Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council

Thursday, February 6, 2014

9:00 a.m. Session


This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete
accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of third
party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.

09:02:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: City Council is called to order.

09:02:35 Chair yields to Mr. Mike Suarez, The head, the chair of

09:02:41 Hartline.

09:02:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.

09:02:44 From one chair to another.

09:02:45 Thanks, chair.

09:02:46 It's my pleasure to introduce Shirley Foxx-Knowles, who will

09:02:50 do our invocation today.

09:02:53 Shirley Foxx-Knowles, of course, is our illustrious city

09:02:56 clerk.

09:02:56 She has done and impressed into this service many times

09:02:59 before.

09:02:59 She does wonderful invocations.

09:03:01 Please, everyone, rise and stay standing for the Pledge of

09:03:04 Allegiance.

09:03:05 Thank you.

09:03:06 >> Thank you and good morning.

09:03:07 Good morning, Council.

09:03:09 Let us pray.

09:03:10 Father, what a joy it is to praise you and to be here once

09:03:15 again, to give you the thanks for your grace and your mercy.

09:03:20 Thank you, father, for how you have blessed us.

09:03:23 You have been so good to us and we are truly thankful.

09:03:26 Thank you for the opportunity to be here at this moment in

09:03:30 time.

09:03:31 Bless our Council, our Mayor, our administration, our

09:03:36 employees and our citizens.

09:03:38 Continue to keep us all in your care.

09:03:40 Bless those being recognized this morning with

09:03:45 commendations.

09:03:46 We thank them for their service to others and their example

09:03:50 of caring.

09:03:50 Father, keep them in your loving care.

09:03:54 Today, we ask you to bless this meeting, as Council takes

09:03:59 care of city matters.

09:04:01 Continue to guide our Council so they would do what is best

09:04:05 for all of our citizens.

09:04:07 Continue to make them instruments of your will.

09:04:11 Lead them as they make decisions that affect all of our

09:04:15 lives.

09:04:15 Father, help us remember to be kind to one another and to

09:04:21 always give you all the praises and thanks.

09:04:24 In your most holy name we pray, let us all say Amen.


09:04:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Roll call.

09:04:47 [Roll Call]

09:04:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

09:04:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.

09:04:55 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

09:04:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

09:04:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay, need a motion for adoption of

09:05:01 minutes of the session held December 19th, 2013.

09:05:04 >> So moved.

09:05:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion made by Mr. Cohen, second by

09:05:08 Mr. Suarez.

09:05:09 Further discussion of the motion, all in favor of the motion

09:05:12 please indicate by saying aye.

09:05:13 Opposed nay.

09:05:14 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:05:14 Okay, we have, Mr. Reddick is going to do a commendation for

09:05:20 Sheilah Youngblood.

09:05:22 Sheilah Youngblood.

09:05:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Good morning, Council.

09:05:47 It's my pleasure to, many of you know this beautiful young

09:05:52 lady, who has fed us well over the past year.

09:05:56 And not only she fed us well, but she also doing a lot of

09:06:02 great things in the community.

09:06:04 And today we want to honor her for her service in the

09:06:07 community because -- and just to give you a brief highlight,

09:06:12 in 2008, Our Sisters, Our Friends incorporation was started

09:06:18 by Hillsborough County native Ms. Sheilah Youngblood in an

09:06:20 effort to improve welfare and nurturing of the area seniors,

09:06:25 veterans and single mothers.

09:06:26 Our Sisters, Our Friends, they will host their second annual

09:06:31 Valentine grandmother day gala at Event Factory on

09:06:35 February 14, 2014 to give the grandmothers their flowers

09:06:40 that still yet live and to show their appreciation and love

09:06:43 for standing in the gap for absent parents.

09:06:46 It is our honor on behalf of the Tampa City Council to

09:06:50 recognize you for your service, but also recognize you for

09:06:54 all the great things you do in this community.

09:06:56 We'd like to present this commendation on behalf of the

09:06:59 Tampa City Council.

09:07:00 [ Applause ]

09:07:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: And you get your three minutes.

09:07:12 [ Laughter ]

09:07:12 >> Thank you, Councilman.

09:07:14 All I can say, good morning to all the councilmen on the

09:07:18 board, the chair.

09:07:20 First I would like to give honor to God, who is the author

09:07:24 of my life.

09:07:27 I'm just the vessel that he's using to do his work.

09:07:31 It is with my great honor and pleasure to be able to be a

09:07:35 servant to this community.

09:07:36 Because it is a great need and I would love to say I thank

09:07:42 you this morning for recognizing Our Sisters, Our Friends,

09:07:47 and we're so humbly grateful for this privilege and we would

09:07:53 like to say thank you and thank you and God bless you.

09:07:59 [ Applause ]

09:08:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Miss Youngblood, unfortunately, you didn't

09:08:08 bring any food for us this morning.

09:08:10 People in the audience don't know what a wonderful caterer

09:08:14 and cook she is and some of the things she has done for us.

09:08:17 And we paid for our food, so just wanted to make sure.

09:08:20 It wasn't with public dollars.

09:08:21 Secondly, I think that the event that you put on every year

09:08:27 is such a wonderful thing.

09:08:28 Too many times we forget about those folks that are older

09:08:33 and can't get out or maybe don't have the family to take

09:08:37 care of them.

09:08:38 Just to have one day, one night available to them so they

09:08:42 can enjoy some good food and some good companionship.

09:08:46 I think it's a wonderful thing.

09:08:48 Thank you very much for everything you do and please keep up

09:08:50 the good work.

09:08:50 [ Applause ]

09:08:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?

09:08:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Ms. Youngblood, as long as I have known you,

09:08:57 you have never wavered from your mission at Our Sister, Our

09:09:01 Friend.

09:09:01 I would like you to mention, isn't there a fundraiser this

09:09:07 weekend, Saturday?

09:09:08 Will you let us know what that is?

09:09:11 >> The fundraiser that will be held this coming Saturday,

09:09:15 February the 8th, from 12:00 to 4:00 p.m.

09:09:18 This fundraiser is for the grandparents.

09:09:22 We are not government funded.

09:09:24 So every dime that Our Sisters, Our Friends raise, we get

09:09:28 out here and we really work hard for it.

09:09:31 And it is for these grandparents that have stood in the gap

09:09:35 for their grandchildren, whether the parents be absent, in

09:09:40 prison, incarcerated or on drugs, or with AIDS or whatever

09:09:46 the case may be.

09:09:47 And this fundraiser will help us to allow them to have an

09:09:55 evening out and to enjoy themselves.

09:09:57 And they are going to have a good time.

09:10:02 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Tell us where it's at.

09:10:03 >> It's on the corner of 22nd and Genesee street, across

09:10:08 from the old Madison, that would be SJ Ferrell.

09:10:14 Right there.

09:10:15 From 12:00 to 4:00.

09:10:17 And we invite anyone that wants to come.

09:10:21 We would have craft show.

09:10:27 Fried chicken, tilapia fish, baked beans, coleslaw, corn on

09:10:33 the cob.

09:10:36 All included.

09:10:38 So you can dine with us there.

09:10:40 We would love to have you.

09:10:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

09:10:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much for what you do for

09:10:51 the community.

09:10:51 You're a wonderful person and I'm sure you got the whole

09:10:54 family behind you, including Mr. Reddick.

09:10:57 Thank you very much.

09:11:01 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.

09:11:02 Councilman Miranda is going to present our next

09:11:05 commendation.

09:11:05 [ Pause ]

09:11:08 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Pete Johnson, we're ready to talk about

09:11:22 all your contributions to the city.

09:11:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, it's an honor to be here

09:11:41 with a good advocate for what he believes is right.

09:11:44 I didn't say he was right.

09:11:45 I said for what he believes is right.

09:11:47 [ Laughter ]

09:11:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You know, we have only done a few of

09:11:50 these.

09:11:51 One was to Mr. Knott.

09:11:53 You remember him.

09:11:54 And this is Mr. Johnson of course, who deserves this.

09:11:57 And I would give one to Ed Tillou, but that vote hasn't come

09:12:02 down to some thousand dollars yet.

09:12:03 But this is for Pete Johnson in his day.

09:12:06 As Pete told us, he was leaving the city.

09:12:09 And I'll believe that when I see it.

09:12:11 I hope he stays.

09:12:12 Here's what it says.

09:12:13 In recognition of your relentless attention to issues

09:12:16 concerning code enforcement and to City Council's mandate to

09:12:20 ensure safety and sanitary housing for all its citizens.

09:12:24 Let me give you a little cute story.

09:12:27 Some years back, 15, 16 years ago?

09:12:30 >> Uh-uh.

09:12:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: When we were both little kids, he had a

09:12:33 big to-do in his neighborhood.

09:12:36 And it was big.

09:12:38 All the media was there.

09:12:39 TV trucks all over.

09:12:40 You thought there was something like, you know, the governor

09:12:44 or the president came down.

09:12:45 Well, it was the governor and the president of the

09:12:49 neighborhood, Pete Johnson.

09:12:50 It was regarding code enforcement.

09:12:52 And about some houses in the neighborhood.

09:12:55 I hate to tell you who got cited.

09:12:58 [ Laughter ]

09:13:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Pete Johnson got cited for overgrowth in

09:13:06 his lawn.

09:13:07 [ Laughter ]

09:13:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I had nothing to do with it, Pete.

09:13:10 Let me confess.

09:13:13 I don't do those things.

09:13:14 And that's what happened.

09:13:15 But, if we wanted words to describe Pete Johnson, we would

09:13:19 say compassionate and passionate.

09:13:22 Passionate about code enforcement but always demanding

09:13:26 compassion for the little person.

09:13:28 Advocacy of accountability by code enforcement officers as

09:13:34 well as City Council.

09:13:35 Pete is a guardian of rights as he understands it and

09:13:39 fearless in his presentation of the truth as he sees it.

09:13:43 He knows how to add heat to the chili.

09:13:46 With his interesting and mix of metaphoric and creative

09:13:52 interpretation of the king's Englished mixed with his humor

09:13:55 and knowledge, he has tried to do the best to keep City

09:13:58 Council focused on what is most important, helping the

09:14:03 people.

09:14:03 We will miss Pete Johnson's passionate and our citizens will

09:14:08 always miss his compassion.

09:14:09 Pete, from City Councilmembers, myself and all the City

09:14:14 Council staff, you know, sometimes you don't win the battle.

09:14:18 You win the war.

09:14:19 That's more important.

09:14:20 And I think because of your efforts, we have a better city.

09:14:24 Didn't win all the battles.

09:14:25 But you won enough to receive this commendation from the

09:14:28 city.

09:14:29 Thank you for what you've done.

09:14:30 It's a pleasure to do this.

09:14:33 [ Applause ]

09:14:33 >> I really appreciate this.

09:14:41 This is like, this is going to go up over my dining room

09:14:45 table.

09:14:45 This is the first time I've ever been recognized for

09:14:48 anything.

09:14:49 But, my most important message is, code enforcement.

09:14:54 If we pass laws in this room the way the government says we

09:15:01 have to pass laws and if they're not enforced, there's no

09:15:05 sense of having this room.

09:15:06 This goes through everything from minimum housing standards

09:15:12 for the poor, to slumlords, to zone-based planning.

09:15:20 Everything.

09:15:20 What is the sense of having rules and regulations in a

09:15:24 society if they are not enforced?

09:15:26 And when you do not get them enforced, then you don't have a

09:15:30 society.

09:15:31 You have chaos.

09:15:32 So, please, we all take what you do very, very seriously.

09:15:38 But we also see where what you do is not being enforced.

09:15:45 Either by many citizens, and the administration, whichever

09:15:51 administration.

09:15:52 So it's up to you to see that what you pass into law is

09:15:59 followed.

09:15:59 Thank you very much.

09:16:01 [ Applause ]

09:16:07 >>HARRY COHEN: Councilman Reddick would like to say a few

09:16:10 words.

09:16:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Pete, now you truly going to be missed.

09:16:17 >> Well, I'm not dead yet.

09:16:19 [ Laughter ]

09:16:20 Unless there's an early bus coming from St. Pete, with

09:16:26 Wi-Fi, I can do all of my e-mails with Wi-Fi.

09:16:29 Might not give up.

09:16:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's have the commendation back.

09:16:35 [ Laughter ]

09:16:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Each time I see you coming before Council

09:16:40 and you remind me of a person used to do this every week.

09:16:43 And he was so sincere and dedicated by this community.

09:16:46 And I thank Charlie and those who have been around, know

09:16:49 this guy.

09:16:50 That was the late Moses Knott.

09:16:52 And he's always come before Council complaining about some

09:16:56 of the same things you complain about.

09:16:58 So, I just want to wish you whelp.

09:17:02 And say you deserve that commendation.

09:17:04 And I'm pretty sure whenever you end up at, I feel sorry for

09:17:09 those politicians over there.

09:17:10 [ Laughter ]

09:17:13 >> Mr. Knott was a guiding light for me.

09:17:16 I have more respect for that man showing up every single

09:17:19 time.

09:17:20 That's one reason I moved downtown.

09:17:22 But thank you again very much.

09:17:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

09:17:28 We go now to approval of the agenda and the addendum.

09:17:33 Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr. Suarez.

09:17:36 Yes, ma'am, Ms. Capin?

09:17:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I have a correction on number 3, part B.

09:17:41 That was -- when I made that motion, it referred to the

09:17:49 draft agenda.

09:17:51 That this is a staff report on the draft agenda that was not

09:17:54 heard on December the 5th.

09:17:56 That was my motion.

09:17:57 And this does not read like that.

09:18:03 >> I'm sorry, did you refer to the draft ordinance or the

09:18:06 draft agenda.

09:18:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The draft ordinance.

09:18:09 I'm sorry the draft ordinance that was not heard on

09:18:11 December 5th.

09:18:12 And this is a staff report on that draft ordinance.

09:18:16 I just want to correct that.

09:18:19 Because that was my motion.

09:18:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, we'll have to check the record.

09:18:23 We have a tape of every hearing.

09:18:24 So we'll go back on the hearing and check the tape.

09:18:29 >> What was appearing on the agenda was the motion that was

09:18:32 actually reflected on this date January 23rd agenda.

09:18:37 So that's how we put that on, based on the wording that the

09:18:42 motion was made on January 23rd.

09:18:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That was not my motion.

09:18:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We'll check it.

09:18:47 I'm not going to debate that I believe what you say, but

09:18:50 we'll look into it.

09:18:51 Legally, what's the protocol, counselor?

09:18:55 >> It's up to Council whether it chooses to amend the agenda

09:18:58 to reflect what Councilwoman Capin is asking for and that

09:19:02 would require a motion and a vote.

09:19:04 You can amend usual agenda as it is written.

09:19:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know what the facts are because I

09:19:08 don't have the agenda in front of me.

09:19:10 >> It's Council's prerogative of whether it chooses to amend

09:19:13 its agenda.

09:19:14 You have that right to do under your rules.

09:19:19 >> Can't we just have the discussion?

09:19:23 I mean, I don't think it makes any difference.

09:19:26 -- does it make any difference to the discussion?

09:19:29 >>YVONNE CAPIN: It doesn't make a difference.

09:19:30 But it makes a difference to me.

09:19:32 When I make a motion that it be properly.

09:19:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand.

09:19:35 But we'll check into it and detail it all and come back.

09:19:38 But we will, as Mr. Cohen said, go on and do the part B and

09:19:43 then come back and review the tapes and so forth at later

09:19:46 date.

09:19:47 Okay.

09:19:48 I had approval on the agenda and the addendum by Mr. Cohen.

09:19:53 Seconds by Mr. Suarez.

09:19:54 Any further discussion?

09:19:55 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

09:19:57 Opposed nay.

09:19:59 The ayes have it unanimously.

09:20:00 Let me say that Council today has a luncheon at 11:00.

09:20:05 I'm going to try to get through the agenda quickly as

09:20:08 possible, without detaining anyone or saying someone can't

09:20:12 speak, none of that stuff.

09:20:14 If we go part of 11, then we'll defer and come back at

09:20:17 Council's request at 2:00.

09:20:19 So, that's the game plan that we have for today.

09:20:22 Okay.

09:20:23 Public comments is next.

09:20:25 30 minutes total.

09:20:26 For anyone to wishes to speak, any item on the agenda,

09:20:30 except items that are set for public hearings.

09:20:33 Those items that are set for public hearings are marked on

09:20:36 the agenda, which is items 34 through 44.

09:20:39 Yes, sir?

09:20:42 >> Here to speak about Brian Becker.

09:21:04 Reside at 3107 West Price Avenue.

09:21:08 Here to speak about budgetary matters.

09:21:14 And specifically surveillance matters within the budget.

09:21:17 The surveillance cameras that are up for funding have Tampa

09:21:23 looking more and more like a paramilitary warrantless

09:21:29 surveillance state.

09:21:29 This is working, right?

09:21:32 You will know that the one operated right here in Tampa

09:21:42 flies the same insignia or flag of that Communist

09:21:48 totalitarian East Germany.

09:21:54 And that it is the same instrument as this, fixture of that

09:22:16 entity.

09:22:16 When you place surveillance cameras up on poles, you're

09:22:39 subjecting people to the same authoritarian abuse.

09:22:43 It's a remotely operated version, much like a drone replaces

09:22:46 an aircraft with a person aboard.

09:22:49 And as you can see who wishes to sit in a park like that

09:22:57 last photo, and as you can see, nobody.

09:23:00 So, again, I urge you to defund or not re-fund or fund again

09:23:09 rather the operation of the surveillance cameras as that

09:23:15 replaced up as a result of the RNC convention last year.

09:23:21 >> Before we go on.

09:23:22 Sir, I wanted to point out.

09:23:24 None of those pictures are from the City of Tampa, correct?

09:23:27 It looked like Seminole.

09:23:29 >> That was up there at Gasparilla.

09:23:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Gasparilla.

09:23:34 Where was it at, at Gasparilla.

09:23:37 >> Right at Bayshore.

09:23:38 >> Bayshore and what?

09:23:39 >> Bayshore and Bay to Bay.

09:23:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All the other pictures are not the City of

09:23:44 Tampa, correct?

09:23:45 >> Yes.

09:23:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Which one?

09:23:48 >> The one with the benches.

09:23:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One with the benches.

09:23:52 Then you have east Germany there, which doesn't exist any

09:23:54 more as a country, correct?

09:23:56 >> It does not.

09:23:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So color schemes, when you make a statement

09:24:00 like that, we have to make sure that we explain to people,

09:24:03 east Germany doesn't exist.

09:24:05 The color scheme is not a reflection of east Germany.

09:24:09 >> What is not?

09:24:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The color scheme is not a reflection of east

09:24:13 Germany.

09:24:14 Sir, I just want to point out Z out.

09:24:16 That is not reflection of east Germany.

09:24:19 >> It was.

09:24:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No, it isn't sir.

09:24:21 We -- sir, I'm not having a debate.

09:24:24 I'm making an explanation which is factual.

09:24:26 There's no country east Germany and that is not the color

09:24:29 scheme.

09:24:29 Thank you, sir.

09:24:32 >> But that was the color scheme.

09:24:34 >> Good morning, City Council.

09:24:56 Vicki Pollyea.

09:24:58 I'm still the president of Bayshore Gardens.

09:25:01 I don't come to Council very often any more because you guys

09:25:04 are doing a good job.

09:25:05 But I really have to come back, you have seen what happened

09:25:09 at the December hearing.

09:25:10 Three years ago, this is item number 3, I'm sorry.

09:25:13 Is it three?

09:25:15 Yes.

09:25:15 I attended a meeting with Mrs. Chapin -- Mrs. Capin, I'm

09:25:21 sorry -- about alcohol issues in the SoHo district.

09:25:24 We talked for a long time and I came to a few workshops and

09:25:27 one of the things we kept talking about is giving the City

09:25:31 of Tampa teeth to enforce issues, not mandated by the state

09:25:36 law, and that about the ownership and how the alcohol

09:25:41 businesses were actually functioning.

09:25:42 And we talked a lot at these workshops about trying to give

09:25:47 teeth to our city laws.

09:25:49 And our PDs and how they impact neighborhoods, safety,

09:25:56 crowd control, all sorts of issues.

09:26:00 Then all of a sudden it became the whole issue about closing

09:26:04 bars at 1:00.

09:26:05 Which I didn't understand how we went from that leap of

09:26:08 making a city permit that allows us to enforce the rules,

09:26:12 already on the books, and now we're talking about closing

09:26:15 bars early.

09:26:16 I'd really like us to go back and think about what the

09:26:19 initial focus was, which was to take care of nightclubs out

09:26:24 of control, bars that are out of control, to give the city

09:26:27 enforcement by having a city permit, nominal fee, that

09:26:33 allowed us to enforce the already in place rules.

09:26:37 Let's get back to that.

09:26:39 You don't need to close anybody early.

09:26:41 We just need to take away to make sure our neighborhoods are

09:26:44 safe, our businesses are safe.

09:26:47 The Ybor district can function.

09:26:49 Everything can go along the same way.

09:26:51 It's just people that are not following the rules, you'll

09:26:53 have a way to talk to them.

09:26:55 And please go back to that discussion.

09:26:59 It meant a lot of sense.

09:27:01 It gave comments all around us who are doing that they have

09:27:04 a city-mandated permit to enforce the rules.

09:27:08 Make a little money to enforce the rules.

09:27:10 That's all we need to do.

09:27:11 And I really hope that we get back to that discussion.

09:27:13 [Inaudible]

09:27:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Those are permits to extend hours.

09:27:26 Exactly what was being proposed.

09:27:32 So, that is exactly what they're doing.

09:27:35 In order to be able to manage what they have granted.

09:27:39 They're extending hours.

09:27:43 But for us to extend hours, we had to pull back our hours,

09:27:46 if that was what we were going to do.

09:27:49 >> I think the --

09:27:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And it's not -- I'm not going to get into

09:27:53 that right now.

09:27:54 I appreciate you -- I very much appreciate your input.

09:27:58 >> It was have positive.

09:27:59 I really appreciates all the meetings you held and the

09:28:01 discussions that we participated in.

09:28:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

09:28:04 >> Thank you.

09:28:07 >> Good morning.

09:28:09 Chairman Sims, chairman of the East Tampa partnership.

09:28:11 Distinguished Council, Chairman Miranda, thank you for

09:28:16 having us here.

09:28:17 I'm here 0 to speak about item number five.

09:28:19 As we know, there's been a growing debate and concern about

09:28:22 this item in reference to the Walmart built up on

09:28:25 Hillsborough Avenue.

09:28:25 I'm here this morning to be a chairman to our constituents.

09:28:30 As you know, East Tampa is a very diverse community.

09:28:33 And if, I would like for all those from East Tampa.

09:28:36 Would you stand?

09:28:37 That are represented within our boundaries, as well as old

09:28:40 Seminole Heights.

09:28:41 And as you see here today, there's a great concern.

09:28:44 I was asked by the old Seminole Heights residents to come

09:28:47 down and stand with them and support of their concern about

09:28:49 this Walmart plan.

09:28:51 As I spoke with the Mayor and I thanked honorable Mayor

09:28:55 Buckhorn this past Monday night in reference to some

09:28:59 concerns that these residents have.

09:29:01 As I say to him before, I may not agree with everything, but

09:29:05 we can have the conversation.

09:29:06 And I thank him this morning because, because of that

09:29:09 conversation, I understand that a call went out to

09:29:13 Mr. McDonaugh, Ed Johnson and also to the Walmart

09:29:16 executive to clear up an issue that we had in concern to a

09:29:20 possibility of a liquor store going in that location.

09:29:22 But I thank the Mayor for that concern and getting on the

09:29:25 horn.

09:29:25 I got a call from Walmart executives yesterday.

09:29:28 They wanted to apologize to us that they were not

09:29:31 forthcoming in being clear as to what was going to be going

09:29:34 into that establishment.

09:29:36 We know it's not going to be a liquor store.

09:29:38 We understand it's going to be beer and wine, which most

09:29:41 locations around there sell that.

09:29:43 I won't belabor you long.

09:29:47 But this is one of the key points most of the residents are

09:29:49 here for.

09:29:50 It's a good neighbor to neighbor mentality of openness and I

09:29:55 guess transparency.

09:29:56 Understand that we don't have, the Mayor's administration

09:30:00 does not have to have that as a public hearing.

09:30:03 But I think as a good neighbor, I think our resident

09:30:06 should've also been included in the dialogue and in the

09:30:09 conversation early on.

09:30:11 So some of their concerns could be heard.

09:30:14 I think that's what you're going to hear this morning.

09:30:16 From many of these residents that have come behind me, is

09:30:19 the fact that we felt there need to be a little bit more

09:30:23 transparent and little more neighbor to neighbor attitudes

09:30:25 from the administration.

09:30:27 We thank you guys for hearing us this morning.

09:30:29 Have a great day.

09:30:31 [ Applause ]

09:30:32 >> My name is Ingrid Ukovis Smith.

09:30:44 I reside at 5605 North Pawnee Avenue.

09:30:46 In regard to two issues.

09:30:48 The alcohol I spoke of during the first hearing.

09:30:51 And I support what the city is trying to do.

09:30:54 Just once again, neighbor to neighbor, we are a city of

09:30:59 neighborhoods.

09:30:59 There are some neighborhoods not conducive to 4:00 a.m.

09:31:02 So when you consider how that business permit gets

09:31:05 implemented, 1:00 to 4:00, we have been very successful with

09:31:10 showing is up at every zoning and cutting it off at

09:31:14 1:00 a.m. for Thursday, Friday, Saturday.

09:31:16 So keep that in mind that how that permit gets issued, not

09:31:20 to just give away 4:00 a.m. and undo everything that we have

09:31:24 done in Seminole Heights.

09:31:25 It was previously done that way so we wouldn't run into with

09:31:31 Ybor and South Howard ran into.

09:31:33 In regard to Walmart.

09:31:35 There is a process in place and it seems like everything got

09:31:39 leapfrogged, whether it was through hubris, graft or just

09:31:43 lack of awareness.

09:31:45 Hopefully not.

09:31:46 There have been processes put in place to protect the

09:31:49 neighborhood.

09:31:49 And as Pete Johnson said, we're only as good as following

09:31:53 that process.

09:31:54 And you guys can be a strong City Council and implement

09:31:57 those.

09:31:57 City Council is very strong and very forceful in regard to

09:32:02 protecting Seminole Heights from CVS, who did work with the

09:32:08 neighborhood.

09:32:08 But because it did not meet the urban village concept as a

09:32:12 comprehensive plan, Abbye did a very emotional presentation

09:32:18 regarding the CVS not meeting those standards.

09:32:21 How is Walmart was not doing anything for the neighborhood

09:32:26 in those regards and meeting the plan any better when

09:32:29 they're not doing anything and not willing -- they're not

09:32:33 showing a willingness to work with the neighborhood or the

09:32:36 facade.

09:32:38 Whether it's the traffic.

09:32:39 Looks more like their traffic and crafted for them to be

09:32:45 positive.

09:32:46 Once again, you know, follow the comprehensive plan.

09:32:50 We have firm base zone in place.

09:32:53 How do they get away with having an S-1 consideration when

09:32:57 City Council was going to make (inaudible) Community Gardens

09:33:01 by making them too.

09:33:03 There's just no common sense in that.

09:33:05 So please protect us in this.

09:33:07 And do what we can as far as supporting the neighborhood.

09:33:11 Thank you.

09:33:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:33:13 Next please?

09:33:15 >> Hi.

09:33:17 I'm Kimberly overman.

09:33:19 I live 1810 east park circle in the northeast corner of

09:33:23 Seminole Heights.

09:33:24 I come to you as a Seminole Heights resident, past board

09:33:27 member of the old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association,

09:33:30 as a past board member of the business guild of Seminole

09:33:33 Heights.

09:33:33 And as a concerned citizen and also on the budget and

09:33:36 finance committee advisory Council for you guys.

09:33:38 So, I've been familiar with City Council and how it

09:33:42 operates.

09:33:43 I also have had an opportunity to meet with code enforcement

09:33:48 and all of the different areas that approve projects.

09:33:51 And I recognize the value of bringing in a large employer

09:33:54 such as a Walmart into our community.

09:33:56 However, as Ingrid did allude to we have a process to make

09:34:01 sure that neighborhoods are able to protect their citizens.

09:34:03 And the traffic plan for Walmart currently will not do that.

09:34:09 It will create an opportunity, if you want to call it that,

09:34:14 for someone to get killed at 15th.

09:34:16 For someone to get killed returning across the street on

09:34:19 Hillsborough Avenue.

09:34:20 If you have been to Hillsborough Avenue when fun land is

09:34:23 having their flea market Saturday afternoon, you recognize

09:34:26 the amount of traffic that travels down a major artery, that

09:34:30 has a very small divided line in it.

09:34:34 Needs strong consideration in recognizing not only foot

09:34:37 traffic but the driving traffic.

09:34:38 The intersection coming out of Mohawk to 15th will create a

09:34:46 hazard.

09:34:46 Back to the point of not going through the appropriate

09:34:49 process.

09:34:50 The property this land is being developed was considered

09:34:54 brownfield and applied for mitigation, if I'm understanding

09:34:57 correctly what the recent issues were.

09:34:59 I don't know how that affects the agenda today that

09:35:03 addresses a drainage field.

09:35:05 But I ask you to strongly pay attention to how that might be

09:35:08 affected.

09:35:08 If the mitigation was done properly, and there is no

09:35:14 brownfield issue associated with that land, then getting a

09:35:18 variance on a drainage issue may be appropriate.

09:35:21 But if it's not, I would make sure that you do your research

09:35:24 before you approach that issue.

09:35:26 That corner is very important to a lot of people that live

09:35:30 in northeast Seminole Heights.

09:35:32 When the interstates backed up, Nebraska is backed up, and

09:35:35 Florida Avenue is backed up in traffic, because of our lack

09:35:39 of a comprehensive transportation plan, 15th is a valuable

09:35:43 artery to get to downtown.

09:35:45 And normal circumstances, that intersection at all times of

09:35:51 the day backs up for two blocks when that light's red.

09:35:56 I can't imagine what it's going to look like when we have

09:35:59 traffic such as the amount that comes in and out of a

09:36:01 Walmart.

09:36:01 Will add to that.

09:36:04 We already have that nightmare at the Starbucks at

09:36:06 Hillsborough.

09:36:06 Let's not make the same mistake.

09:36:09 Please talk to the community about that process.

09:36:11 And make sure the community has an opportunity through a

09:36:14 hearing to address it.

09:36:16 Thank you very much for your time.

09:36:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Next please.

09:36:22 >> Good morning, Councilmembers.

09:36:24 My name is Rick Pfeiffer, 1408 east Hanna avenue in Seminole

09:36:29 Heights.

09:36:29 Like Kim, I have a litany of past divorce.

09:36:32 , president of old Seminole Heights, president of south

09:36:35 Seminole Heights.

09:36:35 I'm here about the Walmart, which is all about five blocks

09:36:39 from where I live.

09:36:40 And nearly four years ago, I and dozens of my Seminole

09:36:46 Heights neighbors came before the last Council regarding the

09:36:48 proposed CVS at the corner of Sligh and Nebraska, asking

09:36:51 Council to support the compromise that many of us had

09:36:54 managed to get CVS to agree to.

09:36:57 Council in my opinion was duped by the way city staff

09:37:02 presented it, for lack of a politer terrible.

09:37:06 And today what we have there is a junkie car lot and an

09:37:09 overgrown lot beside it.

09:37:13 Now here we are almost four years to the day, discussing

09:37:16 another development.

09:37:19 And my neighbors are here again asking for protection for

09:37:22 our neighborhood and to work with us for the vision that we

09:37:25 have for there.

09:37:26 And that's the Walmart at Hillsborough and 19th.

09:37:29 You as Councilmembers of the legislative and law writing

09:37:34 body for this city and what value are the laws passed time

09:37:37 and again by multiple Councils to empower neighborhoods by

09:37:41 requiring hearings, notifications to neighborhoods, and

09:37:45 grand neighborhood elements, if city staff, the Mayor and

09:37:49 even this our future Councils waives and bypasses those laws

09:37:54 to please a developer?

09:37:56 This store is in our neighborhood.

09:37:58 It is on the western edge of the East Tampa redevelopment

09:38:01 area.

09:38:01 But it is our neighborhood and Council should compel Walmart

09:38:07 to get community buy-in and support and not allow staff to

09:38:12 waive the rules.

09:38:13 We want input on this project, whether for alcohol sales,

09:38:18 design or traffic input, as we will be the ones forced to

09:38:23 live with the consequences, just like we're living with the

09:38:26 consequences of the CVS denial.

09:38:28 For good or bad.

09:38:30 I'm not anti-Walmart.

09:38:32 But I am anti any business that is indifferent to what I and

09:38:37 others in Seminole Heights have worked to build for 25

09:38:40 years.

09:38:41 And I wanted to put a picture up of what Walmart did over in

09:38:45 the Kenwood neighborhood, because St. Pete City Council and

09:38:49 the Kenwood neighborhood insisted that they give them

09:38:53 something better.

09:38:53 I don't know if that shows up from there.

09:38:55 Okay.

09:38:57 So, thank you very much.

09:38:58 I appreciates your time.

09:39:02 [ Applause ]

09:39:02 >> Good morning, my name is Richard Boom.

09:39:10 7th avenue, Ybor City.

09:39:13 I own a pub called The Dirty Shame.

09:39:16 I am YCDC board member and founding member of Ybor Merchants

09:39:22 Association.

09:39:22 As to agenda item 3, we were given the task and privilege to

09:39:29 work together with City Council.

09:39:31 And I mean, with city legal department coming up on two

09:39:35 years ago now, to help give the city a tool, an effective

09:39:40 tool to deal with what we define as problem nightclubs.

09:39:45 And we, as YCDC, brought forward our recommendations to that

09:39:52 degree one year ago today, that we presented to City

09:39:56 Council.

09:39:57 Until now, no action has been taken on that.

09:39:59 We feel that, that these recommendations are still valid.

09:40:05 And deserve attention and some action.

09:40:08 The proposed changes to the liquor license ordinance, we

09:40:15 understand evolve out of problems that are current in South

09:40:20 Tampa and South Howard, and I feel that those problems

09:40:26 deserve -- that's a separate issue.

09:40:29 And they deserve the same arduous process for consideration

09:40:34 and the same public input before there are decisions made to

09:40:39 that effect.

09:40:40 As you saw in December 5th, there was at the last minute,

09:40:47 there was certainly an outpouring of concern from local

09:40:52 businesses that would be affected by this.

09:40:54 And I think that before anything goes forward to this

09:40:57 effect, that a -- every affected business license owner

09:41:02 needs to be informed as to the process and be given a chance

09:41:06 to have that input.

09:41:07 Again, I feel that the recommendations from YCDC board to

09:41:13 you that were given one year ago, deserve consideration.

09:41:17 And should be moved forward.

09:41:18 I feel these are two completely separate issues and need to

09:41:21 be hand separately.

09:41:23 Thank you very much.

09:41:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:41:26 Mrs. Capin?

09:41:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I agree.

09:41:28 Every business owner and every citizen in the City of Tampa

09:41:31 needs to be notified.

09:41:34 >> Honorable chairman, honorable members of the Council,

09:41:38 thank you for giving me this opportunity to voice my

09:41:41 concerns.

09:41:43 And to second what the words of Richard.

09:41:46 I'm here on amendment three, or item number three.

09:41:49 Next year it will be 20 years that --

09:41:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Your name.

09:41:58 >> I'm sorry.

09:41:58 John Doble, 16006 McGlamery Road, Odessa.

09:42:05 I'm the Florida Leadership Council representative.

09:42:12 The National Federation of Independent Business.

09:42:14 I'm also chairman of political action committee in Florida.

09:42:17 This blanket attack on small business is -- it's hard to

09:42:29 believe that you're even considering this.

09:42:31 You have all the tools you need to address problem

09:42:37 businesses.

09:42:39 I mean, I sat several terms in the YCDC in Ybor City.

09:42:44 We never had any problems with problem businesses.

09:42:50 All them were resolved.

09:42:52 But, yet the Council is debating to do a blanket solution

09:43:00 for a couple of bad apples.

09:43:02 And this just -- this just flies in the face of small

09:43:06 business.

09:43:07 And so we're adamantly opposed to it.

09:43:11 Thank you.

09:43:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Next please?

09:43:13 >> One more thing, Mr. Chairman.

09:43:15 I make a proposal that you address this issue today instead

09:43:19 of let it keep lingering.

09:43:21 Thank you.

09:43:27 >> Hello.

09:43:29 Council, my name is Gayle Davis.

09:43:31 I live at 1203 East Mohawk Avenue in the Hampton Terrace

09:43:35 area.

09:43:36 I'm here on a agenda number five for the Walmart issue.

09:43:40 There are several things about this whole project that has

09:43:47 really put our community up here in Seminole Heights,

09:43:53 very -- we're very frustrated.

09:43:55 Let me just start with the first thing about not being

09:43:58 informed.

09:43:59 I mean, old Seminole Heights Neighborhood Association is

09:44:02 actually the association that is in the boundaries of this

09:44:07 property.

09:44:07 And Hampton Terrace is right on the borderline, 15th street.

09:44:13 We are on -- our border is a street, which Mohawk Avenue is

09:44:18 where I live on, two blocks from the entrance that is being

09:44:24 proposed there.

09:44:25 And exit, I may add.

09:44:27 And it is going to cause a terrible, terrible cut-through

09:44:32 traffic situation for us over there.

09:44:34 And I -- I implore you to please do something to help us out

09:44:40 there.

09:44:40 Because I can see the nightmare coming.

09:44:42 We were never informed.

09:44:44 We heard in the summer that Walmart is going to be there.

09:44:49 OSHNA was never informed.

09:44:56 So we asked are for a meeting.

09:44:59 And we finally got one, with some city officials and the

09:45:04 Walmart representatives.

09:45:06 We were shown plans of what the Walmart is going to look

09:45:10 like and people brought up well, that doesn't really fit in

09:45:13 with the neighborhood.

09:45:14 We are a historic area.

09:45:15 We got the urban planning district, form-based zoning, even

09:45:21 though I realize it's commercial intensive and they already

09:45:25 got everything they need and they don't have to conform to

09:45:27 any of that.

09:45:28 But they're not being very good neighbors.

09:45:31 We went to the meeting over in East Tampa.

09:45:33 And Glen Wilkins, who represented Walmart, emphatically said

09:45:40 you are not going to get what you want.

09:45:41 I do not want to let you think that you're going to be able

09:45:44 to get a different facade, anything else.

09:45:47 It's just not going to happen.

09:45:48 I don't want to give you false hope.

09:45:50 That is what he said to me personally.

09:45:53 And when I brought up the traffic study that I asked for,

09:45:56 for two months, because I asked if there was one.

09:45:59 Here it is.

09:46:00 I found out just recently, it's incomplete.

09:46:03 I addressed this at the meeting in East Tampa, that it was,

09:46:07 doesn't address anything about the side streets, Mohawk,

09:46:11 Comanche avenue, all these side streets, our neighborhood,

09:46:14 where we are going to be affected about I this.

09:46:16 And I find out just recently it's not complete, which I

09:46:20 brought up to them and said, none of this states any of that

09:46:23 in there it only talks about Hillsborough Avenue basically.

09:46:27 And of course it's very positive for them, so we didn't get

09:46:31 the whole thing.

09:46:32 We didn't get it.

09:46:33 Now we're asking for it so we can review it again.

09:46:37 Very disingenuous being up front about anything for us out

09:46:43 here.

09:46:43 We need your help.

09:46:44 We really do.

09:46:45 Thank you.

09:46:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:46:48 [ Applause ]

09:46:49 >> Good morning.

09:46:51 My name is William Hunter.

09:46:53 I live at 202 east North Street in Seminole Heights.

09:46:57 And I am on the executive boards of the old Seminole Heights

09:47:01 Neighborhood Association.

09:47:02 I want to address everything having to do with the Walmart.

09:47:08 They have to do with the traffic changes, changes which will

09:47:11 result in significant increase in traffic into the

09:47:14 neighborhood surrounding that location.

09:47:16 Also, with the approval of the liquor license, and with the

09:47:24 sale of a public street to a private company.

09:47:27 To the best of my knowledge, neither the neighbors around

09:47:31 that site no are the neighborhood associations affected

09:47:34 received any notice of any of these changes, with one

09:47:37 exception.

09:47:37 In January, the old Seminole Heights Neighborhood

09:47:41 Association received a notice of street changes around that

09:47:44 property.

09:47:44 Our president called the planning department a number of

09:47:48 times trying to find out what was going to happen there and

09:47:51 was told each time they knew nothing about any changes.

09:47:53 We didn't receive -- we weren't able to obtain a copy of

09:47:59 those street change notices until may, by which time of

09:48:03 course they had been completely approved.

09:48:05 I strongly feel and I can report from many, many

09:48:09 conversations in the neighborhood and the last several board

09:48:12 meetings of the old Seminole Heights Neighborhood

09:48:13 Association, that there's a great deal of concern about how

09:48:17 this occurred and there's a strong feeling that in approving

09:48:20 all of these, the city has let us down in a serious way.

09:48:24 Thank you.

09:48:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, sir.

09:48:26 Next please?

09:48:28 [ Applause ]

09:48:29 >> Susan Long, 920 Broad Street.

09:48:34 Yes, I live in Seminole Heights, as do over half the people

09:48:37 in this room today.

09:48:38 And yes, I'm here to talk about Walmart.

09:48:40 Mr. Pfeiffer said it was five years ago.

09:48:45 I think it was more like six or seven years ago, but it

09:48:48 doesn't matter.

09:48:49 CVS wanted to develop a piece of property on the corner of

09:48:52 Sligh and Nebraska.

09:48:53 They came in, worked with the neighborhood and developed a

09:48:55 building we all agreed fit our to be enforced and codified,

09:49:01 form based zoning.

09:49:02 Then they told us what they wanted placed on the property.

09:49:05 The city in many of the neighbors had a fit because they

09:49:08 wanted to put it way back on the property.

09:49:10 They moved it forward a little bit.

09:49:12 But weren't willing to move it to the location that

09:49:14 according to our proposed form-based zoning, would fit.

09:49:18 And result CVS left.

09:49:21 And there was a lot of noise from the city about we are

09:49:23 putting this in, you can't destroy form based zoning before

09:49:27 we even gotten it in.

09:49:29 Walmart now purchased a piece of property on Hillsborough or

09:49:31 has acquired, maybe there's a better word.

09:49:34 They have been given a design exception.

09:49:36 They can build anything they wants, is my understanding.

09:49:39 They don't care about form based zoning.

09:49:42 There's nothing in form based zoning that says if you're a

09:49:45 big business on Hillsborough, you can ignore it.

09:49:47 But if you're a smaller business on Nebraska or other

09:49:50 street, you have to follow form based zoning.

09:49:52 I don't know who struck the pen that gave them the design

09:49:56 exception so they didn't have to abide by the form based

09:49:58 zoning, but the city and the neighborhood spent well over

09:50:01 eight years putting in.

09:50:03 And it just recently been fully codified and yet after

09:50:06 codification, now the city doesn't care?

09:50:09 We feel like we have been sandbagged.

09:50:11 We worked very hard.

09:50:12 The city worked very hard.

09:50:14 City spent a lot of money to put it in.

09:50:16 And now it doesn't matter because it's Walmart?

09:50:18 I'm not opposed to having a Walmart there.

09:50:21 I'm opposed to sandbagging all the work the city and we put

09:50:25 into this and the money spent to develop this.

09:50:27 You put time into it too.

09:50:29 In case you don't remember, which I doubt.

09:50:31 All of you remember us lined up in here to pass the form

09:50:37 based zoning.

09:50:38 Okay?

09:50:39 Since that time, we had a meeting with the CRA with Walmart

09:50:44 there.

09:50:45 They were specifically asked, do you plan on selling alcohol

09:50:48 out of this store?

09:50:49 No.

09:50:50 After the fact, we discovered they had already applied for a

09:50:55 S-1 wet zoning.

09:50:57 And very shortly after that meeting, they got approved for

09:51:01 it.

09:51:01 So, Walmart hasn't been honest with us.

09:51:04 Walmart hasn't been willing to work with us.

09:51:06 And the city certainly hasn't enforced their own code that

09:51:10 they spent a fortune and a lot of time on.

09:51:13 We'd rail like to see why this hand.

09:51:15 How we could've been so sandbagged.

09:51:18 Thank you.

09:51:19 [ Applause ]

09:51:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:51:20 Next please?

09:51:21 Hello, I'm Teresa Miller.

09:51:27 I'm a concerned citizen and I'm a little frustrated.

09:51:30 This is in reference to the permit for alcohol.

09:51:33 It's my understanding that permit is all about the health

09:51:36 and safety of our community.

09:51:38 And I guess I really can't understand why there should be

09:51:41 any problem trying to find another tool to reinforce what's

09:51:46 already on our books.

09:51:47 And I'm really surprised that all the restaurants and

09:51:50 establishments aren't behind this.

09:51:52 Because it's only going to penalize those few establishments

09:51:57 that continue to break state and local laws.

09:52:00 And I don't understand why for two years now, this keeps

09:52:06 dragging out.

09:52:07 When it's about the health and safety of our community.

09:52:13 Not about the profit of these few restaurants who can, and

09:52:16 bars that continue to allow young, underage drinking.

09:52:23 DUIs.

09:52:24 Our county has the second highest DUIs in our state.

09:52:28 Which sounds like wow, the police are doing a great job.

09:52:31 But then you look and see we also have the second highest

09:52:34 fatalities in our state.

09:52:35 So there's a lot of DUIs out there that we're not getting

09:52:38 and we need to decrease the number of DUIs and put other

09:52:43 tools in our city so that Tampa will not have this

09:52:48 reputation that continues to grow, that we are not safe.

09:52:52 And we don't care about our community.

09:52:54 So I really hope that soon we pass this permit.

09:53:01 This permit isn't a new idea that someone just created.

09:53:05 It's similar to the ones in St. Pete, Fort Lauderdale and

09:53:07 Gainesville.

09:53:08 And I really hope that Seminole -- I didn't say the same, I

09:53:14 know our laws are a little different here.

09:53:15 But we really need to work so that Tampa can draw more

09:53:19 conventions, which will make all those other establishments

09:53:22 that are following the laws, more money and keep our city

09:53:27 safe and healthy for everybody.

09:53:29 Thank you.

09:53:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

09:53:31 Next please?

09:53:32 >> Good morning.

09:53:35 My name is Cindy grant.

09:53:37 I'm the director of the Hillsborough County antidrug

09:53:39 alliance.

09:53:40 And we are a private 501(c)(3) organization.

09:53:44 With 150 active members that operate on east Henry in Tampa.

09:53:49 And I just want to -- we, our organization would like to

09:53:54 commend the Council for the time, consideration and research

09:53:57 that you've put in to trying to make our community safer.

09:54:01 And to really look at these ordinances.

09:54:05 19 cities already regulate through late night permits

09:54:09 through hours of sales, including St. Petersburg, as you

09:54:12 heard.

09:54:12 Not as a hardship or punishment, but as a way to regulate

09:54:18 and to hold establishments accountable.

09:54:20 Most of our establishments here in Tampa are very

09:54:24 responsible.

09:54:25 There's only very few that go outside the rules.

09:54:28 However, this gives away with minimal punishment and minimal

09:54:33 regulation to be able to hold everybody accountable.

09:54:37 And only those that are doing the wrong thing are the ones

09:54:40 that will end up paying the price.

09:54:42 So, I just see the hours of sale of regulations helps.

09:54:48 Keep them responsible, keep them in check.

09:54:50 And I want to thank the Council for your time and

09:54:53 consideration to make our community healthier and safer.

09:54:56 Thank you.

09:54:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

09:54:58 Next please?

09:54:59 >> I am Ellen Snelling, chair of Tampa alcoholic coalition.

09:55:07 Wanted to talk about the alcohol regulation regulations.

09:55:10 It's been over two years since a young man was murdered in

09:55:13 what nightclub in Tampa and serious discussion started on

09:55:15 how to better regulate our clubs and bars.

09:55:18 And prevent violence.

09:55:20 So far, there have only been meetings, workshops and talks

09:55:24 and no new regulation.

09:55:26 I believe the time to act is now before another tragedy is

09:55:29 to occur.

09:55:30 We have heard several speakers talk about the extended hours

09:55:33 and I think in December 5th when we first discussed this,

09:55:36 there was a lot of misunderstandings and myths.

09:55:39 There are 19 other cities that have this.

09:55:42 And I would like to say that over half of them are 50,000

09:55:46 population or more.

09:55:47 And five are over 100,000.

09:55:49 So they're not tiny rural towns.

09:55:51 They're urban cities.

09:55:52 Fort Lauderdale, St. Pete, West Palm Beach, Hollywood and

09:55:56 Myanmar, to name a few.

09:55:57 Our neighbor St. Petersburg has enacted an extended hours

09:56:01 ordinance in 2012.

09:56:03 So they've had it for a couple of years.

09:56:05 The reason it was enacted was to mitigate the increased call

09:56:09 for service and the need for overtime for police hours after

09:56:13 St. Pete increased their time from 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m.

09:56:16 So didn't happen the same time.

09:56:18 It took a couple years.

09:56:19 The police were putting a lot of overtime hours or lot more

09:56:22 calls for service when the hours changed.

09:56:24 So they thought we need this tool.

09:56:26 And they seem to be very happy with it.

09:56:30 The cost is a hundred dollars initially.

09:56:33 Then $50 to renew.

09:56:34 So I don't think it's exorbitant.

09:56:37 There some paperwork.

09:56:39 One club called scene had multiple problems and nuisance

09:56:43 abatement board had actually closed them down.

09:56:45 Once they reopened, they got a permit and they were open for

09:56:49 a while.

09:56:50 They had one more problem, they actually had minors in the

09:56:53 club.

09:56:53 They were suspended but every since then they have a new

09:56:56 security plan and the police say they are doing quite well.

09:56:59 That just show us -- that's the only case I've read about.

09:57:02 But I bleach it was used successfully to bring a club in

09:57:06 compliance.

09:57:06 Didn't close them down.

09:57:08 Just temporarily changed the hours.

09:57:09 So bars and clubs rarely are able to have their liquor

09:57:13 licenses suspended or revoked, as we all know, by the state.

09:57:17 Nuisance abatement usually is adequate.

09:57:19 So we need a local regulation.

09:57:21 The extended hours ordinance can bring the problem clubs and

09:57:25 bars into compliance.

09:57:27 This is just a minority, but the permit would apply to

09:57:30 everyone and level the playing field and it wouldn't

09:57:33 discriminate against anyone.

09:57:35 The only ones that will get in trouble, as Cindy mentioned,

09:57:38 would be the ones that are not following basically state

09:57:40 laws.

09:57:41 And which they should be doing anyway.

09:57:43 So I don't feel it's going to be undue problems for any of

09:57:47 the bars and clubs.

09:57:48 In fact, I think it could increase business and make them

09:57:51 more profitable because we will have a better reputation and

09:57:55 we'd all be safer.

09:57:57 I would also like to comment on the nightclub regulation

09:58:00 that were brought up.

09:58:01 I know YCDC has put a lot of work into and I also support

09:58:04 these.

09:58:05 I would support both.

09:58:06 Thank you very much.

09:58:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

09:58:08 Ms. Montelione?

09:58:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

09:58:10 I have the St. Petersburg ordinance, a copy of their code of

09:58:18 ordinance.

09:58:19 And I have an article that was written may 6th of 2010.

09:58:25 This is from

09:58:27 And from what I understand, of the St. Petersburg ordinance

09:58:33 and why it says in the article -- not that I read, with all

09:58:39 due respect to our media in the back there -- it says if

09:58:44 St. Petersburg is going to be a major league city, it needs

09:58:46 to play like a major league city.

09:58:49 And their hours, their extended hours permit was

09:58:54 promulgated, put in place and supported by their City

09:58:58 Council at that time.

09:59:00 So that they could sell alcohol after midnight.

09:59:04 Their hours of much earlier than ours ever where.

09:59:07 And the reason why they have a permit wasn't to control the

09:59:11 out-of-control night clubs, or to put any kind of

09:59:14 restrictions out there.

09:59:16 They did it so that they could sell alcohol later.

09:59:19 And that was the reason why it was put in place.

09:59:23 Not because they were having a problem and they wanted to

09:59:25 rein in so they created this permit.

09:59:28 They wanted to be able to sell alcohol after midnight.

09:59:33 And at that time they couldn't unless they put something

09:59:34 into place.

09:59:35 And they did that to compete with us.

09:59:37 So, I just -- I just wanted to clarify at least in my

09:59:43 understanding, why St. Petersburg put a permit in place.

09:59:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Next please?

09:59:48 >> Good afternoon.

09:59:52 My name is Stephanie Russell Krebs, I'm the dean of students

09:59:55 at the University of Tampa the University of Tampa is

09:59:59 committed to reducing the negative effects of underage

10:00:02 drinking and alcohol abuse on our campus and in the

10:00:05 community.

10:00:05 Through strategic partnerships both on and off campus, we

10:00:09 have built a comprehensive alcohol and other drug prevention

10:00:13 in student assistance program.

10:00:15 Some of our efforts include tough comprehensive policies

10:00:17 that address student behavior both on campus and off campus.

10:00:22 Our mandatory alcohol and drug assessment for our students

10:00:26 and compliance with all recommendations when students are

10:00:29 found a violation of our policies, both on campus and off.

10:00:33 We do a mandatory online alcohol education and drug and

10:00:38 sexual assault program for all students before they even

10:00:41 come to the University of Tampa.

10:00:43 It's required for them to be a student at our university.

10:00:46 We use ongoing social norms and educational policies and

10:00:52 programs, trying to educate our students so they can make

10:00:55 good choices in the community and be good neighbors.

10:00:58 We have an active PR education program.

10:01:01 I know as past City Council meetings, our students have even

10:01:05 come and spoke.

10:01:06 Our students are very involved and lead their peers in

10:01:10 trying to make environmental change, to make our communities

10:01:13 safe.

10:01:13 We have community coalition called cedars, where we get

10:01:18 together regularly with folks from our campus.

10:01:21 Hillsborough County antidrug alliance, Tampa alcohol

10:01:24 coalition and law enforcement to talk about these type of

10:01:27 issues.

10:01:28 We have effective partnerships with many groups that I

10:01:32 already mentioned.

10:01:33 And we also work with alcohol beverage and tobacco.

10:01:36 We currently receive all information when our students have

10:01:42 issues off campus.

10:01:44 I would like to send a big thank you to City Council for

10:01:48 your recent collaboration with the University of Tampa by

10:01:51 taking action and sending letters to property owners that

10:01:55 have had problematic off-campus parties.

10:01:58 We really appreciate this partnership and will enjoy working

10:02:01 together on this.

10:02:02 So thank you so much for that.

10:02:04 We really, really appreciate it.

10:02:06 So we now, we have a comprehensive plan in two different

10:02:10 areas.

10:02:11 We have a great plan on campus for our on-campus issues and

10:02:14 we believe we're making a lot of progress for the off-campus

10:02:18 party issue.

10:02:19 And so now for us, the next issue that we're most passionate

10:02:23 about is problematic bars and clubs.

10:02:25 Like my peers have said, you know, we have no desire to

10:02:32 impede the business of responsible vendors.

10:02:34 We believe that this permit will only really have negative

10:02:39 effects on people that aren't interested in complying with

10:02:43 the law.

10:02:43 So, we fully support an ordinance that will allow the city

10:02:48 to have more checks and balances in place to make our

10:02:51 community safer.

10:02:52 So thank you so much.

10:02:53 We appreciate it.

10:02:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:02:56 Next?

10:02:59 >> Good morning.

10:03:00 My name is Charlotte Petonic, wellness coordinator at the

10:03:04 University of Tampa.

10:03:05 Alcohol abuse is the number one college health issue in

10:03:08 measure.

10:03:09 Underage drinking and binge drinkings is not just a problem

10:03:12 information our students, but are a community problem that

10:03:14 needs a community solution.

10:03:15 Our young people are inundated with alcohol advertisements,

10:03:20 promotions and societal messages about the necessity of

10:03:23 alcohol use.

10:03:24 As you've yesterday heard from Stephanie Krebs, our dean of

10:03:27 students, we're constantly working to minimum Mr. Mize the

10:03:30 harmful effects of alcohol and use and abuse on our

10:03:33 students.

10:03:34 The City of Tampa has a large alcohol outlet density, which

10:03:37 is directly correlated with crime and violence.

10:03:40 With over 7,000 students, many who are under the age of 21,

10:03:44 UT needs help from the city to enforce alcohol laws on bars

10:03:48 and clubs.

10:03:49 And hold bars responsible for these laws.

10:03:51 Most bars and clubs check IDs and serve responsibly.

10:03:56 But some do not.

10:03:57 Those not following the laws contribute to consequences such

10:04:00 as alcohol poisoning, assault, sexual assault, DUIs,

10:04:04 accidental injuries and alcohol abuse.

10:04:07 Problem bars continue to contribute -- excuse me, conduct

10:04:11 business as usual with little or no repercussions.

10:04:15 As we have said, 19 other cities do have successfully

10:04:20 enacted ordinances to allow the city to successfully

10:04:23 penalize or shut down these problematic bars.

10:04:25 Sales of alcohol can lead to negative impacts on a

10:04:29 community, such as noise, parking-related issues, litter,

10:04:32 destruction of property and increased crime and DUI rate.

10:04:36 With the greater number of alcohol establishments, more

10:04:39 police will be needed to secure, for security and monitoring

10:04:43 DUIs and underage drinking.

10:04:46 Late night percentages help limit the negative impacts and

10:04:49 give the city more leverage to rein in and follow the laws.

10:04:52 The University of Tampa fully supports enacting a late night

10:04:55 permit system to begin to allow the city to remove the bad

10:04:59 bars and clubs from our communities.

10:05:00 We would like to emphasis the problems do not occur just in

10:05:03 night clubs.

10:05:04 But we also experience significant issues in bars as well.

10:05:07 I thank you for your time and support.

10:05:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:05:10 I think you got one of the world's greatest United States

10:05:13 baseball team.

10:05:14 I know you're 3-0 and going to North Carolina to play and

10:05:17 you're playing number two seed and number five seed.

10:05:21 However, they better be aware, because you're number one

10:05:25 seed.

10:05:25 Next please?

10:05:26 >> Good morning.

10:05:29 My name is Sharon hall.

10:05:31 I live at 13905 Wolcott drive in Tampa.

10:05:34 I want to thank the Council for the opportunity for us to

10:05:37 come here and speak.

10:05:39 And let you know how we feel as citizens in this community.

10:05:42 I stood before this Council before, as you issued a

10:05:45 proclamation to me to support the prevention of underage

10:05:49 drinking in our community.

10:05:50 And it's with great honor that I received those

10:05:52 proclamations from cities and counties around our area.

10:05:56 Because I know that that's in your heart, that that mission

10:05:59 is a part of what we do to keep our community safe.

10:06:02 I'm here today, however, to speak on behalf of our family

10:06:07 and other families who have lost loved ones in drunk driving

10:06:10 crashes.

10:06:11 Our oldest child was killed as a result of a drunk driver.

10:06:16 This is an everyday journey that we deal with it's not about

10:06:20 how much money a bar or night club may or may not make.

10:06:23 This is about lives.

10:06:24 This is about saving lives.

10:06:25 This is about a tragedy that families every single day deal

10:06:29 with.

10:06:30 Every single day.

10:06:32 This doesn't go away in a year or two years or five years.

10:06:35 This will be the rest of our lives that we deal with this

10:06:38 loss.

10:06:38 If we had ordinances in place in this city, such as the one

10:06:44 being presented, and with adequate training required for the

10:06:49 establishments, the managers, the servers, maybe our son

10:06:53 would still be here with us for holidays, for his sibling's

10:06:57 wedding, and for Christmas and other holidays.

10:06:59 As you've heard, other cities have successfully implemented

10:07:03 these ordinances and they continue to enforce them to

10:07:07 regulate the business owners that are not compliant with

10:07:10 liquor violations and issues in their establishments.

10:07:13 Why wouldn't we as citizens in this community be good

10:07:17 stewards of our citizens' lives?

10:07:19 What reason do we have as a community not to set and enforce

10:07:23 reasonable expectations by way of these ordinances and

10:07:26 permits in order to keep our community members safe?

10:07:29 We need to set a precedent in this community that we will no

10:07:32 longer tolerate bars and establishments that are serving

10:07:35 youth, children under 21 years old and overserving patrons

10:07:40 to the point that we will allow them to leave with keys in

10:07:43 hand, to kill themselves or maybe one of us.

10:07:46 Those establishments that are already compliant have nothing

10:07:50 to worry about.

10:07:51 They are being good stewards of their patrons and of our

10:07:54 community.

10:07:54 Those establishments, if this ordinance is approved, will be

10:07:58 rewarded by being able to stay open past midnight.

10:08:01 It's the ones that are allowing unsafe conditions,

10:08:04 irresponsible serving of alcohol that would be penalized by

10:08:07 having their permits removed.

10:08:09 As an active member of mothers against drunk driving, we're

10:08:13 working tirelessly to stop drunk driving and to prevent

10:08:16 underage drinking.

10:08:17 We will not give up until we no longer have these issues in

10:08:22 our community.

10:08:23 We support these ordinances and permits in some fashion to

10:08:25 be enforced in this community.

10:08:26 And I thank you for your time.

10:08:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:08:28 I need a motion from Council to give to 10:30 in public

10:08:32 speaking.

10:08:32 Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Cohen.

10:08:34 Further discussion by Councilmembers?

10:08:36 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

10:08:38 Opposed nay.

10:08:39 The ayes have it unanimously.

10:08:39 Yes, ma'am?

10:08:42 >> Thank you.

10:08:43 I'm Patricia Camp, 5408 Seminole Avenue.

10:08:47 I'm here to talk about the Walmart.

10:08:49 I am kind of taken aback by the notice, the lack of notice,

10:08:56 with the Walmart that's being apparently permitted to be

10:09:02 built on Hillsborough and 15th avenue.

10:09:05 There's been a lack of notice, a lack of transparency,

10:09:08 accountability, and a lack of any kind of public process.

10:09:13 And I think we have a bigger problem here than that Walmart

10:09:16 in Seminole Heights.

10:09:17 We really have to find out what is going on, what

10:09:20 administrative exceptions were made and why they were made.

10:09:23 Unlike the other speakers here, I think that having a

10:09:27 Walmart in your community is a net loss.

10:09:30 Overall.

10:09:31 And not something that you want in your community.

10:09:34 It's not a job creator for every two jobs that a Walmart

10:09:37 brings to your community, you lose three jobs.

10:09:39 And that's going to really hurt our local grocery stores

10:09:43 that we already have.

10:09:45 Our food wholesaler that we have there.

10:09:47 I don't think Walmart is something that we want to make any

10:09:50 exceptions for.

10:09:51 We want to really have it abide by the rules and be a

10:09:55 partner in the community.

10:09:56 As you know, Walmart is a low wage payer.

10:10:00 Taxpayers already subsidize Walmart to a great extent

10:10:03 because we have to provide their workers with food stamps,

10:10:08 with housing and transportation assistance.

10:10:11 I would like to see the economic development department in

10:10:16 the city really start to look at some other job providers,

10:10:19 like cost co, which pays good wages and brings a knelt

10:10:24 benefit to communities, rather than Walmart.

10:10:26 And there is definitely something wrong with the public

10:10:29 process in the county.

10:10:31 There was a Walmart that they were cite in Carrollwood, and

10:10:34 many, many people showed up, I think something like 500

10:10:37 people showed up to stop that Walmart and the county

10:10:41 commission did stop it.

10:10:42 It wasn't built.

10:10:42 And right now, there's a suit on the Walmart in

10:10:46 Bloomingdale, where neighbors have gotten together and

10:10:49 they're suing over the Walmart there.

10:10:51 I think this City Council really needs to look at what the

10:10:54 process is and how this was done without any must be

10:10:58 process, without any input.

10:11:00 Thank you.

10:11:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:11:02 [ Applause ]

10:11:02 Let me say for the record, I will stop at 10:30, the public

10:11:09 comments.

10:11:10 So those in line be kind to those behind you.

10:11:13 Next?

10:11:15 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman, City Councilmembers.

10:11:16 My name is Joseph Capitano senior.

10:11:20 I live at 3400 West Lykes Avenue, Tampa, Florida.

10:11:23 I'm here to talk a little about number three.

10:11:26 First of all, I'd like to bring back some reminiscing, if

10:11:29 you would.

10:11:29 If you recall, I think possibly Mr. Miranda, you were on the

10:11:32 board at the time, Sandy Murman opened up Ybor City to the

10:11:36 bars.

10:11:38 Ybor City was a historic, probably the biggest jewel we have

10:11:41 in Tampa, Florida.

10:11:43 It's been neglected.

10:11:44 It was not us that built those bars.

10:11:47 That was about the only place that you could get a liquor

10:11:51 zoning back then.

10:11:52 If you recall, sometime back, we had a problem with the

10:11:56 noise ordinance.

10:11:57 You all came to Ybor City and we worked it out ourselves.

10:12:00 We didn't have to have all the problems we have had.

10:12:02 We spent a good -- I think I was the first one of the

10:12:06 first -- I know I was the first member of the YCDC when they

10:12:09 reestablished it way back under Sandy Murman.

10:12:13 I'm involved with I think 15 properties that sell liquor.

10:12:16 We are very responsible.

10:12:18 We are very responsible.

10:12:19 The state of Florida -- let me tell you something.

10:12:23 We don't sell kids alcohol.

10:12:25 The state is there to check us and they've got all kinds of

10:12:28 rules and regulations.

10:12:29 We're probably the most regulated industry in the world.

10:12:32 Ybor City came up with a proposal based -- we came and asked

10:12:35 for some support.

10:12:36 We had a bad club in Ybor City.

10:12:38 Very bad club.

10:12:39 We got beat up and beat up and beat up.

10:12:41 Nothing was done.

10:12:42 Nothing was done.

10:12:43 City couldn't do anything.

10:12:44 We came back with something we thought would work.

10:12:46 And we proposed it to you I guess, Richard said a year ago.

10:12:50 Seems like to me, I was chairman of the central, of the

10:12:54 public safety committee.

10:12:54 I know we met 20 times on this thing with the city lawyers

10:12:58 and so forth.

10:12:59 I'm asking that, if you're going to do something, put this

10:13:03 thing -- we don't have a problem in Ybor City today.

10:13:05 We do not have a problem.

10:13:06 There's not a club giving us a problem today.

10:13:08 But if we ever have another club that's giving us a problem,

10:13:12 we want to be able to close it down without having to fight

10:13:14 and fight and fight.

10:13:17 One killed and one shot.

10:13:19 So we're asking that the ordinance we gave, I guess a year

10:13:21 ago, that was brought up before you, that you accept that

10:13:25 one from Ybor City.

10:13:27 Whatever do you with the rest of the city, that's fine.

10:13:29 But Ybor City is a special place.

10:13:31 It's a different place.

10:13:32 And we're looking to be able to use the ordinance that we

10:13:35 put in originally ourself, with your help and with your

10:13:39 support and see if that ordinance pertains to Ybor City

10:13:42 only.

10:13:43 I mean, it probably doesn't match the rest of the city

10:13:45 because of the clubs that we have.

10:13:47 We have some huge clubs.

10:13:48 Let me tell you something.

10:13:49 We do not serve minors.

10:13:51 We check the kids.

10:13:52 We check them in.

10:13:53 Most of the kids when there's a problem with drinking is

10:13:55 probably in the car outside.

10:13:57 Don't blame the clubs.

10:13:58 The clubs are very regulated already.

10:14:00 Thank you.

10:14:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

10:14:01 Next please?

10:14:06 >> Hi.

10:14:06 My name is Debby Johnson.

10:14:08 I'm president of the old Seminole Heights Neighborhood

10:14:09 Association.

10:14:10 My address is 504 East Frierson Avenue.

10:14:15 And I think you've heard a lot from our neighbors about what

10:14:18 our concerns are with the Walmart.

10:14:20 But I think the bottom line here is, we do not want the city

10:14:24 issuing waivers for things that affect our neighborhood.

10:14:27 This process started last January with a waiver on the

10:14:31 traffic.

10:14:31 I started making phone calls at that time, trying to find

10:14:35 out what was being developed on that property.

10:14:37 I called the planning department.

10:14:39 They said, we don't know.

10:14:40 How does the planning department not know what's being

10:14:43 developed on a piece of land?

10:14:45 It took me until may to get the planning department to share

10:14:50 the plans for this Walmart with me.

10:14:52 The plans were dated January 29th.

10:14:55 So, I was lied to by the planning department.

10:15:01 I think too much power has been given to the planning

10:15:04 department.

10:15:04 This administrative approval process should not be

10:15:08 happening.

10:15:11 We have a vision plan.

10:15:12 And that vision plan was written by the planning department.

10:15:15 I would like to know if they shared that vision plan with

10:15:18 the Walmart, because from the looks of the plans, they did

10:15:21 not share that.

10:15:22 When I met with them in May, I told them the neighborhood

10:15:27 was not going to be happy about the facade of that store.

10:15:30 We tried very hard to meet with Walmart.

10:15:34 And I'd like to thank Councilman Reddick for his help.

10:15:38 He was able to get us a couple of meetings with them.

10:15:41 We expressed our concerns.

10:15:43 They flat out denied addressing any of our concerns.

10:15:47 We saw the same thing happen in St. Pete with the Kenwood

10:15:51 historic district.

10:15:52 The city supported Kenwood.

10:15:54 And we want the city to support us.

10:15:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you so much.

10:15:58 [ Applause ]

10:15:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The more interruptions we have, the less

10:16:03 speakers we have.

10:16:04 The last speaker would be the gentleman with the Pittsburgh

10:16:08 steeler shirt on.

10:16:10 >> Good morning.

10:16:11 Ann Pollock, 501 east Kennedy.

10:16:13 I represent the owners of International Plaza mall.

10:16:16 And I'm here to speak on item 3.

10:16:18 The mall does not oppose regulation of nightclubs.

10:16:23 However -- and this is really in many ways because they

10:16:31 support the policies that are used to regulate nightclubs

10:16:36 and in fact do so at the mall to ensure the tenants and

10:16:42 establishments there don't cause any problems.

10:16:44 That being said, we would strongly ask that you consider the

10:16:49 recommendations of the YCDC.

10:16:51 We feel that there are some concerns in the proposed

10:16:55 ordinance that could be addressed, that would better balance

10:16:59 the need for security and the ability to enforce with the

10:17:06 economic realities of these businesses.

10:17:10 For instance, the requirement for security, it's important

10:17:16 to have security.

10:17:17 But it would be helpful to clarify in the ordinance when

10:17:21 that security is required.

10:17:23 Just because a business has an occupancy determined by the

10:17:27 fire marshal of a certain amount, does not necessarily mean

10:17:33 they're going to be at capacity or close to capacity all

10:17:37 hours of the day, all days of the week.

10:17:39 And so we would ask that you consider the YCDC's

10:17:44 recommendations.

10:17:45 And we would ask that you consider providing additional time

10:17:49 so that there's further time for businesses and neighbors to

10:17:56 work to make this a better ordinance.

10:17:58 I think that the process, the nightclub ordinance was moving

10:18:03 forward and then it kind of got put on the back burner as we

10:18:06 discussed late night permits.

10:18:07 And now it's coming back before you.

10:18:09 So, we want to just to make sure that all the issues are

10:18:13 addressed.

10:18:14 Thank you very much.

10:18:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:18:15 Next please?

10:18:20 >> Margaret Vizzi, 213 South Sherrill Street.

10:18:27 Thank you, Council, for giving us more time.

10:18:30 I don't think I would've gotten up here if you hadn't.

10:18:35 And T.H.A.N. has looked at this issue of the nightclub

10:18:38 permitting.

10:18:39 And I really felt if I watched you as you decided not to

10:18:43 have a workshop on that proposed recommendation for an

10:18:50 ordinance or whatever it's going to be called, a business

10:18:53 license, the nightclubs, that it would've been good.

10:18:56 I think you just heard this, maybe some things that need to

10:19:00 be clarified.

10:19:01 We have been trying to really understand ourselves what the

10:19:05 ordinance says.

10:19:06 But in general, T.H.A.N. does support something being put in

10:19:12 place and put in place citywide, because from what we can

10:19:17 see for the different places where these are going to be

10:19:20 popping up, we need a citywide ordinance.

10:19:24 And that's why T.H.A.N. is addressing this issue.

10:19:26 So I'll leave it at that for that part of it.

10:19:31 The second part is sort of brings in a different issue,

10:19:38 which -- that's I think C on the agenda.

10:19:43 Where the issue of where these places are going to be able

10:19:50 to have parking is a concern to the neighborhoods, because I

10:19:55 think it was proposed that it could be 1400 feet away.

10:20:00 And that could jump into another neighborhood, which could

10:20:04 not -- would not even be noticed, that there was a hearing

10:20:10 or an S-1 granted, whatever.

10:20:14 That's another concern I'll bring to tour attention.

10:20:16 So, that part of it also is a concern.

10:20:20 Where will that part about parking and where they're going

10:20:23 to be allowed to park and will the neighborhoods that would

10:20:26 be affected be notified?

10:20:28 Because all of this, so many of these are being granted as

10:20:33 S-1.

10:20:34 And other issues that came up as I sat here, is the issue.

10:20:39 You haven't heard about the neighbors on Swann who are going

10:20:42 to be putting up with Trader Joe's.

10:20:44 We got that same issue there, because of the fact that the

10:20:50 city said they had the zoning, so they didn't have to do a

10:20:54 traffic study.

10:20:55 And it is going to be a disaster.

10:20:57 And you haven't even heard about it yet.

10:21:01 And it's the same issue that they are putting up with

10:21:04 Walmart.

10:21:04 The city said they had the zoning so they could put in

10:21:08 whatever they wanted.

10:21:08 And we had no input.

10:21:10 Well, there's going to be input, you're going to hear from

10:21:14 it on the back end.

10:21:15 But in the meantime, please, Council, start addressing these

10:21:18 issues.

10:21:19 Transportation put in some new codes that we didn't even

10:21:24 know were happening.

10:21:25 And some of it even went into the comp plan, which was not

10:21:29 in what we with are shown that was passed by the previous

10:21:33 Council.

10:21:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:21:35 Mr. Cohen?

10:21:36 >>HARRY COHEN: I just want to assure Mrs. Vizzi, we have

10:21:40 heard already the everything regarding Trader Joe's.

10:21:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Next please?

10:21:46 Good morning, Jerry Frankhouser, president of T.H.A.N.

10:21:51 I'm here today, I was coming to support Margaret in what she

10:21:55 was saying.

10:21:56 But the theme of the meeting today is, nobody got any

10:22:01 notice.

10:22:01 Duh!

10:22:03 We have been asking each one of you Councilmembers when we

10:22:07 have had meetings with you, to change the process of issuing

10:22:14 liquor licenses away from an administrator and back to City

10:22:17 Council.

10:22:17 Then everyone would get notice.

10:22:21 They would've been notified that this was happening, not

10:22:24 after the fact.

10:22:25 That's something that T.H.A.N. has been working on for a

10:22:29 while, and we would appreciate you helping us with that,

10:22:32 because you're the one that has to do it.

10:22:34 The last Council messed around with everybody in town.

10:22:37 And now we'd like to have you correct it.

10:22:39 Thank you.

10:22:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:22:40 Next please?

10:22:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?

10:22:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me just remind Mr. Johnson that, what

10:22:51 my frustration with some of the comments that been made,

10:22:54 particularly to the people from Seminole Heights, that I

10:22:57 plan to address exactly what you just stated.

10:23:01 Later on today, about S-1 application.

10:23:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Next please?

10:23:08 >> Peat Johnson, 510 Harrison street.

10:23:13 I'm still here.

10:23:14 [ Laughter ]

10:23:19 >> City Council has a section in the charter where they can

10:23:23 ask for investigations of any issue that they seem

10:23:26 appropriate.

10:23:27 I have given you over the, just the recent administration,

10:23:33 10 or 12 reasons why the code enforcement department needs

10:23:38 to be investigated.

10:23:39 This goes from everything from violations being closed out

10:23:44 without compliance, demolition orders changed, so that the

10:23:49 property owner can make more money, and then a new

10:23:52 demolition order given.

10:23:56 Fines being removed from open cases that are still active.

10:24:03 I'm sorry.

10:24:04 There's just too much to go on.

10:24:06 I mean, this is blatant, improper action.

10:24:13 We don't even comply with the Florida state statute on code

10:24:17 enforcement.

10:24:18 Everybody talks about what's good for the neighbor,

10:24:21 enforcing the codes, enforcing form-based, everything else.

10:24:25 But we got to correct the department that is doing this.

10:24:29 And I can back every single one of these statements up with

10:24:33 documentation.

10:24:34 So, you know, it's about time we go back into code and say,

10:24:40 why are we having so many problems?

10:24:43 I've had directors destroy files.

10:24:47 I've had code officers embezzle money.

10:24:51 I have so much history of inappropriate action by the

10:24:56 department.

10:24:58 Council has to do something.

10:25:00 Thank you.

10:25:00 [ Applause ]

10:25:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Next please?

10:25:07 >> Okay.

10:25:10 I'm Ed Tillou from Sulphur Springs.

10:25:24 There's going to be an interpreter's issue later.

10:25:28 I don't need an interpreter.

10:25:30 Here's the key to it.

10:25:31 I have to give a five minute report at school.

10:25:34 Five minutes, right, I know.

10:25:36 I need about five minutes for just my opening remarks.

10:25:40 So anyway, the thing is I gave out something in the past

10:25:45 that was maybe a little obscure, about longitudinal

10:25:48 stability of aircraft.

10:25:49 I mentioned I was an aviator and I flew and you learn a lot

10:25:53 of things in ground school.

10:25:55 Well, one of the things that your learn about is positive

10:25:58 stability.

10:25:58 That's what they used to call it.

10:26:00 And it's when an aircraft is pushed out of its normal

10:26:04 pattern.

10:26:04 It comes back.

10:26:06 It doesn't go further and further out.

10:26:08 The earliest aircraft didn't have that.

10:26:12 And the result of that was that a lot of pilots lost their

10:26:15 life.

10:26:16 Well, the thing is, we don't know about climate.

10:26:20 Climate may not have positive stability.

10:26:22 It might get pushed to a certain extent and then go haywire.

10:26:26 And that's why the Scientific Council, front page on

10:26:34 Saturday.

10:26:35 Climate panel acts soon.

10:26:38 Because they're talking about the impact on agriculture.

10:26:44 Now, this is important also.

10:26:45 Higher tides.

10:26:47 Tampa and most of Florida wouldn't be under 20 odd feet of

10:26:52 water until the middle of the next century.

10:26:54 But people are going to have flood insurance problems.

10:26:58 So this all goes back to essentially this.

10:27:03 The Volt.

10:27:08 The engineering field has given you the technology that's

10:27:12 neglects to prevent these things.

10:27:15 Instead of two gallons a day of gasoline, a half a gallon of

10:27:19 gasoline.

10:27:19 Instead of $11 million that you paid out -- I don't know if

10:27:23 that's quarterly on semiannually or something.

10:27:25 That would be about $3 million.

10:27:30 So like the thing is, the answer is there.

10:27:33 Now, in the absence of that, here's who the ball is in the

10:27:39 court of.

10:27:40 This fellow.

10:27:42 I think you recognize him.

10:27:44 There it is.

10:27:45 Because in Siberia that the biggest emissions.

10:27:51 They're not in northern Canada and Alaska yet.

10:27:58 But they will be.

10:27:59 An Army of scientists needs to descend on Siberia.

10:28:03 In the meantime, these things like the volt could be done.

10:28:05 And I'm talking about fleet.

10:28:08 If each one of you wants to buy a volt, that's nice.

10:28:11 I'm talking about the city.

10:28:12 The city fleet and the county fleet.

10:28:14 To set the example.

10:28:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:28:17 [Inaudible]

10:28:30 >> My name is Tom George.

10:28:31 I am co-owner, partner of Crowbar in Ybor City.

10:28:38 Vice-president Ybor Merchants Association.

10:28:40 And Ybor Chamber of Commerce.

10:28:41 Board of directors.

10:28:43 Just want to echo what Richard and Joe had said on item 3.

10:28:48 Couple years ago, we had a problematic club in Ybor City.

10:28:54 I think many of the good operators out there were very

10:28:58 concerned because we wanted to see our area do well and

10:29:03 thrive.

10:29:04 We wanted some ordinance with some teeth to shut down the

10:29:08 extreme cases like that.

10:29:09 And over the past two years, coming to this point, I think

10:29:16 we need to try to take a look at that original ideas that we

10:29:21 were looking at to try to do.

10:29:22 Operating good business right now in this economy is very

10:29:27 tough.

10:29:27 I heard a lot of people talk about how much money the places

10:29:31 make and that we need to do the right thing.

10:29:33 We do need to do the right thing.

10:29:34 But a lot of places don't make a lot of money.

10:29:37 That's why you see so many good businesses shut down every

10:29:39 year.

10:29:40 I myself have been there for 7 years.

10:29:42 It has not been easy.

10:29:43 It has been tough all the time.

10:29:45 We have had to pull money out of our savings account each

10:29:47 year a lot of the time to get through rough patches.

10:29:51 The business across the street from me has been seven

10:29:53 different businesses since I've been there.

10:29:56 It is tough.

10:29:57 A lot of the businesses that are open still, are the ones

10:30:01 breaking the laws.

10:30:02 So anything we're thinking about doing that allows us to do

10:30:06 as business owners is rewarded to stay open, that we have

10:30:10 already been doing, to me that doesn't help us.

10:30:12 What we need, we need help to be able to do what we have

10:30:16 already done and continue to do that and the negative places

10:30:20 just need to be shut down.

10:30:21 So however we can do that, that's what I would support.

10:30:24 Thank you.

10:30:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:30:25 Mr. Suarez?

10:30:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was just going to say, in order to go on

10:30:29 with the agenda, I would make the suggestion that maybe we

10:30:32 should clear off the second readings first.

10:30:34 And then maybe go back to item number five, which.

10:30:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't mind doing that but I have the

10:30:40 public here now on 3.

10:30:42 I want to take in order.

10:30:44 Because the others --

10:30:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was just talking about our timeframe.

10:30:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand that.

10:30:50 But the public is here.

10:30:51 They've been very intense.

10:30:52 So I'd like to possibly finish with the staff reports, if I

10:30:55 may, so that the public is going to hear what we're going to

10:30:58 discuss while they're here.

10:30:59 Okay.

10:30:59 Item number -- any reconsideration from the, for legislative

10:31:05 matters in the last hearing?

10:31:08 I see none.

10:31:08 We go to staff reports.

10:31:10 Item number 3.

10:31:14 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Catherine Coyle, planning and

10:31:16 development.

10:31:16 Just to give you a brief history on the nightclub piece that

10:31:22 you've heard --

10:31:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say, we only have 30 minutes.

10:31:25 >> I'll be brave.

10:31:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I know I'm not going to get through.

10:31:29 And I apologize.

10:31:31 But I said it earlier.

10:31:33 We're really under crunch time.

10:31:34 I appreciate it.

10:31:35 Continue.

10:31:36 I'm not trying to cut you short.

10:31:38 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No worries.

10:31:38 Back in early 2012, member of, various members of the public

10:31:42 from the Ybor City business industry came forward.

10:31:44 There was an incident at a certain club in Ybor and they

10:31:47 came forward to Council really addressing the issues of the

10:31:50 alcohol permits and is there anything else we can do?

10:31:52 Council addressed, or directed the legal department to come

10:31:55 back in a workshop, may 24th, 2012.

10:31:59 So we are almost two years, one speaker was correct, we're

10:32:02 almost two years since then.

10:32:04 Ms. Kert did come forward and give you a memorandum with

10:32:06 some recommendations looking at business regulations for

10:32:09 nightclubs.

10:32:11 You specifically directed to bring back options for business

10:32:14 regulations for nightclubs.

10:32:16 So she went through different options, looking at defining

10:32:20 nightclubs, what type of business operating permits,

10:32:23 regulation also we could have and criteria for enforcement.

10:32:26 I believe if you recall, there were a great number of people

10:32:31 here from Ybor.

10:32:32 That particular language hadn't been workshopped other than

10:32:36 that at that particular workshop.

10:32:38 I was asked to come in at that point.

10:32:40 We did hold two public information workshops here in

10:32:43 chambers, June 26th, 2012 and June 27th from 6:00 to

10:32:47 8:00 p.m.

10:32:48 Was a packed room both nights.

10:32:50 With a great deal of industry folks from Ybor.

10:32:54 There were some other people that owned businesses around

10:32:57 the town as well.

10:32:58 Nightclub type, bar type businesses.

10:33:01 And we did focus on definition of nightclub, because that's

10:33:06 very important trying to define what that nightclub is and

10:33:09 what it is going to apply to if we come up with a business

10:33:11 operating permit and then looking at the different

10:33:14 regulations and criteria for the operating permit itself.

10:33:17 How it's going function and then the enforcement criteria.

10:33:20 From there we spent the next six months or so working with

10:33:23 YCDC and their public safety committee, TPD, legal, business

10:33:26 tax, planning and development, various agencies in the city,

10:33:29 as well as ABT, talking about the different rules and

10:33:33 regulations that we have.

10:33:34 And that culminated in the draft language that I sent

10:33:40 through.

10:33:41 This is actually the draft from January 16th, 2013.

10:33:45 This is what I took forward to YCDC.

10:33:48 We talked about it at the CRA's office on 7th avenue.

10:33:55 And it goes through the proposed definition.

10:33:57 Which includes defining a location that serves, that allows

10:34:04 people in that are 18 and over.

10:34:05 Adult uses are specifically not a nightclub.

10:34:10 They are constitutionally protected in a different way.

10:34:13 Then there's very criteria that there's ands and ors.

10:34:18 We looked at how these places operate.

10:34:20 Is there a cover charge?

10:34:21 Is there entry ticket fees, are there drink minimum?

10:34:26 Are they open to the general public between 1:01 a.m. and

10:34:29 6:59 a.m.?

10:34:31 Any day of the week.

10:34:32 Looking at capacity and occupancy loads.

10:34:36 Looking at how they advertise for their business, whether or

10:34:38 not they have live entertainment.

10:34:42 Like a rock venue, concert venue, deejays.

10:34:45 If they advertise for house parties or drink specials that

10:34:48 kind of thing.

10:34:49 From there, we also included regulations looking at

10:34:52 security, looking at additional training for crowd

10:34:56 management, which the fire marshal does.

10:34:58 And then looking at the process for revocation or

10:35:01 suspension.

10:35:02 And remember, this is 2012, right into the beginning of

10:35:07 2013.

10:35:07 We have been talking to you in general between legal and

10:35:10 myself, about looking at using a business operating permit

10:35:13 for a whole host of things as opposed to land use permits.

10:35:16 Because a lot of the things we deal with are dealing with

10:35:18 operators.

10:35:19 Not the underlying land use permit.

10:35:21 Because you can have one operator that's great in a certain

10:35:26 land use classification, another one that's doing wrong.

10:35:27 So we want to deal with the operator.

10:35:29 So looking at the revocation and suspension for cause,

10:35:33 you'll see on my draft it says the enter decision-maker.

10:35:39 That was early in the infancy of us drafting and figuring

10:35:42 out legally how we were going to proceed.

10:35:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We're not getting our monitors the same

10:35:48 thing you're getting on the overhead.

10:35:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: So what you'll see in the draft for what

10:36:00 has been dubbed the late night permit, you'll see a little

10:36:03 more refinement to the process for revocation and suspension

10:36:05 because it was later time-wise.

10:36:08 So some of this stuff, as far as when the permits issued,

10:36:12 how it's taken away, how it's enforced.

10:36:14 We would want some of those standards to be across the board

10:36:17 for these types of business operating permits, no matter

10:36:19 what the use is that we're actually, the classification that

10:36:22 we're issuing them for.

10:36:23 But, some of the things that we'd be looking at, and they

10:36:27 are outside of the realm of alcohol, because just as a

10:36:30 reminder, the operator's license doesn't state for alcohol.

10:36:33 So we're looking at other classifications of use.

10:36:36 It may or may not sell alcohol.

10:36:38 Possession or storage or use of felony controlled

10:36:42 substances.

10:36:43 All the unlawful use or possession of firearms.

10:36:49 A whole host of more violent type criminal activity.

10:36:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me ask you one question if I may.

10:36:55 For state law, the unuseful use and possession of a firearm,

10:36:59 that's only in a bar.

10:37:00 You can walk into it with a firearm, into a restaurant.

10:37:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: This particularly is dealing with

10:37:06 nightclubs.

10:37:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

10:37:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Remember, that's kind of the point.

10:37:10 You actually hit it on the head maybe without even meaning

10:37:13 to.

10:37:14 Again, back to the business operating permanent.

10:37:16 If there is a classification of use or business type that

10:37:18 you would like to regulate just from a across the board in a

10:37:22 standard way, it could be restaurant, it could be night

10:37:25 clubs.

10:37:25 You can come up with those classification also of uses and

10:37:28 deal with how they operate, define them and come up with

10:37:31 criteria.

10:37:32 So in this sense, these were some of the more violent

10:37:35 issues.

10:37:37 Sales of, or possession of alcohol by minors.

10:37:41 Criminal possession of marijuana as defined by statute.

10:37:43 So dealing with some of those criminal activities --

10:37:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, Ms. Montelione?

10:37:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

10:37:51 Ms. Coyle, the notes you have written in the margins, are

10:37:54 those changes or suggested changes to the verbiage that we

10:38:01 have in our backup material in our books?

10:38:04 >>CATHERINE COYLE: What I have here are my own notes on my

10:38:06 copy because what I also sent to you was the YCDC

10:38:10 recommendations, which were dated January 22nd.

10:38:13 And so what I've noted on my own copy is referencing some of

10:38:17 their recommendations.

10:38:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

10:38:19 So, because what we had, heard during public comment was

10:38:22 exactly what you have written in there.

10:38:27 If somebody wanted clarification of when would these things,

10:38:31 and they use the word.

10:38:34 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I tend to write notes.

10:38:36 And yes, that was the point of discussion.

10:38:40 And that is something that we definitely need to have

10:38:44 designed with TPD, because for the last couple of years be,

10:38:48 and for very long time, TPD wanted the off-duty officers up

10:38:53 front.

10:38:54 There may be some discussion maybe it should happen after

10:38:56 the first offense.

10:38:57 Especially, because we have that older rule back from 1995

10:39:00 that some establishments actually have to have off-duty

10:39:03 officers by law now and some don't.

10:39:05 That's something internally we just need to define.

10:39:11 But I wanted to make a note that it was theirs.

10:39:13 And then my note on this side is dealing with that

10:39:18 decision-maker.

10:39:18 Because later on, we have come up with the actual criteria

10:39:23 and process for it.

10:39:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, Mr. Reddick?

10:39:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: What is the cost call for an off-duty

10:39:30 officer per hour?

10:39:33 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I don't know.

10:39:36 I'm not really sure.

10:39:37 TPD is here.

10:39:38 I don't know if any of the officers here happen to know.

10:39:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Because could we get that information?

10:39:45 I'm looking at the proposal you got here.

10:39:47 And I just wanted to know what the cost per hour for

10:39:52 off-duty officer.

10:39:53 Especially you're going to specify four hours.

10:39:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We can find out and let you know.

10:39:58 So that's basically it.

10:39:59 There are some refinements based on YCDC's recommendation.

10:40:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, one second.

10:40:04 Officer, can you answer that?

10:40:08 >> Don Miller, City of Tampa Police Department.

10:40:10 The question was, off duty rate for officers?

10:40:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Right.

10:40:14 >> I believe it's somewhere in the realm of about 42 an

10:40:18 hour.

10:40:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: 42?

10:40:21 >> $42 an hour.

10:40:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: If it include a supervisor, what would that

10:40:24 be?

10:40:25 >> It would go to like 46 an hour for supervisors.

10:40:29 Most alcohol establishments, when they get the applications,

10:40:35 is usually two officers to be assigned to any alcohol posts,

10:40:39 just due to the alcohol, there could be a fight or more

10:40:44 trouble.

10:40:45 Having valuable backup office and relatively available if

10:40:48 anything does erupt at a bar situation.

10:40:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.

10:40:51 Thank you.

10:40:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you, Donnie.

10:40:58 So looking at the YCDC recommendations, generally speaking,

10:41:03 we were in concurrence on having the business operating

10:41:07 permit, a lot of the criteria.

10:41:09 We were just looking for refinement on a couple items,

10:41:12 compared between their notes and the original draft from the

10:41:16 16th of January.

10:41:17 We hadn't gotten to the next step.

10:41:19 I had it slated to go out last summer and start working with

10:41:22 the Howard folks and try to shop it around.

10:41:25 But, the tenor changed as I mentioned before, and some other

10:41:30 things came up related to alcohol.

10:41:32 So this one stopped at that time.

10:41:34 And Council had actually never directed to bring it back at

10:41:37 that time.

10:41:37 So, here I am.

10:41:39 And I can answer any questions.

10:41:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?

10:41:41 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Why did it stop?

10:41:42 Did we ask you to stop it?

10:41:44 >> No, actually from the workshop that you in had May of

10:41:48 2012 with Ms. Kert, there actually was no action taken at

10:41:51 that point.

10:41:51 Even to direct it necessarily to move forward, except that

10:41:55 we did have all the issues with Ybor that were raised at

10:41:59 that workshop.

10:42:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So on May 23rd it was finished?

10:42:04 I'm trying to understand why it was stopped.

10:42:06 Why was the research, why was it stopped?

10:42:11 Why didn't you keep going forward?

10:42:14 Or planning keep going forward?

10:42:16 I don't understand that part.

10:42:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can only assume, I'm not trying to get

10:42:23 into the discussion, is that maybe this Council didn't take

10:42:26 any initiative or much action at that time.

10:42:28 I don't know.

10:42:29 I'm only assuming.

10:42:31 You'll have to go back and check the record.

10:42:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Was action requested?

10:42:35 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No.

10:42:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

10:42:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Montelione?

10:42:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Another member of our staff is in the

10:42:45 audience, Mr. Pardo, maybe you have some recollection as to

10:42:50 why Council did not take action.

10:42:53 From my limited experience here in the two years we have

10:42:57 been here, if we don't direct -- what?

10:43:00 Three.

10:43:00 Three.

10:43:01 Okay.

10:43:01 I'm bad at math.

10:43:02 But if we don't give staff direction to actually go do

10:43:11 something, they don't have direction to go do something.

10:43:16 So, I said it last time, I said it December 5th, we dropped

10:43:21 the ball.

10:43:21 You had been requesting us to do something.

10:43:24 The YCDC had requested us to address this.

10:43:29 The vendors, the club owners, Richard from the boom, from

10:43:34 the dirty shame has been asking us to do something, and we

10:43:37 didn't do anything.

10:43:40 Can you shed light as to why this was never pursued?

10:43:44 >> Vince Pardo, manager of Ybor Development Corporation.

10:43:49 Very strict remembrance of that, is that you opted.

10:43:53 You had two models in front of you.

10:43:55 What you did direct staff to do was go forward and draft an

10:43:58 ordinance dealing with the late night issue, rather than the

10:44:01 nightclub issue.

10:44:02 So I don't think staff ever got direction to go forward.

10:44:05 And draft an ordinance and bring it back to you for night

10:44:07 clubs.

10:44:08 Momentum seemed to shift to looking at late night issues.

10:44:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So we just never asked staff to come

10:44:14 forward with an ordinance to address the, the issues of

10:44:17 nightclub large venues that you had requested us to do?

10:44:21 >> Correct.

10:44:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So nobody told you to stop?

10:44:23 , or told planning to stop.

10:44:25 We just didn't bring it forward.

10:44:28 With.

10:44:29 >> But you did ask for an ordinance to come back dealing

10:44:31 with the late night issues.

10:44:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

10:44:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Coyle, any other additional?

10:44:43 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Not now.

10:44:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

10:44:44 To appear and present revisions to the ordinance.

10:44:47 Were those revisions to the ordinance that you spoke about?

10:44:50 On A?

10:44:50 Okay.

10:44:52 Yes, ma'am?

10:44:53 >> That was part A.

10:44:54 I am here on part B, which was basically to follow up on the

10:44:59 report that, a report on the draft ordinance that City

10:45:03 Council had motion to have on their December 5th agenda.

10:45:08 What I had sent to you prior to that date for your

10:45:12 consideration were two ordinances that were prepared to be

10:45:18 as -- I'm sorry.

10:45:21 That were prepared to be as directfully responsive to City

10:45:24 Council's motion as possible.

10:45:26 I think part of what City Council was looking for was, once

10:45:30 you have an inviting, you can identify a lot more issues you

10:45:35 want to address further.

10:45:37 The first change is chapter 14, which is your general

10:45:39 offenses portion of your code.

10:45:41 It deals with the hours of operation when you're allowed to

10:45:44 sell alcoholic beverages.

10:45:45 Currently sales of alcoholic beverages are allowed from

10:45:49 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. except for Sunday when it's

10:45:52 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. with certain exceptions, which I

10:45:54 will discuss later.

10:45:55 The change in the draft that was before you distinguished

10:45:59 between on premise and off premise, off-premise hours did

10:46:02 not change.

10:46:03 On-premise hours changed to midnight unless you received a

10:46:07 separate business operating permit that would allow you to

10:46:10 stay open until 3:00 a.m.

10:46:12 The exemptions that are currently in our code did not

10:46:14 change.

10:46:15 And that had to deal with Tampa International Airport, which

10:46:17 is allowed to open at 7:00 a.m. on Sunday, as well as

10:46:21 hotels, motels and retail stores, which cannot sell outside

10:46:26 of the hours which we previously discussed, but are allowed

10:46:29 to remain open 24 hours day.

10:46:31 The second ordinance which I have provided to you was a

10:46:34 business regulation dealing with chapter 6.

10:46:37 It was alcoholic beverage establishment extended hours

10:46:40 permit.

10:46:41 The first things the ordinance addressed was who it applied

10:46:45 to.

10:46:45 The direction that I heard from City Council that it applied

10:46:48 to all premises with on premise consumption of alcoholic

10:46:52 beverages.

10:46:52 That certainly a discussion point.

10:46:54 If City Council wants to keep it that broad.

10:46:56 The second one is who gets the permit.

10:46:59 As I stated, this is a business operating permanent, not a

10:47:02 land use permit, so we had establish that the business

10:47:04 establishment that holds the state license would be the

10:47:07 entity responsible for getting that permit.

10:47:09 The application was very streamlined.

10:47:13 It just had to be signed and sworn, notarized with the name

10:47:16 and the address and a statement that the permittee

10:47:19 recognized the granting of the extended hours permit is a

10:47:22 privilege and not a right.

10:47:24 Then pursuant to the draft ordinance, it would be issued

10:47:28 automatically upon payment of a fee that had not yet been

10:47:31 established.

10:47:32 I didn't actually get -- as I said last time, as I will say

10:47:37 this time.

10:47:38 City Council had wanted greater detail about how it was

10:47:40 going to be administered.

10:47:42 And the administration have not have an opportunity at this

10:47:45 point to have that established until we get parameters of

10:47:48 exactly what City Council is asking.

10:47:49 We can't exactly tell you exactly how much the fee will be

10:47:54 and how much woe would recommend the fee would be.

10:47:57 You would set the fee, but how much the administrative cost

10:47:59 would be, until we realize how City Council exactly wants to

10:48:02 have it established.

10:48:03 And exactly which establishments it would apply to.

10:48:06 We also have it set up so that if the permit had been

10:48:10 revoked, you cannot get another permit for that location for

10:48:14 six months from the date of the revocation.

10:48:16 The operational standards are fairly straightforward.

10:48:20 It's effective for one year, non-transferable.

10:48:27 Has been to be maintained at the establishment and sets the

10:48:30 hours of operation and the business establishment must at

10:48:34 all times be in come plains with city parking requirements.

10:48:38 That is they must be up to city code.

10:48:40 It conspiracy annually and has to be renewed.

10:48:44 Suspension and revocation, it establishes what are the

10:48:50 violations.

10:48:52 One of the violations is if you are allowing the sale or

10:48:55 consumption of alcoholic beverages after 3:00 a.m.

10:48:59 The additionally, the ones Ms. Coyle just reviewed for you,

10:49:03 that were in Ybor one dealing with felony controlled

10:49:06 substances, homicide, felony murders, et cetera, are not

10:49:09 going to repeat all of them.

10:49:11 But those were also carried forward.

10:49:13 And also whether you have to -- can also be suspended or

10:49:18 revoked if you violated extended hours permit, such as you

10:49:22 don't have permit on premises or in violation of your

10:49:24 parking.

10:49:25 It is also a tiered suspension revocation.

10:49:27 30 days for your first.

10:49:29 60 after that it can be revoked.

10:49:31 One of the things that warrants further discussion, it had

10:49:37 been brought up both in the nightclub regulations as well as

10:49:42 I think at the December 5th hearing from some of the public

10:49:45 comments, is right now, it is a strict liability for any of

10:49:48 the violations listed.

10:49:50 There is no consideration if the business owner is reporting

10:49:53 those violations.

10:49:54 And that's certainly something that you could consider

10:49:57 changing in the ordinance.

10:49:59 There is notice of the suspension or revocation and then

10:50:03 that is automatic.

10:50:04 It would be determined administratively.

10:50:08 There is an opportunity for appeal.

10:50:09 City Council had directed that appeal go directly to City

10:50:11 Council.

10:50:12 Some of the other ordinances that we had looked at allowed

10:50:15 instead of sus pension or revocation, for example, St. Pete

10:50:19 allows you to have a security plan.

10:50:22 Some other establishments had it set up so that if you have

10:50:25 a number of minor violations drink -- minors drinking

10:50:31 alcohol, that you could then prohibit people from being

10:50:33 under 21.

10:50:34 So you do have some options other than revocation or

10:50:37 suspension.

10:50:37 But City Council did not direct that, so those are not

10:50:39 included in here.

10:50:40 And a, for personalities and remedies, it is as provided in

10:50:45 section 1-6, which as you recall allows for arrest or notice

10:50:48 to appear.

10:50:49 60 days in jail and maximum of $500 of fine and 60 days in

10:50:53 jail again as a maximum.

10:50:55 Or the City Council can take any appropriate action in court

10:50:58 that we deem necessary.

10:50:59 And that is a summary.

10:51:01 I'm available if there are any questions.

10:51:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Montelione?

10:51:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

10:51:06 And I guess I wanted to hear both A and B before discussion,

10:51:12 or I guess everybody else did too.

10:51:14 But we're only going to have ten minutes.

10:51:16 So, the -- I'm fully in support of part A, giving us the

10:51:26 tools to deal with out-of-control venues.

10:51:29 Not that we have any currently.

10:51:30 But to give us tools if it does come to a point where we

10:51:38 have operators of establishments that need to be controlled

10:51:43 and we have the tools and the teeth as people put it, to do

10:51:50 that.

10:51:50 Which is what our code currently lacks.

10:51:53 So the proposed regulations that Ms. Coyle discussed

10:51:58 earlier, and the letter and direction received from the YCDC

10:52:04 and the couple of workshops that were held with interested

10:52:08 parties, is something that I want to see finally move

10:52:13 forward after two years.

10:52:16 And go ahead and start putting together an ordinance that

10:52:20 could come to us, containing those provisions are in the

10:52:25 materials provided to us regarding nightclubs.

10:52:28 And Ms. Coyle, I have a question for you.

10:52:31 And I had asked you this before, so I'm not sure if you got

10:52:34 further in your research.

10:52:35 As far as part B is concerned and the business operating

10:52:39 permit, Mr. Suarez had asked you a while ago for the number

10:52:44 of affected businesses, or potentially affected businesses,

10:52:49 because so many have them on the hours of operation on their

10:52:53 site plan.

10:52:53 Have we established a number yet?

10:52:57 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No, not fully.

10:52:57 There are almost 2,000 of them.

10:52:59 And we actually have to read each ordinance and site plan in

10:53:03 detail.

10:53:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Fun.

10:53:04 >>CATHERINE COYLE: We have a fair percentage done.

10:53:06 But I can't give you an accurate number at this point.

10:53:08 I mentioned the e-mail that we're, every month I could

10:53:12 probably give a report on exactly where we are.

10:53:15 It's not something we can necessarily farm out to just any

10:53:18 general staff member because once you write it down, there's

10:53:23 a little fear that we put it out there and we have to --

10:53:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Oh, I understand.

10:53:29 And you feel directly responsible.

10:53:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I do.

10:53:32 And I don't want to get it wrong.

10:53:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I know you well, Ms. Coyle.

10:53:36 I know you well.

10:53:37 So, you know, I don't know how we could put an ordinance in

10:53:44 place, or even talk about putting an ordinance in place when

10:53:47 we have 2,000 potentially records to go through, maybe more.

10:53:53 And make a rule that the affected parties won't know about

10:54:03 until after the fact.

10:54:05 So, as far as even discussion of moving an ordinance forward

10:54:11 on any kind of business operating permit, I don't think we

10:54:15 could even dip a toe in that water until we have an answer

10:54:20 on how many affected businesses there are.

10:54:22 So, I am going to ask Council and I should have done this

10:54:35 fully the last time we discussed it on December 5th, to

10:54:39 table any discussion on a business operating permit, which

10:54:43 is on our agenda item 3-B.

10:54:49 >> That is a motion.

10:54:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, I'll hold that motion to a second.

10:54:53 I have a motion by Ms. Montelione, second bring Reddick.

10:54:55 Further discussion.

10:54:56 But let me go this.

10:54:58 Here's what I'm thinking.

10:54:59 And I need you both give me some -- how many licenses do we

10:55:02 have?

10:55:03 Second.

10:55:06 I haven't finished.

10:55:07 How many licenses to would he have that have been cited for

10:55:11 violation?

10:55:11 In other words, total licenses, how many have been violated?

10:55:16 What is the percent of those that have been violators?

10:55:19 How many have been cited for violation for closure, which is

10:55:22 altogether different?

10:55:24 Within the last two years that we started this process.

10:55:27 I need something because I don't see a great movement of,

10:55:34 from the industry and from the residents that have been

10:55:37 talked about, do we have a hundred that have violated? Do I

10:55:41 have 3,000 lightnings and X number have been violation for

10:55:45 closure?

10:55:46 I got to have something so I can vote on, so I can say this

10:55:50 is the reason why I'm casting this vote.

10:55:55 One way or the other.

10:55:56 And that's what I'm looking at, because I only recall one or

10:56:01 two instances where something has been closed.

10:56:03 And some of those loopholes have been changed.

10:56:06 Where you can't go out and get a 501(c)(3) and start a one

10:56:09 and get a liquor license every day and operate while you're

10:56:12 still in violation.

10:56:13 That has happened.

10:56:14 And the next one that's always been a thorn in my side was,

10:56:17 I have a parking lot nine miles away and I'm going to lease

10:56:20 it.

10:56:20 Or five inches away and I'm going to lease it.

10:56:23 And it's only good until you get what you want and then the

10:56:25 lease is thrown away.

10:56:26 That has to be changed.

10:56:28 And these are the things that have been sticking in my

10:56:31 throat for sometime on the alcohol zoning.

10:56:34 I haven't seen the police department come here and cry foul

10:56:41 that they need help.

10:56:42 I haven't seen that.

10:56:43 I haven't heard of it.

10:56:45 Not only haven't I seen it, I haven't heard about it.

10:56:48 And that leaves me to understand what am I doing?

10:56:53 And why am I doing it?

10:56:55 So I got to have some numbers to justify myself into voting

10:56:59 and implementing something that's needed.

10:57:01 To be a legislature and pass laws is not good enough for me.

10:57:06 I just have to know what the facts are, ma'am.

10:57:08 Yes, sir?

10:57:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.

10:57:12 And I think this goes to the motion itself too.

10:57:15 Which is, there are two things.

10:57:16 The two things that we're looking here, part A and part B.

10:57:20 The part A is, our reaction to things that have happened in

10:57:23 the past at Ybor City.

10:57:25 Part B is our effort to try and solve some of the problems

10:57:28 that were created by our reaction to part A.

10:57:33 So, one of the reasons I think that the chair has laid it

10:57:37 out fairly eloquently is that we need to have more

10:57:42 information to determine what goes forward.

10:57:43 I know in my mind some of the things that I would like to

10:57:46 see on the business use permit aspect of it, is that I would

10:57:49 rather see us have a permit and the permitting would start

10:57:54 for any new applicant that is come forward.

10:57:56 Not those that are already currently enforced.

10:57:59 Primarily because, and this is ply reasoning, those folks

10:58:02 that are already operating have gone through an incredibly

10:58:06 lengthy and expensive process to get their land use permit

10:58:10 approved by our Council and Councils previous.

10:58:14 I think that it is a bit of it an unfair disadvantage to

10:58:20 them that we now request for a business use permit on top of

10:58:23 all the other processes.

10:58:24 I've been told by our zoning folks that that means that if

10:58:27 they wanted to change the time, they'd probably have to go

10:58:29 back, undo the land use and site plan and then come back and

10:58:34 ask for the business use permit.

10:58:36 I may be wrong about that, but nonetheless, there's a lot of

10:58:38 other issues we need to discuss about this.

10:58:40 I don't think table's the right words to use on the

10:58:45 amendment.

10:58:46 I think this is something we still need to discuss because

10:58:48 as my colleague Ms. Capin has mentioned before, we never

10:58:52 brought up the original ordinance to discuss for lots of

10:58:57 reasons, but I think that we need to discuss how we use

10:59:01 business use permits as opposed to land use in order to not

10:59:05 only take control of those bad actors that are out there,

10:59:08 but also have a better sense of how we want some of these

10:59:13 venues to operate.

10:59:14 I think that that's a legitimate issue and a legitimate

10:59:18 discussion.

10:59:18 I don't have a problem with the motion itself.

10:59:21 Just that I don't think we're tabling it.

10:59:23 I just think we're bringing it up for future discussion or

10:59:25 something like that that's all I have to say, chair.

10:59:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

10:59:29 Ms. Montelione?

10:59:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't know, maybe I took the chairman's

10:59:34 words a little bit differently.

10:59:35 But to me, we're looking to solve a problem that doesn't

10:59:38 exist.

10:59:39 We have certain problems.

10:59:42 One of them is the nightclubs, which in the part A is

10:59:49 addressing, which is what the public has asked us to

10:59:52 address.

10:59:53 The other is parking, which is something else that has come

10:59:58 up that the public has asked us to address.

11:00:01 But we can address parking with our parking regulations code

11:00:06 changes, and we have talked about having that discussion as

11:00:09 land use.

11:00:10 And I'm fully in support of that and have asked that we talk

11:00:14 about parking as related to location and certain

11:00:19 establishments.

11:00:20 Or types of establishments.

11:00:22 And that is something that we need to do because I'm tired

11:00:26 of talking about parking every time we have a quasi-judicial

11:00:28 hearing on an application.

11:00:29 But that's not -- we don't need a business operating permit

11:00:33 that affects every business in the entire city to address

11:00:37 parking that is isolated to certain areas.

11:00:41 We don't need a business operating permit to address large

11:00:46 venue night clubs and security at large venue nightclubs

11:00:50 when it's only going to affect, or it's only an issue at

11:00:55 certain size clubs and certain locations.

11:00:58 We don't need to have everyone in the entire city have a

11:01:02 permit because we have these isolated issues and isolated

11:01:07 neighborhoods, and putting the teeth in our ordinance.

11:01:10 And your characterization of saying that part A is

11:01:18 reactionary and part B is proactive, I understand why you

11:01:23 put it that way.

11:01:24 But I think that we have been proactive and not reactive

11:01:29 every single time we have a quasi-judicial hearing.

11:01:33 Because every time a permit comes to us for alcoholic

11:01:37 beverage use, we discussion it.

11:01:38 So it's not like we're not doing anything about, the issues.

11:01:43 So, I think that, I really, I really don't believe that we

11:01:50 need to be out there solving problems that don't exist.

11:01:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:01:54 Let me say this.

11:01:55 It's already 11.

11:01:57 I said we're going to stop at 11.

11:01:59 I don't want to stop this process until we get back.

11:02:02 I want to continue this and discuss it fully, especially the

11:02:05 payments to the TPD, what happens if they don't pay, what

11:02:08 happens, do they have an escrow account they draw from?

11:02:12 I don't know those answers.

11:02:13 All those things have to be done, foremost for the public to

11:02:16 be protected, not only physically but monetarily.

11:02:19 I don't want -- I'm not going to subsidize anyone.

11:02:22 I want to know what happens on all that process, if

11:02:25 somebody's not paid.

11:02:26 And that's happened in the past.

11:02:27 I know it has.

11:02:28 But we're going to stand in recess till 2:00.

11:02:32 I'm sorry, Mr. Suarez, I'm going to hold you, you'll be the

11:02:35 first one back at 2:00.

11:02:36 I appreciate it very much.

11:02:37 All you in attendance.

11:02:38 We'll be in recess until 2:00.

11:02:40 Thank you.




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.

Tampa City Council

2:00 p.m. Session

02:04:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Roll call?

02:04:27 [Roll Call]

02:04:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

02:04:34 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

02:04:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

02:04:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

02:04:39 I understand that we're still on number 3.

02:04:42 In fact, I know we're still in number 3.

02:04:44 In fact, we started with number 3.

02:04:46 I would like to have at least one or two more Councilmembers

02:04:51 here on number 3 because it's been going on for some period

02:04:54 of time.

02:04:54 But I'll ask Cathy Coyle and if any of the other

02:04:59 Councilmembers are coming up, there they come.

02:05:02 Ms. Coyle, would you like to talk about the first portion of

02:05:05 it on the venue of large nightclubs, part A?

02:05:11 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Catherine Coyle, planning and

02:05:13 development.

02:05:13 Only to recap briefly what we talked about before.

02:05:16 The nightclub, this is operating permit is the permit that

02:05:21 we had been working on, originally at Council's direction,

02:05:25 to legal department.

02:05:26 And working through YCDC and other various people on the

02:05:30 industry, looking at potential business operating permit

02:05:34 dealing with conditions and criteria for a large venue

02:05:37 nightclubs.

02:05:39 And the criteria would relate to potentially security

02:05:43 measures.

02:05:45 Crowd control maintenance.

02:05:47 And then looking at possible ability to suspend or revoke

02:05:52 those operating permits whenever there are any type of

02:05:57 violent crime or possession of firearms against state law,

02:06:00 possession of marijuana, per state statute.

02:06:03 Several of those criteria listed in there.

02:06:05 Which again are similar to the ones listed in the part B, as

02:06:09 well.

02:06:10 And with any additional questions that you have.

02:06:13 I'm available.

02:06:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

02:06:15 Comments by Councilmembers on part A?

02:06:18 Who wants the floor?

02:06:28 Mr. Suarez?

02:06:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You've got the last beat down before.

02:06:33 So it's now my turn.

02:06:34 Thank you, chair.

02:06:36 Back to sort of what we were discussing before, which is

02:06:39 what part A and part B actually mean.

02:06:42 For me, I think that if we look at part B, because we

02:06:46 haven't really done an analysis of some of the effects and

02:06:49 some of the other things and because we did not have the

02:06:52 other ordinance before us, I think we had a motion on the

02:06:57 floor before we left that I don't think we voted on.

02:07:00 I think that we should bring this back at some point.

02:07:02 If it's in agreement with the rest of the Council, on part

02:07:05 B.

02:07:06 I think part A we definitely, if we're going to move

02:07:09 forward, let's move forward now on it then because it seems

02:07:11 to me that there's larger issue at hand here.

02:07:15 It is not just large venue.

02:07:16 I know what YCDC wants.

02:07:18 I don't think that looking at the second part will affect

02:07:24 what that first part is saying.

02:07:26 The first part, if we do eventually pass that as an

02:07:28 ordinance, it will probably affect primarily the folks over

02:07:34 in Ybor.

02:07:35 And part B will affect everyone.

02:07:37 So, I think we need to really discuss and come up with a

02:07:40 good assessment of.

02:07:42 So, I have nothing else to say about that, other than, you

02:07:46 know, we did not act on that previous motion.

02:07:48 We may want to look at moving forward from, from 3 so we can

02:07:54 get going.

02:07:54 Thank you, chair.

02:07:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

02:07:56 Any other Councilmembers?

02:07:57 Ms. Montelione?

02:08:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just that on part A, I would like, as I

02:08:07 said before, this is what we asked for.

02:08:09 This is solving some of the issues, this is putting teeth

02:08:11 into our code for the large venues.

02:08:14 And I do want to see this codified.

02:08:16 So, if we can come back on, with language for an ordinance,

02:08:23 but I do want to go ahead and vote on the motion that I, I

02:08:28 made earlier on part B.

02:08:32 I mean, even though we didn't talk about it in depth the

02:08:38 last time, we have talked about it before.

02:08:40 And we continue to talk about it.

02:08:42 And the public now is a little bit thinner than it was this

02:08:48 morning.

02:08:50 But I think we use this phrase when we're in quasi-judicial

02:08:55 hearings, and the applicant keeps asking for a continuation.

02:09:00 And what we say is that we don't want to have too many

02:09:06 continuations because you wear down the public.

02:09:08 They eventually stop coming to the hearings because we

02:09:12 postpone it, we postpone it and they keep showing up and

02:09:15 then, you know, and we chastise applicants for doing that.

02:09:19 And we have even at a time put a stop to it to say no, this

02:09:23 is the last time, we're not going to continue it again.

02:09:25 And I think the same practice could be identified as going

02:09:33 on right now.

02:09:34 We keep talking about it.

02:09:36 A large crowd -- the first time a large crowd shows up.

02:09:40 Second time, a medium size crowd shows up.

02:09:43 The third time, an even smaller crowd shows up.

02:09:45 And that's what's happening here.

02:09:49 It doesn't -- it didn't make the, you know, above the fold

02:09:51 in the paper this time.

02:09:53 Even though it was coming up, this is I've got Sunday

02:09:57 December 1st paper.

02:09:59 It was big news then, but you know, when we schedule this

02:10:02 discussion on the 5th, it wasn't big news yesterday or over

02:10:05 the weekend for people to come here and talk about this

02:10:08 ordinance.

02:10:08 So, I think we have talked about it plenty.

02:10:13 The public has made their voice heard.

02:10:15 And it's overwhelmingly against, from what I've seen in the

02:10:22 letters, the e-mails, the phone calls, in person, on

02:10:27 Facebook, on my accounts where people have voiced their

02:10:31 opinions and I really feel that we have -- we're wearing

02:10:38 tout public by continuing to go forward with this

02:10:40 discussion.

02:10:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

02:10:41 We get to your, the motion in a second.

02:10:46 Mr. Cohen?

02:10:47 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, since we're not talking about the

02:10:49 merits of the issue here at all, I really disagree with that

02:10:54 analysis.

02:10:54 And I'll tell you why.

02:10:56 I think that what I heard today are a variety of different

02:11:00 opinions, with people that are basically all over the map.

02:11:03 And to some degree, I think that's reflective of us.

02:11:07 I think we have been to some degree all over the map.

02:11:10 And the reason is because this is a very complicated issue.

02:11:14 And it is complicated partly because of the way in which we

02:11:19 do our wet zonings and alcohol permitting to begin with.

02:11:24 Like I said, I'm not going to get into the merits of the

02:11:28 issue.

02:11:29 Of course that plays into it.

02:11:30 But I don't think it's appropriate to just table the

02:11:34 discussion of it.

02:11:37 It's really not the same thing as when we continues a

02:11:40 quasi-judicial hearing, in my view.

02:11:43 In my view, we continue to talk about it because we're

02:11:47 trying to wind our way through issues that we're having

02:11:52 difficulty with.

02:11:53 And I think -- I heard a lot of people in the audience today

02:11:57 say things like, you know, move it along and stop talking

02:12:02 about it.

02:12:02 But I just don't think that we're at a point yet where we

02:12:06 have come to the kind of consensus that we can tie a bow on

02:12:10 it and put it on the shelf.

02:12:12 I have suggested in the past that we have a workshop about

02:12:15 this.

02:12:16 That was not something, if I recall, that the Council wanted

02:12:20 to do.

02:12:20 But I do think that the issue and the different compete

02:12:24 being interests that we're trying to balance need more

02:12:30 discussion and more analysis.

02:12:31 And there's an awful lot of things about the proposed

02:12:34 ordinance substantive issues that we need to just work our

02:12:39 way through as a policy matter.

02:12:41 And that's my view of it.

02:12:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other Councilmembers?

02:12:44 Ms. Capin?

02:12:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

02:12:46 Supporting this to go forward when it is not finished is

02:12:54 just not good policy-making legislation.

02:13:02 It's just not ready.

02:13:04 It's obvious with what happened.

02:13:06 And the only thing that happened today was the, the

02:13:13 nightclub, the large nightclub venue was brought forth.

02:13:18 None of it was debated.

02:13:20 And really, it hasn't been really heard outside of Ybor.

02:13:23 And that is really important.

02:13:26 It's very important.

02:13:27 You heard here that it was not worked on past a certain

02:13:31 point.

02:13:32 So we're going to go forward?

02:13:36 The other thing is, when the motion was made for part B, it

02:13:41 was discussed that at that time when it came forward, which

02:13:44 it was never heard, and that is a disservice to the public.

02:13:49 That was an absolute disservice to the public.

02:13:51 So I asked for it to be brought back as a staff report

02:13:55 because I thought it had to be aired.

02:13:58 It had to be brought out.

02:14:00 Because it was a lot of misconceptions that the media

02:14:04 promoted.

02:14:05 They absolutely did.

02:14:07 And it was a bandwagon and it was -- so, when -- you know, I

02:14:16 brought it forth asking -- and you know, it didn't get to a

02:14:21 draft ordinance by itself.

02:14:24 Nor am I a dictator and I dictated it.

02:14:27 There was a vote on this Council that brought it forth two

02:14:31 times.

02:14:31 So, apparently there was merit.

02:14:37 Some people saw merit in it.

02:14:39 Some of my colleagues.

02:14:41 Nonetheless, I think that listening to the public in these

02:14:44 two, both December the 5th and now today, I believe that

02:14:48 yes, we need to move forward, but we need to move forward

02:14:52 and have a consensus and come up with a, I think the

02:14:58 chairman brought up some very good points, that I think are

02:15:02 very important to how are we going to move forward?

02:15:05 Which direction?

02:15:06 And it really is, because this affects everyone in our city.

02:15:11 So, for that reason, I think that we -- we're not done by

02:15:17 any stretch of the imagination.

02:15:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

02:15:21 Mr. Reddick?

02:15:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

02:15:22 This seemed to be a very sensitive issue to everyone.

02:15:29 The chair -- when I listen to Ms. Kert give her report and

02:15:36 there's, just seemed to be too many unanswered questions.

02:15:39 We don't have no idea of what a person would be charged for

02:15:46 the permit.

02:15:47 We're not sure -- I'm not too positive about the off-duty

02:15:57 officer fees.

02:16:00 You know, with supervisor being on duty, it's going to cost

02:16:07 more.

02:16:07 And I'm concerned about the scale they have in the proposal,

02:16:11 where having to have so many officers, off-duty officers and

02:16:18 involving the process and a cost to a business.

02:16:20 Cost for a permit.

02:16:22 Cost to renew it every year.

02:16:25 And Mr. Chair, you made some very, very valid points, that

02:16:32 need to be addressed.

02:16:33 And I think we haven't gotten there yet.

02:16:37 And I just feel, we cannot rush this.

02:16:42 This needs to be -- this is a major decision that the

02:16:46 Council about to embark on.

02:16:48 But we shouldn't rush this.

02:16:52 We need to make sure we got all these questions answered.

02:16:55 We need to make sure that we're doing what we think is

02:16:58 right.

02:16:59 And we need to make sure that we're not putting ourselves in

02:17:04 a position where somebody want to challenge that in the

02:17:08 courts.

02:17:10 And previous meeting, we have heard some comments about

02:17:13 that.

02:17:13 So, I'm just not comfortable at all with so many unanswered

02:17:19 questions sitting out there.

02:17:21 And I think we need to resolve those prior to moving it in

02:17:27 any direction.

02:17:28 Just my comment.

02:17:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

02:17:30 Well, from what I've -- well, let me just, from what I

02:17:33 gather, the feeling of the consensus or expression is that

02:17:40 it's going to be changed in the future, but it won't be

02:17:43 today, from what I, consensus that I feel and the words that

02:17:46 were used.

02:17:46 What I'd like to see is conclusion to this.

02:17:51 Certainly there are things that have happened in this

02:17:54 country that have been controversial.

02:17:56 And some have taken even less too time than this.

02:18:04 Obama care.

02:18:04 This has been hanging just as long as Obamacare, and we

02:18:08 still don't have it.

02:18:09 So, and it's not really Obamacare, but that's what the

02:18:12 public knows it by.

02:18:13 If we're going to continue to do this, we ought to ask

02:18:19 direction to the folks in the legal department and Cathy

02:18:23 Coyle in the planning manager to come back on two items.

02:18:26 A, separate the large venue.

02:18:29 Where are we at today and what is needed, bring it back for

02:18:32 a vote up or down.

02:18:34 For Ybor City.

02:18:35 That's what I think was discussed today by the vendors of

02:18:40 the large venues.

02:18:41 And then B, to incorporate any idea Council may have,

02:18:45 including those four that I thought of just very briefly

02:18:49 about how many licenses do we have, how many have been cited

02:18:52 for violation?

02:18:53 What's the percent of those violators?

02:18:55 And how many were cited since this started two years ago?

02:18:58 And how many have we closed?

02:19:00 And for what reason?

02:19:01 And the state law come into effect where we can ask those

02:19:07 agencies to help us close the business.

02:19:09 This is what it's all about.

02:19:11 From what I heard today from the industry, no one wants

02:19:16 somebody that's creating a problem for the industry.

02:19:18 That was expressed by I think every individual that spoke on

02:19:22 behalf of ownership, especially in Ybor City.

02:19:26 So, give me a date.

02:19:29 So that I can go to item number 4.

02:19:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Are we going to vote on my motion?

02:19:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yeah, I am.

02:19:36 In fact, I'll tell you what I'm going to do.

02:19:38 Your motion was to table it.

02:19:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: My motion was to table 3-B of the agenda

02:19:44 item.

02:19:44 And the reason I asked for that is because -- I don't know

02:19:53 about the rest of you, but I've heard from dozens and dozens

02:19:56 of people who do not want us to have yet another regulation,

02:20:04 another piece of red tape, another process for them to go

02:20:07 through, and, over the time we have been hearing about this.

02:20:12 And this agenda item was originally dated May 16th of 2013.

02:20:17 So we have been talking about this, you know, I've been

02:20:23 here.

02:20:25 Ms. Coyle, do you remember the date that you had those

02:20:28 workshops with not just the folks from Ybor City, but other

02:20:32 interested parties?

02:20:33 They were here in this room.

02:20:34 It was over a year ago.

02:20:39 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The meetings related to the nightclub

02:20:42 regulations were June 26th and 27th, 2012.

02:20:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 2012.

02:20:49 We have been talking about this nightclub regulation since

02:20:52 2012.

02:20:53 All of the verbiage that she provided us in the backup

02:20:58 material and what she put on the screen for us to look at,

02:21:01 we discussed a little bit earlier in looking at those

02:21:03 regulations.

02:21:04 We have been talking about since 2012.

02:21:07 This is 2014.

02:21:09 It's two years.

02:21:11 So to say that we haven't, you know, this came out of

02:21:14 nowhere and that we haven't had time to vet all of these

02:21:18 questions and answers, during those workshops, they vetted

02:21:22 those questions and answered.

02:21:23 And as Ms. Kert said, you can't put a dollar amount on the

02:21:27 process.

02:21:28 We could ballpark it.

02:21:29 It's probably not going to be, you know, over a hundred

02:21:32 dollars, maybe in the area of a hundred dollars.

02:21:36 For another, you know, permit process.

02:21:39 We have been talking about this for two years.

02:21:42 We have talked it to death.

02:21:44 We have worn out the public.

02:21:46 The hotel and motel association representative wasn't even

02:21:50 here today.

02:21:50 And this affects their business in a big way.

02:21:55 So, we have got people who are dropping off because they're

02:21:59 tired of coming back.

02:22:00 So, you know -- when we talked about this in December, I had

02:22:09 counted, and I may have missed some.

02:22:13 There were 26 people that spoke during public comment, all

02:22:15 on the same subject.

02:22:17 Today, we had, we had 22 people speak today total.

02:22:22 But half of them were speaking about just the Walmart in

02:22:25 Seminole Heights.

02:22:26 So you see how the number has dropped down.

02:22:28 Six of those people today spoke from antidrug alliance or

02:22:34 MADD or UT.

02:22:36 So, I don't think we need to keep talking about this and

02:22:43 have another workshop and drag it out some more, because

02:22:47 talking about this for two years means that we have been

02:22:49 doing the work.

02:22:50 Our staff has been doing the work.

02:22:51 Legal department has been doing the work.

02:22:53 I don't know how much more we can discuss this.

02:22:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

02:23:00 Your motion was seconded by Mr. Reddick, if I recall.

02:23:03 Am I correct?

02:23:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, it was.

02:23:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That second still holds?

02:23:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: I forgot the motion now.

02:23:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The motion was to --

02:23:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The motion, I made a motion to table part

02:23:12 B of our agenda, item 3-B of our agenda.

02:23:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: So you have a date?

02:23:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You lay it on the table.

02:23:22 It is postponed indefinitely.

02:23:23 So, somebody could bring it back at some point in time.

02:23:26 But the motion to lay on the table is to postpone the item

02:23:30 indefinitely.

02:23:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's like putting it into funeral parlor

02:23:33 and not digging into a hole.

02:23:34 [ Laughter ]

02:23:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What else can I tell you?

02:23:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Maybe is a some other Council after the

02:23:40 election can bring it back up.

02:23:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

02:23:43 I'm going to take that motion and take a vote on it now.

02:23:47 And then whatever happens, we'll go to part A.

02:23:50 I have a motion by Ms. Montelione, second by Mr. Reddick to

02:23:54 table 3-B, part B.

02:23:57 All in favor of the motion to table, please indicate by

02:24:00 saying aye.

02:24:01 Opposed nay.

02:24:03 Okay.

02:24:05 It's 4-3 on the nay side I believe.

02:24:09 Voice vote, Mr. Suarez.

02:24:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Nay.

02:24:11 [ Inaudible ]

02:24:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

02:24:23 We continue in the sunshine like we were in the beginning.

02:24:26 So now we go back -- what do you want to do with this thing?

02:24:33 Let me know.

02:24:35 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I have a second motion to move 3-A

02:24:38 forward, to have Ms. Coyle work with Ms. Kert to codify the

02:24:45 language as provided in our documents today, with the

02:24:51 answers that Mr. Reddick had asked for about the cost for

02:24:59 on-duty police or off-duty police.

02:25:03 Sorry.

02:25:04 And any other expenses that may be referenced once the

02:25:09 language is put into the ordinance, so we can discuss that

02:25:12 before we vote on a first reading.

02:25:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

02:25:15 Let me simplify that for the clerk.

02:25:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thanks.

02:25:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You're asking for in essence an ordinance

02:25:21 to be brought back with the information that you brought up

02:25:23 based on what Mr. Reddick asked for, and I'd like to add if

02:25:27 possible -- somebody's got tow add, not me, along with the

02:25:30 payments of TPD, how's that collected, if default, what

02:25:34 happens?

02:25:35 The whole nine yards, enchilada.

02:25:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: As they do in the legislature.

02:25:40 Usually when they hear a bill, it has to come back with the

02:25:43 costs associated with that bill.

02:25:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other discussion?

02:25:47 Mr. Reddick?

02:25:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Chair, I just want to add a friendly

02:25:51 amendment to that to also include the question that you have

02:25:54 raised as a part of this inquiry.

02:25:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Those four questions that I asked

02:25:58 earlier, how many license do we have, have been licenses

02:26:04 have been cited for violations?

02:26:05 What is the% of violators compared to the total license that

02:26:08 we have?

02:26:09 How many have we cited for violation of closure in the last

02:26:13 two years since this process started?

02:26:15 So, that will give us a clear picture of what we have done.

02:26:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I accept that friendly amendment.

02:26:23 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Catherine Coyle again.

02:26:25 Looking for how many people have been put on notice for

02:26:28 violation within the last two years, since the process has

02:26:32 been in place?

02:26:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Very simple.

02:26:34 How many licenses, alcohol licenses do you have?

02:26:38 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Permits you mean, not licenses.

02:26:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: How many of those permits have been cited

02:26:43 for violations?

02:26:46 >>CATHERINE COYLE: In all of time?

02:26:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In all time -- let me put it to two

02:26:56 years.

02:26:56 Now, within that, I'm glad you asked that, because then you

02:27:00 have multiple violators of the same location.

02:27:03 You extrapolate those out to one multiple violators within

02:27:07 that.

02:27:08 And single violators, and how many of those have been fixed.

02:27:13 >>CATHERINE COYLE: What you'll get within that report also

02:27:15 is from the annual reports on the restaurants, because

02:27:17 there's always a percentage every year that don't file on

02:27:20 time.

02:27:20 And we issue a notice of noncompliance.

02:27:22 So...

02:27:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand that's a minute little thing

02:27:28 that is usually fixed.

02:27:30 >>CATHERINE COYLE: You're looking for not the annual side.

02:27:32 You're looking for general violations?

02:27:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Right.

02:27:35 And then what percent of those that are violated is a

02:27:42 percent of the total licenses you have?

02:27:44 In other words, you have a hundred licenses, you have ten

02:27:47 violators, you got a 10% ratio.

02:27:50 And number four, how many that we have cited for violations

02:27:55 of closure, this is altogether different.

02:27:58 That we have gone after that establishment for being what

02:28:02 they termed earlier the bad apple in the bushel.

02:28:06 In the last two years since we started this conversation.

02:28:11 I think you can do that.

02:28:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: One thing I will not be able to

02:28:21 necessarily tell you is the exact locations because some

02:28:24 will wind up being places we're actively investigating.

02:28:27 >> CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't need the exact location.

02:28:30 I'm not asking for anything that's going to be something

02:28:34 that will hurt us.

02:28:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: How long?

02:28:39 We're in February.

02:28:40 I would say April, 60 days probably.

02:28:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I ask because Mr. Suarez had asked the

02:28:49 question about how many establishments are regulated by site

02:28:53 plan for their hours.

02:28:54 That was six, eight months ago.

02:28:57 And no offense, because believe me, you know how I feel

02:29:03 about you.

02:29:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It wasn't actually six or eight months

02:29:07 ago, but that's okay.

02:29:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It was -- maybe not eight.

02:29:12 It was at least six.

02:29:13 And we're not through it yet.

02:29:18 I mean, we were hoping -- I think that's why we set this

02:29:22 date -- that's why we set the December date because we were

02:29:25 hoping to have that information before we heard the item

02:29:28 again.

02:29:30 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I believe it was November that the

02:29:32 question was asked, how many.

02:29:33 Late October.

02:29:35 Actually at the October workshop.

02:29:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So four months.

02:29:38 I'm exaggerating.

02:29:40 Four months.

02:29:40 So -- you can do two or three times the amount of work in 60

02:29:47 days.

02:29:49 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, this is just looking back at the

02:29:51 total number of permits, which I can tell you pretty easily

02:29:54 that are active.

02:29:55 And looking at the number that we've actually issued a

02:29:56 violation for related to the alcohol permit, I actually

02:30:01 handle those, so I can look through it pretty quickly, but

02:30:02 it's also coupled with bringing back an ordinance as you had

02:30:05 in your motion.

02:30:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So, Mr. Calendar?

02:30:10 >> I would suggest April 17th.

02:30:11 At 9:00 a.m.

02:30:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: April 17th at 9:00 a.m.

02:30:16 Mr. Reddick?

02:30:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Fine.

02:30:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez?

02:30:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just want to, going with the Florida state

02:30:22 fair theme that we have, I think we have a barrel of apples

02:30:25 here and a barrel of oranges somewhere else.

02:30:28 The part A portion, this is something we have talked about

02:30:33 the last two years.

02:30:34 The part B is not something that we have talked about for

02:30:36 two years.

02:30:37 First.

02:30:38 Secondly.

02:30:38 Some of the issues that Mr. Miranda brought up I believe is

02:30:41 going to affect part B primarily because the threshold for

02:30:46 the large venue is, I think it's 250 or more.

02:30:51 So, we can go and look at those violations, maybe even pare

02:30:54 it down so we can get those, so we can talk about part A

02:31:00 separately.

02:31:00 The biggest problem that we have had on this, we have mixed

02:31:02 the two.

02:31:03 It is -- that has been the biggest problem.

02:31:06 If we are talking about doing a business use permit that has

02:31:09 nothing to do with the large venue portion of it, that's the

02:31:13 only thing I have to say about it.

02:31:14 Your motion that is on the floor, which I don't believe has

02:31:17 been seconded yet, I believe --

02:31:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, it has.

02:31:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: He did second it.

02:31:22 Apologize, Mr. Reddick.

02:31:24 Is about large venue only, correct?

02:31:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

02:31:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think all the other issues we can talk

02:31:28 about since we're not going to table part B, we talk about

02:31:32 part B because that is a more overarching portion.

02:31:36 That's my guess.

02:31:38 Just a guess of mine.

02:31:40 I think Mr. Miranda's point about how many have been cited

02:31:44 because -- I want to make sure that the staff has the right

02:31:48 direction because I think that they going out to look at

02:31:50 everything for the part A portion, doesn't make sense in my

02:31:53 mind.

02:31:54 That's just me.

02:31:55 And maybe I'm incorrect about the discussion that was going

02:31:58 on, but that's just my feeling about it.

02:32:00 So, I mean, I'm going to support the motion to go forward

02:32:04 with part A and we'll talk more about part B after that.

02:32:07 So let's not confuse the two so we can get this thing going.

02:32:10 Thank.

02:32:10 >> You let me say this my name was used -- thank you very

02:32:13 much.

02:32:14 You might be right.

02:32:14 But you're going to have where you need it for part A or

02:32:19 part B.

02:32:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just want to make sure that discussion is

02:32:23 as crystal clear, because there's too much confusion as it

02:32:26 is.

02:32:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand.

02:32:27 Council ready for vote?

02:32:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was just going to say that if -- I

02:32:36 agree with Mr. Suarez, we don't necessarily need the

02:32:39 information for A.

02:32:41 If that means we can bring A back faster than 60 days, then

02:32:46 I would want to do that because they've been waiting two

02:32:48 years for us to do something.

02:32:49 So if we don't have to wait until April and we can do

02:32:52 something, you know, in February, then I would want that.

02:32:57 So it would mean, that would mean removal --

02:33:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Cathy Coyle?

02:33:06 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes, sir?

02:33:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If you don't have to do all of that

02:33:10 research, how quickly could you bring us back a large venue

02:33:13 nightclub ordinance?

02:33:16 >> Two weeks.

02:33:16 [ Laughter ]

02:33:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I would say 30 days because I'd still

02:33:24 want to get it back out to the YCDC folks and make sure,

02:33:28 because, you know, remember, we hadn't actually gotten to

02:33:31 the Howard folks as well.

02:33:32 So I'd at least want to route it to the business industry.

02:33:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

02:33:37 Never mind.

02:33:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's take a vote on item A-3, all in

02:33:41 favor of the motion made by Ms. Montelione, second by

02:33:43 Mr. Reddick, any further discussion by Councilmembers?

02:33:46 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

02:33:49 Opposed nay.

02:33:51 Motion passes 6-1.

02:33:54 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Capin voting no.

02:33:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay let's go back to item B.

02:34:05 What do you want me to do with item B?

02:34:08 Mr. Cohen?

02:34:10 >>HARRY COHEN: It sounds, from what I've heard, particularly

02:34:14 from a what, based on what Councilman Reddick said and what

02:34:18 Councilman Suarez said, that there are a series of questions

02:34:22 that need to be asked about this type of approach.

02:34:26 Councilman Reddick mentioned the cost.

02:34:29 I was also interested in that.

02:34:31 I think it would be very difficult to vote for any ordinance

02:34:33 where the cost was not absolutely nailed down and specific.

02:34:37 Another issue that I think we're going to have to work

02:34:39 through is, and a lot of the cities that have passed this,

02:34:46 they don't have the bifurcated system that we have with some

02:34:49 people having their times on the site plan and others having

02:34:55 to rely on code as the guidance to when they're allowed to

02:34:59 be opened.

02:35:00 And the research that we were talking about, I think bear

02:35:05 directly on that question.

02:35:06 So that's something that needs to be quantified and needs to

02:35:09 be worked through.

02:35:10 There was also I think, and Councilwoman Capin alluded to

02:35:17 this.

02:35:18 There was a wide spreads misperception when this came out

02:35:21 the last time, that we were just going to close the bars

02:35:23 down at 3:00.

02:35:24 And clearly that was never the intent.

02:35:27 Excuse me, at midnight.

02:35:28 I apologize.

02:35:29 Clearly that was never the intent.

02:35:31 And it created an atmosphere where the discussion I think

02:35:35 really moved beyond what was actually being proposed.

02:35:39 So, it seems to me that these issues have to be wrapped into

02:35:43 our discussion of this item for whenever it's going to be

02:35:46 brought back to us in whatever form.

02:35:48 And I think that it's these details -- the devil is in the

02:35:53 details of how this is going to work.

02:35:55 And it's some of these details that need to be fleshed out.

02:36:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What did you say?

02:36:07 >>HARRY COHEN: I guess what I was saying is that I think in

02:36:09 order to continue the discussion in a reasonable way, staff

02:36:12 is going to need some time to answer some of these questions

02:36:15 that have been raised and come back to us with some of this

02:36:18 information.

02:36:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other Councilmember?

02:36:21 Ms. Capin?

02:36:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: You're bringing up, you don't know how much

02:36:25 it costs.

02:36:25 Cathy Coyle, do we know how much the business permit is

02:36:28 going to cost?

02:36:30 Please come up.

02:36:31 We just voted on something that we don't know -- I mean,

02:36:37 Councilmembers talked about, we don't know how much it's

02:36:41 going to cost.

02:36:42 We shunt vote for something we don't know how much is going

02:36:45 to cost, referring to B, when A, we don't know what it's

02:36:49 going to cost.

02:36:50 It's -- it is mind-boggling.

02:36:56 I agree, we have another year and maybe after that election,

02:37:01 we'll get something really done.

02:37:03 I would like to -- you know, I'm going to propose something

02:37:09 that we didn't vote for.

02:37:11 And I think we really need to workshop this to death.

02:37:15 Thank you.

02:37:16 My motion is for a workshop on B and A.

02:37:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I've already taken care of A with a vote.

02:37:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Then a workshop on B and we need to discuss

02:37:29 it.

02:37:29 And besides that, if you look at A, in there, when it came

02:37:35 to the -- Mrs. Kert, when it came to the -- I mean in A,

02:37:43 there's police officers off duty.

02:37:45 The penalties that -- and I think even up here they were

02:37:49 mixing A and B.

02:37:51 >> You were.

02:37:53 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Because on A is where -- on B, there's no,

02:37:57 it does not state that you have to have two police officers,

02:38:00 three police officers, four police officers, but on A it

02:38:03 does.

02:38:04 And that was getting mixed up up here.

02:38:07 The other thing is, on B, when it has the violations, they

02:38:15 almost read right off of what the YCDC suggested.

02:38:22 >> That is correct.

02:38:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That is correct.

02:38:24 Yet, they were all here without reading it.

02:38:29 And I was determined -- I guess I'm not that determined --

02:38:35 to -- and we're standing here, you know, asking for

02:38:41 something to move forward when, and talking about we don't

02:38:44 know the price, we don't know how much it's going to cost.

02:38:47 But yeah, we're going to vote for it.

02:38:49 But we Schnitt vote for the other one because we don't know

02:38:52 how much it's going to cost.

02:38:53 So I think that the first motion that was made back in

02:38:59 December 5th and then it was made again January 23rd, by

02:39:04 Councilman Cohen, to workshop this, is not -- I make that

02:39:10 motion, that we workshop B and look at these.

02:39:15 I mean, it looks like we just want to give the public

02:39:20 something without really, just go okay, let's, here, let's

02:39:24 do this.

02:39:24 It's been two years.

02:39:25 Hasn't been two years because it was not, the YCDC worked on

02:39:29 it for a year before it was brought forth to us.

02:39:31 Which was January of '12 -- of '13.

02:39:36 Is when I got a notice from it.

02:39:38 So, we're looking at a year.

02:39:41 We're looking at something that affects -- you know, we had

02:39:45 26 people here.

02:39:45 We had ten people here.

02:39:47 We had 500 people there.

02:39:48 There's 300,000 people that live in this city.

02:39:51 And everything we do affects them.

02:39:53 We need to work through this and I do believe that's my

02:40:02 motion, if anyone wants to make a friendly amendment or a

02:40:05 second or whatever.

02:40:07 >>HARRY COHEN: I would second is it, with this proviso.

02:40:10 I think April 24th is the work hope day.

02:40:13 It's a week after we're scheduled to take up this part A

02:40:16 business.

02:40:16 It would give the staff plenty of time to answer some of the

02:40:19 questions that have been, that have been raised.

02:40:21 We could have a discussion and a workshop session, answering

02:40:24 all those questions, hear from the public again, and then

02:40:28 decide whether or not to move forward and it will also give

02:40:30 everyone up here a little bit of time to think through what

02:40:34 their issues are, because clearly everyone has different

02:40:37 ones.

02:40:38 Related to this type of an approach.

02:40:40 So, you know, I would second that, because I do think a

02:40:43 workshop discussion.

02:40:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Capin, second by

02:40:48 Mr. Cohen to workshop 3 B, on April 24th, the year 2014.

02:40:55 I want to make sure I have the right year.

02:40:57 At what time?

02:40:59 >> 9:00 a.m.

02:40:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: At 9:00 a.m.

02:41:00 Discussion of that motion?

02:41:02 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

02:41:03 Opposed nay.

02:41:08 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Montelione

02:41:11 voting no.

02:41:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: At least the votes haven't changed.

02:41:15 [ Laughter ]

02:41:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

02:41:18 We go to item number four.

02:41:27 >> Good morning, Council, Ernest Mueller, assistant city

02:41:29 attorney.

02:41:29 Hopefully this will be brief.

02:41:32 I'm here this afternoon to address item four, dealing with

02:41:35 manufactured homes being placed in the neighborhoods and in

02:41:39 the City of Tampa.

02:41:40 Now, I have stated before, I want to reiterate.

02:41:45 The city is going to be preempted with regard to regulating

02:41:49 manufactured homes when it comes to the building code.

02:41:52 However, zoning issues, land use issues can be regulated to

02:41:57 the city.

02:41:59 However, the state legislature gave a very clear directive.

02:42:05 Local requirements must be reasonable and uniformly applied

02:42:09 and enforced without any distinction as to whether a

02:42:13 building is conventionally constructed or is a manufactured

02:42:17 building.

02:42:17 In other words, whatever regulation we do when it comes to

02:42:20 land use and zoning has to equally apply and we can't

02:42:24 distinguish between it being a manufactured home and a

02:42:27 conventionally constructed building.

02:42:30 So, in light of all this, and in talking with Cathy Coyle,

02:42:36 trying to figure out the best way to draft an ordinance that

02:42:39 might regulate both of these, the conventionally constructed

02:42:48 and the manufactured building, we're going to need a little

02:42:51 bit more guidance.

02:42:52 Because what we can regulate are things such as floor

02:42:55 elevations, roof pitch, facades, front door orientation, and

02:43:02 we can do this either akin to kind of the overlay districts

02:43:05 we have done.

02:43:05 Or we can try and do it in supplemental regulation.

02:43:08 But what we need to try and figure out now is whether you

02:43:11 want to regulate as to only in residential zoning districts,

02:43:17 or non-residential or both.

02:43:19 Need to try and figure that out because that's going to

02:43:22 dictate what type of regulations we can try and put out

02:43:25 there that will be uniformly applied.

02:43:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez?

02:43:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me make sure I have this right

02:43:31 motorcycles Mueller.

02:43:32 You're saying the type of construction is immaterial because

02:43:34 it's superseded by state law, correct?

02:43:37 >> Correct.

02:43:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: State laws, the state's idea of what is a

02:43:42 manufactured home is in statute already.

02:43:47 >> Correct.

02:43:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What is that meaning when it comes to

02:43:51 manufactured homes?

02:43:51 As an example, my house may not be considered manufactured

02:43:55 home for differ criteria.

02:43:56 What are some of those criteria?

02:43:59 >> Manufactured homes is parts are already done and it's

02:44:02 gotten the state seal from the department of business and

02:44:05 professional regulation.

02:44:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It has to have a DBR seal.

02:44:10 >> Correct.

02:44:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What other criteria does it have to have?

02:44:14 >> Don't know all the different criteria.

02:44:16 But it's going to already be sealed and approved by the

02:44:19 state.

02:44:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And manufactured homes are the only type of

02:44:21 homes that are regulated in that manner?

02:44:24 Is that correct?

02:44:26 Because of course I think -- I may be wrong about this, but

02:44:29 I think manufactured homes, there's a specific type of

02:44:33 building criteria that you're going to look at, not only the

02:44:37 way the roof is strand down and how you're supposed to strap

02:44:40 it down to the ground, the type, not the type of flooring,

02:44:43 but it as a flooring, that it has, it is probably -- I don't

02:44:47 know this because I don't know the statute well -- probably

02:44:50 that it is not, had not been a permanent structure or can be

02:44:54 moved at some point as a nonpermanent structure.

02:44:57 I don't know about that.

02:44:58 Because manufactured homes have a different idea of what

02:45:02 that actually means.

02:45:03 So, when you're saying we can't regulate anything, so, other

02:45:07 than what we have, some of the criteria you mentioned, which

02:45:11 is pitch of roof, you know, the other criteria.

02:45:16 You know, does that mean no other materials are regulated by

02:45:20 us in terms of the type of materials?

02:45:22 Or is it just because if it's got a seal with a manufactured

02:45:26 housing from DBR, that's it?

02:45:29 You follow what I'm saying?

02:45:30 >> I think so.

02:45:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Someone wants and adobe house out of mud,

02:45:35 which would be stupid here in Florida, but people do some

02:45:38 stupid things.

02:45:39 You know, we couldn't regulate that.

02:45:42 As far as I know, based on what I just heard from you.

02:45:47 >> Speaking of manufactured buildings themselves, it's

02:45:50 pretty broad.

02:45:50 There are ones that seem very mobile on wheels, that can be

02:45:54 placed and strapped down.

02:45:55 We can regulate the strapping down, make sure it's done

02:45:58 correctly.

02:45:58 Then there's manufactured homes that are just actually going

02:46:02 to be right on the ground and will look very similar to

02:46:06 conventionally constructed homes.

02:46:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And there's no specifics in terms -- because

02:46:11 on the strap-down, do they have to have foundations?

02:46:14 You know, what is the specific to that?

02:46:17 My point is, where is it that we have some room that we can

02:46:20 then regulate that both dovetails with the state and follows

02:46:26 what their intent is, and in addition does what we want it

02:46:30 to do in terms of an ordinance?

02:46:32 >> Where we can regulate again is in the land use and zoning

02:46:36 type and design requirements.

02:46:38 And you know, so as I said, that might be, how the front

02:46:43 door would be oriented to the street.

02:46:45 Or how many windows it can have up front, or what, you know,

02:46:49 the pitch of its roof, things like that.

02:46:52 It would have to be, not just the manufactured, but it would

02:46:56 have to apply equally to conventionally constructed

02:47:00 building.

02:47:01 So that's what we -- that's how we would be able to regulate

02:47:05 it.

02:47:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.

02:47:06 But you didn't answer my question.

02:47:07 Because -- I think we may be talking across each other.

02:47:11 Let me see if I can clarify my own thoughts so I can give

02:47:15 you a real question to answer.

02:47:16 I apologize because this is one of those that's gotten a

02:47:20 little bit tricky.

02:47:21 You know, you live in a neighborhood like we all do.

02:47:24 We all live in our own neighborhoods.

02:47:25 Someone decides, there's an empty lot there, they decide to

02:47:29 put a manufactured home there.

02:47:31 If it's already certified by department of business

02:47:33 regulation, you're saying that the only land use criteria

02:47:38 that we have are what you just mentioned, we have no other

02:47:42 basis for us to regulate them, correct?

02:47:47 >> Correct.

02:47:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.

02:47:49 That answers my question, because you know, to me, that kind

02:47:54 of flies in the face of us being able to regulate in

02:47:57 different neighborhoods.

02:47:59 Because part of the problem is, and this goes, not only to

02:48:02 the reasoning why Mr. Miranda originally brought this up,

02:48:06 but also in terms of some safety issues, which is, if I'm in

02:48:09 an older neighborhood of Tampa that has the typical concrete

02:48:14 block joisted masonry type of construction, putting the

02:48:18 manufactured home there could be more of a danger even

02:48:21 though we have certain strap-down requirements and other

02:48:23 things in terms of what it is.

02:48:26 So, we need to find those gaps between our ordinance and the

02:48:31 state law to figure out how we can regulate, or at least

02:48:35 make sure that we don't have this happen.

02:48:37 I don't think it's been a big problem in that aspect of it.

02:48:40 I think the problem we're trying to solve with tissue here

02:48:43 is something different.

02:48:44 So, I just wanted to clarify that and I appreciate you

02:48:46 giving me that information.

02:48:48 Thank you, chair.

02:48:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other Councilmember?

02:48:51 Ms. Montelione?

02:48:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I stepped out for a minute, so if you

02:48:54 covered the definition of manufactured home, I apologize.

02:48:57 But, I know that some homes, because I built some, that are

02:49:04 manufactured panels.

02:49:06 And people would confuse that with a manufactured homes.

02:49:10 But when you use structural insulated panels, the house

02:49:15 comes pretty much on the flatbed of a truck, but it's a

02:49:20 so-called same as a stick built house, which is out of two

02:49:25 by fours or out of wood.

02:49:26 So, I just want to be careful when we use the term

02:49:30 manufactured home, that we get very specific in the

02:49:38 definition.

02:49:39 >> As I said, as far as I can pinpoint and tell you exactly

02:49:42 what it's going to be.

02:49:44 What I do know it will have the state seal that will signify

02:49:47 that it has passed the building codes and qualifies as a

02:49:50 manufactured building for the purposes of chapter 553.

02:49:55 Of Florida statutes.

02:49:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The type of housing that I'm talking

02:50:00 about doesn't require, I mean, doesn't require a stick or a

02:50:04 conversation or anything.

02:50:05 >> Then that probably won't fall under the definition of

02:50:07 manufactured building structure.

02:50:14 That we're talking about.

02:50:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

02:50:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me understand what I heard.

02:50:18 You can bring whatever you want to call it, manufactured,

02:50:22 sealed or unsealed.

02:50:23 But we can say that you don't want particle wood floors.

02:50:29 >> We can or cannot say?

02:50:31 I'm sorry.

02:50:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I guess we can't say it.

02:50:33 Because you said the pitch of the roof and this, that and

02:50:36 the other.

02:50:36 But the materials in it.

02:50:38 >> Well, Ms. Coyle, we talked about I think finished floor.

02:50:41 Would that fall under the finished floor requirement that we

02:50:43 had talked about?

02:50:47 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It's not so much that -- we are

02:50:51 prohibited from doing certain things when it comes to

02:50:53 manufactured and just for lay men's term, say

02:50:56 premanufactured.

02:50:57 It's coming to as an actual built structures, not just the

02:51:00 panels.

02:51:01 That's why it has a state conversation.

02:51:03 Has a seal on it.

02:51:04 We have to treat it as conventional.

02:51:06 So we're prohibited from regulating it differently than

02:51:09 conventional.

02:51:10 That's what I really want to put out there.

02:51:12 So if you have a requirement for a single-family residential

02:51:17 structure and it's a finished floor elevation, it's a roof

02:51:20 pitch, it's how many windows you have, it's the door

02:51:23 orientation, you can't just apply to it a manufactured home

02:51:26 or a manufactured structure.

02:51:28 You have to apply it across the board.

02:51:30 That's the only thing we were talking about is, if you want

02:51:33 to have some type of standard, we certainly could.

02:51:36 But it's going to apply to everybody uniformly.

02:51:39 And we do have certain requirements in overlay districts and

02:51:42 in special districts that adhere to that design standard for

02:51:45 that particular area.

02:51:46 And it works so that sometimes you can't have manufactured

02:51:49 buildings or they have to have a Craftsman style or whatever

02:51:52 else.

02:51:53 But this is citywide.

02:51:54 So you can do it.

02:51:55 But it's going to apply to everything.

02:51:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So then what I'm hearing again is, most

02:52:00 houses are 25, 30, 40-foot by 40-foot, whatever.

02:52:05 So you can put a 12 by 60 manufactured home, take off the

02:52:10 trailer, take off the axle and say it's a manufactured home?

02:52:13 >> No.

02:52:14 No, the ones that are actually built on a chassis are built

02:52:18 with axles like that are actually mobile homes or trailers

02:52:21 and they do not have a state seal, nor can they be

02:52:25 converted.

02:52:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: But there are some that do have a state

02:52:29 seal.

02:52:29 >> That's correct.

02:52:29 The commercial ones that are brought in.

02:52:31 But the base, the structure is built differently.

02:52:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And so then that elevation is different

02:52:37 because now homes are built from the ground up, so these are

02:52:42 not going to be built from the ground up unless they drop it

02:52:45 into a concrete, you know.

02:52:49 >> A lot of different creative ways to do things, yes.

02:52:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If this ain't trickery, I don't know what

02:52:56 is.

02:52:56 Anyway, what I'm trying to get at, I don't know what the

02:53:02 legislature did or didn't do, but I kind of have a home like

02:53:05 this in Harbor Island, somebody buys a lot, says this is

02:53:09 what I want to mess up the neighborhood, I guess they do it.

02:53:12 Money talks and whatever else walks, I guess.

02:53:14 And you can put that anywhere.

02:53:16 And so we got to do some criteria where it meets at least a

02:53:21 standard of what the neighborhood looks like.

02:53:23 Is that possible?

02:53:27 >>CATHERINE COYLE: As I said, we do have that in various

02:53:29 areas around the city.

02:53:31 Based on the overlay districts and the special districts

02:53:35 like for Seminole Heights, downtown.

02:53:36 Harbor Island actually has their own design standards so you

02:53:39 would not be able to put a type of building there.

02:53:42 There are pockets in the city that don't have design

02:53:44 standards though.

02:53:45 So, you would be affecting all of those areas of the city.

02:53:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez?

02:53:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.

02:53:52 And this is for either one that wants to answer it.

02:53:55 We do have resident-owned communities that have manufactured

02:54:01 homes there.

02:54:01 Already in the City of Tampa.

02:54:03 Is it possible under regulation that we can make that

02:54:06 manufactured homes would have to be in those type of

02:54:09 resident-owned type of scenarios?

02:54:12 >> That's kind of what I was talking about.

02:54:14 I think we may want to distinguish.

02:54:16 If you're thinking mobile home, mobile home trailer, that is

02:54:20 not going to be a manufactured home and will only be allow

02:54:23 the mobile homes to be in mobile home parks.

02:54:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That is not what I'm talking about.

02:54:29 We do have resident-owned manufactured home communities

02:54:33 already in the city limits.

02:54:35 And I know that.

02:54:36 There's one that's in south Tampa.

02:54:38 I think Mr. Cohen would probably know about that.

02:54:40 And you know, the, so can we as part of our regulatory, you

02:54:47 know, ordinance making, make an ordinance that those type of

02:54:51 homes would have to be within a resident-owned community?

02:54:56 Is that possible?

02:54:59 >> We can look into that and see whether we can limit -- if

02:55:03 this type of home that you're describing can only be, you

02:55:06 know.

02:55:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And you know, check and see, because I know

02:55:09 already of one community in particular that already is, and

02:55:14 it's probably a age restricted community in addition to

02:55:18 being primarily manufactured homes, that are set up that

02:55:21 way.

02:55:22 So I don't know how we set it up or what the ordinances that

02:55:25 allows them to be set up that way.

02:55:27 But we may want to look at it that way as opposed to trying

02:55:30 to figure out in terms of the construction itself.

02:55:33 Most of those usually only are manufactured homes.

02:55:36 Not mobile homes, but manufactured homes.

02:55:38 And I know the distinction and the difference between the

02:55:40 two.

02:55:41 So we may want to look into that and then that way we have a

02:55:44 little bit modicum of some control over it and see how we

02:55:47 have been doing it now as opposed to trying to maybe create

02:55:50 a new ordinance.

02:55:51 >> Certainly.

02:55:51 We can see if that will fall -- sounds like it might be able

02:55:54 to fall into the land use/zoning type of requirements that

02:55:59 we can do.

02:55:59 We'll check into it.

02:56:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Terrific.

02:56:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Do we have a draft ordinance anywhere or

02:56:03 something that comes up to being close to a draft ordinance?

02:56:06 >> No, not at this time.

02:56:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So we can't fix the problem.

02:56:10 When can we have something from the legal department back so

02:56:13 we can at least look at this?

02:56:15 >> It's really probably going to come out of LDC, I think.

02:56:19 [Inaudible]

02:56:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's go to the mic.

02:56:26 Let's get this going.

02:56:27 Come on.

02:56:28 >> Are you asking for a report back on what we can and can't

02:56:33 do?

02:56:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, ma'am.

02:56:34 I want a report back and when that report comes back, I want

02:56:37 to have something drafting that we can understand and maybe

02:56:39 put something together.

02:56:40 I don't want to wait two years.

02:56:44 >> I would again ask for 60 days then, just giving the other

02:56:48 workload that we have.

02:56:49 I can tell you pretty definitively right now that we will

02:56:55 not be able to, from a manufactured home perspective, the

02:56:59 state seal buildings, we'll not be able to relegate them to

02:57:04 a specific location.

02:57:05 We have to treat them as conventional buildings.

02:57:07 So I can tell you pretty much right off the bat.

02:57:10 I can spend some type doing some additional research.

02:57:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?

02:57:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: I think what you might want to do is check

02:57:15 with the Hillsborough County, because they drafted an

02:57:19 ordinance similar to this, to address this same issue about

02:57:22 manufactured homes several years ago.

02:57:24 So you might want to look at their ordinance.

02:57:26 >> Yes, I used to work for Hillsborough County.

02:57:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: So you should know that then.

02:57:31 >> They have conventional zoning and you have to allow

02:57:33 manufactured homes within the conventional zone? Then you

02:57:37 know the process.

02:57:39 We'll see you April 17th at 9:00 a.m.

02:57:42 Of the year 2014 need a motion by Mr. Cohen, seconded by

02:57:47 Mr. Reddick on a close vote, Mr. Suarez.

02:57:51 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

02:57:51 Opposed nay.

02:57:53 The ayes have it unanimously.

02:57:53 Item number five.

02:57:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you, Council.

02:57:59 Catherine Coyle, planning and development.

02:58:01 The item you asked for was for me to report back on the

02:58:06 special use 1 applications for the Walmart on Hillsborough.

02:58:09 Specifically they're, why us to start off, the property is

02:58:16 zoned commercial intensive, which is the most intense

02:58:18 commercial district that we have.

02:58:19 They are permitted to do a special use 1, which is an

02:58:22 administrative permit for a drive-in window for the

02:58:27 pharmacy.

02:58:28 They also have applied for special use one, administrative

02:58:31 permit for beer and wine package sales, as accessory to the

02:58:34 shoppers goods use, which is the big box store.

02:58:38 Just to clarify the comments, some of the comments that were

02:58:41 made earlier.

02:58:42 The alcohol permit is not, there's no waiver associated with

02:58:46 it.

02:58:47 It's not a wet zoning, it's a special use permit.

02:58:51 First and foremost, the status is still pending.

02:58:54 It is still under review.

02:58:56 It is not approved, as people thought.

02:58:57 Just wanted to clear that up.

02:58:59 Just to remind Council under administrative permitting for

02:59:02 special uses, you legislatively set the criteria.

02:59:05 We review by that criteria.

02:59:07 If the applicant meets the criteria, we're obligated to

02:59:10 approve it.

02:59:11 Again, they've just applied for beer and wine sales only,

02:59:15 package.

02:59:16 Not liquor.

02:59:16 There is no separate liquor store, as some people had

02:59:20 mentioned.

02:59:21 And just referring to the notice issue, because it is

02:59:26 administrative, there is no notice requirement.

02:59:28 But what is codified and what I even agreed to a little over

02:59:32 a year ago, because it's in the code, is that the zoning

02:59:36 administrator is required on a monthly basis to transmit a

02:59:39 list of all pending rezoning special use and variances to

02:59:42 all officially registered neighborhood associations.

02:59:45 So in November and December, the Tampa cares newsletter,

02:59:49 which land development puts out, did actually publish the

02:59:53 list.

02:59:54 And this is actually the part of the page that it's on.

02:59:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, we're not getting it on our

03:00:00 monitors at all.

03:00:01 >> AB 1428, Walmart stores east, 1720 East Hillsborough,

03:00:07 beer and wine, sales consumption off premises.

03:00:10 East Tampa and old Seminole Heights.

03:00:13 It was NA for the public hearing date because it was

03:00:13 administrative.

03:00:14 That's the alcoholic beverage 1, S-1.

03:00:17 So in November and December, this newsletter was routed by

03:00:20 mail and e-mail to Diane Hart, who is the president of East

03:00:24 Tampa business and civic association.

03:00:26 And it was mailed and e-mailed to Debby Johnson, which is

03:00:31 the president of old Seminole Heights.

03:00:34 I just wanted to remind Council it is codified that we

03:00:37 actually have to send these notices out from a staff

03:00:40 perspective of all pending rezoning, special use and

03:00:43 variance applications.

03:00:45 So, I'm available for any questions.

03:00:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?

03:00:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

03:00:49 Ms. Mandell -- Mrs. Kert, what limitations are you going to

03:00:56 put on me?

03:00:57 What are your limitations you're going to put on me before I

03:01:03 talk?

03:01:04 >> I'm sorry.

03:01:04 I did not hear what you just said.

03:01:06 >>FRANK REDDICK: What limitations are you going to put on me

03:01:08 before I talk?

03:01:10 >> I can go ahead and let Ms. Kert speak to that.

03:01:16 [ Laughter ]

03:01:18 >> Rebecca Kert, legal department.

03:01:21 As you all are aware, just to remind you and remind members

03:01:24 of the public, under the charter and pursuant to how your

03:01:27 code is situated, City Council is unable to overrule or the

03:01:31 words used in the charter, not that you ever would, but to

03:01:35 interfere with any sort of administrative decision the S-1,

03:01:39 which is the alcohol permit has been delegated specifically

03:01:41 to the administration, so therefore, I would caution you,

03:01:45 anything that could be perceived on any level as

03:01:48 interfering, because that would be in violation of the

03:01:50 charter.

03:01:51 Certainly if you want to talk more broadly about more global

03:01:54 issues, that's certainly appropriate and we certainly don't

03:01:57 want to stymie you but I want to remind you, also remind

03:02:01 members of the public, there may be a lot of things you all

03:02:03 would want to do, but you are limited by the charter.

03:02:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?

03:02:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

03:02:09 So, I cannot address any of the concerns that I discussed,

03:02:17 some of the people discussed pertaining to that point, how

03:02:20 they got through the application?

03:02:24 >>REBECCA KERT: If you want to talk about the general

03:02:26 process, but with the understanding any sort of approval is

03:02:29 delegated to the administration and City Council doesn't

03:02:31 have, you know, any ability to alter that or change that at

03:02:35 this point unless you want to change your code for the

03:02:37 future, which would not in any way affect a pending

03:02:41 application.

03:02:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

03:02:42 Well, let me just say this.

03:02:44 Hearing the comments, and I have been deeply involved in

03:02:49 this process.

03:02:50 From the beginning.

03:02:52 And you're not going to stop me if I go off track here, but

03:03:01 when people mislead a community, totally mislead a community

03:03:12 in the process of people thinking one thing won't happen and

03:03:16 something else is done.

03:03:17 That is, they have misled the people.

03:03:20 Not only misled the people.

03:03:24 They lied to the people.

03:03:25 They lied to me.

03:03:26 And you know, and it's not fair when you can blatantly tell

03:03:34 a lie and do something opposite of that lie.

03:03:37 I think it's reached a point now, Council, where I think

03:03:45 it's time that we look at reversing a previous Council

03:03:50 decision to allow staff to grant these S-1 application for

03:03:55 beer and wine and liquor.

03:03:57 We are the duly elected officials that have to represent

03:04:01 those people that we saw out there today, that elect us to

03:04:07 this office.

03:04:10 And for them to have something to take place in their

03:04:13 community because some previous Council, and I'm sorry, I

03:04:18 ain't picking on you, Mr. Miranda, and I understand it was a

03:04:25 4-3 vote.

03:04:27 But when we have granted the authority, the power or

03:04:29 authority to staff to make this type of decision.

03:04:32 And we had this discussion once before.

03:04:34 Where application would come before us before and people

03:04:39 would complain.

03:04:41 Here, you might have sent out that newsletter, but I tell

03:04:46 you, I didn't see the newsletter.

03:04:51 And those are my constituents.

03:04:53 That's my district.

03:04:54 And I didn't see the newsletter.

03:04:57 It just by coincidence, I was playing, snooping around, and

03:05:05 saw it on your web site.

03:05:06 And saw where someone has personally told me to my face that

03:05:13 certain things are not going to take place, and the

03:05:17 application was already been filed a month before they told

03:05:22 me that lie.

03:05:23 And I just think through the fairness of those people that I

03:05:29 represent and all of us who represent your constituents,

03:05:35 it's our responsibility to make these tough decisions.

03:05:39 It's our responsibility to make the decision, whether to

03:05:43 grant these permits for the alcohol and beer and wine

03:05:46 permits.

03:05:47 It's not staff.

03:05:48 And somewhere we will have to make the decision to reverse

03:05:53 this, put it back into Council lands.

03:05:57 And I don't care if we have an extra zoning meeting at

03:06:01 night.

03:06:01 I don't care, if we got to stay an extra hour.

03:06:05 It's our duty and it's our responsibility, elected

03:06:09 officials.

03:06:10 And if we're going to neglect that responsibility, then you

03:06:13 don't need to file your papers for reelection.

03:06:15 Because it is our responsibility.

03:06:19 And I'm disappointed.

03:06:22 It's deceitful.

03:06:24 And to hear these people speak this morning, being a part of

03:06:29 that process is very deceitful when they can get away

03:06:33 telling this lie, not only to me, but telling this lie to

03:06:36 this community.

03:06:37 And then go and do something different.

03:06:40 So, I don't know how to process this, what we have to do to

03:06:48 look at reversing this decision.

03:06:50 But I think it's time, because we shouldn't have to go

03:06:53 through this.

03:06:55 It's time that staff relinquish that responsibility and the

03:07:00 duties and powers of that responsibility should've come

03:07:04 before this 7-member body.

03:07:06 And this is a decision we need to make.

03:07:10 And I think we need to make it as soon as possible.

03:07:12 Thank you.

03:07:14 >> I have Ms. Mulhern, then Ms. Capin.

03:07:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

03:07:18 Councilman Reddick, the three people on, that were on this

03:07:21 former Council all voted against that, I believe, so, I

03:07:26 would second your, if you want to make that as a motion,

03:07:30 that legal come back with rewriting or writing the S-1

03:07:39 special use administrative alcoholic beverage permit back to

03:07:49 the, the effect that we had before that was voted on

03:07:56 primarily by people who, none of home are still here.

03:08:01 So I would second that as a motion.

03:08:04 And I would ask that you come back in two weeks with it.

03:08:12 >> No, we can't.

03:08:13 I'm sorry.

03:08:14 >>CATHERINE COYLE: This is an amendment to Chapter 27, which

03:08:17 can only occur in cycle.

03:08:19 So would be in the July cycle.

03:08:20 >>MARY MULHERN: In the July cycle.

03:08:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Just so you know, in this cycle is a

03:08:24 pending regulation that I'll be bringing forward to you that

03:08:28 you've already motioned for me to draft allowing additional

03:08:31 administrative permits in the downtown.

03:08:33 So you have competing regulations.

03:08:35 I've also -- I want to caution Council and I understand the

03:08:38 frustration with it.

03:08:39 But we have time and time made a very strong case as to why

03:08:42 based on a comprehensive plan and based on the regulations

03:08:45 and the history of permitting for 68 years in this city, as

03:08:48 to why the former regulations that you have just don't make

03:08:52 any sense any more.

03:08:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, the last few years we have been having

03:08:56 a lot of problems with what our residents want, as far as

03:09:00 how this city is developing.

03:09:03 And I think that, that unrelated to this particular case

03:09:10 that we're talking about, but overall, we have had, we have

03:09:14 had problems in the past.

03:09:17 And -- you'll have to figure that out.

03:09:24 >> If I may, Council, Julie Mandell, city attorney.

03:09:27 It is completely within Council's legislative discretion to

03:09:30 make this process and change this process the way it would

03:09:33 like to.

03:09:34 But I want to remind you that if you change this to a public

03:09:38 hearing process, you still have a place and a position where

03:09:42 you need to have criteria that is processed, reviewed and

03:09:47 thought through that you follow consistently.

03:09:50 And so, and that was one of the reasons this was originally,

03:09:54 these types of permits were originally moved to

03:09:57 administrative permits because on a very consistent basis,

03:10:01 the decisions that were coming out of Council on grocery

03:10:04 stores, convenience stores, et cetera, were to grant them.

03:10:08 And so, I'm not suggesting to you you don't have that right

03:10:12 and I'm not suggesting to that you if you would like to

03:10:15 motion for Cathy to bring that back as part of the July

03:10:18 cycle process, that that can be done.

03:10:21 But, you still have to be cognizant of the criteria that

03:10:25 will be within the code and simply having that public

03:10:28 hearing and having people in the community who may not want

03:10:32 alcohol, does not give you competent substantial evidence to

03:10:36 make that decision.

03:10:36 So I just want to make sure that that's clear now and

03:10:39 whatever Ms. Coyle is motion to bring back, she will bring

03:10:45 back in that proper process.

03:10:47 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sure we all understand that.

03:10:49 I'd like to -- before we take up that motion, I'd like to

03:11:01 ask that we also look at the changes in allowing --

03:11:10 actually, you need just an explanation in this case.

03:11:14 The design exception that was allowed.

03:11:18 How is this design exception allowed after we voted on the

03:11:22 form-based codes for Seminole Heights?

03:11:25 This is back -- this is separate.

03:11:27 I'm going to hold off on my second.

03:11:30 >> You're talking about the Walmart.

03:11:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Walmart design for.

03:11:34 >> For what?

03:11:36 >>MARY MULHERN: For a driveway --

03:11:42 >> Let me make it very clear.

03:11:43 This project was not subject to the form-based codes.

03:11:45 The rezoning for the northeast sector, which was Hampton

03:11:49 Terrace's area, was continued by City Council.

03:11:52 And it was not adopted until July 22nd, 2013.

03:11:57 If it weren't for that continuance, then this application

03:12:01 would've actually had to follow the Seminole Heights

03:12:04 guidelines, or standards.

03:12:05 They actually applied in June.

03:12:07 So they applied under CI.

03:12:09 Under the standard code.

03:12:12 >>MARY MULHERN: So they didn't have to follow it?

03:12:14 >> That's correct.

03:12:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

03:12:16 What about the question about the traffic studies not being

03:12:24 complete?

03:12:25 >> In 2009, City Council adopted a new comprehensive plan.

03:12:29 And we are a TCEA, transportation concurrency exception

03:12:35 area.

03:12:35 In 2011, in February, you adopted the traffic impact

03:12:38 analysis manual.

03:12:40 Within that manual, coming from the comprehensive plans,

03:12:43 setting out transit emphasis corridors and so on, they were

03:12:47 identified in that manual, which was adopted by City

03:12:50 Council, certain corridors for transit emphasis, one of them

03:12:53 being the BRT route along Hillsborough.

03:12:56 If you develop along one of those routes, you are exempt

03:13:00 from having to do a traffic analysis.

03:13:02 That's why at the city local level they did not have to.

03:13:05 DOT, however, did require one for a site warrant analysis

03:13:09 for the new light that's going in on 19th.

03:13:12 Currently you have a light at 15th and a light at 22nd.

03:13:15 It's a very long distance for pedestrians.

03:13:17 They actually have warranted a new signal for pedestrians

03:13:21 and for cars at 19th, where there's a McDonald's right

03:13:24 across the street.

03:13:25 So actually the pedestrian safety is supposed to actually be

03:13:29 improved as well.

03:13:30 And there will be another route that is actually signaled on

03:13:32 Hillsborough for vehicles to go up and down 19th.

03:13:35 So, FDOT required that analysis for that signal.

03:13:39 It was not a city requirement because they weren't required

03:13:41 by our rules to actually perform one.

03:13:43 There were no rules skirted.

03:13:48 There were no processes waived or avoided.

03:13:51 >>MARY MULHERN: When was that adopted?

03:13:52 >> February 2011.

03:13:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, maybe we should revisit that.

03:13:56 When we have our next cycle review in July.

03:14:00 Because it sounds like we maybe shouldn't be doing that.

03:14:05 We're not really addressing the real traffic impacts in the

03:14:10 city.

03:14:12 >> Well, we are, TCEA well.

03:14:15 That's a much bigger legal conversation to have.

03:14:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?

03:14:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm going to reference Walmart.

03:14:26 That was brought to my attention back in March of this year.

03:14:31 I actually saw a plan, March of this year.

03:14:38 And at that point, I knew that we had, we weren't going to

03:14:42 hear this except, are they going to be asking for a vacation

03:14:49 of any streets?

03:14:51 That you know of?

03:14:59 >> There is a street that was previously vacated in 1985 the

03:15:06 center of this property.

03:15:07 So the vacation took place almost 30 years ago.

03:15:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So they will not be asking for any

03:15:17 vacations?

03:15:17 >> That's correct.

03:15:18 What they will be asking for.

03:15:19 The current owners of the property, is the transference of

03:15:21 the fee, which is on our agenda for today.

03:15:25 That land was previously vacated.

03:15:27 They did not perfect or finish the transfer of the fee.

03:15:32 But no, that a -- that was one of the questions I heard this

03:15:35 morning, well, there was a, there was a vacating and no one

03:15:39 was noticed.

03:15:40 I'm assuming they will be properly noticed 30 years ago when

03:15:43 it took place in 1985.

03:15:46 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I remember being asked, you know, if we

03:15:49 were -- if we're going to weigh in.

03:15:51 I said only if the, the only way, only thing I could see was

03:15:55 if they were going to ask to vacate any streets.

03:15:58 Then it would come to City Council.

03:16:00 Otherwise, no, we were not going to be hearing this.

03:16:04 >> Correct.

03:16:05 And during that conversation, about the transfer of the fee,

03:16:09 on the northern portion, one of the things that the city has

03:16:15 asked for is 25 feet along Comanche to improve pedestrian

03:16:20 access, sidewalks and landscape along there.

03:16:24 And that's part of what's going to be done.

03:16:26 Subject to Council approval.

03:16:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN: All right.

03:16:31 Well, that was my question of Walmart.

03:16:35 I'm going to reiterate with the Councilmember Mulhern.

03:16:39 When that vote was sustain back and it was a special call

03:16:43 meeting, March 28th or 29th, three days before new Council

03:16:51 was sworn in, and it was a 4-3 vote.

03:16:57 And the 3 nos are sitting before you now on that, bringing

03:17:04 administratively S-1 and applications.

03:17:12 So I would like to look at that.

03:17:14 I have to agree with you there.

03:17:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have Ms. Montelione and then Mr. Cohen.

03:17:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

03:17:24 Ms. Coyle, it's your day, Ms. Coyle.

03:17:31 How long does it take to get through the process with a

03:17:36 administrative approval for an S-1 permit?

03:17:40 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The code requires that we do it within 30

03:17:43 working days.

03:17:44 So it's approximately six weeks, give or take a holiday.

03:17:46 And then we can grant additional 15 days if the applicant

03:17:50 needs more time to revise a plan.

03:17:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 30 working days you said?

03:17:56 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Uh-huh.

03:17:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE: How long does it take to go through a

03:17:58 City Council process if they have to come before us for an

03:18:01 approval?

03:18:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Was a minimum of 30 calendar day notice.

03:18:04 And then there is a Development Review Committee meeting.

03:18:07 It's approximately nine to ten weeks on average.

03:18:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So, everyone who wants to -- and.

03:18:16 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The cost is different.

03:18:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was going to get to that too.

03:18:18 What's the cost now for an administrative permit?

03:18:22 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I think it's right around a thousand.

03:18:25 Somewhere between 860 and a thousand.

03:18:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And to come through a Council process?

03:18:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It's little over 2,000.

03:18:34 You have to have the additional survey for distances and so

03:18:37 on.

03:18:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So that's additional cost as well.

03:18:40 And as you said in the current process, because the former

03:18:47 president of the civic association, Mr. Reddick was as well

03:18:50 I think, a couple of us here were.

03:18:53 You get the Tampa care's letter.

03:18:55 That's your notice for the administrative approvals that are

03:19:00 pending.

03:19:02 >>CATHERINE COYLE: And it includes the public hearings one

03:19:04 too.

03:19:04 Includes everything.

03:19:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Includes everything.

03:19:06 So there is notice given to the neighborhood president at

03:19:10 the very minimum, who is then responsible to notify

03:19:13 everybody else in their association.

03:19:16 But not everybody in a neighborhood always belongs to their

03:19:19 association.

03:19:19 So, they might not know.

03:19:23 So, it's six to nine weeks, $2,000, plus the additional

03:19:29 survey costs and whatever other costs it's going to be for

03:19:32 submitting for Council process and a thousand dollars and 30

03:19:37 days, much shorter process for administration.

03:19:41 What other than alcohol does an S-1 permit cover?

03:19:46 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Depends on the zoning classification,

03:19:48 because they're different across districts.

03:19:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: General.

03:19:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, for instance, a drive-in window and

03:19:54 commercial intensive property is an S-1.

03:19:57 Let's see.

03:20:00 Rooming houses and multi-family classifications, beds and

03:20:04 breakfasts and multi-family classifications.

03:20:06 Community Gardens.

03:20:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Community Gardens.

03:20:10 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Yes.

03:20:11 Community Gardens require a special use 1.

03:20:14 >> So we would then be asking Community Gardens to come back

03:20:17 before a Council process.

03:20:19 And when Ms. Mandell mentioned the criteria in the code,

03:20:28 what exactly was she referring to?

03:20:30 I don't think she went into great detail.

03:20:33 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, if there were direction from City

03:20:35 Council to change back to the S-2 process, what we would

03:20:39 need from Council is clear direction on what the criteria

03:20:41 would be.

03:20:42 If it's a blanket go back to the old way of doing it, with a

03:20:45 thousand foot separation and no other, really weren't any

03:20:51 other criteria, but the thousand foot separation, everything

03:20:53 goes to a public hearing.

03:20:55 Or do we do some kind combination of what we have today and

03:20:58 you keep the criteria for shoppers goods?

03:21:02 And convenience and gasoline and specialty retail, you are

03:21:06 required to actually apply for and receive a 1(APS) or a

03:21:12 2(APS) license from the state.

03:21:14 And that's because it's an administrative permit.

03:21:17 We'll give it to you administratively, but you have to come

03:21:20 back in for the signoff for only the package sale lightning.

03:21:23 You can't sell within your parking and loading area.

03:21:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

03:21:27 I get the idea.

03:21:28 I have a question for Mr. Johnson or Mr. McDonaugh, whoever

03:21:34 wants to answer this.

03:21:38 I don't know how many, I don't know that Ms. Coyle can say

03:21:41 now because we have already shown that she has to have some

03:21:45 research done.

03:21:46 But how many establishments now come through and get S-1

03:21:52 processed?

03:21:55 Is it a hundred?

03:21:56 Is it a thousand?

03:21:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I could pull that number and bring it

03:22:00 back to you pretty quickly.

03:22:01 It's probably equal to the amount you hear a month.

03:22:06 At least five or six a month that you see.

03:22:08 It's probably just that many on the other side.

03:22:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.

03:22:11 And I'm wondering what the economic impact would be to the

03:22:15 city if we had, if we go back to the old process.

03:22:20 So.

03:22:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Aside from economic impact, the thing I

03:22:26 worry about is what Ms. Mandell talked about.

03:22:29 Consistency.

03:22:29 Consistency in the way the rules are applied.

03:22:32 And I will tell you the reason why Ms. Mandell mentioned

03:22:35 this.

03:22:35 The reason why grocery stores, because this, Walmart is the

03:22:38 same thing as a grocery store.

03:22:40 It's a shoppers goods establishments.

03:22:42 Targets, Walmart, Publix, doesn't matter.

03:22:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So every time a Publix opposite, they'd

03:22:47 have to come before us.

03:22:49 >> They used to have to.

03:22:50 To my knowledge, there was only ever one denied and then

03:22:53 they came back and got it approved because they made an

03:22:56 adjustment to what they were asking for.

03:22:59 That's the reason why the S-1s made sense for certain

03:23:03 classes of uses because throughout the history of

03:23:05 permitting, you had a whole host of them that just made it

03:23:11 through the process.

03:23:12 Even with a thousand foot waiver, that's why the thousand

03:23:14 foot waiver really didn't work any more, because it was

03:23:17 being waived in every single circumstance.

03:23:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.

03:23:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: So that's why I'd want a very clear

03:23:23 direction on what criteria you'd really be looking for.

03:23:25 That he is the only way I could say that you'd even remotely

03:23:28 be safe in the future for decisions.

03:23:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And in a city where we talk about being

03:23:33 open for business and making things an environment where

03:23:38 businesses can come and be welcomed by us, the Mayor

03:23:43 convened the economic competitiveness committee so that, you

03:23:47 know, regulations can be streamlined and that we would be

03:23:52 able to move things along more quickly when someone wants to

03:23:56 come here and do business.

03:23:58 This seems like the antithesis of that.

03:24:02 And that concerns me.

03:24:03 Mr. McDonaugh, can you weigh in on the economic impact

03:24:09 question?

03:24:11 >>MR. McDONAUGH: It would be a guess again, my opinion is

03:24:19 that it's the identity of the retailer as opposed to the

03:24:24 proposed use.

03:24:25 You know, I think as Ms. Coyle said, if it was a Publix,

03:24:30 there wouldn't be a raised eyebrow.

03:24:32 But there is a certain group of consumers that are not fond

03:24:38 of the applicant.

03:24:39 And.

03:24:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I mean quite frankly, I'm not the biggest

03:24:43 fan either.

03:24:44 I've only ever in my life been opinion side one of those

03:24:47 stores twice, for those reasons that I make that choice as a

03:24:50 personal choice.

03:24:51 If you don't like that establishment, don't visit that

03:24:54 establishment.

03:24:56 >>MR. McDONAUGH: Again, just speaking specifically of this

03:24:58 property, it has been vacant or almost entirely vacant for

03:25:01 over 12 years.

03:25:02 This process that someone brought up, is a brownsfield where

03:25:07 we're going to be removing underground storage tanks and

03:25:10 improving the quality of the ground.

03:25:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That was one question that I had.

03:25:14 She brought up drainage off the property.

03:25:16 That's why I guess our brownsfield expert is here.

03:25:23 >> Again, this has been largely vacant property and eyesore

03:25:27 in the neighborhood for going on 12 years.

03:25:28 It's going to be cleaned up.

03:25:30 As Ms. Coyle mentioned, there are not any variances that are

03:25:35 being applied to this property.

03:25:37 It's being brought up to the urban edge.

03:25:40 They have made concessions to the city as far as the front

03:25:44 of the building, what it's going to look like.

03:25:47 And the East Tampa CRA will give out $185,000 a year in

03:25:51 property taxes.

03:25:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And Mr. Reddick, I, I understand, I

03:25:58 wasn't there, present, but I understand that certain

03:26:01 representations were made to the neighborhood and it's

03:26:04 possible that the representatives of Walmart weren't exactly

03:26:10 truthful and forthcoming.

03:26:12 Doesn't surprise me.

03:26:13 One of the reasons I don't shop in that establishment.

03:26:17 But, you know, I hesitate once again, parallelling to it a

03:26:25 previous conversation we just had, to penalize every

03:26:30 business who wants to get an S-1 permit for whatever reason,

03:26:37 because of the actions of one or the actions of two.

03:26:40 I understand your pain.

03:26:47 I understand the frustration of the neighborhood.

03:26:49 If Hampton Terrace didn't want to cause themselves to be

03:26:54 removed from the Seminole Heights zoning, form-based zoning,

03:27:02 then maybe they would've gotten what they're asking for now.

03:27:05 And that's the different elevations and things that come

03:27:07 along with it.

03:27:08 But every action has a consequence.

03:27:12 And you know, you know, I just feel that this is

03:27:19 overreaching, especially because of all the changes that

03:27:23 have occurred in the past three years, since it's become an

03:27:28 S-1 administrative use.

03:27:31 And if the problem is notification of the neighborhood, then

03:27:36 maybe we have to work on that piece.

03:27:38 The problem isn't necessarily their application for a permit

03:27:45 to sell beer and wine, because as I said, if it was Publix,

03:27:48 we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

03:27:51 Maybe what we have to work on is communication.

03:27:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen so kindly gave up his time to

03:27:57 Mr. Suarez.

03:28:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So I get six minutes instead of three.

03:28:03 [ Laughter ]

03:28:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.

03:28:08 Thank you, Mr. Cohen, I appreciate it.

03:28:10 Ms. Kert?

03:28:11 Okay.

03:28:14 It's been made perfectly clear that we have very little, if

03:28:18 any, control over this particular situation.

03:28:20 And that we talk quite a bit about what we can do in the

03:28:24 future in order to change the way that administrative S-1s

03:28:28 are permitted.

03:28:29 Let me ask you a question though.

03:28:31 Two questions actually.

03:28:33 Can, or is there a process to appeal to the administration

03:28:39 about these type of administrator approved S-1 permits?

03:28:46 >> The applicant can appeal to City Council.

03:28:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Only the applicant.

03:28:52 So there is no other standing for a neighborhood?

03:28:56 >>REBECCA KERT: I just read the code.

03:28:58 If you think I'm incorrect, Cathy, say something.

03:29:00 She's answering a different question.

03:29:04 The aggrieved party that is required for a review petition

03:29:07 to City Council, requires you to participate.

03:29:10 And so, the only person who qualifies is the applicant in an

03:29:14 S-1.

03:29:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So no one else has any standing whatsoever in

03:29:17 these S-1 --

03:29:19 >> Not to take to City Council --

03:29:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Wait.

03:29:22 You're going a step further than what I'm asking.

03:29:24 My question is, is there appeal process on an administrative

03:29:31 decision on an S-1 by, let's say the neighborhood?

03:29:35 Or any other person?

03:29:37 Or is it just, the only entity is the applicant that has

03:29:41 standing to appeal a decision by the administration?

03:29:45 >>REBECCA KERT: There's not internally within the city a

03:29:47 review process for anyone other than the applicant for that

03:29:50 decision.

03:29:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All right.

03:29:52 So, if, let's say for an example, the neighborhood -- this

03:29:57 is a hypothetical.

03:29:58 Has nothing to do with the other issue that we talked about.

03:30:01 S-1 permit is given and a, the neighborhoods that are

03:30:07 affected by that S-1 permit comes to the administration,

03:30:12 says we don't want this because we think it affects us

03:30:15 adversely.

03:30:16 The administration has no say-so in taking away that S-1,

03:30:21 correct?

03:30:22 Is that what you're saying?

03:30:24 Or are you saying --

03:30:26 >>REBECCA KERT: I didn't mean to pause.

03:30:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I can pause if you want me.

03:30:30 >>REBECCA KERT: I need one second.

03:30:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Sure.

03:30:33 [pause]

03:30:37 >>REBECCA KERT: I just wanted to confirm with the city

03:30:39 attorney, who is the voice of the city, that I was not going

03:30:42 to say something she disagreed with.

03:30:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That's a smart move.

03:30:46 [ Laughter ]

03:30:47 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, I'd prefer not to be corrected.

03:30:49 But I will certainly take it if I need to be.

03:30:51 However, I did confirm with her that we have an

03:30:54 administrative appeal process that, to which somebody could

03:31:01 appeal to is the supervisor in that position.

03:31:04 But it would not go to City Council.

03:31:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No, and again, I'm not even talking about

03:31:08 City Council.

03:31:08 Just talking about the process that's in place now.

03:31:10 Which we already know they can't come to City Council

03:31:12 because it was administratively put in place, the S-1.

03:31:16 So, just to be clear, if I am a neighborhood next to a

03:31:21 administratively approved S-1 property, can I appeal to the

03:31:27 administration about that decision?

03:31:32 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.

03:31:32 Under section 1-19.

03:31:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: 1-

03:31:43 >>JULIA MANDELL: Yes.

03:31:43 Do I feel compelled to get involved in this conversation

03:31:46 because I think that there needs to be a basic

03:31:48 understanding.

03:31:49 For the purposes of granting an administrative decision,

03:31:53 there are very specific -- it's a check list.

03:31:55 You either meet the checklist or you don't.

03:31:57 If you meet the checklist under Florida law, we have to

03:32:00 grant that to you.

03:32:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: May I interrupt though?

03:32:03 That's not my question.

03:32:05 >>JULIA MANDELL: But I want -- but that was the starting

03:32:07 point for me explaining this 119 process versus the process

03:32:11 that comes to City Council.

03:32:12 It's undenied and on the applicant I have the right to come

03:32:17 to City Council because someone in that administrative

03:32:20 process, whoever is reviewing it has said you don't meet

03:32:23 these criteria.

03:32:24 That would be the only question in front of City Council.

03:32:26 When you have a third party bringing a 119 proceeding to a

03:32:31 hire up person within the administration, there's a very

03:32:36 limited, what that administrator can be looking at because

03:32:40 the only question in front of anybody is are those criteria

03:32:44 met?

03:32:45 And so, a third party in theory could go to a supervisor and

03:32:49 say, criteria B wasn't met.

03:32:51 We think that that person's wrong.

03:32:53 But other than that, we don't get into, we don't think this

03:32:58 is right for the community.

03:32:59 Or we think it will cause more traffic.

03:33:01 And that is important to understand as too how these

03:33:04 processes work.

03:33:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Can I interrupt you just a second?

03:33:08 That was not my question.

03:33:09 My question was is there a process and what that process is,

03:33:13 not -- whether or not they're going to meet the standard.

03:33:16 Again, on a hypothetical situation in which a neighborhood

03:33:19 is affected and says these are some of the things that

03:33:23 they're going to affect our neighborhood, do they have

03:33:26 standing to go ahead and go to the administration about an

03:33:29 administrative decision?

03:33:30 That's the question.

03:33:31 Is it a yes or a no?

03:33:33 >>JULIA MANDELL: Yes, they do.

03:33:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Then there are criteria, as you just stated.

03:33:38 What they have to prove in order to meet that standard when

03:33:41 they go to a supervisor who is above that particular

03:33:44 administrator that made the decision, correct?

03:33:47 >>JULIA MANDELL: It's related to the code and snowing else.

03:33:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What I'm saying, again, there are certain

03:33:51 criteria that are set out in the code.

03:33:53 So, in this hypothetical situation, if a neighborhood says

03:33:59 I'm going to do this, how would they start that process?

03:34:04 >>JULIA MANDELL: If I recall correctly, it's 15 days they,

03:34:07 upon rendering of the decision, they submit that to either

03:34:11 the supervisor or to the underlying person -- I don't have

03:34:15 the code in front of me.

03:34:17 But it's written down in the code.

03:34:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me give you another question.

03:34:21 If we wanted to tell our constituents about this type of

03:34:23 process, can you go ahead and send that to all of us so that

03:34:26 if we have any constituents that were in the neighborhood

03:34:29 affected in this hypothetical situation, that they'd be more

03:34:33 than willing to see if they meet that criteria?

03:34:36 >>JULIA MANDELL: I mean, absolutely, we can provide you that

03:34:38 information.

03:34:38 It does concern me though that there might be some belief

03:34:42 out there that it has more effect than it does in reality.

03:34:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The Councilmember I am, I would follow

03:34:50 whatever the legal rendering was and the explanation by our

03:34:52 legal department and just send that to the constituent.

03:34:56 I think it's important enough so that people do understand

03:34:58 it and that we are part of communicating to them what this

03:35:02 process is.

03:35:02 When we were sitting here, there was a lot of pieces of

03:35:06 information that had nothing to do with what you are saying

03:35:10 as an administrator -- excuse me, as part of the

03:35:12 administration, as to what the process was and what

03:35:15 happened.

03:35:15 So, because we have gotten this information from you and the

03:35:19 other staff members, I want to make sure that the

03:35:21 neighborhoods that are out there understand there is another

03:35:24 process that they can be part of, as long as they meet

03:35:27 certain criteria.

03:35:28 That's all I'm asking you.

03:35:29 This is not a debate about the specific issue that the

03:35:33 administration has already decided.

03:35:35 But those folks out there that were here in numbers, have to

03:35:38 know that there is a process that's available to them.

03:35:41 And that's what we want to share with them.

03:35:43 We're not going to do it here publicly.

03:35:45 That's why I want you to give me that information and all

03:35:47 the members of the Council, so that we can share that with

03:35:50 our constituents.

03:35:52 Because other than that, it doesn't matter, it doesn't mean

03:35:54 anything, because as you know, many times we are, we are,

03:35:59 have people come to us to solve problems that we have no

03:36:03 power or ability to do.

03:36:05 When it comes to those situations, it is better for us not

03:36:08 to pander and I know that everyone on this Council feels

03:36:11 powerless sometimes because we can't answer the question.

03:36:15 And we can't solve the problem.

03:36:16 But there is a solution to this that they will understand

03:36:20 once you send it to us.

03:36:22 Okay.

03:36:22 That's all I'm saying.

03:36:24 >>JULIA MANDELL: If Council thinks it would be valuable to

03:36:26 them for the legal department to create, I'll call it a

03:36:32 cheat sheet, of rights internally to give to you so you can

03:36:36 provide those to your constituents, I will be happy to get

03:36:39 that to you as soon as possible.

03:36:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Please do.

03:36:43 I must say, before I finish, I just have to say this I want

03:36:47 to make sure you've got to get it to us very quickly,

03:36:50 because if that is a day criteria is not met and you haven't

03:36:54 provided before that 15 day period is.

03:36:57 I need to know the start point and end point of that 15 days

03:37:01 is.

03:37:01 I sure as heck don't want to send something out to someone

03:37:04 that they cannot even meet the standard that's already in

03:37:06 there.

03:37:07 If it's already passed, then let's know that he.

03:37:11 >>JULIA MANDELL: I guess I'm misunderstanding.

03:37:12 You're not saying you want us to send it every single time.

03:37:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm asking for the information now.

03:37:22 So we can follow-up with anyone that has any problem with

03:37:25 any administrative decision specifically about this types of

03:37:29 issue manned planned I understand exactly what you're

03:37:31 saying.

03:37:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you very much.

03:37:33 Thank you, chair.

03:37:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen?

03:37:36 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.

03:37:36 I'll try to be brief.

03:37:37 It makes me uncomfortable when we start talking about

03:37:43 individual applications in this process.

03:37:47 And one of the things that was, little disturbing about some

03:37:51 of the public comment this morning, is that it did go to

03:37:54 Mr. McDonaugh's point, it did seem it was the identity of

03:37:58 the retailer that caused some of the consternation.

03:38:02 One person said they would feel differently if it was a

03:38:04 costo.

03:38:05 And that's really not appropriate.

03:38:07 And certainly not an appropriate type of distinction for us

03:38:10 to make.

03:38:10 But I just want to make a comment about Mr. Reddick's larger

03:38:13 point this that I think was underscored by Ms. Mulhern a few

03:38:19 minutes ago as well.

03:38:20 When these things are decided administratively, even if the

03:38:26 process is totally on the up and up and there's a checklist

03:38:30 and it's ministerial action, it's still a step away from the

03:38:36 people.

03:38:37 And the one good thing about these types of decisions coming

03:38:41 here is that, we have the obligation to vote based on the

03:38:48 law.

03:38:49 And we then can go out into the community when people are

03:38:53 angry with the way that we voted, and we can explain it to

03:38:57 them.

03:38:57 We can defend ourselves and if they don't like it, they can

03:39:00 throw us out.

03:39:01 And the frustration that I think some of the citizens have

03:39:07 with administrative review processes, regardless of what the

03:39:11 subject of them is, is that they don't feel like they have a

03:39:14 remedy to be heard to express their feelings.

03:39:18 And that's the one piece of this that weighs in favor of

03:39:25 Council taking a more proactive approach to being involved

03:39:28 in this decision-making.

03:39:30 And I think that that point is just an important one to

03:39:35 bring back, because ultimately, ultimately people will come

03:39:40 and let us know how they feel about it.

03:39:42 And that's a good thing.

03:39:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

03:39:45 Second round.

03:39:48 >>YVONNE CAPIN: This is my first.

03:39:49 I haven't commented on this at all.

03:39:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I got you down in order.

03:39:52 You spoke after Ms. Mulhern.

03:39:54 But go on.

03:39:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: It's gone so long.

03:39:57 My God.

03:39:57 I thought we were on another subject.

03:39:59 It's the second round?

03:40:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second round.

03:40:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.

03:40:12 So here we go.

03:40:13 So I'm adding up that it takes 30 days, which turns, 30

03:40:19 business days, which turns into six weeks and then there's

03:40:22 15 days additional, which is another three weeks.

03:40:24 So that's nine weeks.

03:40:26 I want to ask you about when the applicant does not meet the

03:40:33 parameters or the criteria and they come forth to City

03:40:37 Council.

03:40:38 Is the cost to them the same?

03:40:42 Mrs. Coyle?

03:40:44 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm sorry.

03:40:45 I somewhat understood what you meant.

03:40:47 If they don't meet the criteria?

03:40:50 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Right.

03:40:52 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Apply for an S-1 and we have denied it.

03:40:57 There is actually a review fee.

03:40:59 They file a new application with the clerk's office.

03:41:01 There's a fee, is it $250?

03:41:06 >>YVONNE CAPIN: What's the application fee?

03:41:08 >> I think it's 250-6789.

03:41:09 >> The fee for petition for review on S-1 is 270.

03:41:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN: 270.

03:41:15 And that covers the new application?

03:41:19 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, it covers you proceeding

03:41:21 essentially.

03:41:21 None of our fees actually cover the cost.

03:41:24 Just so you know.

03:41:25 If they did, no one would be able to afford them.

03:41:27 The reality.

03:41:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: You know, insinuating that the

03:41:34 Councilmembers and the previous Council that was here didn't

03:41:37 know what they were doing or it was, is just really, really

03:41:42 hitting below the belt.

03:41:43 And I heard that already a couple of times.

03:41:46 Again, I agree, this takes steps away from the people.

03:41:52 But when it comes to a cheat sheet, I don't want a cheat

03:41:56 sheet because when a constituent calls me, I'm going to send

03:41:59 them to legal and then I'm going to ask them to call me back

03:42:02 and tell me how soon they got the answer.

03:42:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

03:42:09 I have Mr. Reddick -- excuse me, excuse me, Mr. Reddick,

03:42:14 you're third in line.

03:42:15 Was Capin, Montelione and Mr. Reddick, in that order for the

03:42:20 second round.

03:42:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't think I heard anyone say that the

03:42:24 previous Council didn't know what they were doing.

03:42:26 And the timeframe, as I understand from Ms. Coyle, is a

03:42:38 total of 30 working days for administrative review.

03:42:45 The six to nine weeks is for Council hearing.

03:42:50 It's not one and the same.

03:42:52 Right?

03:42:53 >> Just to clarify, the six weeks was --

03:42:56 >> I need your name.

03:42:59 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Catherine Coyle.

03:43:01 The 30 working days, which is approximately six weeks, give

03:43:05 or take a holiday, that's administrative.

03:43:07 It's between nine and ten weeks on average for public

03:43:10 hearing.

03:43:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Nine and ten weeks.

03:43:12 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Nine to ten for public hearing.

03:43:14 Anywhere from four to six for administrative.

03:43:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And the nine to ten weeks, is that

03:43:19 working days?

03:43:21 Or calendar days?

03:43:23 >> That timeframe.

03:43:24 Calendar.

03:43:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So, now it has been so long, I almost

03:43:30 forgot what I was going to say.

03:43:31 I am going to stick with, with what I had said before.

03:43:45 And we have one in a blue moon that we hear about from the

03:43:53 public that's a problem.

03:43:54 I don't want to put a process in place that is going to

03:44:00 affect every single, you know, S-1 applicant out there,

03:44:06 because we have, you know, a few that is a minuscule number,

03:44:13 that are actual problems.

03:44:15 So, as we asked before, the chairman asked for before, I'm

03:44:20 going to ask for, if we go forward with any of this in

03:44:24 changing the process, I want to have an accurate count of

03:44:30 how many since the rule has changed, how many S-1

03:44:35 applications have been filed and approved, and how many have

03:44:44 been filed and denied, and if we have had any legal

03:44:50 repercussions where we have been sued over a denial, to see

03:44:59 how big of a problem this really is.

03:45:00 And it's, it's a case where we're changing an entire

03:45:08 process, we're making it more expensive.

03:45:12 We're making it lengthier because we have a perceived

03:45:16 problem with one or a few applicants over the years.

03:45:21 Over the three years or however long the new law has been in

03:45:26 place.

03:45:27 And that's I think what due diligence we need to do before

03:45:38 we start changing any processes.

03:45:40 And I also would ask that we have a report on the

03:45:45 ramifications of that -- I'm sorry, Ms. Capin.

03:45:52 I was still speaking.

03:45:56 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay, thank you.

03:45:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So, we know what we would have to

03:46:02 reverse, Ms. Coyle, you mentioned the request for the

03:46:08 central business district process to expand that process.

03:46:12 So you understand what I'm saying?

03:46:14 I need to know, to make a decision, how many rules we have

03:46:19 made that would have to be reversed if we went to a public

03:46:23 hearing S-1 process.

03:46:24 I don't see -- I just want to make sure you understand what

03:46:34 I'm asking for the I don't see an agreement there.

03:46:37 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It's not a public hearing S 1.

03:46:39 You're actually I think requesting, if we wasn't back to the

03:46:42 S-2 process.

03:46:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

03:46:46 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No problem.

03:46:47 Right now, we only have the one pending rule.

03:46:49 To add more special use 1, but specifically for downtown for

03:46:54 the general incidental sales, and we do have some clarifying

03:46:59 rules for the process for, no additional temporary

03:47:03 alcohol --

03:47:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I just want to know what the domino

03:47:05 effect is going to be.

03:47:06 Thank you.

03:47:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?

03:47:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

03:47:15 Hope we can bring some closure to this and get this done.

03:47:18 But, one of the good things about living in America, we

03:47:21 believe in a Democratic process.

03:47:22 So you get to vote yes or no or not vote at all.

03:47:27 Gout that choice.

03:47:28 But let me make this clear.

03:47:29 No one, and I disagree with what staff has said, in

03:47:39 particular Mr. McDonaugh about people are just have this

03:47:45 hatred for this one particular store.

03:47:47 The community in support of Walmart being on Hillsborough

03:47:53 Avenue.

03:47:54 The community is very much in support.

03:47:56 People from Seminole Heights are very much in support of

03:47:59 Walmart being on Hillsborough Avenue.

03:48:02 What they don't support and what I don't support is how

03:48:05 deceitful they have been.

03:48:07 That's what I don't support.

03:48:09 But, and the other part is, is that we have done everything

03:48:18 in that community to be supportive.

03:48:22 And we haven't gotten a fair shake.

03:48:27 I mean, we look at the economic opportunity that coming into

03:48:31 that community.

03:48:33 We're looking at the jobs that will be provided in that

03:48:36 community.

03:48:36 And we appreciate that.

03:48:39 But you cannot be deceitful.

03:48:44 You can't play games with what expecting us to be nice to

03:48:51 you as well.

03:48:52 And that is the problem.

03:48:54 But the bigger point is, as we go through this Democratic

03:48:58 process, I still believe it's our responsibility for these

03:49:03 S-1 application to come before this Council for approval.

03:49:06 And therefore, I'm going to move forward with that motion,

03:49:10 whether it's got the support or not.

03:49:12 I'm just going to put it on the table and we vote it up or

03:49:15 down.

03:49:15 And that is to -- I know staff don't want to lose their

03:49:20 power of authority.

03:49:21 76 they probably happy being able to approve the S-1

03:49:26 application.

03:49:26 But you know what?

03:49:27 It's our responsibility to do that.

03:49:29 And like Mr. Cohen stated, we're the ones that got to

03:49:34 respond to those people out there in the community.

03:49:36 Not staff.

03:49:37 My phone has been ringing off the hook from those people in

03:49:42 Seminole Heights in East Tampa.

03:49:46 I've bin getting the e-mails.

03:49:48 Not staff.

03:49:48 So, point is, whether we don't go forward or not, but I want

03:49:56 to see this reversed and overturned and I hope staff can

03:49:59 come back and put part of July cycle to do that.

03:50:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

03:50:04 Any others, round two?

03:50:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Isn't that a motion?

03:50:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: He had a motion.

03:50:10 Ms. Mulhern seconded it two and a half weeks ago.

03:50:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In fact, this is honest to God true

03:50:20 story.

03:50:21 I went to Walmart last night.

03:50:24 I bought two things.

03:50:27 One of them little Cuban coffee makers.

03:50:32 And a blood pressure kit.

03:50:34 [ Laughter ]

03:50:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And it really wasn't related to today's

03:50:38 meeting.

03:50:39 I just had one that broke and I've always used to having

03:50:42 one.

03:50:42 I said I'd better go replace it.

03:50:45 I'm glad I did.

03:50:46 [ Laughter ]

03:50:47 >> Was $48.

03:50:48 So, that's what I paid for it.

03:50:50 But anyway.

03:50:51 Let me say this.

03:50:52 As this process been -- I haven't been involved directly.

03:51:00 I've been looking at it from the sidelines.

03:51:02 I can see the frustration.

03:51:05 I can understand the neighborhood.

03:51:07 I can understand this Council's frustration.

03:51:10 I can see though, however, that none, not target, not

03:51:16 Publix, not Sweetbay, not Winn-Dixie, any one of those that

03:51:21 has come up here for beer and wine at the end -- notice I

03:51:26 said at the end -- didn't receive what they want.

03:51:28 And I also understand that there has been a case where a

03:51:33 third party, where a variance was given, and granted --

03:51:40 asked for and granted, and a year or so, eight months ago,

03:51:44 whatever that individual came, the neighbor came and

03:51:47 objected to that person getting that, and guess what

03:51:51 happened?

03:51:52 It got overturned by this Council.

03:51:54 I can also tell you that what we have there and I agree with

03:52:01 the honorable Councilmember district five.

03:52:03 Notice I said that I didn't say his name, so he can't speak.

03:52:06 So, I understand what's there now.

03:52:12 Years ago when Sears moved out, people don't remember that

03:52:17 Sears was here on Florida Avenue.

03:52:19 And the great department store of JV Higgins that sold the

03:52:24 guns and bicycles, everybody had JC Higgins skates.

03:52:28 And all those things.

03:52:29 And Sears was the first one to move out from the area and

03:52:32 built to 22nd and Hillsborough.

03:52:34 It was the great Hao Wah.

03:52:36 The loopa of modern areas of shopping.

03:52:42 That died because a single store can't stand by itself when

03:52:45 you limit the things.

03:52:47 Then came others.

03:52:52 That whole area, if it wasn't for the school that went in to

03:52:58 Sears, would really be a disastrous area.

03:53:01 But there's been a technical advisory school there that does

03:53:05 great wonders for individuals who don't want to go to school

03:53:09 and learn a trade.

03:53:10 Yes, there was a street.

03:53:12 That was before Sears, that went all the way through.

03:53:15 That went through Abraham Chevrolet, on 19th, where

03:53:19 McDonald's is at.

03:53:20 And all those things were closed, like was put on the record

03:53:25 30 some years ago.

03:53:26 I assume also it was done legally.

03:53:29 Would this store, whoever it is, and whether it's Walmart or

03:53:36 Publix or somebody else, would they have gotten their beer

03:53:40 and wine from the administration and from us?

03:53:43 I would say yes.

03:53:44 Do I believe with the whole system that the public feels

03:53:50 that they had an injust, not only what we saw today, but the

03:53:54 in the years past, when this state changed three years ago?

03:53:57 Yes.

03:53:57 But I also feel that the system has worked a lot more often

03:54:03 than it has failed.

03:54:04 I can say it's speedier.

03:54:08 It is easier.

03:54:11 It is thus cost effective.

03:54:12 And why was this done?

03:54:14 If you look at our own record on City Council, all of us,

03:54:18 how many times have we waived that thousand foot?

03:54:20 I'll tell you how many.

03:54:22 99.9% of the time.

03:54:24 So then why if we're going to have direction, we'd better

03:54:28 give direction to staff, if you want a thousand foot,

03:54:31 900-foot, 700-foot or two inches, from one to another, we

03:54:37 have been sued many times.

03:54:39 I don't think we won many of them.

03:54:43 That's not to say I'm afraid of getting sued.

03:54:45 But what I'm saying is, I'm not opposed to putting it like

03:54:49 it was.

03:54:50 But you better have some guidelines on what you want because

03:54:54 the process of having all these guidelines and then

03:54:58 violating your own guidelines doesn't work any more.

03:55:01 So, there's where I'm at.

03:55:05 I would also after this vote is taken, that was made by

03:55:10 Mr. Reddick, second by Ms. Mulhern, like I said, two and a

03:55:13 half weeks ago, during today's meeting, I'd like the Council

03:55:17 to ask me to write a letter to Walmart to see if we can

03:55:21 change the outside look.

03:55:23 They did it in St. Pete.

03:55:24 They did it for a neighborhood to help, to create an

03:55:29 ambience that would then be the leader in buildings that

03:55:34 would go up around that area that now would fall under that

03:55:40 agreement at some point.

03:55:41 So these things are paramount to changing a life, you know,

03:55:47 helping someone get somewhere with a little help, get a job,

03:55:52 work, go to school, learn, get a better job.

03:55:55 And maybe one day be the leaders of the city.

03:55:58 But it has to come one inch at a time.

03:56:03 You know, you just can't run the whole field without getting

03:56:06 tackled 99% of the time.

03:56:08 Unless you play at Auburn.

03:56:10 So these are the things that are needed.

03:56:14 If we're going to change, I think we need to change with

03:56:17 direction to the manager that does this work of planning,

03:56:23 Cathy Coyle, and to the legal department as to what we want.

03:56:26 You want to go back to a thousand foot and violate your own

03:56:30 thousand foot, don't count me in.

03:56:32 If you want to change all those codes and in essence be the

03:56:37 same thing that they're enduring, then count me in.

03:56:40 It's which way you want to go.

03:56:41 And I haven't heard that yet.

03:56:43 That's what we need to do.

03:56:44 Whether they do it or we do it, the guidelines have to be

03:56:48 somewhat altered.

03:56:49 Somewhat more responsive to current needs today.

03:56:53 And that's all I'm going to say.

03:56:55 I have a motion.

03:56:56 Anyone else?

03:57:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: If we need to put amendment to that motion,

03:57:03 to my motion to.

03:57:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You can make the motion yourself.

03:57:06 Redirect your own motion, Mr. Reddick.

03:57:08 I'm not trying to tell you what to do.

03:57:10 If you do that it will make it much easier I think in the

03:57:13 heart of this one body.

03:57:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: My motion was to revert back to the

03:57:21 previous policy of Council.

03:57:23 But since what just been stated, I'm also going to include

03:57:27 that our city attorney and meet with land development

03:57:37 coordinator, to establish the -- City Council attorney meet

03:57:43 with land developer coordinator manager to establish the

03:57:46 guidelines that can be implemented and report back to

03:57:49 Council.

03:57:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Do you agree with that second?

03:57:56 She accepts your motion.

03:57:57 In other words, what he's saying, he wants Art Shelby to

03:58:00 meet with you and the legal department to work on this to

03:58:03 find out exactly what you have, to bring it back to us and

03:58:07 see if it's adaptable to our needs so we can adopt the

03:58:10 ordinance change from what you do, bring it back to us in a

03:58:13 different form.

03:58:17 >> The reality is, if you just want the rules that are in

03:58:20 the code right now to be under the S-2 process.

03:58:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: For us to review.

03:58:24 That doesn't mean it will be codified that way.

03:58:27 >> The change in the code is pretty straightforward the

03:58:29 criteria are already set.

03:58:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's for you to negotiation.

03:58:33 >> And I think if I understand what your motion is, is also

03:58:36 to be able to bring to Council in a form to understand what

03:58:40 the present criteria is, to determine whether the criteria

03:58:44 meets City Council's and the community standards.

03:58:46 >> Correct.

03:58:47 >> So the community and City Council would be comfortable

03:58:49 with whatever it chooses to do.

03:58:51 >> Correct.

03:58:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

03:58:53 Ms. Montelione?

03:58:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you motorcycles Shelby.

03:58:56 That was one of the things I was trying to get at when I

03:58:59 said I wanted to know what the impact would be.

03:59:01 So the cost, I mean, just similar to what we asked for

03:59:04 earlier the cost, the timing, and what other things would be

03:59:09 affected by us changing the policy.

03:59:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else?

03:59:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's a separate motion?

03:59:16 Because that's not part of my motion.

03:59:20 >> Is that an amendment?

03:59:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was asking --

03:59:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm not going to include that part in my

03:59:26 motion.

03:59:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You can bring that up after we vote on

03:59:29 this.

03:59:30 All right.

03:59:30 I'm ready to take the vote on the motion by Mr. Reddick,

03:59:33 seconded by Ms. Mulhern.

03:59:36 The latest version of it.

03:59:38 Not the one, but the one he just stated a few minutes ago.

03:59:41 Not the one two and a half weeks ago.

03:59:43 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

03:59:45 Opposed nay.

03:59:47 Okay, Ms. Montelione, you have a motion you'd like to make?

03:59:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: As with anything that we consider in such

03:59:56 a huge policy change, I think we need to know what the, what

04:00:01 the impacts are.

04:00:02 So, as I already stated, what the change in the timeframe

04:00:09 would be, what the change in the cost would be, and what

04:00:13 other ramifications there will be from decisions we have

04:00:17 made, policies that, motions that we have already made,

04:00:21 based on the current system, what will be affected, if we

04:00:28 change the system.

04:00:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Before we go any further, the motion, you

04:00:33 stated, you mentioned to me the date, but he stated, forgot

04:00:37 to put on the record.

04:00:38 I believe 1 April.

04:00:42 >>HARRY COHEN: I think it's the July 10th cycle that you

04:00:45 made that for.

04:00:46 I don't know that a date certain is necessary.

04:00:51 >> May I make a suggestion? I would prefer that it be

04:00:54 brought back in April prior to the July cycle so that you

04:00:57 could have an opportunity to review and to make policy

04:01:01 decisions.

04:01:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Correcto numero uno.

04:01:06 [ Laughter ]

04:01:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just add an addition to your motion.

04:01:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Report back to us on April 17 at 9:00 a.m.

04:01:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The year 2014.

04:01:21 Second by Ms. Mulhern.

04:01:23 She didn't know that but she knows it now.

04:01:26 All right.

04:01:27 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying aye.

04:01:29 Opposed nay.

04:01:31 The ayes have it unanimously.

04:01:31 I'm sorry, Ms. Montelione, your motion was to bring back the

04:01:36 cost related as to it is now, to it will be in the future if

04:01:39 it comes back to us in that form.

04:01:41 Something to that effect.

04:01:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think you got it before.

04:01:45 It was some of what Mr. Shelby had mentioned.

04:01:47 The cost to the applicant, but it is now and what it would

04:01:53 be after we change the process.

04:01:56 What the timeframe is now and what the timeframe would be if

04:02:00 we changed the process.

04:02:01 And what was the third?

04:02:03 Oh, the notice process, what the difference is in the notice

04:02:07 process.

04:02:08 And the criteria, as Mr. Shelby had said and Ms. Coyle had

04:02:12 mentioned about the criteria in the code.

04:02:15 As well as any impact.

04:02:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe that would be part of

04:02:21 Mr. Reddick's motion.

04:02:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, he said no.

04:02:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: He didn't accept that.

04:02:24 Let's not get them confused, please.

04:02:28 No, no.

04:02:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: We hear it once, we hear it twice.

04:02:39 So, and the impact of other decisions we have made that

04:02:44 would be affected if we changed the process.

04:02:48 Way call the domino effect.

04:02:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Ms. Montelione,

04:02:55 seconded by.

04:02:58 >>HARRY COHEN: I'll second.

04:02:58 But it should be brought back on April 17th, the same day as

04:03:01 the other.

04:03:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, I didn't put a date.

04:03:05 >>HARRY COHEN: And then regardless of what happens to that

04:03:08 it will go into the tech cycle in July, depending on our

04:03:12 decision, discussion would go.

04:03:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Ms. Montelione, second

04:03:16 by Mr. Cohen.

04:03:16 Any further discussion by Councilmembers?

04:03:18 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

04:03:19 For April 17th at 9:00 a.m.

04:03:22 Year 2014.

04:03:23 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.

04:03:24 Opposed nay.

04:03:26 Motion passes 6-1.

04:03:31 Okay.

04:03:32 We're at number 6.

04:03:41 >>JULIA MANDELL: I'm actually pitch hitting today for

04:03:43 Allison Singer, who had to leave the office early this

04:03:47 afternoon.

04:03:47 She has had an opportunity to both research with the legal

04:03:52 obligations tore the city as it relates to translation

04:03:55 services and interpreter services.

04:03:57 And has been working with different city departments to

04:04:00 determine what their standard operating procedures are.

04:04:03 And yes, the departments do have differ operating procedures

04:04:06 as to hue they handle folks coming in to their offices, who

04:04:10 need some additional assistance with their English.

04:04:13 So what we're seeking to do is to get all of those different

04:04:18 policies, scrutinize all those policies, to have one

04:04:23 citywide policy that we can bring to each department, which

04:04:27 does recognize the needs of different departments, certainly

04:04:31 say a Land Development Coordination that does have folks

04:04:34 coming into the process who need to appear in front of you,

04:04:37 has a different need than say, you know, human resources or

04:04:41 some of our other departments.

04:04:42 So we, will take about 60 days to complete.

04:04:46 And at that time, if you would like us to report back, we

04:04:49 can.

04:04:49 Or alternatively, we could just submit a written report, et

04:04:52 cetera.

04:04:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Montelione?

04:04:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

04:04:55 I think, when you're looking over the policies and trying to

04:05:02 come up with one citywide policy, I think it's fantastic

04:05:06 thing because I don't think everybody should be just

04:05:08 operating in their own bubble.

04:05:10 But if you could include -- if someone who requires services

04:05:19 of an interpreter during the application process, and that

04:05:24 application process means they are going to be coming to

04:05:27 Council, that the department make that as part of their

04:05:31 staff report, that an interpreter will be required at the

04:05:38 hearing.

04:05:38 Because too many times, they get the service bilingual, we

04:05:44 have lots of bilingual employees are, or trilingual

04:05:49 employees and they'll get through the process, no problem.

04:05:51 Then they come here to the public hearing.

04:05:53 >>JULIA MANDELL: We have specifically been talking with Land

04:05:55 Development Coordination about not just providing, but have

04:05:59 it documented and how we make it clear to those who may have

04:06:03 some English language skill issues, that they have the

04:06:07 opportunity to not only make that request and that we will

04:06:10 go ahead and we can provide that assistance.

04:06:13 Sometimes they come in with their own folks and don't want

04:06:15 it.

04:06:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Some people don't think they need it, but

04:06:19 yet when they get here.

04:06:20 >>JULIA MANDELL: Part of it is making sure there is that

04:06:22 consistent policy and everybody is aware and making sure

04:06:25 that that communication is occurring.

04:06:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Sounds fabulous.

04:06:29 Thank you very much for your work.

04:06:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

04:06:31 Okay, that takes care of number 6.

04:06:33 Number 7.

04:06:42 >> Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, and Councilmembers.

04:06:45 Mike Herr, administrator of public works and utilities.

04:06:49 I'm here for items 7 and 8.

04:06:50 The item 7 is the first item, we're asking your

04:06:54 consideration of a resolution accepting the proposal of

04:06:58 Proshot Concrete, Incorporated, pertaining to contract

04:07:02 13-C-00029 for bridges and minor repairs citywide in the

04:07:08 amount of $1,287,806.

04:07:11 Excuse me.

04:07:13 There were three bids.

04:07:14 This is a low bid award.

04:07:15 In the agenda item, we outlined the nature of the repairs

04:07:20 and the type of, and the bridges that would likely be worked

04:07:23 on under this particular contract and under the fiscal

04:07:26 impact statement.

04:07:28 The monies are budgeted in the local option gas tax capital

04:07:32 projects fund. <