11:37:47 have in place now.

11:37:50 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.

11:37:50 The existing sign will remain, be considered a nonconforming

11:37:56 sign and treated as such is.

11:37:57 So any changes, they can maintain it, but any major changes

11:38:02 would require it to be compliant with current code.

11:38:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

11:38:08 That's -- thank you.




11:38:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other questions by council members?

11:38:12 Thank you very much.

11:38:13 Anyone in the audience care to speak on this hearing?

11:38:20 Item 71.

11:38:21 I have a motion to close by Mr. Suarez, second dollars by

11:38:25 Mrs. Capin.

11:38:26 Further discussion by council members?

11:38:27 All in favor?

11:38:28 Opposed?

11:38:28 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:38:30 Mr. Suarez, would you kindly take this ordinance?

11:38:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move an ordinance for first reading

11:38:36 consideration, ordinance rezoning property in the general

11:38:38 vicinity of 501 east Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and

11:38:42 391 is and 39134 north Central Avenue in the city of Tampa,

11:38:46 Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from

11:38:49 zoning district classifications CG commercial general and CN

11:38:53 commercial neighborhood to PD planned development,

11:38:56 restaurant with drive-in window and community center,

11:38:59 recreation facility, private, providing an effective date.

11:39:02 And including the revision sheet as included by land use

11:39:07 department minus number 2 concerning the sign.

11:39:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, a second

11:39:15 by Ms. Montelione.

11:39:17 Discussion by council members?




11:39:19 All in favor of the motion?

11:39:21 Opposed?

11:39:22 Motion passes unanimously.

11:39:23 Thank you very much for attending.

11:39:25 >>THE CLERK: The second reading of the ordinance will be

11:39:28 held August 16th at 9:30 a.m.

11:39:30 >> Need to open 72 and 73.

11:39:33 >> So moved.

11:39:36 >> I have a motion to open 72 and 73, seconded by Mrs.

11:39:40 Montelione.

11:39:41 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:39:44 I think you were sworn in.

11:39:45 >> I didn't realize it was a separate hearing when I got up.

11:39:50 >> I saw you.

11:39:52 >> Eric Cotton, Land Development Coordination, a continued

11:39:58 public hearing from two weeks ago regarding a request for

11:40:01 nonconforming sign.

11:40:02 To summarize very quickly on Fowler and 15th street, the

11:40:06 request is to increase the height of the sign from 20 feet

11:40:10 to 23 feet, increase the square footage from 50 square feet

11:40:14 to 170 square feet and reduce the front yard setback from 15

11:40:21 feet to 5 feet.

11:40:22 Two weeks ago it was continued after the question arose

11:40:25 whether or not the question would be placed on the sign

11:40:27 itself, depending on a vote of council.




11:40:32 Julia is here to answer any questions regarding the question

11:40:35 comes up whether or not you could put a condition on the

11:40:37 sign itself, that once you made it conforming to be

11:40:41 destroyed, it would have to meet today's current sign code.

11:40:47 Julia can answer any questions as to that.

11:40:51 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:40:53 This is an issue that has come up several times as it

11:40:56 relates to signs which are nonconforming which are

11:40:59 requesting variances so that they can become conforming

11:41:02 signs.

11:41:02 When you look at any kind of variance, you are looking at

11:41:05 whether or not there's a hardship that exists that runs with

11:41:08 the land.

11:41:09 Variances run with the land.

11:41:11 It changes the nature of the requirements for that land.

11:41:16 And I have opined on this issue before.

11:41:18 You can't place a condition on a variance which has like a

11:41:21 time frame associated with it, or if the sign comes down,

11:41:25 and then you have to come into compliance with new codes.

11:41:28 That is against the entire nature of what a variance is

11:41:31 intended to do which is to recognize certain hardships as it

11:41:35 relates to a parcel of property.

11:41:37 In addition you are talking about the sign code and making a

11:41:40 sign conforming the way our code is set up, you are either a

11:41:43 nonconforming sign, a sign that doesn't meet our current




11:41:48 code standards, or you are conform sign.

11:41:51 You become conform with your variance.

11:41:53 You put a condition on that which has a time frame

11:41:56 associated with it or if you are going to come down, you are

11:41:58 really not creating a conforming sign.

11:42:01 It just a nonconforming sign with a variance so I don't

11:42:03 think it would meet either one of those conditions.

11:42:06 And as I have stated in other situations like this, I don't

11:42:09 believe that's a legally enforceable condition to place on a

11:42:11 variance for a sign.

11:42:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Shelby?

11:42:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:42:17 So, therefore, council, under your code as it's presently

11:42:23 written, the only way that somebody can put in an electronic

11:42:28 sign is one of two ways.

11:42:30 Number one is to come into conformance with all the current

11:42:33 standards of your sign code, or, two, pursuant to your code

11:42:36 section 17.5-74, demonstrate practical difficulties or

11:42:42 unnecessary hardships and meet certain criteria and

11:42:48 therefore be grant add variance.

11:42:50 And again I will put this into the record and I will pass

11:42:52 out for you those hardship criteria.

11:42:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:42:58 Mr. Press man.

11:42:59 >> Todd Pressman: I appreciate your attention on this




11:43:06 today.

11:43:06 Just a real quick orientation.

11:43:19 The site is Fowler Avenue here.

11:43:21 This is a site plan of the site.

11:43:23 The large structure.

11:43:24 A site that's been under duress.

11:43:28 It's been dilapidated.

11:43:30 There's a lot of funds put into it to bring it up to a very

11:43:34 nice level today.

11:43:34 And this application is for one of the new tenants.

11:43:38 And this is Fowler Avenue here.

11:43:41 Sign locations located here.

11:43:43 You can see this large area.

11:43:45 It used to be a student teacher facility of some form.

11:43:48 What's proposed, what's proposed is this is an existing

11:43:55 sign.

11:43:56 All that's being sought today, the existing face that you

11:44:08 see here is proposed to be replaced with a digital sign.

11:44:11 So as we understand the issue -- and I'll talk about what

11:44:17 your fine legal folks have told you -- what's requested here

11:44:20 is not one square inch difference than what has been there

11:44:24 and what is there now.

11:44:24 The footprint remains exactly the same.

11:44:27 What I do want to make you aware of on the variance, I do

11:44:31 believe we meet the variance criteria.




11:44:36 If you look at the aerial, you will see that the site

11:44:43 located here, although this is a very far away aerial, these

11:44:49 buildings are quite a distance from Fowler compared to all

11:44:51 the way up Fowler and all the way down Fowler.

11:44:54 In looking at the site plan, it becomes a little more

11:44:57 evident that that distance is about 220 feet.

11:45:02 So this one particular property is stuck in a very, very

11:45:06 deep pocket where they have very limited use of the typical

11:45:13 wall signs that everyone else has.

11:45:15 It has very great difficulty compared to everyone else on

11:45:19 Fowler as I show you on the aerial to have decent visibility

11:45:26 on Fowler as everyone else.

11:45:28 Being a big user of this nature there's a lot of people who

11:45:32 would be coming to the site on a repeated basis -- not a

11:45:37 repeated basis but will draw a large number of people and

11:45:39 it's not just a small business.

11:45:41 It's going to be generating a lot of people, and it's going

11:45:43 to multiply the need for visibility on that sign.

11:45:47 So we do feel that there clearly, as I showed you, there's a

11:45:53 unique condition here which does strike at visibility of the

11:45:56 site.

11:45:57 What proposed in signage today is aligned with what everyone

11:46:02 else has out there.

11:46:04 In a different vein -- and I talked to Mr. Shelby and I

11:46:07 talked to Kathy in, just about a month and a half you are




11:46:12 going to have an orphaned changes come to you that will

11:46:16 basically allow this.

11:46:17 So what I propose to you, I feel we meet the variance

11:46:20 criteria, but at the same time you have approved a couple of

11:46:22 these for me, you have approved -- not for me but you

11:46:25 approved a couple of these similar issues about a face

11:46:28 change on a sign.

11:46:30 I know there's been another approval so it's not out of the

11:46:35 ordinary that you approve these but the fact is the staff

11:46:38 recognizes it's an issue.

11:46:39 They are bringing it forward.

11:46:41 I this I the council members generally understand there's an

11:46:46 issue for pis and that's going to be changing soon so I

11:46:49 would characterize that for these gentlemen, and this is

11:46:52 their third business, trying to expand, trying to add more

11:46:55 locations and signage that's important to them, that this is

11:46:58 something that's going to be allowed by the city anyways.

11:47:01 The bottom line is they could go there today and they could

11:47:03 replace part of the sign and do plastic letters, but they

11:47:07 can't do digital because the code has not caught up to it.

11:47:10 And the code will be catching up to it soon.

11:47:11 So, Mr. Chairman, on the basis that we do believe that there

11:47:14 is a very solid support for the variance, and by the basis

11:47:18 of the changing structure, the code for the city, that this

11:47:21 is an issue that you can well support.




11:47:25 Thank you for your time.

11:47:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Shelby.

11:47:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just to clarify what Mr. Pressman said, I

11:47:31 did have an opportunity to speak to Ms. Coyle about changes

11:47:35 being proposed in the next cycle.

11:47:38 Just a reminder that they are in the process of drafting and

11:47:43 contemplating bringing something forward to council, but it

11:47:49 is ultimately council's decision, it is council's code, and

11:47:52 it is a policy decision that council will make once that

11:47:56 proposal is presented, whether council chooses to adopt it.

11:47:59 So to not characterize it as anything that will be brought

11:48:02 to council's consideration at the next cycle.

11:48:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think this is actually for Ms. Cole

11:48:11 because I do want to ask that question about the text

11:48:15 amendment.

11:48:18 The text amendment that will be come forward for council's

11:48:21 consideration says what?

11:48:25 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:48:27 I'm not completely sure what land development is bringing

11:48:32 forward in the July cycle, so it hasn't completely been

11:48:36 prevented.

11:48:36 I will say that there was a previous discussion on this

11:48:39 exact issue, which is our code does not allow you to put an

11:48:44 electronic message sign on a nonconforming sign.

11:48:48 And so I would think that one of the things that council




11:48:51 could consider is the opportunity to put an electronic sign

11:48:56 on a nonconforming sign, thereby not having so many

11:49:00 variances come forward to create conforming signs, to have

11:49:03 the benefit of electronic signs.

11:49:05 So that's what I would understand a potential code amendment

11:49:08 would say.

11:49:10 And I want to be clear there's not in front of you right

11:49:12 now.

11:49:12 >> I just wanted to familiarize myself, and before you

11:49:19 speak, Mr. Pressman, I do want to say that this is also an

11:49:23 area that is included in that vision plan for the parking,

11:49:29 university square, Copeland park neighborhood, and I read

11:49:32 through the transcript of the last council hearing, I

11:49:36 watched the video, I also watched the video of the VRB

11:49:39 hearing, and one of the things that I want to state is that

11:49:45 although there aren't a lot of people here from the

11:49:49 neighborhood, there have been a lot of people attending

11:49:52 those community meetings for the vision plan with the

11:49:56 Planning Commission.

11:49:57 And there have been surveys that are online, and passed out

11:50:05 on copy paper and a lot of what the discussion is is the

11:50:09 look of Busch and Fowler Avenue, and some of the photographs

11:50:13 you presented during both the VRB and the council session

11:50:18 hearings were obvious that the visual clutter of all of

11:50:22 those signs along that road is a problem.




11:50:27 And the visibility that you talk about being 220 feet off

11:50:31 the roadway, part of having your client's business be

11:50:39 visible is that there is so much clutter.

11:50:43 And our sign codes are now looking at a more -- what I want

11:50:53 to say, the scale of the signs are brought down to a more

11:50:59 pleasing level as far as beautification or an effort to

11:51:06 enhance the public's interaction with the roadway rather

11:51:10 than create even more and more clutter.

11:51:14 So in the transcript when you say there's not a lot of

11:51:19 people here in opposition to this being done, no, they are

11:51:22 not, it's a working class neighborhood and people don't

11:51:25 generally take off from work and come and talk to speak to

11:51:28 council about a sign issue.

11:51:29 So I just want to make that known.

11:51:33 They are speaking about that issue.

11:51:34 It's just not in this venue.

11:51:39 It's in a more vision process.

11:51:45 And that's my feeling about this.

11:51:48 I understand that you are 220 feet off the roadway.

11:51:53 The sign is very large.

11:51:56 And when you come down Fowler Avenue it's very visible.

11:52:00 And I hesitate to add clutter to an already cluttered

11:52:06 roadway by having a digital sign.

11:52:09 If this council does contemplate adding the ability for

11:52:13 digital signs to be placed on property, it would be at the




11:52:19 current code when that sign is constructed so it would be a

11:52:22 smaller scale, it wouldn't be a huge sign that exists there

11:52:29 today.

11:52:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other council members?

11:52:30 >> Councilwoman Montelione, I take your comments in great

11:52:40 regard.

11:52:40 What I suggest to you, I guess a little bit beauty is in the

11:52:44 eye of the beholder.

11:52:45 And I would just would suggest to you that having a very

11:52:48 large sign of this nature which was in very poor condition,

11:52:53 just starting to redo the site it was a derelict property.

11:52:58 >> It was the site of the DeBartolo school.

11:53:05 That sign, even the one you put on, has the DeBartolo school

11:53:08 on it and there's that shopping center right in front of

11:53:11 you.

11:53:11 I wouldn't characterize it as necessarily derelict.

11:53:14 >> Well, that may be extreme but it certainly was not in

11:53:17 good condition.

11:53:18 It was not in good condition.

11:53:19 But the fact is private investors are coming in and

11:53:22 improving it.

11:53:23 They are making tenants make it a viable property.

11:53:26 And a trade-off in terms of the variance, because its

11:53:30 locational and conditions along Fowler does make a big

11:53:36 difference.




11:53:36 And I think there is a difference if you look at the sign

11:53:38 that is there now versus what you see general on Fowler,

11:53:50 it's more responsible, it's very square, it's not different

11:53:55 colors, and as this council and city has allowed, a digital

11:53:58 sign can only change once every five minutes.

11:54:00 So in terms of -- I think your points are well made.

11:54:04 There does need to be improvement.

11:54:06 The people that bought this property have made big

11:54:10 improvement there and I hope that you will recognize that

11:54:12 there is again a -- there's no question it is independent,

11:54:16 it is singular and it does affect visibility of the site.

11:54:19 But this site, the improvements they are making will be a

11:54:23 great asset to the roadway.

11:54:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:54:30 Council's pleasure on this item number 72.

11:54:33 Anyone in the audience care to speak on this item 72?

11:54:36 I see no one.

11:54:37 Need a motion to -- this is a continued public hearing.

11:54:42 Need a motion to close.

11:54:44 I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, seconded by ... Ms.

11:54:49 Mulhern.

11:54:50 All in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye.

11:54:53 Opposed nay.

11:54:54 Eyes have it unanimously.

11:54:55 Council's pleasure?




11:54:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move to -- and I'm not sure if I am

11:55:00 saying this correctly but I move to uphold the decision of

11:55:02 the Variance Review Board, move for denial.

11:55:05 >> I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, I have a second by

11:55:09 Mrs. Mulhern.

11:55:10 Mr. Shelby.

11:55:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you would, the basis would be the

11:55:15 17.5-74, and the findings regarding the hardship criteria?

11:55:24 You don't have to be specific.

11:55:26 >> Yes.

11:55:29 I don't see that hardship is there for which would necessity

11:55:34 a digital sign.

11:55:39 And I'm sorry, I am not provided with the copy of the code

11:55:47 section --

11:55:50 >> 17.5-74.

11:55:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Application of variance?

11:56:02 >> Correct.

11:56:02 >> I have a second by Ms. Mulhern.

11:56:09 All in favor of that motion please signify by saying aye.

11:56:12 Opposed nay.

11:56:13 Motion passes 5-1.

11:56:24 Item number 73.

11:56:25 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Planning development.

11:56:33 The last remaining case from the restaurant reporting for

11:56:36 the annual reports, mama's kitchen, North Florida Avenue.




11:56:43 At the last hearing that we had, the owner was here at the

11:56:51 time, and then was leaving to go on a plane to Greece, and

11:56:55 they left a handwritten note which I turned in to council so

11:57:00 we gave a continuance.

11:57:01 It's my understanding at the last hearing we came back with

11:57:03 the other three cases that he's still out of the country.

11:57:07 It's my understanding he still is, but until August

11:57:09 17th.

11:57:10 I understand one of the staff members in our office spoke

11:57:13 with the manager.

11:57:14 I'm not sure if he's present.

11:57:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Is anyone here regarding item number 73

11:57:18 with mama's kitchen?

11:57:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It was my understanding from the staff

11:57:26 member that the manager made her aware that he was to be

11:57:30 here.

11:57:31 That aside, given that August 17th is the date that we

11:57:38 understand he will be back in the country.

11:57:41 So you have options at this point.

11:57:43 I guess you could continue it again until a later date.

11:57:58 For council it will be the 16th.

11:58:02 The 24th or something like that.

11:58:04 We don't meet the 24th.

11:58:07 We don't meet until September.

11:58:09 September 6th.




11:58:10 And I suggest that that be the last extension.

11:58:13 He can go out of the country.

11:58:14 He can go to the moon if he wants.

11:58:15 But --

11:58:16 >> It's my understanding per the letter that was handwritten

11:58:20 as well as the conversation that was related to me is that

11:58:25 the claim is that he didn't receive the original notice, and

11:58:28 was not aware that he had to do any filing, although he's

11:58:33 the only one that I'm aware of that has made the claim.

11:58:38 This location as reported in the past regularly, so I

11:58:42 don't --

11:58:43 >> What's the pleasure of the council?

11:58:46 We can go to September 6th.

11:58:48 >> Move to continue to September 6th.

11:58:50 >> Motion by Mr. Reddick.

11:58:51 Second by Mrs. Capin on a close vote with Mrs. Montelione to

11:58:55 continue to September 6th.

11:58:57 All in favor?

11:59:01 Time is at 10:00 in the morning.

11:59:03 Okay.

11:59:06 Information reports.

11:59:08 We go from left to right this time.

11:59:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

11:59:15 I have a couple of items.

11:59:19 I would request ten minutes on the August 16th, 2012




11:59:22 City Council agenda to present recommendations compiled by

11:59:26 the members of the advisory committee for the community

11:59:31 development block grant needs and recommendations for Mr.

11:59:35 Smelling Snelling to appear according to his memo to City

11:59:38 Council dated July 18th.

11:59:39 >> I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, seconded by Mr.

11:59:44 Suarez.

11:59:45 All in favor of that motion?

11:59:47 Opposed?

11:59:47 The ayes have it unanimously.

11:59:49 Yes, ma'am.

11:59:49 >> And I have another motion.

11:59:52 I request council's permission to use the city logo on

11:59:58 mailings in relation to the north Tampa vision plan and

12:00:03 being undertaken by the Planning Commission.

12:00:05 >> I'm wondering if there's a process that needs to be

12:00:11 followed.

12:00:24 Is there a deadline for this?

12:00:26 >> We are going to do the mailing next week.

12:00:27 This came up while I was out of up to that the Planning

12:00:29 Commission could not do the mailing themselves which is why

12:00:32 I was interested in the discussion of the budget because I'm

12:00:35 using my office budget to pay for the mailing.

12:00:46 >> There is a code proceed for how this process is followed

12:00:49 and I just don't want to be --




12:00:51 >> Prohibited from using your City Council --

12:00:54 >> It's a postcard.

12:00:55 >> They don't have the money to do it so I am using money

12:01:10 out of my budget for the neighborhood association.

12:01:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ms. Foxx-Knowles?

12:01:15 We were discussing this privately.

12:01:17 I just wonder if it's something that the City Council --

12:01:21 sending it out from your office?

12:01:23 >> Yes.

12:01:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Sending it from her office, paying for

12:01:28 the stamps.

12:01:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So I am not doing anything improper.

12:01:40 >> We have a motion from Mrs. Montelione.

12:01:43 Seconded?

12:01:45 Give me some help here.

12:01:46 >> What we are looking at, it can be done.

12:01:52 I second that.

12:01:53 >> Motion by Mrs. Montelione.

12:01:55 Second by Mrs. Capin.

12:01:57 All in favor?

12:01:57 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:01:58 >> Just one more thing.

12:02:03 We were discussing the Heights.

12:02:04 And I was hoping to say this before she left but she left

12:02:09 rather quickly.




12:02:10 She must have had another appointment.

12:02:11 But her sons, the article she mentioned was in the Tampa Bay

12:02:17 times Wednesday, July 25th, and I just want to recognize

12:02:21 that he really embodies this person that we talk about all

12:02:25 the time and the mayor talked about all the time of who we

12:02:29 want in our community, who we want to lure back to our

12:02:33 abundant they left, but Garrett Johnson became a champion

12:02:45 shot putter for Florida State University, a congressional

12:02:50 staffer.

12:02:51 So I hope he comes back to live in Tampa Heights.

12:02:54 Very soon.

12:02:55 And we would love to welcome him back and congratulate him

12:02:57 on his accomplishments.

12:03:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

12:03:00 Anything else?

12:03:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a couple of things.

12:03:06 I would like to ask that we get a staff report at our next

12:03:13 council meeting, regular council meeting, which is --

12:03:23 >>THE CLERK: August 16th.

12:03:24 >>MARY MULHERN: August 16th responding to -- and I am

12:03:29 going to submit these e-mails to the clerk, because they are

12:03:32 very detailed.

12:03:33 But responding to the questions brought today by Ms. Polyea

12:03:43 regarding landscaping on Bayshore and I would like the

12:03:45 specifics of her e-mail which I am submitting to be




12:03:48 answered.

12:03:49 And it's too long to add in here.

12:03:51 But I'll add a few things.

12:03:54 The fact that they are not native trees have been planted,

12:03:58 that the trees are not saltwater resistant, that we need

12:04:05 answers to the safety as far as view for pedestrians on the

12:04:10 Bayshore side, the waterside, and on the view of the drivers

12:04:19 on Bayshore going both ways.

12:04:21 Who is paying for the maintenance, who has paid for the

12:04:25 installation, where that money is coming from.

12:04:29 And specifically I would like to hear if indeed it's true

12:04:33 that our entire tree fund would be used.

12:04:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Ms. Mulhern.

12:04:42 I have a second by Ms. Montelione.

12:04:43 Further discussion by council members?

12:04:45 All in favor?

12:04:47 Opposed?

12:04:47 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:04:48 >>MARY MULHERN: And then I have been reading about in the

12:04:52 paper and kind of hearing through the grapevine about the

12:05:02 burns site, hotel and restaurant, the PD, I think before

12:05:11 anyone's here time, but on Howard Avenue, and happily they

12:05:16 are planning to go forward with a hotel development.

12:05:20 However, I have been hearing that the PD is being

12:05:26 administratively approved but there are some major changes




12:05:29 including the fact that a hotel which was going to have 75

12:05:32 rooms is now going to have 145 rooms, and the buffer that

12:05:46 was to be provided by town homes is no longer going to be

12:05:49 there, and I'm not sure of all the changes, so I would like

12:05:54 to ask for a staff report from Land Development Coordination

12:06:04 whether these are significant enough that this should be a

12:06:08 new PD.

12:06:09 >> Motion by Mrs. Mulhern, seconded by Mr. Reddick.

12:06:19 All in favor?

12:06:20 Opposed?

12:06:20 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:06:22 Anything else, Ms. Mulhern?

12:06:23 Thank you very much.

12:06:24 Mr. Reddick.

12:06:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

12:06:32 Many of us read or heard about the shooting that took place

12:06:39 at the apartments by TPD recently.

12:06:42 I had an opportunity to meet with the ownership of that

12:06:45 property to discuss conditions, and some of the concerns

12:06:48 that residents have expressed.

12:06:52 After meeting with the ownership, we reached an agreement on

12:06:58 self improvements and several conditions taking place, but

12:07:06 one of the conditions and one of the agreements that we met

12:07:09 and agreed upon is that we found out that the City of Tampa

12:07:13 has no recreational activity, any kind of partnership or




12:07:20 anything in that community for those residents.

12:07:23 And find out whether that's true.

12:07:29 The ownership agreed to build a park in that facility,

12:07:36 within the complex, and one of the conditions that they

12:07:42 wanted me to ask the city to see if they had property within

12:07:49 one or two or three blocks of that complex that they can

12:07:53 purchase at no cost and build a complete park for their

12:07:59 city, for their neighborhood, financially by the ownership

12:08:03 at no cost to the city at all.

12:08:07 Therefore, I'm asking the city real estate department, Bob

12:08:14 McDonaugh and his office to report back and provide a

12:08:17 written report on September 6th, a staff report at

12:08:23 10 a.m., of any available property in their community, that

12:08:26 the ownership can look at purchasing to build a park for

12:08:31 those who live in that complex and throughout the community.

12:08:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Reddick, I missed

12:08:38 the second.

12:08:39 Mrs. Montelione.

12:08:40 All in favor?

12:08:41 Opposed?

12:08:42 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:08:43 Anything else?

12:08:44 Thank you very much.

12:08:48 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Councilman Reddick, I understand what you

12:08:50 are saying there.




12:08:52 And this is going to be in reference to the August 16th

12:08:57 where Mr. Redner came before us to ask us not to waste our

12:09:04 time, but I beg to differ on this.

12:09:08 And maybe it's just different -- I did as I said last week

12:09:13 or recommended two weeks ago, I did ride with Tampa police

12:09:18 from 11:30 p.m. to after 4:00 a.m., and we stayed in the

12:09:25 historic West Tampa district.

12:09:27 What I would like to say is, yes, there are -- and that's

12:09:32 why I asked about the ownership of the Columbus court

12:09:35 apartments along the river there.

12:09:38 I was there on a call with the Tampa police, but the whole

12:09:42 area, and what I would like to maybe present is that to

12:09:46 continue a presentation at another time, if not on the

12:09:50 16th, there are other issues in this area that need to

12:09:57 be addressed and particularly on Main Street and in that old

12:10:00 West Tampa.

12:10:04 So that the community in West Tampa and the participants

12:10:07 that were here before us know and understand that the issues

12:10:13 that were brought up about development well-being and the

12:10:16 overall future of West Tampa will be discussed and will

12:10:20 continue to be addressed.

12:10:32 There are many issues there besides what we were going to

12:10:34 discuss on the 16th.

12:10:36 I witnessed them.

12:10:37 And I think they need to be -- I think they need to be




12:10:42 brought up if old West Tampa -- and I want to let the

12:10:46 community know that we are not just going to let it go.

12:10:50 I was there at 1:45 a.m.

12:10:53 There were over a thousand cars parked along that area.

12:11:02 There was a truck with a gigantic speaker.

12:11:05 The owners of establishments put speakers out on the

12:11:09 sidewalks.

12:11:10 Anyone that was trying to sleep anywhere near that vicinity

12:11:15 was not happening.

12:11:16 At 1:30 we got a call to come back.

12:11:18 There was a bottleneck on Main Street, and to clear the

12:11:21 road, and so the officer I was riding with was on Howard and

12:11:26 union, and she was directing traffic, that I would walk to

12:11:29 Main Street.

12:11:30 I got out of the car and walked to Main Street.

12:11:32 I was about half a block there, one block away, halfway down

12:11:36 the block, people came running toward me.

12:11:39 There must have been anywhere from 3 to 5,000 people along

12:11:43 the street there.

12:11:46 They came running toward me.

12:11:48 I thought something -- obviously they are running a way from

12:11:52 something.

12:11:52 And then I heard at least eight pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, and

12:11:59 I thought firecrackers.

12:12:02 And then I turned around, walked away, walked back down the




12:12:05 block around the corner, and the police officer was calling

12:12:08 me back to get in the car.

12:12:10 Those were gunshots.

12:12:11 It is not in the report because I asked for the report of

12:12:13 the gunshots.

12:12:15 It is not in the report because the police had already been

12:12:18 called out to direct traffic.

12:12:20 Therefore, they are already there, there's no other call.

12:12:25 I was told this is not an isolated incident.

12:12:31 I was also there the Saturday before at 2:00 in the morning

12:12:36 on my way home from the beach.

12:12:38 I witnessed an accident, and it took a little bit longer,

12:12:41 but I told my husband, let's drive by there.

12:12:44 And it was relatively calm on that Saturday.

12:12:46 At 2:00.

12:12:49 On Friday, there was a lot of commotion.

12:12:58 So I really felt for the neighborhood and their peace and

12:13:06 quiet, to live in peace and quiet.

12:13:08 I would like for us to continue to look at the gem that is

12:13:16 Main Street and old West Tampa, and maybe address some of

12:13:19 these issues with either parking, something that can help

12:13:24 these people.

12:13:25 >> Do you want to schedule a workshop on that?

12:13:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

12:13:33 That would be a workshop would be helpful, yes.




12:13:42 September 13th.

12:13:44 Is that a workshop?

12:13:47 >> CRA.

12:13:48 >> The 20th is a workshop session.

12:13:50 It looks pretty crowded.

12:13:52 Can we go to the 25th of October?

12:13:56 It's a long way off.

12:13:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: It is a long way off.

12:13:59 But you know what?

12:14:00 The issues that are there have been going on for years.

12:14:03 I just want to community to know that we are looking at it

12:14:06 and we are paying attention.

12:14:07 So October 25th I make a motion for a workshop on old

12:14:13 West Tampa and have the Tampa police and the code

12:14:18 enforcement here to help us with this workshop at 10 a.m.

12:14:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: I want to just state for the record, and

12:14:30 that is the 2,000 people that was there, they were putting

12:14:37 on a fund-raiser for the young man who got killed, in order

12:14:40 to raise money to bury him.

12:14:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

12:14:50 I have a motion for a workshop by Ms. Capin, seconded by

12:14:56 Mrs. Mulhern, I believe, on October 25th?

12:15:03 At 10:00 in the morning.

12:15:04 All in favor of that regarding the item that she brought up.

12:15:08 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.




12:15:11 Opposed nay.

12:15:11 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:15:13 Anything else, Ms. Capin?

12:15:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

12:15:15 On the overhead, I don't know if they can turn it on, I put

12:15:19 a poster there.

12:15:22 This is the Cuban thing, it is art, it is film, it is music,

12:15:30 but last night was the opening of the Cuban sandwich show

12:15:35 and it's been going on for 22 years with about a 10-year

12:15:40 hiatus and now it's been back for this about the third year.

12:15:44 Way want to say is I was asked at the opening last night,

12:15:47 and it whats brought to my attention by the owners of

12:15:52 Michelle on the go, which happened to be the people who won

12:15:56 the contest for the best sandwich, but what happened was,

12:16:01 you know I mentioned this before, that national geographic

12:16:04 travel is doing a story that will come out in the magazine

12:16:10 on N November on the resolution, the Tampa historic Cuban

12:16:13 sandwich.

12:16:14 Part of that article they contacted Michelle on the go, and

12:16:18 they sent a photographer, a photo crew, here and they wanted

12:16:28 to photograph the sandwich with the back drop of the city of

12:16:36 downtown.

12:16:36 From what I understand.

12:16:37 And I hope that this was all miscommunication.

12:16:41 It was denied by the downtown partnership and someone by the




12:16:47 name of Shawn.

12:16:51 But I hope it was miscommunication because the result was

12:16:53 they had to move -- they went to -- Lykes gave them

12:16:59 permission to photo which was about a two or three hour

12:17:03 photo shoot, to photo with the back drop of downtown from

12:17:06 Bayshore.

12:17:07 So they were not allowed in downtown according to them.

12:17:10 You know, this is again an international magazine that wants

12:17:13 to feature the uniqueness of our city and join in Tampa's

12:17:18 celebration of our original sandwich, and it cost zero

12:17:24 dollars to the city.

12:17:25 And they were denied being able.

12:17:29 We should be rolling out the red carpet.

12:17:31 I hope that this is just a communication -- so I want to

12:17:36 bring it up so that, you know, we don't -- this is a City

12:17:41 Council resolution.

12:17:42 We don't have a PR person.

12:17:45 The administration has a PR person.

12:17:48 So not one press release was sent out by myself or anyone

12:17:56 else.

12:17:57 This all happened organically.

12:17:59 And, again, I hope that it was a miscommunication.

12:18:04 But I want to bring that up.

12:18:07 The only other thing I have was that.

12:18:14 And that's it.




12:18:15 Thank you.

12:18:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

12:18:17 Mr. Suarez.

12:18:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have self motions to make.

12:18:23 Move that a resolution that would set a TEFRA public hearing

12:18:26 for August 16th, 2012 at 9:30 to give the City Council,

12:18:31 the public an opportunity for two bond issues that the city

12:18:35 has been requested to approve for the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer

12:18:41 center.

12:18:43 The resolution in your normal August 26th, 2012 doc

12:18:47 agenda.

12:18:48 >> I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mrs. Montelione.

12:18:50 >> I believe that was approved as part of the addendum.

12:18:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It was?

12:18:57 I apologize.

12:18:58 Next, I requested code enforcement appear before us on

12:19:04 August 16th during the same time frame in which they are

12:19:06 doing a report on robo call and on the volunteer program and

12:19:10 provide a status update regarding the program in VM Ybor for

12:19:16 vacant properties.

12:19:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Suarez, a second

12:19:20 by Mrs. Montelione.

12:19:21 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

12:19:24 Opposed nay.

12:19:25 The ayes have it unanimously.




12:19:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have three others.

12:19:28 I apologize.

12:19:29 I need a motion for commendation recognizing Clyde Hensley

12:19:35 and the Cuban delegations, good will for the sharing of

12:19:40 cultural ideas and celebration of diversity, presented at

12:19:43 the new arts gallery on August 4.

12:19:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Mrs. Montelione.

12:19:48 All in favor of the motion?

12:19:50 Opposed?

12:19:51 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:19:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Next is a motion for a commendation for the

12:19:59 arena twins, covers a half century career of record.

12:20:02 Hopefully their voice has changed since then.

12:20:05 They will be performing on Sunday, August 5th at the

12:20:08 Centro Asturiano.

12:20:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second by Ms. Capin.

12:20:14 All in favor?

12:20:15 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:20:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Last but not least commendation, ask for a

12:20:20 motion recognizing and thanking Sylvia Espanola for service

12:20:27 to the Hillsborough River interlocal planning board.

12:20:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez.

12:20:33 Seconded by Mrs. Montelione.

12:20:35 All in favor of the motion?

12:20:37 Opposed?




12:20:37 The ayes have it unanimously.

12:20:41 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I forgot one.

12:20:43 I knew there was something to announce.

12:20:44 I want everyone to know that Myles is in the house.

12:20:51 That's my grandson.

12:20:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may, I have three things that I

12:20:57 passed the gavel on to Ms. Mulhern.

12:20:59 Three things that have been troubling for a lot of us in the

12:21:04 whole city.

12:21:04 Vendors, code enforcement and land zoning.

12:21:08 Let me explain what they are.

12:21:09 We need a workshop.

12:21:10 And I am not going to go into September, October, November.

12:21:13 Let me tell you why.

12:21:14 We passed the vendor ordinance, and it's very lack enforced.

12:21:21 There are vendors whose permits have expired and they are

12:21:24 still in business I am told.

12:21:25 There are vendors who start with an 8 by 10 selling fruits

12:21:29 and vegetables and now have two semis on the property and

12:21:32 various tents combined 20 by 30 feet long in combination

12:21:37 thereof.

12:21:38 This is on private property.

12:21:40 And those were public properties they would not be allowed

12:21:46 but you can't do certain things.

12:21:48 That's got to be cleared up.




12:21:49 Land zoning has ordinances.

12:21:55 You cannot put a tent or building structure in a city park,

12:22:01 a city right-of-way.

12:22:02 But guess what you can do, in your own land you can do

12:22:05 whatever you want, put up a tent, leave it there for -- it

12:22:09 doesn't say how long, and it's all right.

12:22:11 It's acceptable.

12:22:12 And I'm not talking about the current situation.

12:22:14 That's why I say November.

12:22:17 Code enforcement doesn't have the ability unless they get

12:22:21 the okay and vote from land zoning to cite someone.

12:22:26 That should be changed.

12:22:30 To go in and what do what they do, back out and do another

12:22:36 case.

12:22:36 But not being able to do that it perpetuates the problem.

12:22:40 I have a 30-day permit will.

12:22:43 Code enforcement comes out and gives you a citing and you

12:22:45 have 30 days to fix that problem but guess what.

12:22:49 You only have 20 days left in your permit.

12:22:51 It doesn't make sense.

12:22:53 It senseless.

12:22:54 When you look at that and you look at code enforcement,

12:22:57 another thing we do, there's houses on the market, mainly in

12:23:01 my district, and in other districts; that by necessity all

12:23:06 of a sudden you have a residential house and all of a sudden




12:23:09 you have three apartments in the house.

12:23:12 But no one does anything.

12:23:14 They see them.

12:23:18 I don't know if they are told not to do anything, but once

12:23:20 that house is sold, they don't go after the previous owner,

12:23:24 they go after the current owner because you didn't do your

12:23:26 due diligence.

12:23:27 Well guess what, folks, we didn't do our due diligence

12:23:30 either because we haven't done anything in 20 years.

12:23:34 I just want to clear the air, where we are at.

12:23:37 We get inundated.

12:23:40 The calls we get at my office, I represent, the volume is

12:23:45 extremely large.

12:23:47 These are my main problems that I have to work with.

12:23:50 That's why I want a workshop so I can have code enforcement,

12:23:53 land zoning, the administration, the police department,

12:23:57 everyone that has to do with anything to do with vendors.

12:24:00 When you have a vendor, and you have the way we do the

12:24:04 process, it doesn't lend to the city to have any power to

12:24:08 say this is it, you violated.

12:24:10 It should be done with a contract with the land owner and

12:24:13 the vendor with the exclusion that you can't do so they can

12:24:15 be removed immediately, not 30 days.

12:24:19 Let's not make it into a code enforcement.

12:24:21 Let's make it into a contract where you say audio, Lupe,




12:24:27 bye-bye, you are gone.

12:24:28 It's about time that parts of this city that are inundated

12:24:30 with these operations are cleared out.

12:24:33 I will give you an example.

12:24:34 If you go down on Kirby you will see exactly what I am

12:24:39 telling you.

12:24:40 If you go down Armenia Avenue and Braddock you see exactly

12:24:43 what I am telling you.

12:24:44 If you go down Armenia Avenue, and I think it's chestnut or

12:24:50 union, you see what should be a small little 8 by 10 vendor

12:24:54 selling.

12:24:55 The other two are far beyond, and they are a commercial.

12:24:59 They do commercial things.

12:25:00 They don't pay any taxes.

12:25:01 The people are in competition with them in the neighborhood

12:25:04 and cannot compete, and we are just ruining their business

12:25:08 in a way.

12:25:10 But I like to set that in November, if I may so that we have

12:25:14 a workshop on this and give me a good date.

12:25:19 I have a motion and second.

12:25:22 Ms. Mulhern?

12:25:25 >> November 29th is the workshop.

12:25:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That will be a good one.

12:25:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 9:30?

12:25:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 9:30 is fine.




12:25:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Right after commendation, recommendation

12:25:40 at 9 a.m.

12:25:42 Is that acceptable?

12:25:43 >> 9 a.m.

12:25:44 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

12:25:45 Aye?

12:25:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I want to ask Mr. Reddick because I

12:25:58 believe this is his initial motion and I had amended the

12:26:01 motion in part on the August 16th agenda.

12:26:07 We have TPD, legal, code enforcement, planning development,

12:26:11 Hillsborough County health department coming to us with a

12:26:13 report on voices of freedom park.

12:26:16 That was -- Mr. Redner was here this morning on and said

12:26:20 that he had agreed and promised that the folks who are there

12:26:24 now -- I was just going to ask if you want to move to the

12:26:31 September.

12:26:31 >>FRANK REDDICK, no I am not going to move it.

12:26:34 >> That's a lot of people to bring here in August.

12:26:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm not pleased with his response.

12:26:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We go to general public comment.

12:26:43 Anyone in the audience care to address this council at this

12:26:46 time, all 500 of you?

12:26:49 >> Motion to receive and file.

12:26:50 >> I have a motion to receive and file by Mr. Reddick,

12:26:53 seconded by Mr. Suarez on a close vote with Ms. Mulhern.




12:26:56 All in five of the motion?

12:26:58 Opposed nay?

12:27:00 Any other new business to come before this council?

12:27:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I have to go get Miles, M-I-L-E-S, from the

12:27:09 airport so I have to have my hands on this other Miles

12:27:13 before I leave.

12:27:13 So I would like to hear from Myles.

12:27:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We stand adjourned.

12:27:22 (Meeting adjourned at 12:27 p.m.)

12:27:26



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.