TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, January 8, 2015
9:00 a.m.
DISCLAIMER:
This file represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all
capital letters and any variation thereto may be a
result of third party edits and software
compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
09:04:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: City Council order, chair
09:04:35 yields to Ms. Yvonne Yolie Capin.
09:04:52 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm sorry.
09:04:53 I didn't see you.
09:04:54 I know you were here in my office.
09:04:55 But I didn't know -- thank you, Mr. Chair.
09:05:01 First of all, let me say to all the citizens of
09:05:06 Tampa, to have a healthy and happy new year.
09:05:08 With that, all else is, we'll work out.
09:05:12 So happy new year to all.
09:05:14 And it is my pleasure to introduce Reverend Steven
09:05:19 Brown, who is presently the assistant president of
09:05:21 the university ministry at Saint Leo university.
09:05:26 While also participating as a supply priest
09:05:28 throughout the diocese of St. Petersburg and
09:05:31 Orlando, specializing in Spanish, Portuguese and
09:05:34 English masses.
09:05:35 Reverend Brown has been at Saint Leo university
09:05:37 since 2007.
09:05:39 Prior to Saint Leo, he served as the pastor at St.
09:05:41 Regis church in Indianapolis and St. Nicholas in
09:05:47 St. Louis.
09:05:47 A graduate of the Catholic theological union in
09:05:50 Chicago, Reverend Brown has also served as a
09:05:52 columnist for the Indianapolis recorder newspaper.
09:05:56 Welcome, Reverend Brown.
09:05:58 And thank you.
09:05:59 Please stand for the invocation and the Pledge of
09:06:00 Allegiance.
09:06:02 >> Oh, holy one, oh, mighty one, oh, immortal one,
09:06:11 we recognize you as God.
09:06:13 You're always here.
09:06:14 And to hear us when we pray.
09:06:17 We come before you having begun this new year of
09:06:21 2015.
09:06:21 You have called us to be the servants of your
09:06:25 people here in the City of Tampa.
09:06:27 Today, those in leadership who serve and represent
09:06:30 your people ask your blessing, as together they
09:06:35 seek a new direction for this city in this new
09:06:37 year.
09:06:37 Loving God, we ask for the grace and guidance to
09:06:41 help them truly represent all who live, work,
09:06:46 recreate and better their lives from the city of
09:06:49 Tampa.
09:06:51 The true needs of our city and the common good of
09:06:53 all be their aim.
09:06:55 O, God, let each citizen, both the great and
09:06:58 small, of all races and walks of life, find in
09:07:01 them advocates for justice and equality.
09:07:04 That all those who serve recognizing each person
09:07:08 the dignity you alone bestow and have implanted in
09:07:13 every human heart.
09:07:14 And above all, may your will in these matters
09:07:17 become their will.
09:07:17 Help all those who serve remember that all
09:07:21 decisions and concerns are aimed to the
09:07:24 transformation of our city to effect the presence
09:07:27 of your kingdom, a kingdom of justice, love and
09:07:30 peace.
09:07:31 May material aspects discussed not blind us to the
09:07:35 primary mission of our city, mainly the well-being
09:07:39 and wholeness and respect of all its members and
09:07:42 may you inspire the pentecost meeting of the
09:07:45 apostles, visit us and grant us the light of
09:07:49 divine wisdom, in the words of great prophet, we
09:07:52 are reminded, O, people, just as you regard this
09:07:57 month, this day, this city as sacred, so regard
09:08:01 the life and the property of everyone as a sacred
09:08:04 trust.
09:08:05 We ask this in your name, O God, who is creator,
09:08:09 redeemer and sanctifier and together we say, Amen.
09:08:14 [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]
09:08:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Roll call.
09:08:36 [Roll Call]
09:08:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
09:08:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.
09:08:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
09:08:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:08:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
09:08:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.
09:08:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:08:46 Okay, I need approval of the agenda and addendum.
09:09:04 Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Ms. Capin.
09:09:06 Further discussion by Councilmembers.
09:09:08 All in favor of the motion please indicate by
09:09:10 saying aye.
09:09:11 The ayes have it unanimously.
09:09:11 We go to--before I go to public comments, I want
09:09:16 special thanks to Dan and the technical assistance
09:09:19 of all the equipment that's been ordered.
09:09:21 He worked very long hours with his staff and
09:09:23 providing the upgrades that we have here and
09:09:26 they're not completed yet.
09:09:27 The monitors are back ordered.
09:09:29 And we'll go through trial and error and the clerk
09:09:32 will advise us how the voting is going to be by
09:09:36 roll call, so forth.
09:09:37 Thank you very much for the inconvenience.
09:09:38 But will be a great help to the public once it's
09:09:40 completed.
09:09:41 We go to public comments.
09:09:43 First three minutes, on any item on the agenda
09:09:46 that you wish to discuss.
09:09:49 Items on the agenda first.
09:09:51 And unless those items are set for public hearing.
09:09:54 Items set for public hearing, discussion will
09:09:56 occur only during that period of time.
09:09:58 Anyone in the audience?
09:10:01 Anyone in the audience care to speak to this
09:10:06 Council?
09:10:07 Come right up.
09:10:08 >> Bear with me.
09:10:15 Wanted to have a demonstration here.
09:10:21 I have three minutes.
09:10:22 First of all, my 0 bead dance call to Almighty
09:10:31 God, to allow me an opportunity to present what I
09:10:34 want to present to you today.
09:10:36 To my name is Winston Michael Ray.
09:10:39 And I'm homeless.
09:10:40 I'm the happiest homeless man in the world because
09:10:43 I was born to end homelessness worldwide.
09:10:46 Indulge me for a few minutes and I'll explain
09:10:46 that.
09:10:48 My address is the streets of Tampa.
09:10:49 First I want, again I want to give greetings to
09:10:53 you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Miranda, this distinguished
09:10:58 body.
09:10:58 Well, I want to show you something here.
09:11:01 Everyone here should have one of these.
09:11:03 A home.
09:11:06 And as I walk throughout the city, I don't see
09:11:10 that's quite the case.
09:11:11 It's ironic, we worship a homeless man on Sunday.
09:11:17 Jesus, I think his name was.
09:11:19 Jesus.
09:11:19 But we walk past homeless people from Monday
09:11:23 through Saturday.
09:11:23 That is amazing for the beliefs of a Christian --
09:11:31 we won't get into that.
09:11:32 Have so much here to say.
09:11:34 Operation hobo, acronym for homeless one Barack
09:11:38 Obama.
09:11:39 Will be over in 99 days on April the 17th.
09:11:43 The Mayor is fully aware of it.
09:11:46 This is why I'm here.
09:11:47 I want to invite, take this time to invite the
09:11:49 entire City of Tampa, this distinguished body, the
09:11:53 Mayor, and surrounding areas to come out and have
09:11:58 brunch with the homeless at Trinity Cafe, this
09:12:03 Saturday, January 10, starting at 9:00 a.m.
09:12:06 We can launch the worldwide silver S-I-L-V-E-R,
09:12:10 silver rights movement.
09:12:12 Everything is done.
09:12:12 The soup is done.
09:12:14 We're ready to sit down at the table and eat.
09:12:16 For those who is interested in getting the Mayor's
09:12:19 views on this I would like them to find out what
09:12:22 he says.
09:12:24 Is this an election year?
09:12:27 He's going to be reelected, especially if he comes
09:12:29 out to this brunch.
09:12:30 For those who want to come out and get the Mayor's
09:12:33 views on is it, I think they should give him at
09:12:35 call.
09:12:36 813-274-8251.
09:12:40 John F. Kennedy put it like this.
09:12:43 Let the word go forth.
09:12:45 From this place and time to friend and foe alike,
09:12:50 that the torch has been passed to a new generation
09:12:53 of Americans.
09:12:54 So forth, and so on.
09:12:57 I feel that the torch has been passed.
09:12:59 So, on your closing note, I simply want anyone who
09:13:02 wants to get with me today after this meeting,
09:13:06 I'll avail myself to you.
09:13:07 I did pass information on to your staff to give to
09:13:09 you.
09:13:10 Have you all received that information I passed,
09:13:12 Mr. Chairman?
09:13:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Would you just make your
09:13:16 presentation.
09:13:17 We don't have direct contact.
09:13:18 We just listen and observe.
09:13:20 >> Well, get with your staff.
09:13:23 Operation hobo, homeless one Barack Obama, the
09:13:26 president's been fully aware of this I want to
09:13:29 thank you for your time.
09:13:30 Give it to the Mayor and encourage him we need him
09:13:33 there because it's a choice between Tampa, and
09:13:37 Seattle, Washington.
09:13:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.
09:13:40 Thank you very much.
09:13:41 Next, please?
09:13:42 >> I'm Ed Tillou, Sulphur Spring.
09:14:00 Yeah, I don't have any handouts today.
09:14:04 They succumbed to the cold.
09:14:08 Here was something good in the TVT.
09:14:13 Doesn't seem to be coming up.
09:14:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's a new system put in this
09:14:17 week.
09:14:18 And it's all technical.
09:14:19 Maybe I can get some assistance for you while
09:14:22 we're discussing it here.
09:14:23 Ask and they shall show.
09:14:30 >> This was from today's TVT.
09:14:33 Now I got to get it out of focus.
09:14:35 Which I guess this is to set at rest people at
09:14:44 MacDill, it's probably about a dozen or two
09:14:46 dozen people from NORAD.
09:14:48 They know the significance of this thing brought
09:14:51 up at the last meeting.
09:14:52 About the necking of the ADIZ.
09:14:57 Right here, which last never been an issue before,
09:15:02 but Putin is saying he'll resume these flights and
09:15:07 these bomber flights, not only in the Atlantic,
09:15:10 but into the Gulf.
09:15:11 So, anyone, there's probably trepidation at high
09:15:14 levels.
09:15:15 But, weapons systems, World War II ended with
09:15:19 Germany having jet planes and Tiger tanks.
09:15:23 It takes a long time to get this stuff into the
09:15:25 working of things.
09:15:26 Any case, picking up where I was before, didn't
09:15:33 get to finish.
09:15:34 This fellow, this was newsworthy December 7th, but
09:15:38 of course you have so few meetings.
09:15:40 What is it now, a month later.
09:15:42 But you at least had more than the county
09:15:45 commissioners.
09:15:46 This was an interesting thing by Patrick Buchanan.
09:15:52 I don't necessarily agree with it.
09:15:55 Because World War II was necessary.
09:16:01 Was made necessary by World War I.
09:16:03 And within the book he actually does touch on
09:16:05 that.
09:16:05 And he's criticized for underestimating German
09:16:10 militarism and things, which put these two wars in
09:16:17 more or less a context.
09:16:18 But in any case, the bottom line of this material
09:16:23 that this situation with the ADIZ is that in Argo,
09:16:28 they had a half an hour at that embassy to try to
09:16:31 dispose of things.
09:16:33 And the other case here it would be saving things.
09:16:35 But that cuts the half hour warning of missiles
09:16:39 coming from Russia to six minutes.
09:16:43 Six minutes from international waters by cruise
09:16:47 missiles launched from aircraft.
09:16:49 And the aircraft can be aircraft like this, that
09:16:52 didn't denigrate it because they're propeller
09:16:55 planes.
09:16:55 Even though they go 550 miles an hour for hour
09:16:59 after hour, which is pretty much what fan jets do.
09:17:03 So these things are on a par, not to be minimized.
09:17:06 But I come to other dimensions of this.
09:17:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
09:17:13 Appreciate it.
09:17:13 Anyone else care to address this Council at this
09:17:16 time?
09:17:16 Anyone else?
09:17:18 All right.
09:17:20 Thank you very much.
09:17:20 We go to staff reports and unfinished business.
09:17:25 Before I go any further, Chief Castor is asking
09:17:28 when she comes in, I'm going to ask her to come in
09:17:30 because she wanted to discuss the other items
09:17:34 related to police cameras and so forth.
09:17:36 I asked her when she comes in, I would ask the
09:17:39 chairman of that committee, Mr. Reddick, if he
09:17:41 would be so kind to bring it up before we finish
09:17:44 staff report.
09:17:44 Yes, sir?
09:17:45 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
09:17:46 Members of councilmember.
09:17:47 My name is John Grandoff, suite 3700 Bank of
09:17:51 America Plaza.
09:17:52 I'm representing several folks here this morning
09:17:54 on items 65.
09:17:56 And they want to just have clarification that
09:17:59 their time to speak would be at the 10:00 item and
09:18:01 not at this time, because it is set for public
09:18:03 hearing.
09:18:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I believe, Mr. Counselor.
09:18:07 >> Yes, Mr. Grandoff, as I stated at the previous
09:18:09 hearing, with regard to that particular item, it
09:18:11 is set for a public hearing.
09:18:13 At date and time certain.
09:18:15 However, it's governed by section of the code,
09:18:18 27-61, which sets out the parameters as to whether
09:18:22 there will be public comment.
09:18:25 It is inappropriate for your clients to speak to
09:18:29 that matter at this time.
09:18:30 Moreover, at the time of the public hearing, City
09:18:35 Council will make a determination as to whether or
09:18:37 not it will accept public comment.
09:18:39 >> Thank you.
09:18:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
09:18:41 Anyone else?
09:18:42 We go to staff reports and unfinished business.
09:18:46 Item number one.
09:18:47 Mr. Bob McDonaugh.
09:18:49 >>MR. McDONAUGH: Good morning, Council.
09:18:58 Bob McDonaugh, economic development.
09:19:00 I was asked to give an update on potential
09:19:04 relocation of the City of Tampa's solid waste and
09:19:08 maintenance facility.
09:19:09 It's approximately 20 acres, which is located on
09:19:12 Spruce Street.
09:19:13 There's 20 acres of land, about 110,000 square
09:19:16 feet of buildings.
09:19:17 Five acres of paved land, three acres of concrete.
09:19:21 And at the current time, although there is a fair
09:19:26 amount of encroachment and probably this is not
09:19:28 the highest and best use for the property, there
09:19:31 are not available funds to do a relocation.
09:19:35 There are some pressing issues for solid waste.
09:19:37 One of which is capital for the purchase of more
09:19:43 of the trucks to use, the CNG, which will be more
09:19:48 efficient, extend the useful service life of the
09:19:50 trucks as well as lower their carbon footprint.
09:19:54 And at the -- there are a couple things at the
09:19:57 waste to energy plant that needs some serious
09:20:01 investment.
09:20:01 There will be an extension or an expansion of the
09:20:05 transfer station, which now suffers from fairly
09:20:07 long lines.
09:20:08 And the turbines in the waste to energy plant is
09:20:15 reaching the end of their useful lives.
09:20:17 And so, as far as priorities for capital spending,
09:20:20 right now, they far outstrip the desire to
09:20:24 relocate this facility.
09:20:26 >> Any comments by Councilmembers?
09:20:29 Thank you very much.
09:20:31 Appreciate it.
09:20:32 Item number two.
09:20:34 Mr. Cohen?
09:20:38 >>HARRY COHEN: This was placed on the agenda in
09:20:41 order to hold a place in case there were changes
09:20:46 that needed to be made to the domestic partnership
09:20:50 ordinance that was proposed by Councilwoman Capin
09:20:54 three years ago and passed by this Council in
09:20:56 2012.
09:20:56 In light of the fact that the county is moving
09:20:58 forward with a similar ordinance.
09:21:00 The clerk, Shirley Foxx-Knowles and I attended a
09:21:04 meeting on this matter just on Wednesday, or
09:21:07 Tuesday.
09:21:08 And it appears that there are not going to be
09:21:11 changes needed to the ordinance.
09:21:12 The ordinance is fine the way it is.
09:21:16 The one item that may be brought back to this
09:21:20 Council and it might have to be done next week in
09:21:22 our evening meeting, under the terms of the
09:21:24 ordinance, the clerk sets the fees and in order to
09:21:27 make the fees consistent with Hillsborough
09:21:29 County's fees, they might need to be tweaked.
09:21:33 If that is the case, she will bring us that item
09:21:36 back at a later date.
09:21:37 The second thing I just wanted to mention is that
09:21:39 if Councilmembers have any questions about how any
09:21:43 of this will work, commissioner Beckner, members
09:21:46 of the clerk's office that are implementing it,
09:21:48 the county staff have all offered to make
09:21:51 themselves available to us in a public meeting.
09:21:53 So, I just -- that's the report.
09:21:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
09:21:58 Any further comments by Councilmembers?
09:21:59 Item number two?
09:22:01 We go to item number three.
09:22:05 >>HARRY COHEN: Item three was an item that was on
09:22:08 our December agenda that we continued to today.
09:22:12 After that meeting I had an offline discussion
09:22:15 with Cathy Coyle since it was my item.
09:22:18 I believe that if we can talk about it today, but
09:22:21 it's also fine if we just want to move on.
09:22:24 She's just going to do some analysis of the
09:22:26 parking ratios in the area of north Franklin
09:22:29 Street.
09:22:32 >>CATHERINE COYLE: And later this year, we're
09:22:34 actually going to be starting the community vision
09:22:35 plan with the Tampa Heights area as well.
09:22:38 Which we already did with Seminole Heights and the
09:22:41 street area as the third area to do.
09:22:43 What results from that typically are code changes
09:22:45 and land use changes as well.
09:22:46 Which one in effect in Seminole Heights was
09:22:50 dealing with parking and redevelopment of older
09:22:52 buildings and older blocks.
09:22:54 Within the next year or so, we should see some
09:22:57 good resolution on how to deal with those
09:22:59 redevelopment issues.
09:23:00 But we can continue with the analysis as well.
09:23:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Satisfied, Mr. Cohen?
09:23:06 Any other comments by Councilmembers on item
09:23:08 number three?
09:23:09 Thank you very much.
09:23:09 We go to item number four.
09:23:12 Man just walked in.
09:23:23 Got to come to the mic.
09:23:24 >> Good morning, Council, Jake Slater, City of
09:23:29 Tampa administrator of neighborhood empowerment.
09:23:33 I'm here to give update on item number four.
09:23:36 The address of 8207 North Ola Avenue.
09:23:44 Concerning active code enforcement violations.
09:23:47 The address is currently vacant, secured, cut and
09:23:51 overall clean.
09:23:52 There are flow active violations at this time.
09:23:54 The property owner has advised that in order to
09:24:00 move anybody in, he has to fix the toilet and the
09:24:04 sink before it could be occupied.
09:24:07 But as of right now, we don't have any open cases
09:24:09 on that address.
09:24:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Also comment there whether the
09:24:13 other properties, I don't know if that has any
09:24:15 correlation with this.
09:24:18 >> Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman -- the owner of that
09:24:22 address owns another piece of property located at
09:24:26 402 west Sitka.
09:24:31 And that is occupied.
09:24:32 Currently that's occupied by the owner.
09:24:35 And by three other adults.
09:24:37 At this time, we do not have any open cases at
09:24:41 that address either.
09:24:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?
09:24:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you for that report.
09:24:45 I appreciate it, as I, I was the one that brought
09:24:50 it forth first.
09:24:52 But when you talk about having to put in the sink
09:24:57 and toilet and -- do we go back and inspect before
09:25:00 they move in?
09:25:02 Or once they move in, we'll look at it?
09:25:05 How does that work?
09:25:06 >> If we see any activity at all at that address,
09:25:09 we'll definitely go back in and do an inspection
09:25:11 at that time.
09:25:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
09:25:12 Thank you for your hard work.
09:25:14 >> Yes, ma'am.
09:25:14 You're more than welcome.
09:25:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other comments on item
09:25:17 number four?
09:25:18 Thank you very much.
09:25:19 We go to item number 5.
09:25:23 And where is he?
09:25:33 Okay.
09:25:39 Item number 5, evidently on his way in.
09:25:43 Ms. Coyle, you got item number six?
09:25:52 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Good morning, Council.
09:25:53 Catherine Coyle, planning and development.
09:25:56 Quick update on the chickens, since the passing of
09:25:59 the ordinance.
09:25:59 It was adopted August of last year.
09:26:02 We have done a quick analysis of state
09:26:08 regulations, all local regulations throughout the
09:26:10 state dealing with chickens.
09:26:12 We did switch at the end of September from the old
09:26:14 comply system to the new Accela enforcement
09:26:19 system, which is a lot easier to track cases.
09:26:22 They have chickens and roosters complaint line in
09:26:25 there.
09:26:25 So easier to filter out those complaints.
09:26:29 In comparison of the past system and the new
09:26:32 system, it appears there isn't too much more of up
09:26:35 tick in complaints about chickens.
09:26:37 It ranges between 20 and 30 or so per year.
09:26:41 Related to animals, roosters and chickens.
09:26:44 The bulk of the ones that we have seen are rooster
09:26:49 related.
09:26:50 And complaint from noises for roosters.
09:26:51 At this point, I wouldn't recommend any changes to
09:26:56 any of the ordinances.
09:26:57 I'd actually request that you ask, have me come
09:27:00 back beginning of November.
09:27:01 That way we'll have a full year of the data in
09:27:05 Accela, which is easier to export and more detail
09:27:10 to analyze and more information from those notes.
09:27:12 The inspections are tracked and other civil cases
09:27:15 are linked.
09:27:17 So it's actually much easier system to use.
09:27:20 Using the filters.
09:27:21 But vast majority of the complaints have been
09:27:23 about roosters, actually not chickens.
09:27:25 There have been a couple chicken cases that have,
09:27:28 complaints that have come in.
09:27:30 One in particular was a hundred plus chickens and
09:27:33 it was up in the north Tampa area.
09:27:35 And that was cleared out.
09:27:37 They removed the chickens.
09:27:38 That was one example that was extreme.
09:27:40 But the bulk of the rest are rooster related.
09:27:43 Which are prohibited in our regulations, from
09:27:46 keeping on the property.
09:27:47 So there's not anything that I can see that's any
09:27:49 great difference pre or post adoption of the
09:27:52 chicken ordinance at this point.
09:27:53 I would just recommend that I come back in the
09:27:55 beginning of November so I can give you a full
09:27:57 year analysis in the new system.
09:28:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Comments by Council at this
09:28:03 time?
09:28:03 Mr. Suarez, and Mr. Reddick.
09:28:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Ms. Coyle, I had a situation in the
09:28:10 V.M. Ybor area where there was some discussion
09:28:13 about someone's yard or whatever.
09:28:16 Because of the restraints that we have based both
09:28:20 on what it means, the protection for chickens
09:28:25 specifically in Ybor and throughout the city, what
09:28:28 do you suggest people do when it comes to
09:28:30 something like that when there is a lot of folks
09:28:32 that are around?
09:28:39 [audio feedback]
09:28:47 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I don't know if that is me.
09:28:49 I'm sorry.
09:28:50 If you could repeat that.
09:28:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What I'm saying if someone does
09:28:55 have a situation where there are, you know, lots
09:28:57 of chickens in the yard or whatever, because
09:29:00 restricted to what we can do to them, what is your
09:29:03 suggestion or what can we, canning a citizen do to
09:29:06 help solve that situation?
09:29:08 I know the north Tampa area, when you mentioned a
09:29:11 lot of, over a hundred chickens or something to
09:29:14 that 0 effect, what do you do if somebody has a
09:29:17 bunch of chickens that congregated in a particular
09:29:20 neighborhood or towards someone else's house,
09:29:23 doesn't belong to anyone?
09:29:24 Okay.
09:29:24 What do you do then?
09:29:26 I think we had this discussion previously.
09:29:27 I just want to figure out.
09:29:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: At this point, I don't have a
09:29:32 direct answer on that.
09:29:35 Like we said previously, the bird sanctuary covers
09:29:38 wild fowl.
09:29:39 Our interpretation of that has at has been
09:29:41 historically is that that covers any free roaming
09:29:45 bird.
09:29:45 It pretty much is written same way, interpreted
09:29:51 generally the same way throughout the state.
09:29:52 The state itself and those agencies which we did
09:29:55 contact don't necessarily protect chickens the way
09:30:00 local jurisdictions do.
09:30:01 They really let us do that on our own.
09:30:03 How we define that.
09:30:06 It varies slightly around the state.
09:30:09 There have been other jurisdictions around the
09:30:11 state that have recently adopted chicken
09:30:14 regulations as well.
09:30:15 I'm watching Jacksonville because they just
09:30:17 adopted theirs recently too.
09:30:21 So it's kind of a newer thing that's coming out.
09:30:23 Watching what they're doing.
09:30:24 Key West is probably the one that has the longest
09:30:27 standing policy on chickens and the longest
09:30:32 standing program for humanely capturing the
09:30:35 chickens, there are not for profit foundation that
09:30:39 is actually capture them humanely.
09:30:43 They don't execute them.
09:30:45 They actually rehabilitate the chickens and
09:30:47 provide chicken coops and education back to
09:30:50 families to essentially adopt back out chickens to
09:30:53 family.
09:30:53 Was actually an interesting program that we just
09:30:55 found out about.
09:30:56 It is run through a not-for-profit.
09:30:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What I was going to ask, the last
09:31:00 part of this, which is animal services through the
09:31:03 county would not have any kind of jurisdiction on
09:31:05 this.
09:31:06 >> That's correct.
09:31:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One of the problems we have in
09:31:08 dealing with constituents when it comes to these
09:31:10 situations, we don't really have an answer for
09:31:13 them, for chickens that are owned by someone else,
09:31:15 because they're not essentially regulated because
09:31:17 of our citywide bird sanctuary standards.
09:31:23 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Only thing beyond that would be
09:31:24 kind of like what Key West did.
09:31:26 Start brainstorming and coming up with a program
09:31:29 or something to actually work on not, not
09:31:33 enforcement, but being able to humanely capture
09:31:38 them.
09:31:39 Move them.
09:31:41 Get them in an education program for people
09:31:43 keeping them.
09:31:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
09:31:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?
09:31:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
09:31:49 Let me just follow-up from my colleague,
09:31:52 Mr. Suarez, talking about.
09:31:54 If a citizen had a complaint, who do they contact?
09:31:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Code enforcement.
09:32:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Do you think most citizens know
09:32:02 that?
09:32:04 Because you say you're not receiving any
09:32:06 complaints.
09:32:07 >>CATHERINE COYLE: No, we are receiving
09:32:08 complaints.
09:32:09 There's not any dramatic uptick from previously.
09:32:12 There are approximately between 20 and 40
09:32:15 complaints in any given year, from 2011 on.
09:32:17 There are -- that are directly chicken related.
09:32:21 There are many more that are rooster related.
09:32:24 As I said, we didn't authorize people to keep
09:32:26 roosters in the ordinance that you passed.
09:32:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Do you know whether code
09:32:30 enforcement keep a record of the complaints they
09:32:32 receive?
09:32:33 >>CATHERINE COYLE: They do.
09:32:33 The new system I was explaining to you, that's an
09:32:36 easier system to filter out and look at the
09:32:39 complaints that are coming in.
09:32:40 And they did develop and actual complaint titled
09:32:44 chickens and or roosters.
09:32:45 And put the detail underneath that.
09:32:48 So I'm able to pull the information out much
09:32:50 quicker.
09:32:51 Under the old system they did track but it was
09:32:54 under animal violations, which could've been a
09:32:57 loud dog, could've been animal feces, anything.
09:33:01 So you have to read into the old system to find
09:33:06 out what kind of animal.
09:33:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: Maybe we need to start a program
09:33:12 about adopting a chicken.
09:33:15 [ Laughter ]
09:33:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Maybe that might help.
09:33:19 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It sounds funny, but it's
09:33:21 not -- it's not very farfetched.
09:33:25 Like I said, Key West actually has it and there
09:33:28 are other jurisdictions around the country that
09:33:30 have the same types of programs.
09:33:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
09:33:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any others?
09:33:35 Mrs. Capin?
09:33:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN: As usual, Councilman Reddick comes
09:33:39 up with the solutions.
09:33:42 [ Laughter ]
09:33:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't think we want him
09:33:48 adopting any chickens.
09:33:49 >> Unless we find a deep friar.
09:33:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Don't worry, after today,
09:33:59 you're going to get a lot of chicken reports,
09:34:02 roosters and everything else.
09:34:03 But anyway, anyone else on this item?
09:34:06 Item number 6.
09:34:07 Let me just stop here for a minute.
09:34:09 Chief called and I asked her to come over.
09:34:11 She wanted to hear, take out of order, public
09:34:16 safety.
09:34:16 Mr. Reddick said he would accommodate the chief.
09:34:19 Chief?
09:34:20 Chief of police, Mrs. Castor.
09:34:24 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Thank you, Councilman Miranda and
09:34:25 Reddick for allowing me to move this item up.
09:34:28 I'm over here to answer any questions that you may
09:34:30 have on the camera system that the Tampa Police
09:34:33 Department is beginning to enter into a pilot
09:34:39 program with taser international.
09:34:41 And they have partnered with evidence.com so the
09:34:45 actual cameras will be from taser and the storage
09:34:50 and evidence handling will be done by
09:34:53 evidence.com.
09:34:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So most specifically, you're
09:34:56 speaking about item 14, are 15 often the agenda.
09:34:59 Just want to make sure the public is
09:35:00 understanding.
09:35:02 >> Yes, sir.
09:35:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick hasn't done
09:35:05 anything yet.
09:35:06 >> I have a few questions.
09:35:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?
09:35:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: My first question, chief, what is
09:35:23 the feeling of the most of the officers within TPD
09:35:29 about utilizing the cameras?
09:35:33 >>CHIEF CASTOR: I think most officers are in
09:35:35 agreement with the camera systems, the body-worn
09:35:39 cameras.
09:35:39 Is so there can be an accurate depiction or
09:35:43 portrait of what they're doing out there on a
09:35:46 day-to-day basis.
09:35:47 Officers are involved in a lot of different
09:35:49 activities throughout any given shift.
09:35:53 And they're in favor of having this information
09:35:55 available so there won't be any question, in most
09:35:58 cases, of what occurred.
09:36:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: The other question is, when will
09:36:03 an officer turn on the camera?
09:36:07 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Well, we have a policy.
09:36:08 What we did, just to give you a quick historical,
09:36:12 we put together a committee over a year ago,
09:36:15 because we saw this coming, the body-worn cameras.
09:36:19 So we put together a committee to investigate it.
09:36:21 That committee is made up of users, officers from
09:36:24 different assignments within our organization.
09:36:27 From T and I and from the union.
09:36:30 So we really tried to be inclusive in that.
09:36:33 And they went through and put out requests for
09:36:37 proposals and, or requests for information first
09:36:41 and they had demonstrations by all of the
09:36:43 different camera systems.
09:36:45 They also got policies not only from the
09:36:48 international association of chiefs of police
09:36:51 model policy, but from other departments that had
09:36:53 already implemented this system, so that we could
09:36:56 try and avoid some of the mistakes that had been
09:37:00 made in the past.
09:37:01 And I can say the group did an outstanding job and
09:37:03 they ended up choosing taser as the company that
09:37:09 would provide the body-worn cameras and handling
09:37:12 of the evidence.
09:37:13 There's two ways to handle the evidence.
09:37:15 You can do it on your own or you can allow a
09:37:18 company to do that.
09:37:19 And we looked at both possibilities there.
09:37:21 It's much more cost effective to allow an
09:37:25 independent company to handle all of the video
09:37:29 storage and the evidence as well.
09:37:31 We also partnered with USF and we'll be working
09:37:35 with them on a year-long pilot project.
09:37:39 We're going to have 60 cameras to start off with.
09:37:41 We have 20 volley tears from each of our uniformed
09:37:45 districts.
09:37:46 And they will volunteer to wear these camera
09:37:49 systems.
09:37:50 And then we'll also have a control group of
09:37:52 officers who aren't wearing those.
09:37:54 And USF will study those two groups for a year to
09:37:58 look at officer injuries, to look at citizen
09:38:02 complaints, use of force incidents, all of those
09:38:06 to try to make some type of evidentiary
09:38:08 comparative between not wearing the cameras and
09:38:11 wearing the cameras.
09:38:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: And then last question is, once
09:38:16 that is done after the year time, will you be
09:38:19 providing us an updated report on the
09:38:21 effectiveness of the cameras?
09:38:24 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Yes, sir.
09:38:24 And the intent is to not to wait a year.
09:38:31 To roll out Moore cameras to the department.
09:38:33 Historically what has happened in other agencies,
09:38:37 I think you all know that we, the Tampa Police
09:38:39 Department is a member of the major city chiefs
09:38:42 association.
09:38:42 And what has happened, we have found from other
09:38:45 agencies that have implemented this, is that
09:38:48 there's kind of a stampede at the door once they
09:38:50 implement a pilot program of the other officers
09:38:52 that want to wear these body-worn cameras.
09:38:55 So we envision that there will be more cameras
09:39:00 implemented during that year long pilot.
09:39:03 But that year long pilot will stay to the 60
09:39:06 officers that initially wear them and the control
09:39:09 group as well.
09:39:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
09:39:11 Would you be agreeable to report back in six
09:39:15 months after having utilized the cameras?
09:39:19 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Yes, that won't be a problem at
09:39:21 all.
09:39:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Could I have a motion?
09:39:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: After I finish with
09:39:26 Councilmembers, I'll go back to you for a motion.
09:39:29 I have Ms. Montelione, Mr. Suarez.
09:39:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you for being here this
09:39:33 morning, chief.
09:39:34 Before I pull the items, I did call the chief's
09:39:38 office and let them know that I was going to pull
09:39:42 these items for discussion because I thought it
09:39:44 was important, rather than have them on consent
09:39:46 for, you know, this issue is a very, shall I say
09:39:50 hot item for the public, and I thought that they
09:39:53 would benefit from this discussion.
09:39:55 The questions, some of the questions have already
09:40:01 been asked by Mr. Reddick, that I posed yesterday.
09:40:05 Thank you for the call-back.
09:40:07 Sorry I didn't get back to you.
09:40:09 I was at the doctor.
09:40:10 How will the officers being chosen, since you said
09:40:18 there will be a stampede at the door for some of
09:40:21 them, they'll want to wear the cameras.
09:40:23 How will the officers be chosen who's going to be
09:40:26 in the control group and who's going to wear the
09:40:28 cameras?
09:40:30 >> Initially it's going to be volunteer.
09:40:31 There will be a limit of 20 from each district and
09:40:34 officers will volunteer to wear these.
09:40:36 Again, we'll get them in all different shifts and
09:40:38 cycles.
09:40:39 Then the control group is going to be done very
09:40:43 scientifically.
09:40:44 Because I came up with it.
09:40:45 [ Laughter ]
09:40:48 >> The rest of the squad members, basically put
09:40:50 them in a hat and draw a flame for the control
09:40:53 group.
09:40:53 So you will have two officers that will be in like
09:40:56 situations.
09:40:56 They'll be working the same shift, relatively the
09:40:59 same area of the city, so the control officer and
09:41:03 the officer with the body-worn camera will come
09:41:07 from the same squad.
09:41:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And will the cameras be equally
09:41:12 distributed between the three districts?
09:41:16 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Yes, ma'am, 20 in each district.
09:41:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The other questions I had
09:41:20 related to what the president had stated, now
09:41:25 probably a couple months ago.
09:41:27 Time goes so fast.
09:41:28 That federal money was going to be made available
09:41:33 for departments to purchase cameras.
09:41:37 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Yes, ma'am.
09:41:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Have we utilized that, applied
09:41:40 for any -- I don't even know.
09:41:44 >> We'll apply for that.
09:41:45 But like I left in the voicemail yesterday, one of
09:41:48 the few downsides of being a very safe city for a
09:41:51 city our size is that you don't get a lot of those
09:41:54 grant awards.
09:41:55 But we continue to apply for grant funding in
09:41:59 every instance where it's applicable.
09:42:00 And we'll do so in this one as well.
09:42:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Although I had the answer, I
09:42:04 wanted you to answer it in public, so that I
09:42:09 wasn't the only one privy to that information.
09:42:11 And that really is, wraps up kind of why I wanted
09:42:16 to ask you these questions this morning.
09:42:19 I think that wearing these cameras
09:42:22 unscientifically will probably be a benefit, both
09:42:28 to the officers themselves and to the public.
09:42:30 So, I'm hoping that this goes well and I'm very
09:42:35 pleased that you're utilizing USF.
09:42:37 Go bulls.
09:42:39 >>CHIEF CASTOR: You're welcome.
09:42:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Suarez?
09:42:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.
09:42:43 Chief, thanks for being here today.
09:42:45 I've got a few questions.
09:42:46 Some has to do with specifics in terms of how this
09:42:49 is going to work and some have to do with what
09:42:52 other jurisdictions are doing.
09:42:53 What other jurisdictions either have a pilot
09:42:56 program or have a, are using these body cameras on
09:43:00 a day-to-day basis?
09:43:01 Do you know?
09:43:03 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Yes, there are departments
09:43:04 nationwide that are probably the closest to us,
09:43:08 Pasco County just went to taser as well.
09:43:10 And they have already started -- I'm not sure if
09:43:14 they're in a pilot program or they have gone
09:43:16 full-blown from the jump.
09:43:19 Orlando is in a pilot program as well.
09:43:21 And Miami I believe is going to start a pilot
09:43:25 program soon.
09:43:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So we'll probably be the third
09:43:27 large municipality in the state that is going into
09:43:30 a pilot program for these particular uses.
09:43:33 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Yes, sir.
09:43:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: In terms of the cameras themselves,
09:43:36 are they recorded on, you know, disc?
09:43:40 Small, you know, removable pieces?
09:43:44 Is it streamed directly in?
09:43:46 What's the protocol for how it gets recorded and
09:43:49 where it goes?
09:43:50 >>CHIEF CASTOR: The actual recording of those, the
09:43:52 officer will have to activate the camera.
09:43:54 And the cameras will be worn in one of three
09:43:59 different locations and we are going to test drive
09:44:01 each of those as well.
09:44:02 There's the hat you can put the camera on a hat.
09:44:05 The cameras can be mounted on the epaulet of the
09:44:07 uniform or be worn on the glasses on the side of
09:44:12 either sunglasses or regular glasses.
09:44:15 And we're going to utilize all of those so the
09:44:17 officers can figure out which is the best.
09:44:19 We are not going with the chest-mounted because
09:44:23 that has been through trials.
09:44:26 And there are other departments that like that,
09:44:28 but it doesn't get the view of what the officer is
09:44:30 actually seeing.
09:44:31 So, clearly something where it's glass is mounted
09:44:35 or hat, then you get everything the officer is
09:44:37 seeing as well.
09:44:39 Next best in our opinion is up on the epaulet as
09:44:42 well.
09:44:42 Now, in our model policies, there are instances
09:44:46 where the cameras will be turned on and there are
09:44:49 instances where they will not be utilized.
09:44:52 And in between, which you could imagine is the
09:44:55 larger area, is up to the officer's discretion.
09:45:00 If it's a situation where they're supposed to be
09:45:02 used and they weren't, officer has to articulate
09:45:06 why they weren't used.
09:45:07 Now, turning the cameras on and off, I think
09:45:10 everyone is aware that with the muscle memory, the
09:45:14 repetition you have to do something approximately
09:45:16 a thousand times for it to become muscle memory.
09:45:19 And the analogy I could use would be our firearms.
09:45:23 To pull your firearm, which is something that just
09:45:26 has to become automatic with a police officer, is
09:45:29 just as important as target acquisition.
09:45:31 So you have to repeat that over and over.
09:45:33 And that again is why we're going into this pilot
09:45:36 program, so that the officers will be able to hit
09:45:38 it as an automatic on and off.
09:45:42 And the storage of it, the officers will have --
09:45:45 two choices on the storage.
09:45:48 We'll have docking stations within the department.
09:45:50 They can come and put that in at the end of their
09:45:52 shift.
09:45:53 Or they can choose to get a personal docking
09:45:55 station and they can attach that to any home
09:45:58 system that has wi-fi, it will automatically be
09:46:02 downloaded to evidence.com.
09:46:04 >> Let me ask you a couple questions.
09:46:06 Since you mentioned with the type of storage
09:46:08 that's going to be used and you mentioned someone
09:46:11 might have a home unit versus a docking station,
09:46:13 let's say at one of the precincts.
09:46:16 Have you seen anything in terms of chain of
09:46:20 custody issues from other jurisdictions because of
09:46:23 that kind of use?
09:46:25 >> No.
09:46:27 Because they -- we have never had any issues and
09:46:30 we had the in car videos for years now.
09:46:34 I would assume that your question is with
09:46:36 tampering with evidence.
09:46:37 Is there any way that someone could somehow.
09:46:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Let me interrupt you for a second.
09:46:42 It is not directly necessarily tampering with
09:46:45 evidence but also just where's the evidence?
09:46:48 Whether or not there's a missing piece of evidence
09:46:52 concerning timeframe, not necessarily a disc
09:46:55 itself.
09:46:56 So, my point is that the police officers going to
09:46:59 have full discretion, based on the guidelines that
09:47:02 you set forth, as to whether or not they turn on
09:47:04 the cameras.
09:47:06 There may be even a piece where they either don't
09:47:09 turn it on or do turn it on but it's also if it's
09:47:13 worn on the glasses, they may forget the glasses,
09:47:16 don't put it on for whatever reason.
09:47:18 I'm not implying anything at all by saying that.
09:47:20 But you know, what happens then legally for folks
09:47:24 that are arrested?
09:47:25 Legally arrested, you know, probable cause based
09:47:28 on the actions of that particular person, what
09:47:32 happens in terms of the evidence chain and what
09:47:35 does that mean for Tuesday as a police department?
09:47:37 Some of the things that we need to look at.
09:47:39 I think you already are looking at this.
09:47:42 Those legal issues are going to become different
09:47:44 than the ones we currently deal with.
09:47:46 We already dealing with a lot of those issues in
09:47:48 the old fashion gum shoe type of police work.
09:47:51 Now with the different technology, we need to
09:47:54 figure out okay, what is it that's happening in
09:47:56 other jurisdictions concerning these body cameras,
09:47:59 where are the holes in terms of our chain of
09:48:02 custody issues, and then how can we solve those
09:48:06 particular issues?
09:48:06 I think that a pilot program, and I know you agree
09:48:09 with me on this, is to find those holes and fill
09:48:12 them so that we don't get into a situation where
09:48:15 we start buying these cameras in a more robust way
09:48:19 and then we find out there are a lot of gaps that
09:48:21 we have not dealt with.
09:48:22 So, my main issue is, you know, really the model
09:48:30 standard operating procedures that we're going to
09:48:31 put in place for these officers in the pilot
09:48:33 program.
09:48:34 And make sure that we work those things as much as
09:48:37 possible to make sure we're not going to have
09:48:39 future problems when we, if we buy any more body
09:48:44 cameras.
09:48:45 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Correct.
09:48:45 That's exactly what we're working towards.
09:48:48 And there haven't been any gaping holes that have
09:48:52 been discovered so far in any of these camera
09:48:56 systems.
09:48:56 Clearly whenever you involve humans, you could
09:48:59 have the possibility of the video not being turned
09:49:03 on, not being turned off.
09:49:04 I haven't heard any issues of the cameras not
09:49:07 functioning.
09:49:08 The cameras are very high tech.
09:49:11 They're weather resistant.
09:49:13 They're shock resistant.
09:49:15 They can film in low light basically what you see
09:49:19 is what you'll see on the camera system as well.
09:49:22 They also will automatically sync up with our
09:49:27 records system.
09:49:27 Every camera is individually assigned to the
09:49:30 officer by a payroll number.
09:49:32 So, the video that is taken will link up with
09:49:36 reports that are written.
09:49:37 And then the officer will be required to tag that
09:49:42 video if it is going to be used for evidentiary
09:49:45 value.
09:49:45 If it isn't, then it will have to be disposed of
09:49:48 because I'm sure you could all guess the
09:49:51 biggest -- the largest cost in this entire program
09:49:56 is the storage of the information.
09:49:58 And the chain of custody is clearly tracked
09:50:02 through evidence.com once it's marked for
09:50:06 evidentiary value.
09:50:07 And we do have, as I said, specific guidelines of
09:50:10 when they will be filmed, situations that will be
09:50:13 filmed and if they're not, the officer has to
09:50:17 articulate why.
09:50:18 And those instances will come up.
09:50:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We'd like to have a copy of that as
09:50:22 to what those situations are, so we're aware of
09:50:25 it.
09:50:26 In addition, I would make a friendly suggestion
09:50:28 that dealing with our legal department and with
09:50:32 your lawyer over at TPD and actually trying get
09:50:36 some advisory opinions from private attorneys that
09:50:38 deal with defense of criminals that are out there,
09:50:43 to find out, you know, where the holes are at now
09:50:47 so we can work them out during the pilot program
09:50:49 so if we do make a decision to buy a large number,
09:50:52 it's going to be a large expenditure, obviously,
09:50:55 and as you mentioned, it's the holding of the
09:50:57 evidence is where the cost is going to be.
09:50:59 That we are prepared as much as possible to go
09:51:03 forward because I do think that this is important
09:51:05 tool for the police officers to have.
09:51:07 I think that this is something, the wave of the
09:51:10 future, but we need to make sure those legalities
09:51:14 are worked out so that we're better prepared for
09:51:17 any legal challenges that come in the forefront.
09:51:21 >>CHIEF CASTOR: I couldn't agree more.
09:51:22 And I feel we have done due diligence in that
09:51:25 area.
09:51:25 We have researched to see other areas that have
09:51:27 implemented those and some of the issues that have
09:51:29 Arisen, clearly we have included legal Council in
09:51:33 the drafting of our policy.
09:51:35 And the questions of what if situations.
09:51:39 We have also worked with the state attorney's
09:51:41 office because they will be a very integral part
09:51:44 of this as well.
09:51:45 So, we feel like we have included as many
09:51:49 individuals in it.
09:51:51 We have done everything that we can to avoid any
09:51:56 errors moving forward.
09:51:57 But as you stated, there still is a lot to learn
09:52:00 with these body-worn cameras.
09:52:02 But I believe it will be very positive for not
09:52:05 only the officers but for our citizens in the
09:52:07 community as well.
09:52:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chief.
09:52:10 Appreciate it.
09:52:11 Thank you, chair.
09:52:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen?
09:52:15 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.
09:52:16 Good morning, Chief Castor.
09:52:17 Happy new year.
09:52:18 I have one quick question and then a comment.
09:52:21 What exactly is the retention period for the
09:52:24 tapes?
09:52:24 Because I would think it doesn't always -- it's
09:52:27 not always immediately apparent that you need to
09:52:30 go back and review something.
09:52:31 So how long do you actually keep it before it gets
09:52:33 destroyed or discarded?
09:52:35 >>CHIEF CASTOR: That's a date, that's a timeframe
09:52:37 that each agency can set.
09:52:40 Clearly if it's mark for evidentiary value, then
09:52:42 it would go into a long-term storage area, which
09:52:46 is much cheaper than the short-term storage.
09:52:49 And we were looking at a period of 30 days, which
09:52:52 would allow the community, any citizen that had an
09:52:57 issue, public records request, anything along
09:52:59 those lines, a month would clearly be long enough
09:53:02 for someone to come forward and request that
09:53:06 video.
09:53:08 >>HARRY COHEN: You know, I just wanted to say
09:53:10 that, just last couple of months have been very
09:53:13 challenging in this country.
09:53:14 They've been challenging for law enforcement
09:53:16 agencies, in a lot of different municipalities.
09:53:20 And challenging for citizens in a lot of different
09:53:23 cities.
09:53:23 And I think that you should be commended and our
09:53:26 community should be commended for taking a
09:53:28 proactive approach to try and use whatever
09:53:31 technology we can to, you know, do everything we
09:53:35 can to really understand what's happening in our
09:53:38 city.
09:53:39 So I'm happy to support this and I think it's
09:53:41 great that we'll have a report in six months and
09:53:44 be able to see how it's doing.
09:53:46 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Thank you.
09:53:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?
09:53:50 >>YVONNE CAPIN: This might be a odd question but
09:53:52 it just popped into my head.
09:53:54 I just want to say, is there anything, for
09:53:57 instance, if the police officers wearing a camera,
09:54:02 is there any law against a citizen holding a
09:54:05 camera to the police?
09:54:07 >>CHIEF CASTOR: No.
09:54:08 That happens every day.
09:54:10 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
09:54:10 You know how much I run into police officers in
09:54:14 the street.
09:54:15 But not -- I was just wondering if that was -- so
09:54:21 that does happen all the time.
09:54:24 >>CHIEF CASTOR: All the time.
09:54:25 Every single day.
09:54:26 Mast, our officers basically function under the
09:54:30 assumption that they're on video.
09:54:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
09:54:33 I was curious about that.
09:54:35 I was more curious about if there were any rules
09:54:38 of procedure or if it's just okay, you're filming.
09:54:43 >>CHIEF CASTOR: No, it's fine.
09:54:44 Police officers, we work for the citizens.
09:54:46 So they want to film us doing that work, they're
09:54:49 more than welcome to.
09:54:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So do we.
09:54:52 We work for the citizens too.
09:54:53 Thank you.
09:54:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?
09:54:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:54:59 Chair, I would like to make a motion for the new
09:55:04 chief because you will not be here in six months.
09:55:07 For the new chief --
09:55:10 [ Laughter ]
09:55:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: To report back to the Council on
09:55:16 the effectiveness of the body cameras and
09:55:23 instances where they might have any problems as
09:55:26 they relate to the camera.
09:55:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: When six months, will be in
09:55:30 June.
09:55:30 Have a motion by Mr. Reddick -- just give me the
09:55:36 date in June.
09:55:38 >> June 25th.
09:55:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: June 25th at 10:00 on the year
09:55:42 2015 Tampa city hall.
09:55:44 The old city hall.
09:55:45 I have a motion by Mr. Reddick, second by
09:55:47 Mr. Suarez.
09:55:48 Further discussion by Councilmembers?
09:55:49 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
09:55:50 saying aye.
09:55:51 Opposed nay.
09:55:53 The ayes have it unanimously.
09:55:54 Would you kindly move number 15 and 16?
09:55:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mover items, resolution 14 --
09:56:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, 14 is cameras, I imagine
09:56:02 the helicopters.
09:56:03 That's a different one.
09:56:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move resolution 15 and 16.
09:56:07 >> Second.
09:56:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick.
09:56:10 I have three seconds in a row.
09:56:12 I wish I had equipment here that would tell me who
09:56:15 made the motion because when they triple motion, I
09:56:19 part in the middle.
09:56:20 I'll go with what I heard first, second and third.
09:56:23 I'm not sure I'm correct.
09:56:24 I go with Mr. Cohen on a tie vote with
09:56:27 Ms. Montelione, Mr. Suarez and Ms. Capin.
09:56:31 I satisfied them all.
09:56:32 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by
09:56:34 saying aye.
09:56:34 Opposed nay.
09:56:36 The ayes have it unanimously.
09:56:36 Thank you very much, chief, for reporting to us.
09:56:38 Really appreciate it very much.
09:56:41 I was going to say I hope you're here longer.
09:56:43 But I know, understand what you want to do in life
09:56:46 and I appreciate that very much.
09:56:48 >>CHIEF CASTOR: Thank you, sir.
09:56:49 I appreciate that.
09:56:50 The only thing I would like to say, our policy
09:56:52 right now is in draft form.
09:56:54 And so, that is going to be released publicly, but
09:56:59 we clearly could make it available to Council.
09:57:01 Thank you all very much.
09:57:03 Behind.
09:57:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number five.
09:57:06 And then due respect, we're going to go back.
09:57:08 Promised the attorneys on both sides and good
09:57:12 people at Harbor Island, everyone else in 65.
09:57:15 After this I'll go to 65 and we'll continue the
09:57:17 agenda from them.
09:57:18 Yes, sir?
09:57:18 >> Good morning, Council.
09:57:19 I apologize for missing my tee time.
09:57:22 I was en route when I got called.
09:57:24 Could I please have the PowerPoint for item number
09:57:28 five?
09:57:28 This is my biannual report on the work the city is
09:57:35 doing in regard to the homelessness issue.
09:57:37 Basically we work with, the areas I'm going to
09:57:55 touch 0, I'll work with the Hillsborough homeless
09:57:58 initiative and this is becoming one of our
09:58:00 strongest partnerships with the way this is now
09:58:02 structured.
09:58:03 And the city's involvement on this board.
09:58:05 Also, when I talk about what they're doing at the
09:58:09 homelessness initiative, give you quick update on
09:58:13 25 cities way started 50, 60 days ago.
09:58:16 And the future focus of the organization itself.
09:58:18 The plan that we had been working on.
09:58:23 I say we because I'm on the board.
09:58:25 That we had been working on with the new director,
09:58:28 executive director coming on board, you know, the
09:58:31 board looked at and she looked at and felt there
09:58:34 was a lot of issues with how measurable these
09:58:38 things were.
09:58:39 There weren't a lot of metrics involved in the
09:58:41 plan so you really couldn't judge, you know, how
09:58:43 many homeless people you were actually taking off
09:58:46 the street and finding them suitable, dignified
09:58:51 living arrangements.
09:58:52 So was voted on by the board that they are going
09:58:54 to go back and refocus on putting the strategic
09:58:57 plan together and that's going to be the focus of
09:58:59 our plan going forward.
09:59:01 Especially in January.
09:59:02 Our next meeting is actually January 13th.
09:59:05 The goals and actions still do remain the same.
09:59:12 Chronic homelessness among the various sub
09:59:15 populations by 2022.
09:59:17 And those sub populations are the chronic
09:59:20 individuals, veterans, families, youth and other
09:59:24 single adults.
09:59:25 Those are the populations that the plan is going
09:59:27 to focus on and develop the measures.
09:59:30 For each of the sub populations, these various
09:59:37 strategic priorities will be involved in each and
09:59:40 address and applied to each of the sub
09:59:42 populations.
09:59:43 The community engagement example of that is our
09:59:47 strongest one has been thus far has been operation
09:59:50 reveille.
09:59:50 I'm going to talk more about that as I focus on
09:59:53 that itself.
09:59:54 But also community engagement.
09:59:58 Things as simple as homeless service memorial that
10:00:00 took place just a few days past.
10:00:02 As well as the point in time count which is coming
10:00:05 up in February.
10:00:06 So if you see information on that and want to go
10:00:10 out and count and participate in that effort, it's
10:00:13 quite eye opening.
10:00:14 I did it last year.
10:00:15 Plan on doing it again this year as well.
10:00:17 It kind of really puts you out on the street to
10:00:20 see what's going on.
10:00:21 So those are just a couple things of the community
10:00:24 engagement.
10:00:24 The crisis response system, a big part of that is
10:00:28 just recently taken place with the centralized
10:00:32 facility that was over on 50th street.
10:00:35 Again, I'm going to talk about that later in the
10:00:37 presentation.
10:00:38 But also they're initiating a critical homeless
10:00:43 hotline starting in January.
10:00:46 Hasn't started yet but getting ready to start.
10:00:48 So those are some of the examples of those things.
10:00:50 Ending revolving door homelessness.
10:00:54 That really speaks to providing the needed wrap
10:00:57 around services from medical and emotional health,
10:01:01 job training, medication, food, supplies, and just
10:01:07 all of those, all the things that implies.
10:01:09 Then using increasing self-sufficiency.
10:01:13 And you know, that's why I say we can provide --
10:01:22 talking too fast.
10:01:23 Need to slow down.
10:01:24 Increasing self-sufficiency and then also using
10:01:28 models, proven models, example, the housing first
10:01:31 model and some of that kind of thing, provide
10:01:34 permanent housing.
10:01:34 And then accountability and increasing housing
10:01:39 options.
10:01:39 Accountability really speaks to everybody's
10:01:41 getting on board using the IDIS system, which
10:01:44 is--unity, which is the HMIS.
10:01:50 It's way of tracking, evaluating specifically the
10:01:55 needs of people that are finding themselves in the
10:01:58 homeless situation.
10:01:59 The future focus for the Hillsborough initiative,
10:02:04 reducing veteran homelessness.
10:02:06 The housing solution centers, which we'll talk
10:02:08 about.
10:02:08 The homeless hotline and again focusing on
10:02:11 reducing homelessness for all those sub
10:02:13 populations.
10:02:14 One of the things that we had been started, back
10:02:20 six months ago, or about four months ago, was
10:02:24 Tampa participated in 25 cities initiative.
10:02:27 We were selected by the federal government to
10:02:29 participate in that.
10:02:30 And you recall the key elements of that was many
10:02:33 of the things that we have implemented.
10:02:35 Many things that took place during operation
10:02:37 reveille, which coordinated intake and focusing on
10:02:47 the various needs and identifying the various
10:02:50 needs in a specific fashion of what people need
10:02:53 rather than just kind of shotgun effect.
10:02:56 It really helped with case management and also
10:03:00 combining a lot of the local efforts with the
10:03:02 veterans and the federal government as well as
10:03:05 local government to participate in that.
10:03:07 The goal of that in the first 100 days was to
10:03:10 place 31 veterans and 34 nonveterans chronically
10:03:14 homeless in housing.
10:03:15 And we have achieved that.
10:03:17 We have first of all through operation reveille
10:03:22 and the effort the city has done with
10:03:23 participation in the tenant based rental assistant
10:03:26 as well as continuum of care with all the agencies
10:03:29 that participate with that as well.
10:03:31 From the city's perspective, our housing and
10:03:36 community development activity, we take care of,
10:03:39 we work with the tenant based rental assistance
10:03:43 program.
10:03:43 I'm going to also talk and touch on the current
10:03:48 funding allocations as well as our ongoing effort
10:03:50 with housing first.
10:03:51 And then again with operation reveille.
10:03:55 With the tenant based rental assistance, we have
10:04:01 successfully have 18 active participants.
10:04:05 And have those leased units.
10:04:07 Actually five of those individuals were
10:04:10 chronically homeless veterans that we housed prior
10:04:14 to operation reveille.
10:04:18 Families, shows up as a single voucher but affects
10:04:23 four or five, three or four people or more that
10:04:26 were housed as a family.
10:04:28 So the numbers, even though there's the 18
10:04:31 vouchers, it represents a higher number of actual
10:04:33 homeless individuals.
10:04:34 And we have a few vouchers left that we're going
10:04:38 to, we're continuing to seek and provide housing
10:04:40 for.
10:04:41 The partnerships that have been established Haas
10:04:45 as part of this effort, we did not -- well, we had
10:04:49 these partnerships.
10:04:50 We were not actively engaged with them before.
10:04:52 Includes agencies such as ACT, Catholic charities,
10:04:56 Tampa Police Department and the homeless
10:04:58 initiative, of course, Frances house, healthy
10:05:02 families, county sheriff's office, Tampa
10:05:05 crossroads.
10:05:07 There's a number of those things.
10:05:08 A lot of those individuals were the ones that also
10:05:10 participated in operation reveille.
10:05:16 Perhaps the thing I'm most pleased with is the
10:05:18 partnering landlords we have.
10:05:20 We have identified 12 active landlords to
10:05:23 participate in this program amount of and the
10:05:25 benefit of that is that you're not taking
10:05:29 individuals who are homeless and putting them all
10:05:31 into a single location.
10:05:33 You're able to distribute them to different parts
10:05:35 of the city, north, south, east and west.
10:05:38 By doing that you avoid a lot of the not in my
10:05:41 backyard kind of syndrome that is very difficult
10:05:44 with this particular subject matter.
10:05:46 And you have tenants that are just moving in and
10:05:49 they're recognized as tenants and nothing more.
10:05:52 There's no special stigma associated with that.
10:05:55 So, I really like that deal.
10:05:59 We have identified 12 landlords willing to
10:06:01 participate in this program with us.
10:06:02 Our funding allocations, it still remains very
10:06:10 robust.
10:06:10 This is the money that we do with the various
10:06:13 public service agencies.
10:06:15 Housing agencies.
10:06:16 All have a direct homelessness benefits.
10:06:18 It's the amount of money we put toward that.
10:06:20 We'll draw to your attention we do give the
10:06:26 general fund, the homeless coalition, $55,000.
10:06:28 But also this year when we did participate in
10:06:30 operation reveille, they needed addition natural
10:06:34 money to provide services that were required for
10:06:36 those veterans.
10:06:37 So the city went into the general fund and put in
10:06:41 another $40,000.
10:06:44 And we're also still have the housing first money,
10:06:47 the $250,000 earmarked for that process as well.
10:06:51 Operation reveille, has been a lot of conversation
10:06:56 and there's been a lot of new stories and what it
10:06:58 did.
10:06:59 And really what that represented, the most
10:07:03 significant thing about that represented, it was a
10:07:05 real shift in how we addressed homelessness.
10:07:08 Right now, it's about veterans and that.
10:07:11 But the notion is to really take these kind of
10:07:13 model and move it forward as it applies to other
10:07:16 chronically homeless individuals as well as people
10:07:19 that are just finding themselves homeless out of
10:07:22 other reasons, for other reasons.
10:07:24 It really was a partnership between the Tampa
10:07:27 Hillsborough homelessness initiative, Hillsborough
10:07:29 County and the City of Tampa.
10:07:30 And because it's private sector, ranging from
10:07:35 hooters and McDonald's right down to Dave,
10:07:38 Ashley furniture and various law firms and
10:07:43 contractors.
10:07:45 Dozens and dozens and dozens of private sector
10:07:48 citizens and companies all participating in this
10:07:51 effort.
10:07:51 It was very well received.
10:07:53 We identified 79 individuals that came through
10:07:57 that day.
10:07:57 And we were able to successfully house 53 on that
10:08:02 very day.
10:08:03 With the other 26 in line.
10:08:07 Right now, they're in the various process of
10:08:10 finding those houses and finding those places to
10:08:13 stay.
10:08:13 The other thing, the last thing I wanted to touch
10:08:23 base on with you is the community housing
10:08:25 solutions center.
10:08:27 Initially, we had talked last time we reported
10:08:31 that we're getting ready to go out with RFP for
10:08:34 the Orient Road facility.
10:08:35 That was going to house up to 175, provide for up
10:08:39 to 175 men and women.
10:08:41 And basically it hit a snag in that the
10:08:44 neighboring facility has an above ground fuel tank
10:08:47 that was bordering right next to it.
10:08:49 And when the analysis came back, that they felt
10:08:52 that they really couldn't implement housing there
10:08:56 of this nature until they got that tank addressed.
10:08:59 So they're looking at various options, either
10:09:03 building a berm, to provide the mitigation and the
10:09:08 buffering needed for the safety and protection, or
10:09:10 moving the tank.
10:09:12 And at some point this facility will go back
10:09:15 online to be available to have that type of
10:09:16 facility there.
10:09:17 So in the meantime, county went out and put out
10:09:20 the RFP and the successful proposer for that was
10:09:24 the, was the drug abuse comprehensives
10:09:30 coordinating offers.
10:09:32 Award of $2.3 million for the housing center.
10:09:35 There's their center over on 50th street.
10:09:37 That's going to house up to 75 people with
10:09:39 complete wrap around service also.
10:09:41 Exactly the kind of thing Ms. Capin had been
10:09:43 talking about and what this Council had been
10:09:45 talking about two, three years ago, about having a
10:09:48 place where you have some place to move, that you
10:09:53 have some place to move if somebody's homeless,
10:09:56 you can take them somewhere.
10:09:57 They're able to stay there until they literally
10:10:01 Raleigh got on their feet, got the services they
10:10:03 needed, got identified, found their ID, their
10:10:05 social security, drivers license, whatever they
10:10:07 needed, they helped them get back engaged.
10:10:11 That's what this center does, food, showers,
10:10:13 personal storage facilities, supervision.
10:10:16 There's a full time doctor there and a part time
10:10:20 psychiatrist on staff 24/7.
10:10:22 Officer McDonald, the various sheriff's department
10:10:26 will have places to take people they find who are
10:10:28 homeless and need help.
10:10:30 They'll take them there.
10:10:31 The other thing is the, the notion is that they
10:10:34 want in the future is to work to establish
10:10:36 additional community, community housing solution
10:10:42 centers.
10:10:43 In various locations throughout the city and the
10:10:45 county.
10:10:45 The purpose being again if you go back to what I
10:10:48 was talking about where you have multiple
10:10:50 landlords participating and accepting the vouchers
10:10:53 for homelessness, or for homeless people.
10:10:57 If you have more of these centers that are
10:10:58 smaller, 50, 75, maybe a hundred, that size
10:11:02 facility is a little easier to find, number one.
10:11:06 Number two it again doesn't concentrate everything
10:11:08 in one part of town and as kind of what everybody
10:11:13 fears.
10:11:14 It disperses it, mitigates and makes a lot of our
10:11:19 social issues and ability to help individuals in
10:11:22 multiple part of the city.
10:11:24 So that is one approach the homelessness
10:11:26 initiative and the county and us are going to
10:11:28 continue to work towards establishing more of
10:11:30 these types of places.
10:11:31 Location as I said is over on 50th street.
10:11:35 Which actually is in the City of Tampa.
10:11:39 The first one is in the City of Tampa.
10:11:41 And again the various partners that are part of
10:11:44 that is just a long list of all the service
10:11:47 providers, whether they're providers of job
10:11:50 training or food services or medical services or
10:11:54 psychiatric training, and things like that.
10:11:58 So, I'll answer any other questions you may have.
10:12:01 And then at the end of the presentation, I have
10:12:03 one more thing I want.
10:12:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have Ms. Montelione,
10:12:06 Ms. Capin, in that order.
10:12:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:12:09 Tom, I asked for my book, my notebook.
10:12:18 He hasn't brought it forth yet.
10:12:20 So I don't remember exactly the name of the effort
10:12:24 that was undertaken that you the and I both
10:12:27 participated in.
10:12:29 Actually, there were a couple efforts.
10:12:31 Going back about two, three years now.
10:12:35 Had was the initial, when it was still the
10:12:39 homeless coalition, before it was rebranded.
10:12:44 Rye view of the ten year action plan.
10:12:47 >> Right.
10:12:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And there were many community
10:12:50 engagement sessions.
10:12:52 When I say community, I mean the community of
10:12:54 individuals and agencies that work in this space.
10:12:59 >> Correct.
10:13:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: We spent nearly a year --
10:13:04 I flight nearly a year going through that process.
10:13:06 At the end of that process, HUD asked us to
10:13:14 convene in regular session for probably another
10:13:18 eight months of meetings with some of the same
10:13:24 players, if you will.
10:13:25 And we developed out of those two efforts a series
10:13:30 of recommendations.
10:13:35 And I have not seen some of those recommendations
10:13:40 in your presentation.
10:13:41 I know you can't cover everything in the time
10:13:45 allotted, but one of the most serious, felt by
10:13:53 everyone who attended, was that there was a lack
10:13:57 of planning at discharge from various institutions
10:14:05 or agencies that see homeless people on a daily
10:14:08 basis.
10:14:09 One was discharge planning from hospitals.
10:14:12 So someone goes into the hospital, maybe they had
10:14:16 an apartment or a home before, they have an
10:14:18 extended stay in a hospital.
10:14:20 They have medical bills they can't afford and they
10:14:22 end up homeless because of their medical
10:14:25 situation.
10:14:25 Hopefully with the affordable care act, they're
10:14:29 having a better time of it because they have
10:14:32 health insurance now.
10:14:33 Hopefully.
10:14:34 They've signed up.
10:14:36 But the other was from incarceration.
10:14:42 So discharge from either the prison system or from
10:14:46 the hospital system, there wasn't enough care
10:14:51 taken to where that person was going once they
10:14:54 walked out the door.
10:14:55 Has there been any effort or any movement on that?
10:15:02 Because that was where most of the homeless on our
10:15:06 streets are coming from.
10:15:08 >> Right now -- let me answer in a couple ways.
10:15:15 A lot of the plans that came from the dedicated
10:15:18 opportunities to end homelessness through the
10:15:20 interagency Council on homelessness, a lot of the
10:15:23 efforts that came out of it are the efforts you
10:15:25 talked about in the ten year plan, one of my
10:15:28 issue, one of my problems was, and when I sat down
10:15:33 and had my one on one with Antoinette Triplett, I
10:15:37 told her, I said we have a number of plans when we
10:15:40 first started, it was presented the homeless
10:15:42 coalition 10 years ago had a plan to end
10:15:44 homelessness in 10 years.
10:15:46 And then 10 years later and we went through
10:15:49 homelessness of like 2000 people up to 17,000
10:15:51 people.
10:15:52 And believe me, those numbers were cooked I think
10:15:55 and it was weird way of counting.
10:15:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That was the federal
10:15:59 government's directive.
10:16:00 To count people who were, you know, by no choice
10:16:05 of their own.
10:16:09 >> My daughters are technically homeless by that
10:16:11 definition.
10:16:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No.
10:16:14 I would beg to differ.
10:16:15 You and I have had that conversation before.
10:16:19 >> You know, doing, intervening on the front end
10:16:23 prior to somebody coming home -- becoming
10:16:26 homeless, I'm certain that will be part of the
10:16:28 strategic plan that comes up.
10:16:29 Because I think we don't have a plan that
10:16:31 everybody has agreed to at this point.
10:16:33 And with the new leadership at the initiative, I
10:16:36 think that's the real focus of trying to get those
10:16:38 kinds of things in.
10:16:39 The meeting on Thursday, I'll make sure this
10:16:41 becomes part of that conversation.
10:16:42 I know that we have, when I did talk to Antoinette
10:16:46 to lay the plans on the table to see where there
10:16:49 are places they can be integrated and where they
10:16:51 make sense to have it as a single document.
10:16:54 She and I have had that conversation.
10:16:56 I will continue to have that conversation with
10:16:58 her.
10:16:59 Hopefully, the, hopefully the, the final plan, or
10:17:07 the final document comes out of that will have
10:17:09 that intervention prior to somebody actually
10:17:11 becoming homeless.
10:17:11 That there is some post discharge planning,
10:17:14 whether it's from the prison system or the jail or
10:17:16 the hospitals or whatever.
10:17:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: This is the notebook that I was
10:17:22 referring to.
10:17:23 So -- but you filled in the names, so I didn't
10:17:27 have to look them up.
10:17:28 Thank you very much.
10:17:28 You know, one thing I beg to differ with, is that
10:17:32 when we went through this process with everyone in
10:17:34 the room, there was consensus on a lot of the
10:17:39 goals and a lot of the strategies that were
10:17:42 outlined in the work that we put in over probably,
10:17:45 you know, an 18 to maybe even, I would say 24
10:17:50 months of discussions and planning.
10:17:52 I attended almost every one of those meetings over
10:17:55 that time period.
10:17:57 And there was a lot of consensus.
10:17:59 Especially on the discharge planning.
10:18:02 So I have to say I'm really disappointed that we
10:18:04 spent all that time --
10:18:06 >> I don't know where --
10:18:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And then.
10:18:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: I don't know where that plan is
10:18:11 in terms of what we're going to discuss next week.
10:18:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
10:18:17 >> I know that in my regular day job --
10:18:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Now that I brought it up again
10:18:23 I'm sure you'll address it.
10:18:24 >> As the planner, like we develop multiple,
10:18:27 multiple, multiple plans a lot and they do get,
10:18:30 they get shelfed.
10:18:32 That's the biggest knock sometimes with planning.
10:18:34 Is implementing and bringing them forward.
10:18:37 Having a document that brings all of those kinds
10:18:40 of things together is really the goal.
10:18:43 And I think we're closer to that than we have ever
10:18:46 been before quite frankly.
10:18:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Understand.
10:18:49 Okay.
10:18:49 So, the other major -- well, two questions I have.
10:18:54 Do you know what percentage of the city's budget
10:18:56 is spent on homeless?
10:18:59 Not talking about federal money because that is
10:19:02 pass-through money in my mind.
10:19:05 >> The actual general fund percentage of that, I
10:19:07 don't have that number.
10:19:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's probably a really small
10:19:09 number.
10:19:12 Probably infinitesimal number.
10:19:15 I would, you know, we just came through a budget
10:19:18 process and I would say that it's something that
10:19:21 the City of Tampa needs to do is step up to the
10:19:24 plate.
10:19:24 We dedicate a lot of staff time, so if you want to
10:19:29 add that in, that's budget money being spent on
10:19:32 these initiatives.
10:19:33 But you know, I don't see that we have any real
10:19:37 skin in the game, so to speak.
10:19:40 >> I would beg to differ on that I have a lot of
10:19:42 my skin in this game.
10:19:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, that's what I said.
10:19:45 Staff time we do.
10:19:46 Staff time we do.
10:19:47 I'm talking about as a percentage of our budget.
10:19:49 I think it's a reflection on us, you know, how we
10:19:52 treat the least of us is a reflection on how we
10:19:58 operate.
10:19:58 And the last thing I want to mention is that there
10:20:03 are few boards, agencies that are as important as
10:20:09 this one.
10:20:10 I would say that this is probably one of the most
10:20:15 important ones.
10:20:16 At least in my mind.
10:20:17 In my opinion.
10:20:17 And this Council has been talking about homeless
10:20:22 since we were first seated in 2011.
10:20:25 It was one of the biggest topics we had in 2011
10:20:29 because we were discussing the street solicitation
10:20:34 ordinance and a lot of this discussion was borne
10:20:37 out of that a lot of us felt very strongly about
10:20:39 what the city should be doing in that regard.
10:20:42 So, I'm curious, we all sit on a lot of boards.
10:20:46 Each one of us has a number of committee
10:20:48 assignments.
10:20:49 But this is not one that we have an assignment to.
10:20:52 Hillsborough County has an elected official on
10:20:56 this board.
10:20:57 Correct?
10:20:57 >> Yes.
10:20:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But the City of Tampa does not.
10:21:00 >> I represent the Mayor on that board.
10:21:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You represent the Mayor.
10:21:03 You're not an elected official.
10:21:06 So it's hard for us to know how we can help and
10:21:09 what we can do if we're not part of the
10:21:12 conversation.
10:21:12 So I guess, you know, what I would ask, it would,
10:21:18 I'm assuming be part of the bylaws of THHI.
10:21:22 >> Which we're updating.
10:21:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: What perfect timing.
10:21:24 So I would ask that an elected official, I mean
10:21:33 all due respect, I know you represent the Mayor,
10:21:36 but we answer to the public.
10:21:38 Directly.
10:21:40 So I would ask that an assignment be created for
10:21:44 Council to have an appointment to THHI.
10:21:47 >> I can bring up when they discuss the bylaws.
10:21:51 We were asked to come back and look at the bylaws
10:21:53 and see what kinds of things.
10:21:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry?
10:21:57 You appoint me?
10:21:57 I put a lot of time into this, since we talked
10:22:01 about that, you know, I made that statement during
10:22:04 the ordinance when we were passing the ordinance.
10:22:07 You know, it's something my constituents wanted.
10:22:10 Me personally, I may not have voted the way that,
10:22:13 you know, I felt.
10:22:14 But it was what my constituents wanted.
10:22:17 I voted for the ordinance.
10:22:18 But I said right then that I would do everything
10:22:20 that I possibly could to assist and eliminate the
10:22:26 cause of homelessness in the first place.
10:22:28 So, it's not something new.
10:22:29 It's something I've been doing, I participate in
10:22:33 the homeless count more times than I can count.
10:22:35 And I also sit on the board of Ybor youth clinic,
10:22:39 which serves many of the -- many of their clients
10:22:43 are unaccompanied homeless youth.
10:22:46 I'm trying to do my part.
10:22:47 I that I Council should have a representative on
10:22:50 this board because we can't, we can't be an active
10:22:55 part of the solution if we're not part of the
10:22:57 process.
10:22:58 Thank you.
10:22:59 >> I can carry that message forward.
10:23:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?
10:23:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
10:23:05 That was a great campaign for that position.
10:23:06 Okay.
10:23:15 Right when you said, Ms. Capin had suggested that,
10:23:23 I was going to comment because you read my mind.
10:23:26 I was thinking okay, I hear what, where we're at
10:23:30 with that.
10:23:31 And when we talk about, you know, three years,
10:23:34 whatever, in 2010, when I was serving here, you
10:23:39 know, it was brought up and I remember the
10:23:42 homeless coalition coming up with their plan and
10:23:44 we were questioning why we had been, we were eight
10:23:49 years or nine years into a plan and we were at
10:23:52 17,000.
10:23:53 And I understand the count the way it went and
10:23:55 that we were talking about doubling up and, but I
10:24:01 was invited twice.
10:24:02 One to Cathy Castor's office, about this.
10:24:08 And then I was invited by Mr. Guy king, who serves
10:24:12 on this board.
10:24:16 To come and observe.
10:24:19 And that was about three years ago.
10:24:23 I agree with Ms. Montelione, that the Mayor may or
10:24:30 may have an appointment.
10:24:31 But we are not part of the administration.
10:24:33 We are legislative and when it comes to us, we
10:24:36 need to vote on these things, so we should be
10:24:38 somewhat informed about them.
10:24:39 Or at least have some direction.
10:24:46 So I appreciate that coming up.
10:24:47 Thank you.
10:24:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else at this time?
10:24:51 Anything else, sir, on item number five?
10:24:55 >> I'm good, sir.
10:24:56 Thank you.
10:24:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
10:24:58 Appreciate it.
10:24:58 And your next semiannual report will be June 25,
10:25:03 right?
10:25:04 >> Yes, I think that's right.
10:25:05 I want to introduce Keyana.
10:25:08 You've seen her a couple times before.
10:25:10 We recently promoted her to be our housing
10:25:14 planning coordinator.
10:25:15 So she has gotten a promotion and this issue is
10:25:19 very passionate to her.
10:25:20 She's working very hard in this and definitely,
10:25:22 just wanted to acknowledge her.
10:25:25 You'll probably be seeing more of her in the
10:25:28 future.
10:25:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Congratulations to you.
10:25:30 Okay.
10:25:30 Like I stated earlier, Ms. City attorney will make
10:25:35 a presentation at this time.
10:25:38 Very short.
10:25:39 >>JULIA MANDELL: I know you're back go to go into
10:25:42 a significant hearing.
10:25:43 But prior to you moving into that wanted to take
10:25:45 this opportunity to introduce our legal intern for
10:25:48 this spring.
10:25:49 His name is Jared Simpson.
10:25:51 He's a third year law student at Cooley school of
10:25:54 law and he graduated from the University of South
10:25:57 Florida as well as Hillsborough Community College.
10:26:02 So he is a local guy who has a very interesting
10:26:05 and unique background.
10:26:07 I'm really excited for him to be with us because
10:26:10 his background really is in music and art and
10:26:12 technical writing.
10:26:13 And we have a lot of interesting things going on
10:26:15 in the city right now where we're working through
10:26:19 our, some of our Lights on Tampa practice.
10:26:24 He brings an interesting perfective and will being
10:26:27 a very good addition to our office for this spring
10:26:30 semester, plus we take whatever free labor we can
10:26:33 get around here.
10:26:34 So I'm very excited to introduce him.
10:26:36 Hopefully you'll get to see him a little bit
10:26:40 through this semester.
10:26:41 If he could come on up and say hi.
10:26:44 >> I didn't know I was going to get put on the
10:26:46 spot.
10:26:47 I just want to say that it's a greats pleasure to
10:26:49 be working for the City of Tampa.
10:26:51 I'm really thankful that opportunities like this
10:26:53 are provided for students.
10:26:55 Look forward to doing the best I can and learning
10:26:57 the most I can from this experience.
10:26:59 So, thank you.
10:27:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just for the record, state
10:27:02 where coolly is at.
10:27:03 >> It's Thomas Cooley law school in Riverview,
10:27:06 Florida.
10:27:07 Miranda all right.
10:27:09 Thank you very much.
10:27:10 Our pleasure to meet you, sir.
10:27:12 Keep that legal department in check.
10:27:14 [ Laughter ]
10:27:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.
10:27:16 Just for the record, so I don't, I know we said we
10:27:20 were going into 65.
10:27:21 But I like to open all items 55 through 65, motion
10:27:27 by Mr. Suarez.
10:27:28 Second by Mr. Cohen.
10:27:30 Further discussion by Councilmembers on those
10:27:32 items, please indicate by saying aye.
10:27:34 Opposed nay.
10:27:36 The ayes have it unanimously.
10:27:36 All right.
10:27:37 65 is open.
10:27:38 I'm going to turn to Mr. Shelby.
10:27:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
10:27:48 Good morning, members of City Council.
10:27:49 Martin she will buy, City Council attorney
10:27:51 bringing up item number 65.
10:27:55 A continued public hearing from December 18th,
10:27:58 2014.
10:27:59 For City Council's consideration on the
10:28:01 recommended order of Steven Pfeiffer, the hearing
10:28:04 officer pertaining to the decision of the zoning
10:28:06 administrator which approved a PD incremental plan
10:28:11 review for the manor of Harbour Island 402 Knights
10:28:14 Run Avenue in Tampa.
10:28:15 This being a continued public hearing, I am going
10:28:20 to begin the discussion without repeating all that
10:28:24 was discussed and all that I had informed you of
10:28:29 at the hearing on December 18th.
10:28:32 But the purpose of the continuance was to give
10:28:39 City Council the opportunity to review the record.
10:28:41 So I am going to begin by asking members of City
10:28:45 Council, is there any member of City Council who
10:28:48 has not reviewed the record of the hearing that
10:28:51 was held before the hearing officer?
10:28:52 I see no response.
10:28:55 So then, Mr. Chairman, the City Council is
10:28:59 prepared to proceed.
10:29:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Shelby.
10:29:04 Discussion should be, which we have any argument
10:29:07 on the motion that's before us.
10:29:10 It's up to the City Council to decide whether you
10:29:13 want any further argument.
10:29:16 We have heard a lot of that the prior week before
10:29:18 we took our Christmas vacation.
10:29:20 Mr. Suarez?
10:29:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just want to clarify something
10:29:24 with our legal team here.
10:29:26 The parameters in terms of whether or not we open
10:29:30 up for any discussion, we have a very narrow
10:29:35 purview in which we can hear any kind of
10:29:38 presentation towards us, is that correct?
10:29:40 If you could go through that for us, I would
10:29:42 appreciate it.
10:29:44 >> I'd be very happy to.
10:29:45 Thank you.
10:29:46 Councilman Suarez, you're referring to code of
10:29:50 ordinances section 27-61 J 1 E, Roman numeral II,
10:29:59 number one.
10:29:59 The oral argument criteria.
10:30:01 I'd like to read it for you, please.
10:30:03 To refresh your recollection.
10:30:05 City Council may only allow public discussion upon
10:30:09 a request for oral argument filed by a party or
10:30:12 upon its own motion.
10:30:13 And to refresh your recollection, a request had
10:30:16 been made by Mr. Grandoff.
10:30:18 City Council may only open the meeting for oral
10:30:21 argument if City Council finds that the hearing
10:30:27 officer did not address a matter introduced into
10:30:29 the record or the recommended order contains an
10:30:31 ambiguity.
10:30:32 If City Council allows oral argument, City Council
10:30:35 may limit such oral argument to addressing only
10:30:39 those matters for which it opened oral argument.
10:30:42 And I would remind Council that this requires then
10:30:46 a finding by City Council and I would recommend
10:30:50 that that be made in the form of a motion, a
10:30:53 second and a vote.
10:30:54 If Council were to entertain that.
10:30:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: After hearing that, does any
10:31:01 Councilmember have any respect to what the City
10:31:04 Council attorney, Mr. Shelby said regarding what
10:31:07 they read, if there's any ambiguity or anything
10:31:10 they feel must be brought up at this time for
10:31:12 argument?
10:31:13 I see none.
10:31:15 Discussion on the recommended order.
10:31:21 Any further discussion by Councilmembers on the
10:31:24 recommended order?
10:31:24 Yes, sir?
10:31:26 [Inaudible]
10:31:26 Section 27-51, let me remind you then that with
10:31:39 regard to the final order, there are certain
10:31:42 criteria that has to be fold.
10:31:44 I'd like that, to read that to you.
10:31:47 City Council may adopt the recommended order as
10:31:49 the final order or may reject or modify the
10:31:52 recommended order as provided herein.
10:31:54 City Council may not reject or modify any findings
10:31:59 of fact reached by the hearing officer.
10:32:02 If City Council determines that finding of fact is
10:32:05 not based upon competent substantial evidence,
10:32:08 contained in the record, or that a finding of fact
10:32:11 does not comply with the special requirements of
10:32:13 law, City Council may replanned the matter back to
10:32:17 the hearing officer.
10:32:18 But only if it determines that additional fact
10:32:22 finding is required.
10:32:23 If City Council rejects or modifies the conclusion
10:32:27 of law, it must state with particularity in the
10:32:31 final order its reasons and must make a finding
10:32:36 that substitution of a conclusion of law is as is
10:32:40 as or more reasonable than that which was rejected
10:32:44 or modified.
10:32:45 If City Council directs staff to prepare a final
10:32:49 order, which Council would be my recommendation,
10:32:52 the revised order usual be transmitted to the
10:32:55 parties and nonparty participants and presented to
10:32:58 the City Council within 45 calendar days for
10:33:01 adoption.
10:33:01 And that's if there is a revision to be made.
10:33:07 So, Council, basically your discussion amongst
10:33:12 yourselves in that you found, or that you did not
10:33:16 find any basis for an oral argument, it would be
10:33:19 to discuss the order that is before you, a
10:33:24 recommended order.
10:33:25 It is recommended to you by the hearing officer.
10:33:28 Your options are to adopt it as the final order,
10:33:32 or reject it or modify the recommended order as
10:33:36 previously provided in the ordinance.
10:33:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.
10:33:41 Further discussion by Councilmembers on the
10:33:43 recommended order?
10:33:44 Any discussion on the recommended by Councils?
10:33:49 >> Mr. Miranda, I'd like to be heard on
10:33:54 Mr. Shelby's opinion to the board.
10:33:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll have to ask for opinion
10:33:58 from my own counselor on this.
10:34:00 What are the procedures within the guidelines of
10:34:02 the discussion of the order?
10:34:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ultimately, Council, my
10:34:10 recommendation would be to have a motion on the
10:34:13 floor and a second, if that's what Council chooses
10:34:16 to do.
10:34:16 In advance of discussion.
10:34:19 Normally under Roberts rules you do that.
10:34:21 In the past, Council has discussion before a
10:34:23 motion has taken place.
10:34:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm asking.
10:34:26 I will get to that in a second.
10:34:28 I just want to make sure in the legal light before
10:34:30 I go to the Council, that I'm from the proper
10:34:34 guidance of the zone.
10:34:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With regard to Mr. Grandoff, I do
10:34:40 have a concern.
10:34:42 Now, Mr. Grandoff, with you speaking at this
10:34:45 point, because within the procedure of 2761, there
10:34:52 is no opportunity delineated for you to do so.
10:34:56 What I can do if you wish is we can ask Council to
10:35:00 be able to allow me to have a side bar
10:35:04 conversation with you.
10:35:06 Otherwise, Mr. Grandoff, I am going to at the end
10:35:09 of the hearing give you an opportunity to proffer
10:35:12 something for the record.
10:35:13 In order to preserve whatever rights your clients
10:35:16 may be entitled to.
10:35:17 So however you wish to proceed.
10:35:19 >> Perhaps Mr. Shelby and I can speak at the side
10:35:21 for a moment.
10:35:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern, Ms. Capin?
10:35:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm going to try out -- sorry.
10:35:29 Go ahead.
10:35:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just one second.
10:35:31 >> I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
10:35:38 Could I resolve Mr. Grandoff's issue before we
10:35:41 proceed further?
10:35:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me take a three minute
10:35:44 break.
10:35:44 We come back.
10:35:45 You gentleman address that.
10:35:46 You counselors address that and we'll be back in
10:35:50 three minutes.
10:35:50 They're going to discuss something -- let me take
10:35:57 three minutes here and we'll be right back.
10:35:59 Stand in recess for three minutes.
10:36:01 [Short recess]
10:37:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: City Council is called back in
10:44:26 session.
10:44:27 Roll call.
10:44:27 [Roll Call]
10:44:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
10:44:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.
10:44:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
10:44:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
10:44:34 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
10:44:35 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.
10:44:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
10:44:37 All right.
10:44:38 I believe we're back on 65 and the short recess we
10:44:44 had, I believe Mrs. Montelione, Ms. Capin wanted
10:44:47 the floor in that order.
10:44:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't know if Jean Duncan had
10:44:54 a chance to talk to you outside, Mr. Chair.
10:44:56 Know we already opened the public hearing, but we
10:44:58 have a couple of people here, some senior staff
10:45:01 members, that I'd like to get out of here.
10:45:04 And it's on items 8 and 9.
10:45:06 Two contracts, I would move approval of the
10:45:09 contracts just so that they can get back to work.
10:45:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 8, 9.
10:45:15 Any further discussion by Councilmembers on 8, 9
10:45:18 under staff reports?
10:45:19 >> Seconds.
10:45:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by
10:45:21 Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr. Cohen.
10:45:25 Any further discussion by Councilmembers?
10:45:27 All in favor of the motion for 8, 9 for passage,
10:45:31 please indicate by saying aye.
10:45:31 Opposed nay.
10:45:33 The ayes have it unanimously.
10:45:33 Thank you very much.
10:45:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you for your indulgence,
10:45:37 Council.
10:45:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We go to item 65.
10:45:39 Ms. Capin?
10:45:41 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Just very quickly.
10:45:42 I noticed at our last meeting and it was very
10:45:47 distracting so I want to make a point that our
10:45:49 staff refrain from nodding in approval or
10:45:56 disapproval.
10:45:57 That did happen.
10:45:58 And I would please ask if any of the staff that
10:46:06 refrain from those gestures.
10:46:09 Thank you.
10:46:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.
10:46:12 Any further things?
10:46:13 We're at the decision for recommended order.
10:46:16 Discussion for recommended order.
10:46:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, if I can, Mr. Chairman.
10:46:21 I had the opportunity the speak with the attorneys
10:46:24 and the city legal department in the vestibule
10:46:30 regarding a concern of Mr. Grandoff.
10:46:32 Mr. Grandoff raises an issue I would ask City
10:46:35 Council to address clearly for the record.
10:46:37 And that is as you know, that City Council may
10:46:42 only allow public discussion upon a request for
10:46:45 oral argument filed by a party or upon its own
10:46:48 motion and then we discuss the criteria.
10:46:50 Mr. Grandoff raised the issue that he did file a
10:46:53 request for oral argument.
10:46:55 You do have a copy of it.
10:46:57 You have reviewed it as part of the record.
10:46:58 It was served on December the 4th of 2014.
10:47:02 And for the purposes of the record, Council, I am
10:47:05 asking you to make a ruling on that request for
10:47:10 oral argument as to whether that request did or
10:47:16 did not meet the criteria for allowing oral
10:47:19 argument.
10:47:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I need a motion one way or the
10:47:23 other from Council.
10:47:24 On item, for oral argument.
10:47:27 Mr. Suarez?
10:47:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Just quick question.
10:47:30 We're still under the same criteria in terms of
10:47:32 what oral argument actually means in terms of
10:47:35 their parameters going forward if an oral argument
10:47:38 or not oral argument is going to be presented
10:47:41 before us.
10:47:42 Meaning it's still within that very narrow
10:47:44 parameter of what is already in the record as
10:47:47 opposed to any new evidence or any new discussion
10:47:50 about any other issues.
10:47:52 Correct?
10:47:53 >> That is correct.
10:47:54 I will also remind Council that if the motion is
10:47:57 to allow the oral argument, there needs to be a
10:48:00 finding specifically that it did not address a
10:48:03 matter introduced into the record or recommended
10:48:06 order contains an ambiguity and that criteria was
10:48:09 in fact met.
10:48:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So meaning if we make that order to
10:48:13 allow oral argument, we have to state those
10:48:16 reasons which was not found in the record, is that
10:48:18 what you're saying?
10:48:19 Or am I correct?
10:48:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It would be my recommendation
10:48:21 that you make a finding as to what criteria had
10:48:26 not been met.
10:48:27 There is no ambiguity within your decision.
10:48:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
10:48:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern?
10:48:35 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't, you know, I hate to wade
10:48:41 into these legal questions that maybe -- but I
10:48:44 ought to be clear on them.
10:48:45 The place we did allow the oral argument at our
10:48:52 last hearing.
10:48:52 And this is, isn't this a continuing?
10:48:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To refresh your recollection, you
10:48:59 did not get to the threshold question of whether
10:49:01 to allow oral argument.
10:49:03 It was continued for the purposes of giving
10:49:06 Council a full opportunity to review the record.
10:49:08 So that question had not been addressed.
10:49:11 I will try to simplify this, Council, in the sense
10:49:15 that when it was opened on the floor as to whether
10:49:18 the criteria was met, a short while ago, no motion
10:49:22 was made.
10:49:23 And no second and no discussion on that oral vote.
10:49:27 So therefore, one might argue by unanimous
10:49:30 consent, that the cry they aria was not met.
10:49:34 Mr. Grandoff is asking for a formal determination
10:49:37 by motion and vote of that fact.
10:49:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
10:49:39 I understand that.
10:49:40 So what we had at the last hearing was the
10:49:42 argument for us, to allow the oral argument?
10:49:46 Is that correct?
10:49:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
10:49:48 The parties did not have the opportunity at that
10:49:51 time to discuss with you.
10:49:55 The discussion was amongst Council as to whether
10:49:58 you were prepared to proceed.
10:49:59 And if that does not -- I believe that's my
10:50:02 recollection.
10:50:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, they made their appeal --
10:50:07 they made their appeal case.
10:50:08 They made a case.
10:50:09 We heard from.
10:50:11 >>JULIA MANDELL: Julie Mandell, city attorney.
10:50:13 What occurred at the last proceeding is in order
10:50:16 to move forward, there needed to be assurances on
10:50:19 the record that all members of City Council had
10:50:22 had the full and complete opportunity to review
10:50:24 the record.
10:50:25 There was some concerns that possibly not all the
10:50:28 members of Council had a full opportunity to
10:50:30 review the entire record.
10:50:32 Therefore, it was continued to assure that the
10:50:35 entire record was reviewed.
10:50:36 We did never get to the question of whether or not
10:50:39 the criteria for oral argument had been met and
10:50:42 therefore never took any other motion.
10:50:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:50:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Montelione?
10:50:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, sir.
10:50:49 Going back to the first question, where you said
10:50:54 you didn't hear anyone from Council say that they
10:50:58 felt that one of the thresholds was met.
10:51:01 I'm referring to, excuse me a second.
10:51:05 It's E 21, where it says that Council may only
10:51:13 allow public discussion upon request for oral
10:51:16 argument and if the City Council, and I'm skipping
10:51:20 over -- and if the City Council finds the hearing
10:51:24 officer does not address the matter introduced
10:51:26 into the record or recommended order contains an
10:51:29 ambiguity.
10:51:30 Now, there are in the recommended order, there
10:51:34 were two places where I had a question.
10:51:40 You know, and in reading through all the
10:51:43 transcript and all the testimony that was given,
10:51:48 in my mind, some of these, or the two things that
10:51:53 I cited in the finding by the hearing officer were
10:52:03 more or less satisfied.
10:52:04 I mean, I guess if the hearing officer were here,
10:52:09 I would ask him the question of how he came to
10:52:13 those two conclusions, where I felt that maybe it
10:52:18 wasn't exactly stated in a clear and concise
10:52:25 manner.
10:52:25 Do you understand the question or you want me to
10:52:30 clarify?
10:52:30 Would that be a basis for opening the oral
10:52:36 argument under the ambiguity.
10:52:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is the question -- I'm trying to
10:52:49 understand your question.
10:52:50 Did you find that there were ambiguities in terms
10:52:55 of what his findings were or was the basis, or the
10:53:04 fact that he did not to your satisfaction
10:53:07 articulate a basis in the order for those
10:53:09 findings?
10:53:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
10:53:11 The latter.
10:53:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Then my question to you then is,
10:53:15 are the findings ambiguous?
10:53:18 And the second question would be, are the findings
10:53:21 supported by competent substantial evidence based
10:53:24 on your review of what you found in the record?
10:53:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Reading the hearing officer's
10:53:37 recommended order, without reading all of the
10:53:42 pages of testimony, presents the order as not
10:53:50 being clear.
10:53:51 But once you read all of the testimony, then you
10:53:55 understand where the hearing officer is coming
10:53:57 from in what he stated in the order.
10:54:03 So in other words, you would have to read all of
10:54:06 the pages of testimony to get the clarity of the
10:54:12 recommended order.
10:54:12 Does that mean that the recommended order is
10:54:17 ambiguous?
10:54:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ms. Mandell, did you want to
10:54:26 opine?
10:54:27 >>JULIA MANDELL: Yes.
10:54:28 You are obligated to review the record as a whole
10:54:31 which includes both the recommended order and
10:54:33 background information.
10:54:34 Therefore, you need to find, make your
10:54:36 determination based upon the record as a whole,
10:54:39 not just the face of the recommended order.
10:54:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And I agree with her position on
10:54:48 that.
10:54:48 That's true.
10:54:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Before I go to other
10:54:51 Councilmembers who have asked, anyone who has not
10:54:54 spoken care to speak at this time? Ms. Mulhern
10:54:57 then.
10:54:57 >>MARY MULHERN: I was just going to say her answer
10:54:59 was yes and no.
10:55:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Let me see -- let me see if I can
10:55:09 ask you this, Councilwoman Montelione.
10:55:13 Was it related to something that is a finding of
10:55:25 fact or a conclusion of law?
10:55:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Hmm, finding of fact -- define
10:55:37 conclusion of law.
10:55:38 I'm not a lawyer, so...
10:55:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Was the correct criteria of the
10:55:45 code applied correctly in a nutshell?
10:55:47 In other words, did he follow what the code
10:55:49 required?
10:55:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
10:55:52 And the feedback from these microphones is making
10:55:56 me insane.
10:55:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I won't get so close.
10:56:00 Here is my question to you.
10:56:05 Will the oral argument resolve the ambiguity or
10:56:14 what you determined may or may not be something,
10:56:17 because if I understand what you're saying is, the
10:56:21 conclusions that he's made were not ambiguous.
10:56:24 But you are unclear as to -- until you review the
10:56:30 record below, upon all that which he based his
10:56:32 decision.
10:56:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
10:56:35 And Ms. Cole already opined that the, whether or
10:56:41 not the, if I understood her correctly, the
10:56:45 recommended order was ambiguous to me, I would
10:56:49 base my clarification of that ambiguity on the
10:56:54 entire record as a whole.
10:56:55 In reading through all of the testimony, not only
10:57:00 by, you know, the staff that was called and the
10:57:05 professional opinions of the engineers and
10:57:09 consultants, but of the petitioners themselves,
10:57:16 my, the initial questions I had in the hearing
10:57:24 officer drawing those conclusions were clarified.
10:57:27 I understood after reading the entire testimony
10:57:32 why he said the things he did in the recommended
10:57:37 order.
10:57:38 But if someone were to just read the recommended
10:57:41 order, a member of the general public or anybody
10:57:44 else were to just read the recommended, the
10:57:47 recommendation that the hearing officer made, it
10:57:50 would not be clear.
10:57:51 But if Ms. Cole opining that it's based on the
10:57:56 entire record, then it's not ambiguous.
10:58:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We haven't said anything.
10:58:06 What I'm trying to say, not in your case, anyone's
10:58:09 case, all seven of us, you were very specific in
10:58:13 why you had to bring it up.
10:58:14 Where was the error?
10:58:15 And where was the fallacy of the recommendation or
10:58:19 something to those words?
10:58:20 Where you felt that that, whoever Mr. Pfeiffer I
10:58:25 believe his name was, or pronounced that way, made
10:58:28 an error or committed a mistake in his
10:58:31 recommendation of the order and you had to be very
10:58:33 specific and to where it was to bring it up to say
10:58:38 that the oral argument, here is what you want to
10:58:41 bring Republican the oral argument.
10:58:43 And have yet to hear that from anyone.
10:58:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, then I guess my question
10:58:48 would be, Ms. Montelione, if you wish to raise
10:58:55 your question in the form of a motion, should it
10:59:00 get a second, then it would be open for discussion
10:59:02 and maybe the ambiguity could be then resolved
10:59:05 amongst City Council before the vote on oral
10:59:11 argument, and if City Council allows the oral
10:59:14 argument, then it could be limited to those
10:59:16 issues.
10:59:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Like I said, the ambiguity for
10:59:19 me goes away once, once the entire record, once
10:59:22 all of the testimony is taken into consideration.
10:59:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Let me ask you this.
10:59:29 And I apologize for getting into this in detail.
10:59:33 But I --
10:59:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I guess before you go on,
10:59:35 Mr. Shelby, what I'm trying to say is that in our
10:59:38 code, it says that we, oral argument could be
10:59:41 heard if the, if the hearing master's recommended
10:59:46 order is ambiguous.
10:59:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And you're saying it is.
10:59:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just in and of itself, it may
10:59:52 be.
10:59:52 But in the context of the entire hearing, it is
10:59:57 not.
10:59:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well then let me ask you this
11:00:00 question, then.
11:00:00 If the -- is it ambiguous because you believe that
11:00:05 there is a matter that the hearing officer did not
11:00:10 addressed that was introduced into the record?
11:00:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You know, what I'm -- I'm
11:00:21 struggling with is something that this Council
11:00:24 struggles with during almost, wouldn't say every
11:00:28 rezoning, but I would say maybe 50 to 75% of the
11:00:32 rezonings that we hear on a monthly basis brings
11:00:36 up the same issues and this Council has struggled
11:00:40 with those issues every single time.
11:00:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My advice to you, Council, and
11:00:49 this goes to any member of Council, and you
11:00:51 particular, Ms. Montelione, is using the criteria
11:00:56 which you delineated, there is based upon my
11:01:01 conversations with the attorneys, the issue being
11:01:07 Mr. Grandoff's request for oral argument, he made
11:01:09 this request, and even had he not, if there is a
11:01:13 reason, Council can do it on its own motion, there
11:01:16 needs to be finding.
11:01:17 So my question to you is looking at that criteria,
11:01:20 can you frame a motion that could be put on the
11:01:23 floor and receive a second to allow oral argument?
11:01:29 Because Ms. Montelione, the other opportunity for
11:01:32 you to do that, to raise these issues, would be on
11:01:36 the discussion of whether to adopt the recommended
11:01:40 order as the final order.
11:01:41 The question now is whether this warrants oral
11:01:47 argument and whether your issues can be resolved
11:01:49 at oral argument or maybe your issue is in fact
11:01:52 with the wording of the recommended order.
11:01:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would say that -- this is
11:02:10 very difficult to try and frame this properly.
11:02:15 My issues were resolved in reading the entire
11:02:23 testimony.
11:02:23 But does that mean that the public is not served
11:02:38 by not hearing oral arguments?
11:02:40 Are we serving the public by not hearing the oral
11:02:45 argument because their legal teams and their
11:02:53 clients, whether it be the City of Tampa or
11:02:56 Mr. Grandoff's clients, don't have the opportunity
11:03:02 to weigh in on these questions that we struggle
11:03:04 with on a regular basis.
11:03:09 >>JULIA MANDELL: I do understand this is so
11:03:12 different than what you're used to handling that
11:03:14 it clearly is hard to put it in the same frame of
11:03:19 reference as your typical quasi-judicial
11:03:22 proceedings.
11:03:22 But you are used to having record reviews.
11:03:26 There are cases that come to you that are limited
11:03:28 to the record only.
11:03:29 You need to think about this in terms of the
11:03:31 record only.
11:03:32 I want to just let Council know so that they
11:03:35 understand that members of the public have already
11:03:36 had an opportunity to weigh in on this decision.
11:03:39 And the decision is a recommended order to you
11:03:43 with an underlying record.
11:03:45 The question for you is, are you going to uphold
11:03:48 that decision or overturn that decision based upon
11:03:50 the record?
11:03:52 The only purpose for oral argument is to argue to
11:03:55 you why there may be an issue within the record.
11:04:00 So I think you need to look at it in the context
11:04:02 of the whole.
11:04:03 It is not a question of whether or not the public
11:04:06 might be on notice of one line out of the hearing
11:04:09 officer's recommended order because this is taken
11:04:12 as an entire record.
11:04:13 So I would say to any Councilmember who might want
11:04:16 to open this up for oral argument and that is
11:04:18 completely within your jurisdiction based upon the
11:04:21 criteria and the code, that if you find that there
11:04:24 is an ambiguity in the order that is not
11:04:27 satisfactory to you within the context of the
11:04:29 record, the question you would be asking people to
11:04:32 discuss with you at oral argument is that
11:04:35 ambiguity, which is not found in the record for
11:04:38 your satisfaction.
11:04:39 And so that's why this is different.
11:04:42 But it is a record review.
11:04:43 It is completely based upon the record in front of
11:04:46 you.
11:04:46 Any argument that needs to come based upon the
11:04:48 record and if you're satisfied that the record
11:04:50 takes care of any ambiguities, then I would opine
11:04:55 that that's where you need to look at in terms of
11:04:57 making a decision on opening for oral argument.
11:05:00 But it is unclear again.
11:05:05 It is the record as a whole you're reviewing, not
11:05:07 just one line or one statement out of a, the
11:05:10 recommended order.
11:05:11 But the record as a whole.
11:05:13 >> I disagree with Ms. Mandell.
11:05:17 Not what the rule says.
11:05:20 Not what the rule says.
11:05:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'd like to hear from other
11:05:25 Councilmembers.
11:05:26 I mean.
11:05:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm going to speak and then
11:05:28 I'll let other Councilmembers speak.
11:05:30 This is about a record.
11:05:31 This is not a if I read one part and the other
11:05:35 part I didn't read, if I hadn't read the other
11:05:37 part, I wouldn't understand the first part.
11:05:38 In my case or anyone else's case.
11:05:40 This is about whether some individual, in this
11:05:43 case, the magistrate, and any way, if you feel
11:05:48 that there's something that you read that you
11:05:50 disagree with, then bring it up.
11:05:53 And we'll have oral arguments on that.
11:05:56 But no oral arguments are necessary if you agree.
11:06:00 If you disagree, then be specific.
11:06:03 Bring it out.
11:06:04 And let the Council get a second.
11:06:06 And let's bring it up to the open air.
11:06:08 No one is trying to hide anything from the public.
11:06:10 This is a --
11:06:13 >> Mr. Miranda -- my client has to be able to
11:06:16 understand from the recommended order what the
11:06:17 decision was.
11:06:18 The rule says that the recommended order contains
11:06:22 an ambiguity, you may open the matter for oral
11:06:24 argument.
11:06:25 We have a due process right to read the order and
11:06:28 understand what the officer said.
11:06:30 We do not have to be obliged to read every page
11:06:33 from hither to yon of the record to understand
11:06:35 what he meant.
11:06:36 There's an ambiguity.
11:06:37 I'm allowed to be heard on that.
11:06:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I didn't say you were not.
11:06:42 But I never interrupted you, sir, never.
11:06:44 >> I apologize.
11:06:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I've never done that, have I?
11:06:48 >> No.
11:06:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: But take you a habit to do it
11:06:50 to me.
11:06:51 >> I apologize.
11:06:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just want to get that clear in
11:06:54 the Orlando argument.
11:06:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
11:06:57 Might I state what I am talking about?
11:07:05 >> Absolutely.
11:07:06 I think --
11:07:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I am talking about, this might
11:07:10 clear things up and might help other
11:07:12 Councilmembers.
11:07:12 What I am talking about, so we're not talk in
11:07:14 circles here.
11:07:19 Finding number 17, on page 7, the bottom of the
11:07:27 paragraph, the part that I underlined states that
11:07:36 the proposed development would disturb the quality
11:07:38 of life of existing residents that could not serve
11:07:41 to negate a property owner's right to develop.
11:07:44 That is one of two things that I struggle with.
11:07:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could unread the whole sentence,
11:07:54 please?
11:07:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
11:07:55 The whole sentence, it starts, it's number 17.
11:08:01 I'll give Councilmembers a chance to locate it
11:08:04 because we have volumes and volumes of paper.
11:08:06 Page 7 of the recommended order.
11:08:11 Number 17.
11:08:12 Almost to end of the paragraph.
11:08:20 It starts, sentence even if it were clear from the
11:08:23 evidence, which it is not, that the proposed
11:08:27 development would disturb the quality of life of
11:08:30 existing residents that could not serve to negate
11:08:34 a property owner's right to develop in accordance
11:08:36 with the city's ordinances, including ordinance
11:08:39 9797.
11:08:40 That is one of two things that I don't think until
11:08:54 you read all of the evidence, because one has to
11:08:58 be presented during a hearing a competent and
11:09:00 substantial evidence.
11:09:01 When I read the testimony of the petitioners, I
11:09:06 did not find competent and substantial evidence.
11:09:08 It was all subjective.
11:09:11 So, as we know during rezoning hearings, we don't
11:09:16 take subjectivity.
11:09:17 We take competent substantial evidence.
11:09:21 What in my mind may not have been fully explored
11:09:26 or addressed is that when we hear a rezoning, we
11:09:30 also hear from the Planning Commission.
11:09:33 And in the Planning Commission, they read their
11:09:39 recommendations and the comp plan speaks to those
11:09:49 tenets, if you will.
11:09:51 So that's, that's one.
11:09:54 The other is previous page, page 6, number 13.
11:10:03 Where it says the sentence starts out, third,
11:10:12 continued availability is secured through a shared
11:10:15 parking arrangement that has been approved by the
11:10:18 city attorney.
11:10:20 I put check marks next to, you know, whether or
11:10:23 not I thought they were met.
11:10:25 Now, after reading all the testimony, I put a
11:10:29 check mark next to it.
11:10:30 However, it was brought up during the testimony
11:10:36 and I could go through and find who said it.
11:10:39 Might have been the hearing officer himself.
11:10:41 That lease agreements can been broken.
11:10:49 A parking garage could be sold.
11:10:52 It could be challenged in court.
11:10:55 It could be terminated.
11:10:58 I have not, according to the legal department,
11:11:03 they're satisfied with the lease agreement.
11:11:05 But I've not read the lease agreement.
11:11:09 I don't know whether or not -- and that's why I
11:11:17 brought up what we struggle with during a lot of
11:11:19 rezonings, is just that particular issue.
11:11:21 About leases being broken.
11:11:25 So, those are my concerns.
11:11:28 Now, from what I understand, the question is, is
11:11:33 whether or not the process of an incremental
11:11:38 review was the proper process.
11:11:39 In my mind, an incremental review was the proper
11:11:45 process.
11:11:45 City staff followed the right process.
11:11:48 There was no question whether or not a substantial
11:11:51 change review had to be taking place because first
11:11:55 you go from a planning standpoint, and a review
11:12:00 standpoint.
11:12:00 First you look at whether or not it satisfies the
11:12:04 code.
11:12:04 When they submit the application.
11:12:05 There are 20 people who sit on our pre-submittal
11:12:10 conference.
11:12:10 20 people decided, as a group, that the
11:12:13 incremental review was the right way to go.
11:12:16 I feel the incremental review was the right way to
11:12:18 go.
11:12:19 I don't think there's a question whether or not
11:12:22 this should've been a substantial change review.
11:12:24 The right process was followed.
11:12:26 It was an incremental review.
11:12:29 It met all the criteria, according to our code,
11:12:31 they followed the right process.
11:12:33 If that's the only question, then there's no
11:12:37 reason for oral argument because file that they
11:12:39 did follow the right process.
11:12:41 But if the question is whether or not there's
11:12:43 ambiguity, then have a different question.
11:12:47 Then in my mind, there is a reason to have oral
11:12:50 argument.
11:12:51 I'm sorry I make this more complicated.
11:12:57 Just from my experience, I go a little bit deep.
11:12:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Let me see just for the purposes
11:13:01 of the record, you referenced the last sentence of
11:13:04 paragraph 17 and your second point was related to
11:13:07 which?
11:13:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Paragraph 13.
11:13:09 I'm sorry, I went backwards.
11:13:12 Excuse me.
11:13:13 17 was the more important than 13.
11:13:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, Council, that --
11:13:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't know if it's a motion.
11:13:31 [Inaudible]
11:13:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's the question.
11:13:33 The question is, if that is in a form of a motion
11:13:36 and a second, then there could be discussion and
11:13:40 second on the motion.
11:13:41 If there's a vote in favor of oral argument, you
11:13:43 can choose to limit to it those subject matters.
11:13:46 But if you believe it contains an ambiguity, or --
11:13:53 see, here's the issue.
11:13:55 First of all, for the record, you've made clear
11:13:57 what your concerns were.
11:14:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:14:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would having an oral argument
11:14:07 resolve those issues for you or were those issues
11:14:11 resolved in the question of reviewing the record?
11:14:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: As I said before, issues were
11:14:14 resolved in my mind by reviewing the entire
11:14:16 record.
11:14:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you feel a need that this
11:14:20 would, based on your reading, give you pause as to
11:14:27 whether to adopt the ordinance as a whole?
11:14:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No.
11:14:36 I would -- I hate this saying, but at the end of
11:14:41 the day, I would agree with the recommended order
11:14:46 from the hearing master.
11:14:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So would oral argument --
11:14:54 >>JULIA MANDELL: I'm getting concerned we are
11:14:55 getting way too down this path.
11:14:59 Julie Mandell, city attorney.
11:15:01 I think we are going too far down the path when
11:15:03 the only question is the question of whether or
11:15:05 not the criteria of the method to open for oral
11:15:08 argument.
11:15:09 Only comment I will say is that under the code,
11:15:12 you cannot change the findings of fact.
11:15:15 You can only change the conclusions of law.
11:15:17 So therefore, when you look for whether or not
11:15:22 there is an ambiguity, you look at the record as a
11:15:24 whole and ultimately you're only opportunity to do
11:15:29 anything different is to change a conclusion of
11:15:31 law based upon the record.
11:15:33 But other than that, I think we're going too far
11:15:35 afield and I would really think at this point if
11:15:38 we could move forward with a motion, that would be
11:15:40 appropriate.
11:15:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have Mr. Reddick.
11:15:47 >>MARY MULHERN: If Mr. Reddick could restate his
11:15:50 motion.
11:15:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: I haven't stated one.
11:15:52 But I'm ready to state one.
11:15:54 We just need a motion, right?
11:15:56 , to move it.
11:15:57 >> Yes.
11:15:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motorist.
11:15:59 Mr. Chair, I'm going to move that we deny the
11:16:01 request for oral argument based on no ambiguity in
11:16:03 the record.
11:16:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There's been no motion for
11:16:06 denial.
11:16:06 There's been no motion to deny it.
11:16:08 That I know of.
11:16:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Reddick, the
11:16:16 motion is with regard to the request for the oral
11:16:20 argument and my understanding is that you are
11:16:23 making the motion to deny the request based on the
11:16:27 fact the criteria has not been met, is that
11:16:29 correct?
11:16:31 Or am I misstating?
11:16:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:16:34 That I found there not to be ambiguity within the
11:16:40 state of records.
11:16:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And with also regard to the fact
11:16:43 that, a matter that was not addressed that you
11:16:48 find --
11:16:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Everything has been met.
11:16:51 >> Second.
11:16:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion on the floor
11:16:53 now, discussion by Mr. Reddick.
11:16:57 Stated on the record by Mr. Reddick, seconded by
11:17:01 Ms. Mulhern.
11:17:02 Further discussion by Councilmembers?
11:17:04 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:17:06 saying aye.
11:17:06 Opposed nay.
11:17:13 Motion passes 6-1.
11:17:15 I need a motion to receive and file any and all
11:17:19 documents.
11:17:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
11:17:23 The next step would be to then have a discussion
11:17:25 on the recommended order itself.
11:17:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, that was item on
11:17:31 discussion for a recommended order.
11:17:32 Any further discussion on the recommended order at
11:17:34 all?
11:17:35 I need a motion to that then.
11:17:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'll move acceptance of the
11:17:39 hearing master's recommended order.
11:17:41 >> Second.
11:17:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by...
11:17:49 >> Mr. Chairperson, would the motion be per the
11:17:51 code to adopt the recommended order as the final
11:17:53 order?
11:17:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:17:54 >>I have a motion by Ms. Montelione, I have a
11:17:57 second by Ms. Mulhern on the order stated by
11:18:02 Ms. Montelione, motion stated by Ms. Montelione,
11:18:04 seconded by Ms. Mulhern.
11:18:07 Further discussion by Councilmembers?
11:18:09 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:18:10 saying aye.
11:18:10 Opposed nay.
11:18:11 Motion passes unanimously.
11:18:13 All right.
11:18:14 Now I need a motion to review documents made
11:18:18 outside of section 2761.
11:18:20 Requirements and everything that was considered.
11:18:23 >> So moved.
11:18:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And not considered.
11:18:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, if I can, I'm
11:18:27 handing that to the clerk.
11:18:29 Basically what I'm providing is the correspondence
11:18:32 received outside the hearing that was before the
11:18:34 hearing officer.
11:18:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm sorry, I missioned the
11:18:36 maker of the motion was for that, Mr. Reddick made
11:18:41 the motion, seconded by Ms. Montelione.
11:18:43 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by
11:18:45 saying aye.
11:18:45 Opposed nay.
11:18:48 Counselor?
11:18:50 Mr. Shelby?
11:18:55 You need anything regarding the, allow the
11:18:58 parties?
11:18:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
11:19:00 I see Mr. Grandoff is at the lectern.
11:19:03 At this time, Council, Council having made its
11:19:06 decision, I'm going to allow the parties to
11:19:10 proffer for the purposes of preserving their
11:19:12 client's rights in the record to make their
11:19:15 argument for the purposes of review if certiorari
11:19:22 review if they so choose.
11:19:24 >> Thank you, Mr. She will beach.
11:19:25 All items are in evidence and in the record.
11:19:28 What I'd like to do at this time is poll each
11:19:31 member of the City Council if they would please
11:19:33 enunciate their reasons for the decision.
11:19:38 >> Mr. Grandoff, I appreciate that request.
11:19:41 However, that request is not delineated within
11:19:46 the, within the section 2761.
11:19:53 Also by the way, that is, if it were to be a roll
11:19:56 call vote that would be that Council's purview,
11:20:00 not yours.
11:20:00 The purpose of your opportunity to speak now is to
11:20:03 assert anything you wish to have preserved for the
11:20:05 record.
11:20:06 >> Okay.
11:20:06 Thank you, Mr. Shelby.
11:20:07 Then I would like to proffer a very brief argument
11:20:12 that based upon the record in evidence and
11:20:15 considered by the hearing officer as enunciated in
11:20:19 the recommended order, that was adopted this
11:20:23 morning, that the incremental review process as
11:20:27 provided in Chapter 27 and the review process as
11:20:32 provided in Chapter 27-61, are both on their face
11:20:38 and as applied operating to deny my client's
11:20:42 procedural due process and equal protection under
11:20:45 the law as guaranteed under the United States
11:20:48 constitutional's fifth and 14th amendments.
11:20:50 And further, that the decision rendered this
11:20:54 morning as well as a decision of the recommended
11:20:56 order by the hearing officer is not supported by
11:21:00 competent substantial evidence.
11:21:03 And it departs, both decisions departs from the
11:21:06 essential requirements of the law as provided by
11:21:08 the Florida Supreme Court decision of Snyder
11:21:10 versus Broward County.
11:21:12 And with those comments and proffer, I conclude my
11:21:17 remarks.
11:21:17 And I thank you very much for your time last
11:21:24 December and your deliberations this morning and
11:21:27 going through the record and doing what is
11:21:30 necessary to guarantee us a proper hearing this
11:21:33 morning.
11:21:34 Please understand that my, my arguments of law are
11:21:39 meant for the preservation of the record and to
11:21:43 properly enunciate my client's arguments on the
11:21:46 law and for us to find further relief as
11:21:50 necessary, which we intend to do immediately.
11:21:52 Appreciate your courtesy this morning.
11:21:55 Again, Mr. Miranda, I apologize for enter
11:22:00 correcting during your discussion.
11:22:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I appreciate your
11:22:03 professionalism.
11:22:04 Appreciate you appearing on behalf of your client
11:22:06 and I appreciate everything you said to this
11:22:07 Council.
11:22:08 Thank you very much.
11:22:08 Mr. Cohen?
11:22:10 >>HARRY COHEN: May I ask a question of Mr. Shelby
11:22:12 for a moment?
11:22:13 During this matter, we have all been basically
11:22:18 subject to a gag order.
11:22:19 We have not been allowed to talk to our
11:22:22 constituents about it.
11:22:23 It puts news the awkward position of not being
11:22:29 able to explain to people why we do what we do.
11:22:32 And I'm wondering, now that we have taken these
11:22:36 actions, are we still not allowed to discuss it?
11:22:42 Are we still prevented from, from, you know -- is
11:22:47 it going to come back to us again or are we free
11:22:50 to at least have colloquy with our citizens?
11:22:55 >> Thank you for asking that question.
11:22:58 I was going to address that.
11:23:00 I was going to advise City Council to not discuss
11:23:02 the matter during a 30 day appeal period.
11:23:04 And obviously if an appeal is filed, then there
11:23:07 will be an action in court that might ultimately
11:23:11 certainly affect City Council.
11:23:12 So, it would be my strong advice to you and to
11:23:16 also assert to your constituents that under advice
11:23:22 of Council, considering there have been discussion
11:23:27 about legal proceedings that are going to occur
11:23:30 subsequent to this, it would be my advice that for
11:23:33 as much you a as elected officials might want to
11:23:36 talk to constituents, it would be my strongest
11:23:38 advice to refrain from doing that.
11:23:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One other question.
11:23:42 When does the 30 days start?
11:23:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: From the time the order is, from
11:23:48 the time the order is signed.
11:23:50 Is that correct?
11:23:51 I don't know when would that -- do we have?
11:23:56 I don't know the exact.
11:23:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Please let us know.
11:23:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I will inform you.
11:24:00 But until such time as 30 days runs from then,
11:24:03 please do not say anything.
11:24:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anything else on this item?
11:24:06 Night a motion to close this hearing.
11:24:08 Have a motion by Ms. Montelione, second bring
11:24:10 Reddick to close the hearing.
11:24:11 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:24:12 saying aye.
11:24:13 Opposed nay.
11:24:14 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:24:15 Thank you all very much for appearing.
11:24:17 Vulnerability it very much.
11:24:18 We go back, I believe the only item we had left
11:24:23 was item number 7.
11:24:25 And the first part of staff reports.
11:24:27 >> Good morning, Councilmembers.
11:24:38 Dennis Fernandez, architects review and historic
11:24:41 preservation mag.
11:24:42 Item number 7 I was asked to appear and provide
11:24:46 some information related to two particular items.
11:24:49 The difference essentially between a national
11:24:52 historic district and a local historic district.
11:24:55 And the decision-making process for demolitions of
11:24:59 structures that are outside of a local historic
11:25:01 district.
11:25:02 On the first matter, just for ease of discussion,
11:25:17 I provided this slide.
11:25:19 National register designation, which is listed on
11:25:23 the national registry of historic places is a
11:25:25 method of recognition that's provided through the
11:25:28 national Parks Department.
11:25:29 And the department of the interior.
11:25:31 And essentially it lists that property as being a,
11:25:37 having historic integrity within the master list
11:25:40 of historic properties for the United States.
11:25:42 It also allows tax credits for the restoration and
11:25:45 preservation of those properties that are federal
11:25:48 level.
11:25:48 It does have requirements for section 106
11:25:52 mitigation when historic properties are affected
11:25:56 through the expenditure of federal funds.
11:25:58 And it does provide in some situations the ability
11:26:03 for local governments to provide ad valorem tax
11:26:06 exemptions, which our particular municipality does
11:26:09 take advantage of.
11:26:10 A local historic district, which is the program
11:26:16 that I administer, is related to our local
11:26:20 historic preservation ordinances that are housed
11:26:22 under Chapter 27 within the City of Tampa.
11:26:25 And that does provide methods for various forms of
11:26:29 review of historic properties, both for
11:26:33 architectural changes to those properties and we
11:26:35 have two boards.
11:26:35 The architectural review commission, the Barrio
11:26:38 Latino commission that review those locally.
11:26:41 It provides for a process of demolition.
11:26:43 This prescriptive within Chapter 27 as to what
11:26:46 would satisfy that criteria for demolition.
11:26:51 It sets building standards that are within the
11:26:54 various design guidelines that apply to historic
11:26:57 properties throughout the city.
11:26:59 And once again, it does allow in our case for an
11:27:02 ad valorem tax exemption program as incentive to
11:27:06 preserving.
11:27:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern?
11:27:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Fernandez, can you put that
11:27:13 back?
11:27:14 I wanted to ask if, for local historic
11:27:19 designations, does the demolition permit have to
11:27:24 be, go through the architectural review?
11:27:27 >> That is correct.
11:27:29 If a property is locally designated either as a
11:27:34 contributing structure within a local historic
11:27:36 district or as a local landmark structure, then
11:27:40 any type of demolition request is required to go
11:27:44 through a process, either with the A.R.C. 0 are
11:27:47 the BLC.
11:27:48 >>MARY MULHERN: But if it's a national register,
11:27:50 it doesn't?
11:27:51 >> That's correct.
11:27:51 It does not as a national register listed
11:27:55 property, the local government's authority is a
11:28:00 requirement.
11:28:01 Under our particular avenue as a certified local
11:28:04 government, is to simply report back to the state.
11:28:07 The state historic preservation office, that a
11:28:10 demolition has been granted.
11:28:11 We do have a process for any, within our
11:28:15 ordinances, within the Historic Preservation
11:28:16 Commission ordinance, for any property that's over
11:28:20 50 years old, rather they are listed on the
11:28:23 national registry or not, there is an
11:28:25 administrative review that's conducted for the
11:28:28 demolition request on those properties.
11:28:29 And we do apply criteria within the code that
11:28:33 mainly clarifies the importance of that structure
11:28:37 individually to the local history of the city.
11:28:40 So we, for everyone we do these every day, every
11:28:44 property that's 50 years old has a review on it.
11:28:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
11:28:48 But that's not, it doesn't go there you go through
11:28:51 the architectural review commission or any kind --
11:28:53 there's no public notice.
11:28:56 >> That's correct.
11:28:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Or public hearing.
11:28:58 So my question, is there something that precludes
11:29:00 us from adopting that as a policy an ordinance
11:29:05 where that would be under review?
11:29:08 >> In a national registry?
11:29:11 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
11:29:11 >> I believe there would need to be changes to the
11:29:14 ordinance for that to occur because currently
11:29:16 that's not how the ordinance is written.
11:29:18 >>MARY MULHERN: But there's no law that precludes
11:29:20 us from doing that, is there?
11:29:23 >> No.
11:29:23 You can create ordinances to effect the process by
11:29:27 which those decisions are made.
11:29:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:29:29 Thank you.
11:29:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other Councilmembers?
11:29:32 >> Well, we kind of covered the second part of
11:29:37 that with the demolition process.
11:29:39 But did want to state, there was this question
11:29:43 about a Courier City particularly because that was
11:29:47 the issue that generated the motion.
11:29:49 And Courier City is part of the Hyde Park local,
11:29:53 I'm sorry, national register historic district
11:29:56 that was created in 1985.
11:29:59 When the ordinances were created to establish Hyde
11:30:02 Park as a -- this is the Hyde Park historic
11:30:08 district map.
11:30:09 And this is the area that's Courier Oscawana.
11:30:15 And in 1985, the national district, which is
11:30:17 indicated in the blue line, was established.
11:30:19 In 1988, the local historic district, which is
11:30:23 indicated in the red line, was established and has
11:30:26 been maintained essentially since that time.
11:30:28 In 1988, there was essentially a lack of support
11:30:34 in these particular areas of national register
11:30:37 district to join in to the local historic
11:30:39 district.
11:30:40 And as a means of moving the designation process
11:30:44 along, those particular areas were left out of the
11:30:47 local boundaries.
11:30:48 And that has been a struggle with sort of ad hoc
11:30:53 redevelopment in these areas really ever since
11:30:56 because it does rise to the level of being
11:31:00 considered to be part of the national registry
11:31:03 district but lacks protection of the local
11:31:05 historic district.
11:31:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Montelione?
11:31:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
11:31:11 When you said that it was, how you phrased it,
11:31:17 lack of support for including those areas in the
11:31:20 local district when the, in 1988 I think you said,
11:31:25 when -- really hard to see from here.
11:31:28 The areas in the red line.
11:31:31 I don't think that's going to make a difference.
11:31:35 I'm sure if I was closer to it would be clearer to
11:31:41 me too.
11:31:41 Could we consider the local designation for those
11:31:49 areas?
11:31:51 That are national now?
11:31:53 >> The Historic Preservation Commission has looked
11:31:57 at this item a number of times.
11:32:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: When was the last time they
11:32:01 looked at it?
11:32:02 >> We looked at it extensively in 2007.
11:32:05 At that time, we resurveyed the area.
11:32:09 Essentially.
11:32:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's much better.
11:32:14 >> This is the original map that was part of the
11:32:18 survey that was conducted in 1985.
11:32:20 At that time, you can see there was 123 was
11:32:23 considered contributing or historic structures.
11:32:26 And 56 noncontributing structures.
11:32:28 And the percentages that you see at the bottom are
11:32:31 what really are crucial to meeting the
11:32:34 requirements for designation both on a national
11:32:37 and local level.
11:32:39 And those, that number is essentially 65% that you
11:32:43 look for contributing structures within a
11:32:45 designated area.
11:32:47 And a lot of times that's why you see these
11:32:49 boundary lines on these national registry
11:32:51 districts particularly kind of jog in and out in a
11:32:54 fashion that captures the most historic structures
11:32:58 that are able.
11:32:58 Since this particular time, through our records,
11:33:05 these are the numbers that we have now.
11:33:07 Through demolition, historic structures or through
11:33:11 inappropriate modifications of historic
11:33:14 structures, obviously that number has fallen.
11:33:15 An interesting point is the number of
11:33:18 noncontributing structures, which have increased,
11:33:21 with essentially one structure being torn down on
11:33:25 a particular lot and then two structures being
11:33:27 replacing that structure.
11:33:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And that's, you know, I'm not
11:33:30 surprised.
11:33:32 Which would, if they weren't protected, they're
11:33:35 going to go away.
11:33:36 And it's really too big a shame that we didn't in
11:33:42 1988 make this part of the local historic district
11:33:44 because those structures that were contributing at
11:33:47 that time might still be with us.
11:33:50 And you know, you look at 65, I think it was 65%
11:33:53 you said of contributing.
11:33:55 >> Normally.
11:33:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: To establish a district.
11:33:57 For me, we need to save what we have left.
11:34:01 Because at this rate, you know, I could see in
11:34:06 another 10 years, we're not going to have any.
11:34:10 Or we're going to have very few.
11:34:12 And it's the historic districts that increase in
11:34:17 value.
11:34:18 You know, the property values, even when we
11:34:22 experience a downturn in the economy.
11:34:24 If you with are in a historic neighborhood, those
11:34:28 properties, those houses more or less held their
11:34:30 value and it's part of the fabric of the City of
11:34:34 Tampa is people come here for the history.
11:34:37 And if we continue to allow these structures to be
11:34:46 demolished, or to have contributed, to have
11:34:50 noncontributing structures built without having
11:34:53 that same character as the neighborhood, we are
11:34:57 going to end up not having any history at all in
11:35:02 that area.
11:35:03 And that's why you know the national historic
11:35:06 district to me really doesn't do a whole lot.
11:35:09 >> The situation that we were in with this
11:35:13 property on MELVA, for me was the most difficult
11:35:17 situation.
11:35:18 When you're facings, you have the demolition
11:35:20 application in front of you and then you have a
11:35:23 cry for preservation.
11:35:24 You know, the time to do this is, well in advance
11:35:29 of one redevelopment is planned.
11:35:33 You know, the case probably most in review by this
11:35:37 Council is when we worked with VME board to expand
11:35:39 the boundaries of the Ybor City historic district
11:35:42 to include that particular neighborhood.
11:35:44 We did that over a course of a few years and were
11:35:47 able to accomplish that.
11:35:48 And working with a neighborhood association.
11:35:50 The last time that this particular issue was
11:35:52 brought up before City Council, previous Council
11:35:55 in 2007, they instructed a request for the HPC to
11:36:00 look at -- the historic preservation commission to
11:36:03 look at alternatives that could be preservation
11:36:06 oriented for the area.
11:36:08 And we had several discussions on that and several
11:36:10 hearings and there was a discussion about what's
11:36:13 called a conservation district that essentially
11:36:15 protects historic structures but allows for the
11:36:18 nonhistoric parcels to redevelop in accordance
11:36:22 with the appropriate zoning levels.
11:36:24 And at that, following that discussion I reached
11:36:27 out to Courier City neighborhood and sent them a
11:36:31 letter and we had a subsequent meeting and he took
11:36:34 that back to his organization as a discussion
11:36:37 point because what it does is essentially put the
11:36:39 restrictions on the historic property owners to
11:36:42 maintain their property while the nonhistoric
11:36:44 properties can redevelop.
11:36:46 And there was not support for that concept at that
11:36:49 particular time.
11:36:50 And at that point, the discussion ended for the
11:36:51 conservation district.
11:36:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, I have a couple of
11:36:55 feelings because you know, on the one hand, if you
11:36:58 make the, the regulations so strict, if it reduces
11:37:08 the opportunity for these properties to be
11:37:13 preserved.
11:37:13 In other words, they have to put so much money
11:37:15 into it that it's not feasible for most people to
11:37:18 purchase the home or the commercial building and
11:37:22 restore it because it's so expensive.
11:37:24 So, you know, demolition becomes a preferred
11:37:29 method because they just can't afford to restore
11:37:31 it to the historical, you know, exact thing.
11:37:36 So I would like to have some leeway in there so
11:37:38 it's economically feasible.
11:37:40 And you and I have talked about in the past,
11:37:48 counseling people who come in for a demolition
11:37:52 permit.
11:37:55 In advance to say look, you can tap into these
11:37:59 funds, you know, we have a team of people, maybe
11:38:03 we could have what I termed at one point a rapid
11:38:08 response team when we were talking about Jackson
11:38:10 house.
11:38:10 We have a team of people who can sit with you and
11:38:13 give you alternatives on how this can be
11:38:16 profitable for you or this can be economically
11:38:19 feasible because you would get tax credits.
11:38:21 You would get help with the facade grants or
11:38:23 whatever the case may be.
11:38:25 And establish a program where we actually are
11:38:29 proactive with the historic structures we have
11:38:33 left.
11:38:34 So, I have very mixed feelings.
11:38:40 I want to do something and I don't know if we can
11:38:42 do it by ordinance or those are procedures or, you
11:38:49 know, how we could put something like that plan in
11:38:53 place so that we stop losing our historic
11:38:57 structures and the character of the neighborhood.
11:38:59 >> One thing to keep in mind within this
11:39:01 particular area of town is that most of the
11:39:04 underlying zoning allows for multi-family
11:39:08 residential development.
11:39:09 You know, either RM-16 or more intensive zoning
11:39:15 classifications that are the housed underneath the
11:39:17 single-family houses.
11:39:19 Which is unique to the district.
11:39:21 You won't find that as widespread within the local
11:39:25 historic district which has primarily
11:39:27 single-family zoning or multi-family zoning that
11:39:31 was applied to a multi-family structure, which was
11:39:33 appropriate at the time.
11:39:34 So there's a incentive to demolition within
11:39:39 courier city because they do have a highest and
11:39:43 best use that they can achieve by removing the
11:39:45 single-family structure and then putting three or
11:39:48 more units on that particular parcel.
11:39:50 And that's particularly been challenging within
11:39:53 this neighborhood, where there's the lack of
11:39:56 protection and then that ability to maximize
11:40:00 investment.
11:40:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Finished?
11:40:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:40:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern?
11:40:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I think -- thank you.
11:40:12 This is informative and discouraging at the same
11:40:16 time.
11:40:16 You might want to -- those same people or perhaps
11:40:21 new people in the neighborhood that were upset
11:40:23 about a recent demolition of a historic
11:40:29 hundred-year-old, or more than a hundred, might
11:40:31 have changed their mind.
11:40:33 So might be worth doing a survey and seeing if
11:40:36 they'd be willing to reconsider.
11:40:39 >> By all means.
11:40:40 I'm very happy to do that.
11:40:41 We have a very, we have limited resources
11:40:45 staff-wise.
11:40:46 But if there's neighborhoods, we'll always engage
11:40:48 with neighborhoods' attempt to preserve those.
11:40:51 We do respond, I think with a sense of urgency
11:40:56 when we have demolitions.
11:40:57 Particularly when those demolitions meet the
11:40:59 requirements of the code.
11:41:00 I have two properties right now that have been
11:41:03 required for demolition that are going through the
11:41:04 Historic Preservation Commission process.
11:41:07 So that process does play out.
11:41:11 We do try to engage the neighborhoods and now
11:41:14 reach out and have that same discussion I had with
11:41:17 the past president.
11:41:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:41:20 Good.
11:41:20 I have some questions but I'm going to try to meet
11:41:22 with you and talk about some other possibilities
11:41:25 about take without taking the up too much time
11:41:28 right now.
11:41:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any further discussion on that
11:41:30 item?
11:41:31 Thank you very much for appeal.
11:41:32 Appreciate it very much.
11:41:34 We're going to go through 12 maybe, ask Council
11:41:38 give me another 30 minutes.
11:41:40 Yes, Mrs. Capin?
11:41:42 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Just one thing I want to bring up
11:41:44 about this.
11:41:44 As he walks out the door.
11:41:47 That's okay.
11:41:49 For the record, he could look it up and watch it
11:41:52 on TV.
11:41:55 [ Laughter ]
11:41:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Dennis, I'm sorry it took me a
11:41:59 minute.
11:41:59 When we talked about tax credits and letting them
11:42:04 know, I agree with Councilwoman Montelione in that
11:42:09 we need to have common sense in these, in these
11:42:16 preservation in accordances and, because we have
11:42:20 people that are elderly and a tax credit means
11:42:24 nothing to them.
11:42:25 Want means to them is they are fixed income.
11:42:29 They've lived in the house for 40, 50 years.
11:42:32 And when that has to be taken into consideration.
11:42:37 It absolutely does.
11:42:38 And maybe one of the things to look at is that the
11:42:47 existing owner, when it changes hands, at that
11:42:54 point, the new owner knows all the rules and these
11:43:00 are applied.
11:43:01 But the owner of record at the time, we have to
11:43:06 have some flexibility.
11:43:07 I'm not sure how it would apply, but it should,
11:43:12 because really, we ask for these things but it's
11:43:16 not always the most economical or efficient, both
11:43:24 in, for instance, in windows, not necessarily the
11:43:31 most effective in energy saving, but yet it's
11:43:35 historical.
11:43:36 And so what are we looking at?
11:43:38 We're looking at the environment or we're looking
11:43:40 at, what exactly are we trying to accomplish?
11:43:45 I think we should try to accomplish both.
11:43:48 >> Correct.
11:43:49 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I appreciate you listening to me.
11:43:51 But that is very big concern for me.
11:43:54 Because I have seen, I have witnessed and I'm sure
11:43:59 you've seen where cigar factories were purchased
11:44:04 and have been boarded up because the owners could
11:44:06 not afford the windows that were required to be
11:44:10 replaced there.
11:44:11 And so what do we have?
11:44:16 We have a boarded-up factory.
11:44:19 We have to have some kind of, some kind of
11:44:23 compromise.
11:44:24 Some kind of variance review that they need
11:44:29 certain criteria.
11:44:30 That's just my point.
11:44:34 It's not one size fits all.
11:44:36 Okay.
11:44:37 Thank you.
11:44:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone else?
11:44:39 Okay.
11:44:39 We go to item 54.
11:44:41 Night a motion for Pate for review,
11:44:46 February 19th at sock 30 in the morning.
11:44:48 Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr. Suarez.
11:44:50 Further discussion by councilmembers.
11:44:52 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:44:54 saying aye.
11:44:55 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:44:55 55 through 65, we're open prior.
11:44:59 These are seconds readings.
11:45:00 55 is nonquasi-judicial.
11:45:02 This open.
11:45:04 Ordinance for second reading.
11:45:06 >> Mr. Chair, I have number 55 [Inaudible]
11:45:11 >> So moved.
11:45:12 >> Second.
11:45:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Ms. Montelione.
11:45:14 I have a second by Mr. Cohen.
11:45:16 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by
11:45:17 saying aye.
11:45:18 Opposed nay.
11:45:19 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:45:19 Item 56, anyone from 56 through 64, these are
11:45:27 quasi-judicial hearings.
11:45:28 Need to be sworn in.
11:45:29 If you're going to speak on these items, please
11:45:31 stand and be sworn in by the clerk.
11:45:33 [Oath administered by Clerk]
11:45:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 56.
11:45:46 >> Glorida Moreda, land development.
11:45:48 I just, the site plan has been certified.
11:45:51 This is AB 2-14-37.
11:45:55 I did want to state for the record that the
11:45:58 requested AB sales permit is for a small venue
11:46:03 packaged sales retail sales, package sales, beer,
11:46:07 wine liquor for off premise consumption only.
11:46:11 They are asking for a reduction of the distance
11:46:14 separation from other AB establishments.
11:46:18 250 feet to 146 feet.
11:46:21 The nearest other establishment is Can Carlos
11:46:26 tavern and liquor store.
11:46:28 And they are also asking for the distant
11:46:31 separation waiver from residential 250 feet to
11:46:35 63 feet.
11:46:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Petitioner?
11:46:37 Item 56, petitioner here?
11:46:40 Let's go.
11:46:41 I'm trying to get you all in before time expires.
11:46:45 >> Greg Barnhill, 219 South Glen Arbor.
11:46:54 The minor modifications requested at the first
11:46:57 hearing have been adjusted and submitted for
11:47:00 review.
11:47:00 And there's no additional comment.
11:47:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any question by Councilmembers?
11:47:04 Anyone in the audience care to speak on item 56.
11:47:06 File ab 2-14-37.
11:47:09 Please come far.
11:47:10 Item 56.
11:47:11 >> Move to close.
11:47:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion to close by Mr. Cohen,
11:47:14 second by Mr. Reddick.
11:47:16 Stirrings discussion by Councilmembers?
11:47:17 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:47:18 saying aye.
11:47:19 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:47:19 Mr. Suarez, would you kindly read 56 please.
11:47:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I present an ordinance for second
11:47:24 reading and adoption, an ordinance approving a
11:47:26 special use permit, S-2 for alcoholic beverage
11:47:30 sales, small venue package sales off premise
11:47:30 consumption only and making lawful the sale of
11:47:30 beverages regardless of alcoholic content - beer,
11:47:31 wine and liquor - at or from that certain lot,
11:47:32 plot or tract of land located at 6428 and 6430
11:47:44 North Florida Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more
11:47:47 particularly described in section 2, that all
11:47:49 ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict are
11:47:51 repealed, providing an effective date.
11:47:52 >> Have a motion by Mr. Suarez for passage of
11:47:56 second reading, seconded by Mr. Reddick.
11:47:58 Further discussion by councilmembers?
11:48:00 Voice vote, roll call.
11:48:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:48:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:48:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:48:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:48:12 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:48:15 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and
11:48:16 Montelione being absent.
11:48:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
11:48:19 As I said earlier, most of these votes, all going
11:48:22 to be voice roll call because the monitors are not
11:48:25 operable right now.
11:48:26 Item 57.
11:48:27 >>Glorida Moreda, land development.
11:48:32 The AB 2-15-01, the request is for bar, lounge,
11:48:37 beer, wine, on premise consumption only.
11:48:39 The site plan has been certified.
11:48:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Petitioner?
11:48:48 >> Good morning, Kelsey Patterson.
11:48:50 I have no comment unless you have questions.
11:48:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone in the audience, any
11:48:54 further questions by councilmembers?
11:48:57 I remember you from shark tank.
11:49:00 Anyone care to speak on item 57?
11:49:02 AB 2-15-01.
11:49:04 Motion to close by Mr. Cohen, second by
11:49:06 Ms. Montelione.
11:49:07 Further discussion by councilmembers?
11:49:08 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:49:10 saying aye.
11:49:10 Opposed nay.
11:49:12 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:49:12 Ms. Capin, would you kindly read number 57.
11:49:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: An ordinance approving a special
11:49:17 use permit, S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, bar,
11:49:21 lounge, consumption on premises only and making
11:49:23 lawful the sale of beer, wine at or from that
11:49:27 certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 2310
11:49:29 and 2312 West Waters Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as
11:49:33 more particularly described in section 2, that all
11:49:36 ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict are
11:49:38 repealed, providing an effective date.
11:49:39 And that modifications -- did she state that the
11:49:47 modifications have been made?
11:49:48 >> Yes.
11:49:49 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So I don't need to repeat that.
11:49:51 >> Second.
11:49:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion for approval on
11:49:53 file AB 2-15-01 on second reading by Ms. Capin,
11:49:57 second by Mr. Cohen.
11:49:58 Roll call vote.
11:50:00 Voice vote.
11:50:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:50:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:50:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:50:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:50:08 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:50:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:50:13 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being
11:50:15 absent.
11:50:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 58.
11:50:16 >> Good morning.
11:50:23 Mary Samaniego, land development coordination.
11:50:25 For items 58 and 64, all the required changes
11:50:26 between first and second reading have been
11:50:27 complete and the certified applications are at the
11:50:30 clerk's office ready for your signature.
11:50:32 Thank you.
11:50:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Petitioner here on item number
11:50:34 58?
11:50:35 Please come forward.
11:50:36 >> Good morning, commissioners.
11:50:39 Thank you for previous approval.
11:50:40 I don't have any additional comments.
11:50:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone in the audience care to
11:50:45 speak on item 58?
11:50:47 File REZ 14-50.
11:50:50 Please come forward.
11:50:52 Motion to close by Mr. Cohen, second by Ms.
11:50:54 Montelione.
11:50:55 Further discussion, please indicate by saying aye.
11:50:57 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:50:58 Mr. Reddick, would you kindly take number 58,
11:51:02 please.
11:51:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an item being presented for
11:51:06 second reading and adoption, ordinance rezoning
11:51:08 property in general vicinity of 411 and 411 1/2
11:51:12 South Albany Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida,
11:51:16 more particularly described in section one, from
11:51:19 zoning district classification RM-16 residential
11:51:22 multi-familiar had to PD planned development,
11:51:25 dwellings detached and semi detached residential,
11:51:27 providing an effective date.
11:51:28 >> Second.
11:51:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion for approval by
11:51:30 Mr. Reddick on second reading and adoption.
11:51:34 Seconded by Mr. Suarez on REZ 14-50.
11:51:38 All in favor of the motion vote by voice roll
11:51:42 call.
11:51:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:51:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:51:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:51:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:51:50 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:51:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:51:52 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Mulhern being absent.
11:51:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 59.
11:51:56 Petitioner here on 59?
11:52:00 59.
11:52:00 Please come forward.
11:52:03 >> Good morning, Council.
11:52:07 David Singer, Singer & O'Donniley, 712 South
11:52:11 Oregon.
11:52:12 Here to answer any questions.
11:52:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any questions by
11:52:13 Councilmembers?
11:52:14 Anyone in the audience care to speak on REZ 14-66,
11:52:17 please come forward.
11:52:18 I see no one.
11:52:20 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.
11:52:21 Cohen.
11:52:22 Further discussion by Councilmembers.
11:52:24 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:52:25 saying aye.
11:52:26 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:52:26 Mr. Cohen, would you kindly take number 59.
11:52:30 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
11:52:31 I move an ordinance being presented for second
11:52:33 reading and adoption.
11:52:34 An ordinance rezoning property in the general
11:52:36 vicinity of 2011 North Dale Mabry Highway in the
11:52:39 City of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
11:52:42 described in section 1, from zoning district
11:52:44 classifications, CI, commercial intensive to PD,
11:52:48 planned development, restaurant, restaurant with
11:52:51 drive-in window and retail sales shoppers and
11:52:53 convenience goods, providing an effective date.
11:52:55 >> Second.
11:52:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion for approval on
11:52:57 REZ 14-66 by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr.~Suarez.
11:53:02 Voice roll call.
11:53:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:53:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:53:06 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:53:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:53:10 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:53:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:53:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being
11:53:14 absent.
11:53:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 60.
11:53:19 >> Kevin Rolls, petitioner.
11:53:24 I have nothing further unless I have questions
11:53:25 from the Council.
11:53:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any questions by Council at
11:53:28 this time?
11:53:28 Anyone in the audience care to speak on file REZ
11:53:33 14-69?
11:53:34 Please come forward.
11:53:35 I see no one.
11:53:36 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.
11:53:38 Cohen.
11:53:40 Further discussion?
11:53:41 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:53:42 saying aye.
11:53:43 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:53:43 Mr. Cohen, would you --
11:53:49 >> No, my turn.
11:53:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm sorry.
11:53:51 Ms. Montelione, would you kindly take number 60
11:53:54 please.
11:53:55 60 is a bad age.
11:53:57 That's why I wanted to skip you.
11:53:58 Look so nice.
11:54:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I present an ordinance for
11:54:03 second reading and adoption.
11:54:05 An ordinance rezoning property in the general
11:54:06 vicinity of 3407 West Bay Avenue in the City of
11:54:09 Tampa, Florida, more particularly described in
11:54:11 section 1, from zoning district classifications
11:54:13 RS-60 residential single-family to RS-50,
11:54:16 residential single-family, providing an effective
11:54:17 date.
11:54:18 >> Second.
11:54:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion for approval on
11:54:20 second reading by Ms. Montelione.
11:54:22 Second by Mr. Suarez on REZ 14-69.
11:54:26 Voice roll call vote.
11:54:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:54:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:54:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:54:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
11:54:37 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:54:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:54:39 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Miranda voting no.
11:54:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much for
11:54:44 appearing.
11:54:44 We go to item 61.
11:54:50 >> Good morning.
11:54:50 Michael Horner, 14502 Dale Mabry representing the
11:54:54 applicant and owner.
11:54:55 Here to answer any questions.
11:54:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any questions by
11:54:57 Councilmembers?
11:54:58 Anyone in the audience care to speak on 61?
11:55:03 REZ 14-71.
11:55:04 Please come forward.
11:55:05 Motion to close by Mr. Cohen.
11:55:07 Second by Mr. Reddick.
11:55:08 Further discussion by councilmembers?
11:55:09 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:55:11 saying aye.
11:55:12 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:55:12 Mr. Suarez, would you kindly take number 61
11:55:14 please.
11:55:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I present an ordinance for second
11:55:18 reading and adoption.
11:55:19 An ordinance rezoning property in the general
11:55:22 vicinity of 2912 North Decatur Avenue in the City
11:55:25 of Tampa, Florida, from zoning district
11:55:27 classification PD planned development detached
11:55:29 single-family dwelling to RS-50, residential
11:55:32 single-family, providing an effective date.
11:55:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion for approval by
11:55:35 Mr. Suarez, second by Mr. Cohen on file number 61
11:55:41 REZ 14-71.
11:55:42 This is a voice roll call vote.
11:55:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:55:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:55:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:55:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:55:51 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:55:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:55:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being
11:55:54 absent.
11:55:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 62.
11:55:56 Yes, sir?
11:56:01 >> Dale Alderman, petitioner.
11:56:03 5000 17th Avenue North, St. Petersburg.
11:56:07 I'm available to answer any questions.
11:56:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any questions by
11:56:10 Councilmembers?
11:56:11 Anyone in the audience care to speak on item 62,
11:56:13 REZ 14-73, please come forward.
11:56:16 I see no one.
11:56:17 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.
11:56:19 Cohen.
11:56:20 Further discussion by Councilmembers.
11:56:21 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:56:22 saying aye.
11:56:23 Opposed nay.
11:56:24 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:56:24 Ms. Capin?
11:56:29 Item number 62.
11:56:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
11:56:32 An ordinance rezoning property in the general
11:56:34 vicinity of 4524 West Fig Street in the City of
11:56:38 Tampa, Florida, more particularly described in
11:56:41 section one from zoning district classifications
11:56:42 RS-50 residential single-family to PD planned
11:56:46 development, residential single-family attached,
11:56:49 providing an effective date.
11:56:50 >> Second.
11:56:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion for approval by
11:56:52 Ms. Capin on number 62, seconded by Mr. Suarez on
11:56:56 REZ 14-73.
11:56:57 Voice roll call vote.
11:57:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:57:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:57:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:57:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:57:07 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:57:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:57:09 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Mulhern being absent.
11:57:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item number 63.
11:57:14 Petitioner here on 63?
11:57:18 >> Abbye Feeley, Land Development Coordination.
11:57:20 The petitioner's on item 63 and 64 are not present
11:57:24 this morning.
11:57:25 There are places of religious assembly.
11:57:31 One is a parking lot and the other was the
11:57:33 manifestation that was doing the fellowship hall.
11:57:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Anyone in the audience care to
11:57:38 speak on item 63, file SU-2-14-13.
11:57:42 I see no one.
11:57:44 Motion to close by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr.
11:57:46 Cohen.
11:57:47 Further discussion?
11:57:48 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
11:57:49 saying aye.
11:57:50 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:57:50 Mr. Reddick, will you kindly take 63, please.
11:57:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an ordinance being presented
11:57:55 for second reading and adoption, ordinance
11:57:57 approving a special use permit S-2 approving a
11:58:00 place of religious assembly, day care, fellowship
11:58:03 hall and associated activity in RS-50 residential
11:58:07 single-family, CN, commercial neighborhood, and
11:58:09 RM-16, residential multi-family, zoning district
11:58:13 in the general vicinity of 2917, 3008, 3010 and
11:58:18 3102 East Lake Avenue and 3703, 3707 and 3717
11:58:24 North 30th Street in the City of Tampa, Florida
11:58:27 and as more particularly described in section 1
11:58:30 hereof, providing an effective date.
11:58:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion for approval by
11:58:34 Mr. Reddick on item number 62 -- excuse me, 63.
11:58:41 SU-2-14-13.
11:58:43 Seconded by Mr. Cohen for approval.
11:58:45 This is a voice roll call vote.
11:58:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:58:49 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:58:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:58:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
11:58:54 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
11:58:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
11:58:56 >>THE CLERK: Motion carries, Mulhern being absent.
11:59:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Item 64.
11:59:01 Anyone in the audience care to speak on file
11:59:04 SU-2-14-14?
11:59:07 I see no one.
11:59:09 >> Move to close.
11:59:10 >> Motion to close by Mr. Suarez, seconded by Mr.
11:59:12 Reddick.
11:59:13 All in favor of the motion to close, please
11:59:15 indicate by saying aye.
11:59:15 Opposed nay.
11:59:17 The ayes have it unanimously.
11:59:17 Mr. Cohen, would you kindly take number 64.
11:59:21 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
11:59:21 I move an ordinance being presented for second
11:59:24 reading and adoption.
11:59:25 An ordinance approving a special use permit S-2,
11:59:27 approving parking, off-street, commercial
11:59:29 recreational facility private in an RS-50
11:59:32 residential single-family zoning district in the
11:59:35 general vicinity of 4309 North 34th Street in the
11:59:40 City of Tampa, Florida, as more particularly
11:59:41 described in section one hereof, providing an
11:59:44 effective date.
11:59:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion for approval on
11:59:46 second reading by Mr. Cohen, second by Mr. Suarez,
11:59:50 File SU-2-14-14.
11:59:53 Voice roll call vote.
11:59:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
11:59:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
11:59:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.
11:59:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
12:00:00 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
12:00:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.
12:00:02 >>THE CLERK: Motion carries with Mulhern being
12:00:04 absent.
12:00:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 65 we have done.
12:00:06 We go back to committee reports.
12:00:09 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Chair, move for an additional
12:00:12 five minutes.
12:00:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm sure we can make it in
12:00:14 five.
12:00:14 Make it ten.
12:00:16 I have a motion by Mr. Cohen, seconded by
12:00:19 Mr. Suarez for ten minutes addition.
12:00:21 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:00:23 saying aye.
12:00:23 Opposed nay.
12:00:25 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:00:25 We go to public safety committee chair, Mr. Frank
12:00:28 Reddick.
12:00:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move item ten, 11, 12 and 13.
12:00:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick, second
12:00:33 by Mr. Cohen.
12:00:34 14 needs -- that's single source.
12:00:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ten through 14.
12:00:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Reddick for 10
12:00:43 through 14.
12:00:44 Second by Mr. Cohen.
12:00:45 All in favor of the motion under public safety
12:00:47 committee, please signify by saying aye.
12:00:49 Opposed nay.
12:00:50 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:00:51 Okay.
12:00:54 We go to park, recreation, culture committee
12:00:59 chair, vice chair, Ms. Lisa Montelione.
12:01:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Move items 17 through 24.
12:01:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion by Ms.
12:01:07 Montelione, second by Mr. Cohen.
12:01:08 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:01:10 saying aye.
12:01:11 Opposed nay.
12:01:12 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:01:12 [Inaudible]
12:01:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Substitute on 17.
12:01:17 I have -- now we go to public works committee
12:01:24 chair, Mr. Mike Suarez.
12:01:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair I move items 25
12:01:28 through 34.
12:01:30 >> Second.
12:01:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by
12:01:32 Mr. Cohen.
12:01:32 Further discussion by Councilmembers, all in favor
12:01:34 of the motion, please indicate by saying aye.
12:01:37 Opposed nay.
12:01:38 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:01:38 We go to finance committee, Mr. Harry Cohen,
12:01:45 chair.
12:01:47 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.
12:01:47 I move items 35 through 39.
12:01:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion by Mr. Cohen,
12:01:51 second by Ms. Montelione.
12:01:54 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:01:56 saying aye.
12:01:56 Opposed nay.
12:01:57 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:01:58 With removal I think one item removed in your
12:02:03 committee, Ms. Montelione, was it 42?
12:02:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 42.
12:02:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Building zoning and
12:02:09 preservation chair, Ms. Montelione.
12:02:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, sir.
12:02:13 I move items 40 and 41 and 43 through 50.
12:02:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have a motion by
12:02:22 Mrs. Montelione, second by Mr. Cohen.
12:02:24 Further discussion?
12:02:25 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:02:26 saying aye.
12:02:26 Opposed nay.
12:02:28 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:02:28 Transportation committee chair, Ms. Yvonne Yolie
12:02:33 Capin.
12:02:35 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Move items 51 through 53.
12:02:37 >> Second.
12:02:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mrs. Capin, second by
12:02:39 Mr. Suarez.
12:02:40 Further discussion by councilmembers.
12:02:42 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:02:43 saying aye.
12:02:44 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:02:44 >> Mr. Chair, on zoning, do you wish to make a
12:02:49 motion to remove item 42?
12:02:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I need a motion for that.
12:02:53 >> Move 42, 41.
12:02:56 >> Motion to remove items 42.
12:02:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Ms. Montelione,
12:02:59 second by Mr. Cohen on 42.
12:03:01 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by
12:03:03 saying aye.
12:03:03 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:03:05 Okay.
12:03:07 We go to information reports by Councilmembers.
12:03:10 I believe this time it's left to right.
12:03:14 >>No new business, sir.
12:03:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen?
12:03:16 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
12:03:18 Just one item I wanted for clarification of the
12:03:21 clerk.
12:03:21 There were two items on today's calendar.
12:03:23 One related to river art, the other related to
12:03:26 Hogan's beach that were not on our agenda.
12:03:28 I wondered whatever became of those, if they need
12:03:35 to be put on our agenda for January 22nd.
12:03:40 >>THE CLERK: I believe those might have been
12:03:43 already heard on the 18th and there was no motion
12:03:46 to continue.
12:03:48 It might have been recopied.
12:03:50 I'll check on it.
12:03:51 >>HARRY COHEN: I know the rowing art wasn't.
12:03:53 I don't think either were.
12:03:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One we asked code enforcement
12:03:58 to come back at a certain time.
12:04:01 >>HARRY COHEN: Maybe easiest thing is make a
12:04:03 motion both items appear on staff report agenda on
12:04:05 January 22nd.
12:04:07 >> Second.
12:04:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by
12:04:08 Ms. Montelione.
12:04:09 Both of those two items.
12:04:12 All in favor please indicate by saying aye.
12:04:13 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:04:15 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you very much.
12:04:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick?
12:04:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Just one item.
12:04:18 Request an commendation recognizing 35th annual
12:04:22 Tampa organization of black affairs breakfast on
12:04:25 Martin Luther King breakfast on Monday,
12:04:27 January 19th.
12:04:28 >> Motion by Mr. Reddick, second by Mr. Cohen.
12:04:30 Further discussion by Councilmembers?
12:04:32 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:04:34 saying aye.
12:04:35 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:04:35 Anything else, sir?
12:04:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's it.
12:04:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Capin?
12:04:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Here we go.
12:04:44 Nothing.
12:04:45 [ Laughter ]
12:04:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
12:04:46 Mr. Suarez?
12:04:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
12:04:53 I have one item.
12:04:55 I'd like to ask the Council, move for commendation
12:04:59 for Mr. Mike Scanlon, years of service as an
12:05:02 engineer in the public works department to be
12:05:04 presented on January 22nd, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.
12:05:08 >> Second.
12:05:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion by Mr. Suarez, I have a
12:05:11 second by Ms. Montelione, in extremely close vote
12:05:14 with Mr. Cohen.
12:05:15 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:05:16 saying aye.
12:05:17 Opposed nay.
12:05:18 The ayes have it unanimously.
12:05:18 Anyone in the audience care to speak to this
12:05:23 Council? All 152 of you.
12:05:25 I need a motion to receive and file with the
12:05:27 documents.
12:05:29 >> So moved.
12:05:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN: There is one thing.
12:05:32 That flag --
12:05:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We're going to move it now.
12:05:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN: One can stay on one side.
12:05:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The American flag got to be the
12:05:40 right side.
12:05:41 I'm taking that up at the meeting.
12:05:43 I'll appoint you to move the flag.
12:05:44 [ Laughter ]
12:05:45 >> Motion to receive and file.
12:05:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion to receive and
12:05:52 file by Mr. Cohen, seconded by Mr. Suarez.
12:05:55 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by
12:05:56 saying aye.
12:05:57 Anything else to come before this meeting today?
12:06:00 Stand adjourned.
DISCLAIMER:
This file represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all
capital letters and any variation thereto may be a
result of third party edits and software
compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.