TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, August 27, 2015
9:00 a.m. Session
DISCLAIMER:
This file represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all
capital letters and any variation thereto may be a
result of third-party edits and software
compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
>>FRANK REDDICK: Good morning.
09:04:35 I'm going to call this meeting to order.
09:04:37 I'll yield to Councilman Mr. Miranda.
09:04:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:04:42 It's my pleasure this morning to bring up Steve
09:04:44 Michelini to say the prayer this morning.
09:04:47 Please rise for the invocation and remain standing
09:04:49 for the Pledge of Allegiance.
09:04:53 >> Dear Lord, we thank you for this day.
09:04:55 We ask that you bestow your grace and blessings
09:04:58 upon your servant Judge John Germany, consolation
09:05:01 to his family, and we thank you for his
09:05:05 contribution to this community.
09:05:06 We ask that you grace and bless also those
09:05:08 bestowed upon the Durkin and Diez families for
09:05:11 their losses as well.
09:05:13 We are humbled before God and all of his works and
09:05:16 ever mindful that none are greater than thee.
09:05:19 In the course of governance, your servants face
09:05:22 many difficult and challenging decisions.
09:05:24 We ask that you, Lord, help them in all their
09:05:27 deliberations and find just and fair solutions
09:05:30 facing them.
09:05:31 Lord, set by the hand of God that you find comfort
09:05:35 and relief in your righteous labor, despair not
09:05:37 for the Lord God is always there.
09:05:39 We ask that you protect and shield our teachers
09:05:41 starting a new year, police, firefighters and
09:05:44 armed forces and civil servants.
09:05:46 We ask this in your holy and exalted name.
09:05:50 Amen.
09:05:50 [Pledge of Allegiance]
09:06:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Roll call.
09:06:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:06:13 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
09:06:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.
09:06:17 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
09:06:19 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.
09:06:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
09:06:22 We'll go to our ceremonial activities.
09:06:28 I yield to Mr. Miranda.
09:06:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:06:55 It's my pleasure to be before you and the
09:06:57 honorable City Council, Tampa, Florida, to make a
09:07:00 commendation presentation to police officer
09:07:02 Raymond Wurst, officer of the month for
09:07:06 August 2015.
09:07:07 If I may, let the individuals who will make the
09:07:13 presentation do so and make the commendation,
09:07:15 presentation at the end.
09:07:18 >> Good morning, Council.
09:07:20 Today we honor one of our officers that has gone
09:07:24 above and beyond the regular call of duty, which
09:07:27 has made him one of the leaders of his squad and
09:07:31 one of the leaders among his peers.
09:07:32 Raymond Wurst has 18 years on the City of Tampa
09:07:38 police department and another seven years as K-9
09:07:40 handler.
09:07:41 On June 4th, 2015, he responded to an
09:07:47 in-progress call of an armed carjacking.
09:07:52 Officers who went into the call were employed,
09:07:55 engaged in a vehicle in pursuit.
09:07:57 Shortly after the pursuit, the vehicle crashed at
09:07:59 the intersection of 37th and Yukon.
09:08:02 Officers quickly set up a perimeter.
09:08:05 K-9 officer Raymond Wurst had just recently
09:08:08 completed the K-9 school.
09:08:11 After completing his 480 hours of training, he
09:08:14 quickly deployed his K-9 partner on the street.
09:08:17 With only three days on the street with his new
09:08:20 K-9 partner, he was called to the scene.
09:08:23 He deployed his K-9 partner and tracked over 30
09:08:29 minutes through thick vegetation in the
09:08:31 neighborhood in the community.
09:08:32 He located the suspect and made an arrest
09:08:35 rendering the community safe.
09:08:37 For his efforts and everything he's done
09:08:40 throughout this month, Raymond has been awarded
09:08:43 City of Tampa's officer of the month.
09:08:47 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:09:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Officer Wurst, it's my pleasure
09:09:03 for your dedication and exemplary services to the
09:09:06 city.
09:09:07 You know, all of you ladies and gentlemen who work
09:09:09 in the police department, it's not just today's
09:09:12 work or tomorrow's work, it's 24 hours, 365 a
09:09:16 year, and we're really appreciative.
09:09:19 Your dog's name is havoc.
09:09:22 He should be on City Council.
09:09:23 [ LAUGHTER ]
09:09:25 Let me say although my aide bought the wrong
09:09:29 peanut butter because I know he doesn't like
09:09:32 Skippy, I heard.
09:09:33 I heard he's a Peter Pan guy.
09:09:36 But we'll give him a jar of Skippy because I heard
09:09:39 through rumors of your central intelligence
09:09:41 operations that he really likes peanut butter.
09:09:43 >> He will appreciate that.
09:09:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know if it's true or
09:09:46 not.
09:09:47 Here is one for havoc.
09:09:49 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:09:50 Commendation signed by the seven members of Tampa
09:09:57 City Council.
09:09:57 We're honored for the work you've done for the
09:10:02 police department and all the citizens of the City
09:10:04 of Tampa.
09:10:05 >> Sir, I appreciate it.
09:10:06 Thank you.
09:10:07 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:10:14 >> Good morning, Council.
09:10:15 I'm Vinny Gericitano, president of the Tampa
09:10:17 Police Benevolent Association.
09:10:19 Joining me is Abe Carmack, vice president, and
09:10:22 Gene Haines, secretary and treasurer of the PBA.
09:10:26 Charlie, first of all, I want to thank you for
09:10:30 your continued recognition of the Tampa Police
09:10:31 Department who go out and police this city is
09:10:35 courtesy, professionalism.
09:10:39 Charlie, we appreciate every time we enter this
09:10:43 room.
09:10:44 We know we have your support.
09:10:46 I'm very proud to say that Ray is a member of the
09:10:51 Tampa PBA.
09:10:52 Ray, we want to thank you for representing the PBA
09:10:55 and doing such a great job in the city.
09:10:58 Chief, I want to thank you for recognizing him in
09:11:02 that fact.
09:11:03 Ray, we just want to present you with a small
09:11:06 token of our appreciation in being such a good PBA
09:11:13 member.
09:11:14 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:11:18 >> Good morning, Council.
09:11:19 Dan Mathis junior, chief of security at the Straz
09:11:22 center.
09:11:23 I just want to present dinner for two at the Straz
09:11:24 Center.
09:11:29 Thank you for keeping us safe and keeping our
09:11:31 streets safe in Tampa.
09:11:32 Thank you.
09:11:33 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:11:36 >> Good morning, Council.
09:11:38 Joe Durkin on behalf of all of us at Bright House
09:11:41 Networks.
09:11:43 Congratulations.
09:11:44 Very proud of you.
09:11:45 We would like to present you one month
09:11:50 complimentary services.
09:11:53 Make your life a little easier.
09:11:55 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:11:57 >> Steve Stickley, representing Crockett's Towing
09:12:00 and Transport.
09:12:02 Officer, appreciate the hard work you do out
09:12:05 there.
09:12:05 We have a $50 gift card to Bass Pro Shops.
09:12:11 >> Appreciate it.
09:12:12 Thank you.
09:12:12 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:12:16 >> Hi, Mario Gutierrez from Island Flowers.
09:12:19 I didn't bring the Skippy Peanut Butter for your
09:12:23 significant other, but here are some nice roses.
09:12:27 >> Thank you, sir.
09:12:28 >> You're welcome.
09:12:35 >> Good morning.
09:12:37 Stepp's Towing Service.
09:12:39 We have a few things to tell you how much we
09:12:41 appreciate what you do for the community.
09:12:42 On behalf of Stepp's Towing and the family and
09:12:46 employees, we would like to present you a night
09:12:49 out in the company limousine.
09:12:51 $50 Bass Pro Shop gift card.
09:12:53 And we didn't leave out havoc.
09:12:58 We got havoc a nice little dog bone.
09:13:04 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:13:05 I have one more.
09:13:13 >> Thank you.
09:13:18 >> Good morning.
09:13:23 Jim Carson, Bill Currie Ford.
09:13:26 Ray, on behalf of the Currie family and myself, we
09:13:31 see many great officers come into the dealership.
09:13:34 Like to give you a 50th anniversary edition
09:13:37 catalog, special edition.
09:13:39 We also have a customized Mustang just for you.
09:13:46 And we have a couple other goodies in here for
09:13:51 you.
09:13:52 Thank you.
09:13:53 Congratulations.
09:13:55 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:14:00 >> Michael Kilgore with the Columbia Restaurant
09:14:04 group.
09:14:05 Also celebrating 110 years of continuous family
09:14:08 ownership of the Columbia.
09:14:10 Yesterday, we celebrated one-year anniversary of
09:14:13 Ulele, our newest restaurant.
09:14:15 Maybe you can take the limo and $100 gift card to
09:14:19 the restaurant.
09:14:22 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:14:26 >> Well, you know, Joe Durkin just gave you a
09:14:30 presentation from Bright House.
09:14:31 What he didn't tell you was, there are only two
09:14:34 channels programmed.
09:14:35 One is Lassie.
09:14:37 The other is Rin Tin Tin.
09:14:39 He gets to see that all the time.
09:14:44 On behalf of prestige portraits, we'll provide you
09:14:50 with a gift certificate so you can have your
09:14:52 portrait and if you want to take havoc with you,
09:14:55 you can do that, too.
09:14:57 On behalf of the Chico's restaurant group, we're
09:15:00 providing you a gift certificate for $50.
09:15:03 You can go to any of their restaurants, breakfast,
09:15:05 lunch, dinner, whichever you prefer and a cafe
09:15:10 providing you with a $100 gift certificate so you
09:15:13 can enjoy yourself there for lunch or dinner.
09:15:16 We greatly appreciate everything you do every day
09:15:19 and taking the call doesn't mean just picking up
09:15:23 the phone.
09:15:24 So we understand that.
09:15:25 And when you take the call, we appreciate it.
09:15:28 Thank you.
09:15:30 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:15:34 >> First off, I'd like to thank the City Council
09:15:37 for having me here today.
09:15:39 I'd like to thank chief ward and his staff for
09:15:42 recognizing me officer of the month.
09:15:43 What makes this one special, the end of December
09:15:46 of 2012, I got this award with my first K-9, K-9
09:15:50 Razor, a phenomenal police dog.
09:15:52 At the end of his career, it makes it special,
09:15:55 even greater today is I had havoc for three days
09:15:59 on the street and we're getting the award again.
09:16:01 I expect great things from this partnership.
09:16:06 There's plenty of other people to thank.
09:16:08 There are a thousand Tampa police officers that
09:16:10 would deserve this award what they do each and
09:16:12 every day out there on the streets for the
09:16:14 citizens of Tampa.
09:16:15 We go through a strenuous K-9 school and K-9
09:16:21 training.
09:16:22 I'd like to thank MPO Jenny Houston and MPO Ryan
09:16:25 Flanagan who do our training.
09:16:27 We do all our training in-house.
09:16:30 They do a phenomenal job of training the dogs.
09:16:32 I'd like to thank them, too.
09:16:34 I'll keep it short and sweet.
09:16:36 Thank you.
09:16:36 Also, my family who came down from Sarasota, all
09:16:39 the way up here.
09:16:41 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:16:42 Thank you very much.
09:16:54 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:17:03 >> Mr. Chair, I would like to make a motion that
09:17:05 every time we have a K-9 officer it is mandatory
09:17:08 that the K-9 attend.
09:17:10 Who knows if you're going to deliver that peanut
09:17:14 butter and milk bones.
09:17:16 We want evidence.
09:17:19 >> He surely will appreciate this.
09:17:29 >> I want to tell you I overheard you in the
09:17:32 elevator talking to detective Miller.
09:17:34 When he asked about havoc and you said that your
09:17:38 significant other was not in the mood.
09:17:41 With a name like that, I think you should take his
09:17:45 lead.
09:17:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Not too long ago, I met this
09:17:59 next individual.
09:18:00 I'm about to introduce.
09:18:03 He's a famous Cuban abstract painter.
09:18:07 He has artwork, and it has exhibitions and has
09:18:11 visited the United States, Italy, Spain, Denmark,
09:18:15 Chile, Czechoslovakia, Colombia, Algiers, Brazil
09:18:21 and United Kingdom.
09:18:23 He presently has a display of artwork at the TECO
09:18:26 center just across the street from the Tampa
09:18:28 Theater.
09:18:30 The show was named known and unknown.
09:18:35 The gentleman I'm about to introduce, artwork was
09:18:38 called known.
09:18:39 My artwork was called unknown.
09:18:42 It remains still unknown.
09:18:44 My art I did not paint it.
09:18:47 I bought it when I visit the island of Cuba.
09:18:50 It's my pleasure to introduce to this Council
09:18:53 Mr. Juan T. Vazquez Martin.
09:18:58 Mr. Martin told me that he wanted to make a
09:19:02 presentation in English.
09:19:03 I told him, my friend, you're going to make it in
09:19:06 Spanish and maybe your niece can abbreviate a
09:19:11 short section in English.
09:19:13 We have a lot of Spanish speaking people in the
09:19:16 United States, most live in Tampa or Miami.
09:19:19 Here we say Ybor City, West Tampa and the rest.
09:19:23 [speaking Spanish]
09:19:35 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:19:40 >> [speaking Spanish]
09:21:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Now we'll translate part of it
09:21:10 so everybody can understand.
09:21:12 >> On behalf of Juan T. Vazquez Martin he would
09:21:16 like to thank the members of City Council and his
09:21:18 family and friends for coming in and supporting
09:21:20 him today.
09:21:20 He wants to thank Debra Radke, the curator at TECO
09:21:26 Public Art Gallery, for inviting him to contribute
09:21:29 his Cuban abstract art to the exhibit that's
09:21:35 currently there, if anyone is interested in seeing
09:21:38 his paintings.
09:21:39 He has two paintings at the TECO art gallery now.
09:21:42 Juan is committed to the strengthening of the
09:21:46 relations between Tampa and Cuba.
09:21:47 He's very excited to share his artistic experience
09:21:50 with the New Tampa generations.
09:21:51 And he publicly supports the reopening of the
09:21:54 Cuban consulate in Tampa.
09:21:58 Thanks again.
09:22:02 If you want to know more about Juan T. Vazquez
09:22:06 Martin, you can go ahead and Google his name on
09:22:09 the Internet you will find a lovely website about
09:22:13 him.
09:22:14 Once again, he would like to thank the members of
09:22:17 City Council for this.
09:22:18 My name is Laura Hayward.
09:22:23 Thank you.
09:22:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Martin, going to say about
09:22:27 his professors who taught him art in Cuba, you're
09:22:30 going to be amazed.
09:22:37 >> [speaking Spanish]
09:23:27 [ APPLAUSE ]
09:23:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: [speaking Spanish]
09:23:34 In essence what he spoke about is saying his first
09:23:38 two college professors in Cuba that taught him art
09:23:42 were not Cubans.
09:23:44 They were individuals who were born in Tampa.
09:23:46 And they were teaching in Cuba.
09:23:48 He says that the relations between Cuba and Tampa
09:23:50 has always been something for many, many years,
09:23:53 and they would like to see some type of review of
09:23:57 individuals that could go to Cuba, young people to
09:24:00 study and report back how long that relation and
09:24:02 all the actions that were taken between the island
09:24:05 nation of Cuba and the City of Tampa, Florida.
09:24:09 [speaking Spanish]
09:24:18 >> Muchas gracias
09:24:24 >> [speaking Spanish]
09:25:07 >> [speaking Spanish]
09:26:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: My time to say something in
09:26:19 Spanish?
09:26:20 [ LAUGHTER ]
09:26:20 Thank you, Mr. Miranda.
09:26:23 We'll go to approval of the agenda.
09:26:28 >> Mr. Chair, move approval, and I think that
09:26:30 includes removal of item 71 or continuance of item
09:26:34 71 to September 10th.
09:26:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a motion from --
09:26:42 >>THE CLERK: Mr. Chair, that item you will have to
09:26:45 open it and then continue at 10:30.
09:26:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen to prove the
09:26:56 addenda to the agenda.
09:26:58 Do we have a second?
09:26:59 All right.
09:27:02 Motion by Mr. Cohen.
09:27:04 Seconded by Mr. Suarez.
09:27:05 All in favor of the motion, aye.
09:27:07 Opposed?
09:27:08 All right.
09:27:09 At this time, we will go to public comment.
09:27:11 You can speak on any item except items set for a
09:27:15 public hearing.
09:27:15 Any item on the agenda except those that are set
09:27:19 for a public hearing.
09:27:20 You've got three minutes.
09:27:22 Please state your name and address.
09:27:24 >> Good morning, City Council, Joe Robinson, 2338
09:27:27 Palmetto Street, second vice president of the
09:27:29 Hillsborough County NAACP.
09:27:30 I'm here to speak on item number 3 concerning
09:27:35 chief ward's report.
09:27:37 I wanted to see if it was a report concerning the
09:27:41 quarterly report that you requested that they have
09:27:43 for citations or arrests that have been made on
09:27:46 those that have been ticketed for bicycles.
09:27:50 So I haven't seen the -- there was no backup data
09:27:55 in the online version of the agenda, so I assume
09:27:59 he's got a report that he's going to pass out.
09:28:03 The NAACP would like to get a copy of that report.
09:28:08 What I can tell you, we requested the Florida
09:28:11 state conference to write a letter to the U.S.
09:28:13 Justice Department asking for a patterns and
09:28:15 practice review of not just ticketing but also
09:28:18 citations for traffic violations.
09:28:21 Received one myself recently and resolved it.
09:28:25 I'm just here to hear what the chief has to say
09:28:29 and hopefully we can move forward with getting
09:28:31 this citizens review board talked about.
09:28:33 It's not something we -- to the 21st century.
09:28:41 This isn't the 1800s.
09:28:43 This isn't 1925 when they annexed West Tampa.
09:28:46 This is 2015.
09:28:47 So the citizens are asking for that.
09:28:49 The NAACP is asking for that.
09:28:50 I'm here to hear what the chief has to say with
09:28:55 his report.
09:28:55 And I'll be back on the hot-button issue later.
09:29:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, sir.
09:29:03 Next.
09:29:06 >> Garm.
09:29:07 Clay walk-up.
09:29:08 117 south Clark avenue.
09:29:10 You may remember me.
09:29:12 I was here earlier this month talking about the
09:29:14 stormwater flooding.
09:29:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: Sir, that is a public hearing
09:29:16 item.
09:29:17 You cannot speak on a public hearing item.
09:29:21 You have to wait until that time.
09:29:23 >> Chair, may I make a suggestion, an announcement
09:29:26 concerning those three items coming up for public
09:29:28 hearing so folks understand that there is public
09:29:31 comment during that time.
09:29:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Items, public hearing items are
09:29:41 set for 9:30 if we get to 9:30.
09:29:45 We have a few items to take care of first.
09:29:48 If you are here to speak about the stormwater
09:29:50 issues, you'll have to wait until we open up the
09:29:53 public hearing.
09:29:53 Otherwise, any comments we take for any items on
09:29:56 the agenda, except those set for public hearing.
09:29:59 Anyone wishing to speak on any item on the agenda
09:30:02 besides the public hearing item?
09:30:09 >> Good morning, Council.
09:30:11 Good morning, everybody.
09:30:12 My name is Fuad Ahmad, 4506 West Gray Street in
09:30:19 Tampa.
09:30:20 Shine a little light about Uber and the effects it
09:30:24 has on me as a local business owner, as a driver,
09:30:28 shuttle driver, valet drivers and you can see a
09:30:31 ripple effect that will happen eventually soon.
09:30:34 Basically, I'm here to ask you guys, met the rules
09:30:37 on the books.
09:30:38 About a year ago, the cabdriver, we were informed
09:30:41 in the SoHo District Park on the street and wait
09:30:44 our turns there.
09:30:45 Now I see Uber drivers in the middle of the
09:30:47 street.
09:30:51 It's really affecting us.
09:30:53 This is my first time here.
09:30:54 Just letting you guys know.
09:30:56 You'll start seeing a little bit more of me and a
09:30:59 little more of the local people coming up soon.
09:31:01 I appreciate it if you guys help the local people
09:31:04 here.
09:31:05 Thank you.
09:31:08 >> In reference to that, I served on the PTC for
09:31:12 five years.
09:31:13 I will tell you that the issue with Uber.
09:31:16 It is an app.
09:31:17 It is not a delivery service.
09:31:19 That is the issue.
09:31:20 It needs to have regulation.
09:31:22 You would not get on a city bus if it was not
09:31:26 inspected, if it did not have the proper
09:31:29 insurance.
09:31:30 This is what is -- they sat in my office when I
09:31:38 was on the PTC and I said to their attorneys, you
09:31:40 have $40 billion, insure yourselves.
09:31:45 They did not.
09:31:45 >> Like you said, it's an application.
09:31:47 It's a great application.
09:31:49 We can't take that away from them.
09:31:51 They have to get legal.
09:31:53 For me to go through, I'm not as well organized or
09:31:56 well funded as they are.
09:31:57 I'm sure they could get fingerprints.
09:32:02 You see more rapist, more criminals driving people
09:32:05 around.
09:32:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm not going to go there, but I
09:32:08 do understand the regulation.
09:32:09 You would not get on an airplane that was not
09:32:12 inspected, that the pilot was not vetted no more.
09:32:18 But people get into these cars.
09:32:19 I have said and I will say it again and my friends
09:32:23 know that this is not a politically correct
09:32:25 statement I'm making, but it is a true statement.
09:32:27 And the statement is, I -- I will not be the
09:32:31 crash-test dummy for the insurance nor do I want
09:32:35 my daughter, my son, my grandson to ride.
09:32:38 They are not a delivery service, and that is the
09:32:41 issue.
09:32:42 And anything else that the media covers is PR and
09:32:48 they need to really study what they are
09:32:51 encouraging the public to do.
09:32:53 Thank you.
09:32:54 >> I thank you.
09:32:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next.
09:32:56 Anyone else wishing to speak on any other agenda
09:33:03 except the ones set for public hearing?
09:33:27 >> I'm Ed Tillou, Sulphur Springs.
09:33:42 I was going to talk a little bit about stormwater,
09:33:44 but since it's a public hearing, I can't stay for,
09:33:47 that was a big chunk of my work experience with
09:33:50 the state of Maryland.
09:33:52 Item 9, also impinges on item 3.
09:33:58 With the reduction of tickets for bicycling, one
09:34:01 law enforcement tool has been removed.
09:34:04 Living in Sulphur Springs, the crime rate there is
09:34:08 likely to increase.
09:34:09 That's what I believe in order for -- we'll say
09:34:14 guilty bicyclists to be ticketed.
09:34:17 Now, in that respect, giving warnings is
09:34:19 advisable.
09:34:20 The problem seems to be downstream of Tampa PD.
09:34:24 But in any event, the thing that Jane castor
09:34:29 mentioned was keeping record of how many warnings
09:34:32 have been given so that you can get the people who
09:34:34 have had about 50 warnings out of the picture so
09:34:38 they don't get killed.
09:34:40 That's what a big part of this was.
09:34:42 Item 2, I'll pass that to Lina Dunham because her
09:34:49 dad is also an abstract artist.
09:34:51 This will be for next week, I guess because one of
09:34:58 wants advance warning, but this was last week I
09:35:02 circulated this.
09:35:06 It's been improved.
09:35:07 It's a long way from totally electric vehicle but
09:35:12 it's getting there, maybe in 50 or 100 years.
09:35:15 It's got to be availed of now.
09:35:18 TECO is going to solar, but the problem is, they
09:35:21 seem to be producing half as much power as they
09:35:24 could be even if it's photovoltaic.
09:35:27 It might be steam turbines from parabolic mirrors.
09:35:32 In any case, what I suspect is the problem is they
09:35:35 are saving $44 million by not going to Helio
09:35:38 stats.
09:35:39 With respect to this week in advance -- okay.
09:35:46 Here was a little bit crop insurance, because
09:35:50 there are ways if vehicles become zero emission of
09:35:55 carbon dioxide.
09:35:57 $5 million a year in crop insurance for the
09:36:01 current kind of vehicle, it would be about a
09:36:03 quarter of that for a volt.
09:36:05 That's why I keep coming and saying volt, volt,
09:36:08 volt, and I will relay in a letter upcoming to the
09:36:11 Pope, Pope Francis, who is actually a Jesuit, that
09:36:16 City Council here has not been doing much about
09:36:19 global warming.
09:36:20 So maybe that's worth a thousand years in
09:36:22 purgatory.
09:36:23 I'm not sure.
09:36:24 The question is whether the U.N. will give the
09:36:30 north pole to Russia.
09:36:31 They have made a strong case for that.
09:36:35 The thing is, they'll blame Obama.
09:36:37 Everything gets blamed on Obama.
09:36:38 Obama lost the North Pole.
09:36:40 Actually, the North Pole is being lost here
09:36:43 because irresponsible approach to global warming.
09:36:48 I mean, there's no approach.
09:36:50 I can't say they are irresponsible.
09:36:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
09:36:53 All right.
09:36:54 Anyone else wishing to speak during this time of
09:36:58 public comment?
09:37:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, sir.
09:37:02 Before we get into the bulk of the agenda, I want
09:37:04 to bring something to the Council's attention and
09:37:08 to the staff's attention.
09:37:10 Some time ago, I think it was 2011, 2012, made a
09:37:14 motion that any items over a million dollars come
09:37:16 to Council for review rather than being on the
09:37:20 consent agenda.
09:37:21 And on this particular agenda, I noted a couple of
09:37:26 items that although the estimated amount is less
09:37:31 than a million, the cumulative -- and Councilwoman
09:37:36 Capin is shaking her head because she noted that
09:37:39 as well, I can see from her head nodding in
09:37:44 agreement, that there are several items that are
09:37:47 over a million dollars cumulatively speaking.
09:37:50 Item 13, item 38, item 41, item 35, and it
09:38:05 disturbs me that a motion of Council is not being
09:38:09 regarded and adhered to by staff.
09:38:13 So I would caution in the future that any item
09:38:19 over a million dollars not be put on the consent
09:38:21 agenda, come to staff -- come to Council as a
09:38:26 staff report.
09:38:26 I'm not going to pull those items today, but I
09:38:31 would say just as a caution to staff in the
09:38:38 future, if other items that are over a million
09:38:42 dollars appear on consent, I will pull each and
09:38:45 every item.
09:38:46 Thank you so much.
09:38:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: I would suggest to staff that
09:38:49 they get with you and give you an explanation for
09:38:51 why those are stated in the agenda.
09:38:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
09:38:54 Much appreciated, sir.
09:38:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not here to answer staff,
09:39:00 but what item 13 is, although cumulative is over a
09:39:03 million dollars, it's for 230,000 for the year
09:39:06 2013, 230,000 for the year 2014, two years,
09:39:10 230,000 for the year '15 and estimated total of
09:39:14 690,000 for the three-year period.
09:39:18 The conglomerate at the end but a yearly thing of
09:39:21 213.
09:39:22 I don't know care what you all do.
09:39:24 I'm just telling you what it is.
09:39:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's just a suggestion from me
09:39:27 that they meet with her and give her an
09:39:32 explanation.
09:39:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's fine.
09:39:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
09:39:35 Anyone else wishing to speak at this time?
09:39:37 Seeing none, do we have any requests for public
09:39:41 reconsideration of legislative matter?
09:39:43 Seeing none at this time, we'll go to item number
09:39:47 3, Chief Ward.
09:40:10 >> Present some of the statistics that you
09:40:12 requested on a quarterly report on biking.
09:40:26 These are the results over the last three months
09:40:29 comparing 2014 to '15.
09:40:32 You can see there is a significant decrease in the
09:40:34 number of citations that were issued during the
09:40:39 previous three months.
09:40:41 We captured the information for the last three
09:40:45 months simply because May is when we changed our
09:40:49 process to where we can capture the warnings and
09:40:52 citations in different fields which would make our
09:40:55 reporting a little more accurate than previously
09:40:58 reported.
09:41:02 You can see over the past three months, 69%
09:41:05 decrease.
09:41:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: Chief, this is a tremendous
09:41:13 decrease in the number of tickets that were issued
09:41:17 in May to July.
09:41:19 Could you be more explanatory in a simple way of
09:41:30 what caused the decrease?
09:41:31 >> I met with all the sergeants, supervisors, up
09:41:36 to assistant chiefs and kind of explained my
09:41:39 philosophy on policing and what we should do as
09:41:42 far as our efforts in education first versus
09:41:45 citation as well as making sure that the officer
09:41:48 engage with the community.
09:41:50 Part of our responsibility is focus on the
09:41:52 community relationship building.
09:41:54 That resonated through the department and the
09:41:59 officers get it.
09:42:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Because this is done quarterly, I
09:42:07 believe, is it possible we can get a copy when you
09:42:10 make these presentations that we get a copy of
09:42:13 this report?
09:42:15 >> Yes, sir.
09:42:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Capin.
09:42:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: You asked the question I was going
09:42:19 to ask, elaborate on how the numbers changed.
09:42:23 I had a feeling that would be the answer because
09:42:25 that was about the time you came on board.
09:42:28 >> I think the next quarter, we'll have a better
09:42:31 analysis of the project because we're comparing
09:42:32 these three months to the next quarter and we'll
09:42:35 have a better idea on what is the significant
09:42:37 decrease or if it's a continual decrease in our
09:42:41 citation efforts.
09:42:43 >>HARRY COHEN: I was actually going to ask the
09:42:45 same question.
09:42:46 Just a follow-up.
09:42:48 The graph that's up there now, what is the
09:42:53 difference between a stop and a citation?
09:42:55 The same thing like when someone is pulled over
09:42:58 for a traffic violation, they might or might not
09:43:01 get a ticket?
09:43:02 >> Everything about law enforcement is about
09:43:03 discretion.
09:43:04 A stop is simply that person is going to get more
09:43:06 than likely a warning.
09:43:08 If it's something that maybe it's on a bicycle,
09:43:11 maybe it's a stop to issue that person light for
09:43:14 the bicycle or helmet.
09:43:16 Citation in the other field is a civil citation.
09:43:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any comments?
09:43:23 Mr. Suarez.
09:43:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.
09:43:26 Chief Ward, you said philosophically you are a
09:43:28 little bit different in terms of more education
09:43:33 when there is a stop.
09:43:34 And thank you very much for putting down the
09:43:35 number of stops you had.
09:43:38 Correct me if I'm wrong, when you're out there,
09:43:41 when a beat officer is out there and he makes a
09:43:45 stop, is it better for them to have not only more
09:43:49 education towards the general public, the person
09:43:51 that they have stopped, but also gather more
09:43:54 information about the folks that are in the
09:43:55 neighborhood to know exactly who should and should
09:43:57 not be there, who should and should not be doing
09:44:00 whatever they are doing as opposed to necessarily
09:44:03 having a citation.
09:44:05 Have you seen that to be a more successful way of
09:44:09 handling community policing?
09:44:10 >> Absolutely.
09:44:11 Officers back on the streets in the same areas,
09:44:15 they get to know the community.
09:44:18 They get to know who belongs and who doesn't.
09:44:20 Knowing the people who come through the community,
09:44:22 it's a tool that the officers have at their
09:44:24 discretion.
09:44:26 Issuing citation or warning, every contact we have
09:44:28 with a citizen is an opportunity for us to educate
09:44:31 as well as build that relationship.
09:44:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I may not have the answer to this,
09:44:36 but were any of these bike stops or citations,
09:44:41 probably the bike stops specifically, led to any
09:44:44 kind of probable cause for any additional crimes
09:44:48 that may have been committed or suspicion or
09:44:53 arrests that led to other things?
09:44:55 >> I don't have those numbers.
09:44:56 I have to look through each what we call daily
09:44:59 incident log to see what was the reason for the
09:45:01 stop.
09:45:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The reason I'm asking, there is a
09:45:06 significant difference between the number of
09:45:07 citations and the number of bike stops.
09:45:10 Of course, the citation is not going to capture
09:45:12 whether or not you actually, after a bike stop,
09:45:14 found someone to have committed a more serious
09:45:17 crime and then it becomes part of the arrest
09:45:20 record.
09:45:20 I would make a suggestion and a motion that on
09:45:24 these type of reports, if you can show us that,
09:45:27 because I think that there is a definite causal
09:45:31 relationship between some of the stops you make
09:45:32 and you may be educating folks as to what this
09:45:35 means, when they are riding bike, should be riding
09:45:38 bikes or doing something that might be a rule
09:45:41 violation of the road as opposed to an actual
09:45:44 breaking of the law.
09:45:45 Now, we'd like to know that, because that is a
09:45:48 significant portion of what was originally brought
09:45:51 to us prior to you ascending to chief that, you
09:45:55 know, there were a lot of folks that were stopped
09:45:57 and then arrested because of specific crimes that
09:46:00 they found they were committing while using the
09:46:03 bicycle.
09:46:03 So I guess my point is, I don't want you to lose
09:46:07 sight of the things you do well which is making
09:46:10 sure you keep the streets safe.
09:46:12 But at the same time, where are we at on this.
09:46:15 I think that would help us understand what these
09:46:17 bike citations lead to.
09:46:19 >> That was one of the fields we added when we
09:46:21 changed the system so we could capture the
09:46:24 information.
09:46:25 One was consensual stop citation issue or warning.
09:46:29 Also a criminal investigation.
09:46:30 We should be able to pull that information.
09:46:32 It's new in the process.
09:46:34 It's something that we need to populate and I
09:46:37 should be able to pull those numbers.
09:46:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chief.
09:46:39 Thank you, chair.
09:46:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Hold your motion until
09:46:46 Montelione.
09:46:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'll go ahead and make the motion.
09:46:50 The motion would be to as part of any reports
09:46:56 concerning the bike stops, citations for folks on
09:47:00 bikes, to show those that are stopped that also
09:47:03 lead into arrests for more serious crimes and not
09:47:07 citations only.
09:47:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Second.
09:47:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
09:47:11 Motion from Mr. Suarez, seconded by
09:47:13 Ms. Montelione.
09:47:14 Ms. Montelione?
09:47:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, I did have some questions
09:47:20 for the chief.
09:47:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With a motion on the floor, I
09:47:24 would appreciate if we act on the motion.
09:47:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: This is discussion on the motion.
09:47:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was curious as well for a
09:47:37 report on the difference -- as councilman Suarez
09:47:43 said, the causal relationship between stops and
09:47:46 citations, it was my understanding that we didn't
09:47:53 have a way of -- before now.
09:47:55 There wasn't a little box to check on the citation
09:48:00 itself to say that this was a bike warning or what
09:48:06 detail --
09:48:07 >> That just went into place in May of 2015.
09:48:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So how do we know 57% decrease
09:48:16 from '14 to '15 if we just started tracking since
09:48:20 May?
09:48:21 And you might want to take action on the motion,
09:48:24 because my questions might stray a bit from what
09:48:29 we discussed.
09:48:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
09:48:32 >> The answer to your question, the information
09:48:34 you're seeing here, '14 to '15, we could actually
09:48:37 track warnings but in a different system.
09:48:40 It's basically we have a lot of systems at the
09:48:42 police department.
09:48:44 So it's a matter somebody has to pull that
09:48:47 information and basically manually go through that
09:48:52 information.
09:48:53 As of May 2015, it's a little more simple.
09:48:56 Punch the information and pull it out.
09:48:58 It's on the ELMO.
09:49:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, whoever has to go through
09:49:10 that information manually, I want to thank that
09:49:13 person, because I'm sure it was very tedious to do
09:49:16 that.
09:49:16 I guess for me it may be a little -- it may be
09:49:27 reaching to put an exact number on it since we did
09:49:32 not have a definitive way to track those numbers.
09:49:35 And I think it's a good thing that we are not
09:49:44 stopping or citing people as often as we were.
09:49:51 >> Remember, this is the number of citations.
09:49:53 That's all this is capturing, the citations, which
09:49:56 we've always been able to capture the citations.
09:49:58 We add the field to capture the warnings and
09:50:00 everything else.
09:50:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I guess we'll wait until we see
09:50:08 the next report to see if there is a relationship
09:50:10 between citations and actual major offenses.
09:50:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Suarez seconded by
09:50:19 Ms. Montelione, any further discussion on the
09:50:21 motion?
09:50:22 Hearing none, all in favor?
09:50:24 Opposed?
09:50:25 Chief, I think I feel a little more at ease riding
09:50:28 my bike now.
09:50:29 [ LAUGHTER ]
09:50:29 How many people are here to speak on the
09:50:40 stormwater issue?
09:50:41 We're going to do item 4 and 5, and we'll try and
09:50:50 clean the room up.
09:51:06 >> Good morning.
09:51:07 Thom Snelling, planning development director.
09:51:10 I'm actually asking for a one-week continuance on
09:51:13 this.
09:51:14 I did not provide you with the information that
09:51:15 was the subject matter of the motion, and I would
09:51:18 like to be able to get you that information as
09:51:20 well as a couple of other pieces relating to that
09:51:23 by the end of this week so we have time to look at
09:51:26 it because it's not really fair for me to do a
09:51:28 report that you haven't had a chance to look at.
09:51:31 >> Move continuance to September 3rd at 9 a.m.
09:51:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen.
09:51:36 Second by Ms. Montelione.
09:51:39 Anybody want discussion on the motion?
09:51:40 Seeing none, all in favor of the motion?
09:51:42 Opposed?
09:51:43 >> Thank you, Council.
09:51:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: We thank you, sir.
09:51:45 Item 5.
09:51:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's just moving the
09:51:50 resolution.
09:51:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm waiting for a motion.
09:51:53 >> Move the resolution, sir.
09:51:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Ms. Montelione,
09:51:57 second by Ms. Capin.
09:51:59 All in favor?
09:52:00 Opposed?
09:52:01 All right.
09:52:01 We'll move -- items removed from the consent
09:52:05 agenda, do we have any?
09:52:07 Item number 6.
09:52:25 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Good morning, chair.
09:52:27 Ernest Mueller, assistant City Attorney.
09:52:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: Before we do that, can we notify
09:52:32 the people in the TV room that they put the
09:52:36 stormwater assessment report on our monitor.
09:52:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sure the overflow in the
09:52:45 Mascotte Room is open.
09:52:47 I understood detective Miller saying only
09:52:51 reporters are now allowed because we are over
09:52:56 capacity I'm sure in this room.
09:52:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Mueller.
09:53:00 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Thank you, chair.
09:53:03 The ordinance in front of you for first reading is
09:53:05 not related to the stormwater assessment, as my
09:53:08 memo said.
09:53:09 It's actually an ordinance that's going to allow
09:53:11 the city to enforce those code provisions that are
09:53:15 protecting the stormwater system by allowing us to
09:53:20 enforce it by civil citation.
09:53:23 One of the important things we are doing in here
09:53:26 is amending 21-9 to make it to where it's an
09:53:31 immediate citation, irreparable, irreversible if
09:53:36 they entered some sort of pollutant or debris into
09:53:39 the stormwater system.
09:53:40 Also, what I want you to understand is if an
09:53:43 individual has done this, it would be a class one
09:53:47 violation for a first offense, which means
09:53:50 $75 citation.
09:53:51 However, if they work for a company, like
09:53:55 landscape company or somebody like that, that
09:53:57 citation on that employee will act as a notice to
09:54:01 the company that a subsequent violation against
09:54:07 one of its employees will result in a citation for
09:54:11 $450 against that company.
09:54:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions?
09:54:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Sir, thank you, Mr. Chair.
09:54:16 This reads, introduce any foreign matter,
09:54:20 including, but not limited to, trash, leafs, grass
09:54:24 clippings, debris, garbage fill construction
09:54:27 material, organic or inorganic pollutants,
09:54:32 petroleum products is what's identified, but I
09:54:38 would assume that it is not limited to just those
09:54:42 items that are identified in the --
09:54:48 >>
09:54:49 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Correct.
09:54:49 What you read is existing language.
09:54:51 We already have the ability for enforcement.
09:54:54 The protection is there.
09:54:55 We're allowing it to be done by civil citation.
09:54:59 We've got to get it in fines and schedules.
09:55:01 It starts with including but not limited to.
09:55:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I want to center on leafs and
09:55:09 grass clippings.
09:55:10 Do we have an ordinance that prohibits -- and I
09:55:18 think Mr. Cohen brought this up a couple of
09:55:20 sessions ago.
09:55:24 Let me state what it is for the general public.
09:55:29 Because we know what we're talking about.
09:55:31 They might not.
09:55:32 Prohibiting leaf blowers.
09:55:37 Just observing, when you're using a leaf blower,
09:55:41 most of that material ends up in the street and
09:55:45 thereby ends up in the stormwater system.
09:55:46 Do we have an ordinance on the books that
09:55:50 prohibits the use of leaf blowers within the City
09:55:56 of Tampa?
09:56:00 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Right off the top of my head,
09:56:03 for some reason -- haven't had to deal with that.
09:56:07 If Council member Miranda says we do --
09:56:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's chapter 27 something.
09:56:14 I saw it.
09:56:15 She showed it to me.
09:56:17 I read it.
09:56:18 She showed it to me like six months ago.
09:56:20 This has been going on since the beginning of time
09:56:23 that I know of has never been enforced.
09:56:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So there is a prohibition but
09:56:28 it's never been enforced.
09:56:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not saying there is that I
09:56:31 know of.
09:56:32 Not saying certain it's ever been enforced.
09:56:34 I don't know if anyone has gotten a citation over
09:56:37 it, let me put it that way.
09:56:40 >> I think staff will be better equipped to answer
09:56:42 the question.
09:56:43 It's not a prohibition against the use of leaf
09:56:46 blowers.
09:56:46 It's a prohibition against not capturing what is
09:56:51 blown.
09:56:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.
09:56:52 Which is what is outlined in this ordinance.
09:56:56 If it is, logic would say if it is a violation and
09:57:05 we're authorizing a civil citation for material to
09:57:08 be put into the stormwater system, I would venture
09:57:12 to guess that either we need to enforce this
09:57:18 ordinance because I see it happening all the time
09:57:20 where just people are leaf blowing and the debris
09:57:24 goes where it may, or we start looking at and
09:57:29 investigating an ordinance that would ban the use
09:57:33 of leaf blowers within the City of Tampa.
09:57:37 I'm sorry.
09:57:42 If I can speak, it would be really helpful to not
09:57:45 have all the comment, because we have a really
09:57:47 long hearing.
09:57:48 If there's comment after every time someone
09:57:51 speaks, we're going to be here until 2 in the
09:57:54 morning.
09:57:54 So it defies logic that we prohibit and will issue
09:58:03 civil citations for putting debris into the
09:58:06 stormwater, but yet allow the system that places
09:58:11 things into the stormwater system to exist.
09:58:13 We have to do something about that.
09:58:19 I'll make a motion --
09:58:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think you're going to read
09:58:24 from the ordinance right there.
09:58:26 If I may read it.
09:58:28 What I read, may I, Mr. Chairman?
09:58:31 Under section 21-9, protection of public drainage
09:58:35 system, it is unlawful to introduce any foreign
09:58:38 matter including but not limited to trash, leafs,
09:58:40 grass clippings, debris, garbage fill,
09:58:43 construction material, organic or inorganic
09:58:46 pollutants, acid, petroleum products, whether by
09:58:49 actions or inactions to any public draining system
09:58:51 including but not limited to the streets.
09:58:53 It is the public nuisance for any person to
09:58:56 damage, obstruct or interfere with the operation
09:58:58 of any public drainage system whether by action or
09:59:02 inaction.
09:59:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So as you had pointed out, you
09:59:07 can't -- it's illegal to put anything into the
09:59:11 system, but we don't enforce it, and there's no
09:59:16 way to really police that type of action.
09:59:22 The only way that we can ensure that debris
09:59:28 doesn't enter the system is to pass an ordinance
09:59:33 that prohibits the system used to put things into
09:59:42 the stormwater drains.
09:59:46 >>ERNEST MUELLER: I understand what you're saying.
09:59:48 What I'd like to do, because I probably should
09:59:51 know, I want to look it up and I can report back
09:59:53 to you.
09:59:54 Even the use -- just because you're using a blower
09:59:58 doesn't necessarily mean you have to blow it into
10:00:00 the system.
10:00:00 I've seen, especially in my neighborhood, they'll
10:00:03 lay a tarp down and blow the leafs into the tarp
10:00:05 and then pick it up.
10:00:06 I don't know if a complete ban is necessary.
10:00:09 But let me look at what we have right now.
10:00:12 I apologize that it isn't coming to me at this
10:00:16 moment standing at the podium.
10:00:19 We may regulate the hours when you can do it, like
10:00:21 not before 9:00 in the morning.
10:00:23 Seems to me that I think we have some regulation
10:00:24 on blowers.
10:00:25 I may be wrong.
10:00:26 Let me check that.
10:00:30 >> Yes, exactly what you said about making a tarp
10:00:34 or making it specific that they have to capture
10:00:36 the leafs and grass as they do it.
10:00:39 If they are not, then -- but that would move on
10:00:43 and I just wanted to add that.
10:00:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I think what
10:00:48 Mr. Mueller is addressing is that you want it to
10:00:50 be a civil citation at that point to issue --
10:00:53 that's what the change is.
10:00:55 It's already there.
10:00:56 Go pay the piper.
10:00:59 That's what you want.
10:01:00 I agree with you.
10:01:02 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Thank you, sir.
10:01:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:01:04 Mr. Mueller, you're requesting an action from
10:01:07 Council this morning?
10:01:08 >>ERNEST MUELLER: It's before you for first
10:01:10 reading.
10:01:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Capin.
10:01:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:01:19 An ordinance presented for first reading
10:01:22 consideration, ordinance of the -- ordinance being
10:01:26 considered for first reading, consideration of
10:01:28 ordinance of the City of Tampa, Florida, relating
10:01:30 to violations and penalties making revisions to
10:01:32 the City of Tampa code of ordinances, amending
10:01:35 chapter 21, Stormwater Management, amending
10:01:38 section 21-9, protection of public drainage
10:01:42 systems; amending chapter 23.5, supplemental
10:01:46 enforcement procedures; amending section 23.5-5,
10:01:50 schedule of violations and penalties; repealing
10:01:54 all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
10:01:57 therewith; providing for severability, providing
10:02:01 an effective date.
10:02:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: We have a motion by Ms. Capin.
10:02:04 Seconded by Mr. Miranda.
10:02:14 >> I thought we had comments.
10:02:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: No.
10:02:16 Your comment can be outside.
10:02:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just to inform the public, this
10:02:19 is for first reading.
10:02:21 If it passes at first reading, it comes back for
10:02:24 second reading for public hearing.
10:02:26 The clerk will announce the date.
10:02:28 At that point you'll have a chance to speak on the
10:02:30 subject.
10:02:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Sir, let me state to you that you
10:02:35 arrived late.
10:02:36 You arrived late.
10:02:37 You had opportunity under public comment to speak
10:02:39 on any item on the agenda except for public
10:02:41 hearing.
10:02:42 You missed that opportunity.
10:02:44 We appreciate it if you don't interrupt us again.
10:02:46 Motion by Ms. Capin, second by Mr. Miranda.
10:02:50 All in favor, aye.
10:02:51 Opposed.
10:02:51 Thank you.
10:02:53 >>THE CLERK: Mr. Chairman, second reading and
10:02:55 adoption held on September 17th at 9:30 a.m.
10:02:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:03:00 Here's what we're going to do.
10:03:03 We'll do consent agenda.
10:03:06 Then open public hearing 65 through 70.
10:03:10 So those who want to speak, get ready as soon as
10:03:16 we get through with the consent agenda.
10:03:17 Public safety committee, Mr. Miranda.
10:03:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:03:21 I move items 7 through 14.
10:03:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Miranda.
10:03:26 Second by Mr. Cohen.
10:03:27 All in favor, aye?
10:03:29 Opposed?
10:03:30 Motion carried.
10:03:32 Parks, recreation, Maniscalco.
10:03:36 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I move items 15 through 30.
10:03:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Maniscalco, second by
10:03:42 Montelione.
10:03:43 All in favor, aye.
10:03:44 Motion carries.
10:03:47 Public works, Mr. Suarez.
10:03:48 >> Thank you, chair.
10:03:49 I move items 31 through 37.
10:03:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Suarez, seconded by
10:03:53 Mr. Miranda.
10:03:54 All in favor of the motion, aye.
10:03:56 Opposed?
10:03:57 Motion carries.
10:03:58 Finance Committee, Mr. Cohen.
10:04:00 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:04:01 I move items 38, 39, 40.
10:04:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen.
10:04:05 Seconded by Mr. Miranda.
10:04:07 All in favor, aye.
10:04:08 Opposed?
10:04:09 Motion carries.
10:04:09 Building, zoning, preservation.
10:04:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move items 41 through 54.
10:04:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Ms. Montelione, second
10:04:18 by Mr. Cohen, all in favor, aye.
10:04:20 Motion carried.
10:04:21 Move to Transportation Committee, Ms. Capin.
10:04:26 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move item 55, 56, 57, 58 and 59.
10:04:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Ms. Capin.
10:04:32 Seconded by Mr. Suarez.
10:04:33 All in favor, aye.
10:04:35 Opposed?
10:04:35 Motion carries.
10:04:43 >> Move items 60 through 63 set for public
10:04:46 hearings.
10:04:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by
10:04:48 Ms. Montelione.
10:04:50 All in favor, aye.
10:04:51 Motion carries.
10:05:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open public hearing 64.
10:05:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Miranda, seconded
10:05:07 by Ms. Montelione.
10:05:11 Motion carries.
10:05:12 Item 64.
10:05:14 I was waiting to see if anybody from staff was
10:05:31 coming up.
10:05:32 64, anyone from staff?
10:05:34 Seeing none.
10:05:35 Anyone in the public wishing to speak on item
10:05:37 number 64?
10:05:43 >> Move to close.
10:05:46 >> What is item 64?
10:05:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If everybody has a copy of
10:05:54 their agenda, they are available outside.
10:05:56 Next time, pick one up on the way in.
10:05:58 The background on item 64 is all matters relating
10:06:01 to firearms and ammunition or preempted by the
10:06:05 state.
10:06:05 This is a housekeeping amendment to ensure
10:06:08 compliance with that preemption.
10:06:10 And I would like to say that in light of recent
10:06:14 news of the shooting of a news reporter, and we
10:06:21 have many of them in the room today, that it
10:06:25 disturbs me that we have so many acts of violence.
10:06:34 This one played out on live TV, that no one seems
10:06:39 to be safe anymore.
10:06:40 But, unfortunately, we are preempted by the state
10:06:45 from acting on any regulations that would prohibit
10:06:56 or any means -- by any means regulate the
10:07:00 possession or use of firearms.
10:07:03 And that's what item 64 is on.
10:07:07 I think that today, as much as any day, that there
10:07:15 needs to be a conversation about the use and
10:07:22 possession of firearms in this country.
10:07:24 I understand that we are only second in the world,
10:07:29 and the next nation that has as many regulated
10:07:36 permits for firearms is Yemen.
10:07:40 So take that under advisement.
10:07:45 I'll move item 64.
10:07:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Do we have a second?
10:07:50 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'll second.
10:07:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Capin.
10:07:52 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, sir.
10:07:53 Adding to that, about conversation, if we did not
10:07:56 have a conversation when 20 children were
10:07:59 murdered, we definitely need a conversation.
10:08:05 With that, I did second the motion.
10:08:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen seconded the motion.
10:08:13 >> I move an ordinance being presented for second
10:08:15 reading and adoption.
10:08:17 Ordinance amending Tampa code section 2404(a)(1)
10:08:21 to ensure compliance with Florida statute section
10:08:24 790.33, providing for severability and providing
10:08:27 an effective date.
10:08:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Ms. Montelione,
10:08:35 second by Mr. Cohen.
10:08:36 Any further discussion?
10:08:37 All in favor of the motion, please record your
10:08:40 vote.
10:08:50 >>THE CLERK: Motion carries unanimously.
10:08:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:08:53 Before we go to item 65, 66, 67, we'll do item 68.
10:09:01 >> I move to open all the public hearings, 65
10:09:04 through 69.
10:09:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: I thought we had done that.
10:09:07 Motion by Mr. Cohen.
10:09:13 >>HARRY COHEN: Excuse me, 65 through 70.
10:09:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen, second by
10:09:17 Ms. Capin, all in favor of the motion, aye.
10:09:18 Item 68.
10:09:21 Item 68, anybody from the downtown area?
10:09:29 They thought it would be at 1:00 this afternoon.
10:09:36 They are not here.
10:09:37 Let's go.
10:09:38 68.
10:09:49 >>SAL TERRITO: We are here on the special
10:09:52 assessments. There are three of them.
10:09:54 Downtown, Westshore and streetcar as well.
10:09:56 There are people in the audience to discuss that
10:09:58 with you from all three of the jurisdictions.
10:10:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone wishing to speak on item
10:10:03 68?
10:10:04 Item 68?
10:10:06 Anyone to speak on item 68, need do it now.
10:10:10 >> Council members, Richard Davis from the Tampa
10:10:12 Downtown Partnership, special services district.
10:10:15 We appreciate your consideration of the matter and
10:10:18 look forward to having a renewal of our special
10:10:20 assessment and continuing with the special
10:10:22 services we provide the downtown area.
10:10:24 Again, thank you very much.
10:10:24 We're here to respond to any questions you may
10:10:28 have.
10:10:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Capin.
10:10:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
10:10:31 Please let us know how much is collected for part
10:10:33 one and how much is collected for part two for the
10:10:37 public to know.
10:10:38 The amount.
10:10:40 That is assessed and collected.
10:10:56 >>SAL TERRITO: There is only --
10:11:00 >>YVONNE CAPIN: How much is collected?
10:11:05 >> Good morning, Council.
10:11:07 Christine Burdick with the Tampa downtown
10:11:10 partnership.
10:11:10 This year's collection, gross collection is
10:11:13 $1,868,494.
10:11:17 That's what we will be budgeting for total uses.
10:11:25 Thank you.
10:11:32 >>SAL TERRITO: I think the confusion is part one
10:11:34 is dealing with the approval of the special
10:11:36 assessment.
10:11:37 Part two is the contract that we do with them for
10:11:39 the services.
10:11:39 That's the confusion.
10:11:40 I apologize for that.
10:11:42 It will happen on all three -- on two of them.
10:11:45 >> I apologize.
10:11:46 I read it and --
10:11:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone in the public wishing to
10:11:50 speak on item 68?
10:11:52 We need to vote to close public hearing.
10:11:59 We need to move the resolution.
10:12:02 Got a motion from Mr. Miranda, seconded by
10:12:06 Mr. Cohen.
10:12:06 All in favor of the motion, aye.
10:12:08 Opposed.
10:12:09 >> Move to close the public hearing.
10:12:11 >> Move resolution -- [microphone not on]
10:12:16 >> Mr. Chair, may I -- may I suggest in the future
10:12:19 that we do these as separate items.
10:12:22 They can be sequential but have them numbered as
10:12:25 separate resolutions.
10:12:26 >> If you're going to approve it, you approve the
10:12:28 special assessment of the public hearing.
10:12:30 Then you can close it, and the resolution for the
10:12:33 contract can be done outside the public hearing.
10:12:35 That will happen as well with the Westshore one as
10:12:37 well.
10:12:41 >>HARRY COHEN: The appropriate motion is to --
10:12:42 >>SAL TERRITO: Take a vote on the special
10:12:43 assessment first.
10:12:44 If you do approve that, then you close the public
10:12:48 hearing and you take up the contract outside the
10:12:50 public hearing.
10:12:51 >> Move to close the public hearing.
10:12:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen.
10:12:56 Seconded by Mr. Miranda.
10:12:57 All in favor, aye.
10:12:59 Motion carries.
10:13:01 >> Move part 2 of item 68.
10:13:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Suarez, seconded by
10:13:06 were Miranda.
10:13:07 All in favor, aye.
10:13:08 All right.
10:13:09 It's done now?
10:13:10 >> Yes, sir.
10:13:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
10:13:11 Thank you.
10:13:12 Item number 69.
10:13:13 Streetcar.
10:13:20 >> Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the City
10:13:22 Council, pleasure to be here.
10:13:25 I'm Michael English.
10:13:26 President of Tampa historic streetcar.
10:13:29 We have always appreciated your support for the
10:13:31 special assessment for the streetcar which is an
10:13:34 essential part of our budget.
10:13:35 We also, I might add, appreciate your support from
10:13:38 the three CRAs.
10:13:40 We had a good year this year despite not having
10:13:43 enough funding.
10:13:44 Our ridership went up and we expect it to go up
10:13:49 again this year because we're doing more with
10:13:51 less.
10:13:51 We appreciate your support over the next year.
10:13:53 Thank you very much.
10:13:53 Be happy to answer any questions.
10:13:55 There's material there that kind of shows you some
10:13:57 of the ways in which we have been more creativity
10:14:00 this year -- creative this year, including making
10:14:03 the streetcar available for early service, for
10:14:05 special events, using money that we made by
10:14:09 spending less on the CSX costing agreement this
10:14:13 year.
10:14:14 So it's all good.
10:14:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
10:14:15 Any questions from Council?
10:14:17 Anyone in the public?
10:14:20 >>YVONNE CAPIN: How much less CSX?
10:14:23 >> We're still paying over $300,000 a year, but
10:14:26 reduced it 430,000 to about 300.
10:14:29 >>YVONNE CAPIN: It was down almost a hundred
10:14:31 thousand dollars.
10:14:33 Excellent.
10:14:33 Good job.
10:14:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone in the public wish to
10:14:37 speak on item 69?
10:14:39 Got a motion from Mr. Miranda, seconded by
10:14:42 Mr. Suarez.
10:14:43 All in favor of the motion, aye.
10:14:44 Opposed.
10:14:45 Move to close.
10:14:48 >> Move to close the public hearing.
10:14:50 >> Second.
10:14:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by
10:14:52 Ms. Montelione.
10:14:54 All in favor of the motion, aye.
10:14:55 Opposed?
10:14:55 All right.
10:14:57 What's next?
10:15:00 >> Thank you very much.
10:15:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: We through item 69?
10:15:05 >>SAL TERRITO: This is the Westshore one.
10:15:07 Westshore one has two parts as well.
10:15:09 Again, what you would do if you're going to
10:15:11 approve this is approve the assessment in the
10:15:14 public hearing.
10:15:15 Then close and take up the contract.
10:15:17 That's a separate item.
10:15:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item number 70.
10:15:22 >> Chris Weber, Westshore alliance.
10:15:24 I'll make this quick.
10:15:25 We're in our 14th year.
10:15:28 Funds transportation and marketing, security
10:15:32 programs.
10:15:32 The assessment is the same.
10:15:34 The boundaries have not changed and we appreciate
10:15:36 your support.
10:15:36 Thank you.
10:15:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
10:15:38 Any questions from Council?
10:15:39 Anyone in the public wishing to speak on item
10:15:43 number 70?
10:15:45 >> Move the resolution.
10:15:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Miranda, seconded
10:15:48 by Ms. Montelione.
10:15:51 >> Move to close the public hearing.
10:15:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen, seconded by
10:15:55 Mr. Miranda.
10:15:56 All in favor of the motion, aye.
10:15:58 >> [INAUDIBLE]
10:16:00 >> Second.
10:16:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: You all are about to choke me
10:16:02 you're moving so fast.
10:16:04 Motion from Mr. Miranda with a second by
10:16:07 Mr. Cohen.
10:16:08 All in favor of that motion, aye.
10:16:10 Opposed?
10:16:11 Motion carried.
10:16:12 All right.
10:16:13 We thank you.
10:16:14 Now, we're going to item 65, 66, 67, stormwater.
10:16:19 Ms. McLean.
10:16:27 >>JAN McLEAN: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Council
10:16:29 members, Jan McLean, City Attorney's office.
10:16:32 We are here today on the public hearing for items
10:16:34 number 65, 66, and 67 with regard to stormwater
10:16:38 assessments and the collection method thereto.
10:16:42 As you have just moved through public hearings on
10:16:47 other non-ad valorem assessment, you're well
10:16:50 versed in what the protocol needs to be.
10:16:55 What we will be doing here today with regard for
10:16:59 the public's information as well as yours as well,
10:17:03 is that the public hearing is opened.
10:17:07 The staff will make a presentation on all of the
10:17:09 items.
10:17:10 They are interrelated, that way you'll hear the
10:17:13 presentation one time.
10:17:14 You can take public comment one time that will
10:17:17 cover all of the items.
10:17:19 Council will then have discussion, and you will
10:17:22 vote on an item one at a time.
10:17:24 As we take the items and after your vote, we will
10:17:28 then close the public hearing, move on to the next
10:17:32 two in like manner.
10:17:34 We have them set up in this order and with regard
10:17:37 to the voting, I would request that we stay in
10:17:41 this order of 65, 66 and 67.
10:17:45 With regard to public comment, that is within the
10:17:50 Council's discretion as to what limits or not to
10:17:54 be placed on time frame.
10:17:56 If I could bring up the presentation, please.
10:18:06 just to refresh your memory, we have been before
10:18:25 you in May.
10:18:28 We came before you in June, and that's when you
10:18:30 adopted the initial resolutions for your three
10:18:35 items, and then we came back in August and
10:18:38 provided you a workshop and additional
10:18:40 information.
10:18:40 We have provided notices on all of the actions
10:18:45 that you will take here today, and we have a time
10:18:50 line that is established with regard to taking
10:18:54 actions today.
10:18:55 They are in the time line that you've seen
10:18:59 previously.
10:18:59 I built in an additional Council meeting just as a
10:19:06 measure of comfort and necessity that we would
10:19:09 need to continue the hearing, because you do need
10:19:11 to take action on your service assessment at
10:19:14 whatever level you determine in order for the
10:19:16 service assessment to continue on an annual basis.
10:19:19 Once we have finished all the actions on the
10:19:23 items, then the roll would be certified to the
10:19:29 property appraiser, the tax collector's office,
10:19:31 excuse me, for collection of the service
10:19:32 assessment for this year.
10:19:36 And the other deadline is the notice to use the
10:19:39 uniform method of collection through the tax
10:19:41 collector for the additional improvement
10:19:43 assessment, which you would consider and adopt
10:19:48 today would then allow us to let the tax collector
10:19:52 know that an additional assessment would be
10:19:53 imposed next year, as we've explained it to you
10:19:57 before.
10:19:58 So that would be the process time line on the
10:20:00 actions that you have before you.
10:20:01 Mr. Baird is going to give you a presentation on a
10:20:05 little bit more of the information.
10:20:10 >> Thank you, Jan.
10:20:12 Good morning.
10:20:14 Mr. Chair, members of the City Council, brad
10:20:16 Baird, public works and utility services
10:20:20 administrator.
10:20:20 First, I want to talk about the two types of
10:20:31 assessments as a quick refresher for the viewing
10:20:35 audience there are two kinds of stormwater
10:20:40 assessments.
10:20:41 A service assessment and an improvement
10:20:45 assessment.
10:20:45 The service assessment is item 66 and the
10:20:49 improvement assessment is item 67.
10:20:52 A service assessment is used for operations and
10:21:00 maintenance activities.
10:21:01 An improvement assessment can be used for capital
10:21:04 improvements and allows the city to borrow monies
10:21:07 to pay for them.
10:21:08 The notice that was received earlier this month,
10:21:15 on the front of the notice was a service
10:21:19 assessment.
10:21:20 On the back was the improvement assessment.
10:21:21 Well, there was some confusion about that at the
10:21:26 last meeting.
10:21:26 The notice reflects the maximum amount that could
10:21:31 be assessed up front.
10:21:33 So it reflected, if you recall last time, that
10:21:37 scenario A.
10:21:40 You asked us to present scenario B at this public
10:21:45 hearing, which is -- includes phasing in the
10:21:50 improvement assessment.
10:21:51 So implementation, if it were approved today in
10:21:58 both cases, would be -- the assessment would be
10:22:04 less than what was sent in the mail until the year
10:22:09 2021, if that makes sense.
10:22:12 So the service assessment was set up in 2003 and
10:22:18 increased in 2005.
10:22:20 There is no improvement assessment currently in
10:22:23 place.
10:22:23 With that overview of the two assessments, I would
10:22:31 like to get into the assessment methodology.
10:22:36 There were quite a few questions with regard to
10:22:38 that, both in writing and verbally into our call
10:22:43 center.
10:22:44 So I want to -- I'm going to attempt to make this
10:22:47 as simple as possible and use an example while I
10:22:53 explain it.
10:22:54 The impervious area methodology associated with
10:23:03 the residential tiers and nonresidential
10:23:08 properties and associated with calculating the
10:23:13 ESU, or the equivalent stormwater unit.
10:23:18 I want to put the equivalent stormwater unit aside
10:23:21 for a moment because the first, the data was used
10:23:26 for developing the residential tiers and the
10:23:29 nonresidential methodology.
10:23:31 So put in simple terms, this methodology is a
10:23:38 methodology that determines who pays what.
10:23:40 It is methodology that is used throughout the
10:23:44 state and has been vetted thoroughly.
10:23:45 In 2003, the city performed a statistical sampling
10:23:53 of over 80,000 residential parcels and used
10:23:57 building footprints from the property appraiser's
10:24:01 office to develop the tiers that I'll talk about
10:24:04 in the next slide or that are delineated in the
10:24:07 next slide.
10:24:08 Let's get into the example.
10:24:14 Let's say you have a one-story house.
10:24:18 It's 20 feet by 50 feet or a thousand square feet.
10:24:22 It also includes a one-car garage.
10:24:26 It's under the same roof that is 10-foot by
10:24:30 20 feet or an additional 200 square feet.
10:24:33 So for a total of a building footprint of 1200
10:24:39 square feet.
10:24:40 All right.
10:24:42 This falls in, and you'll see in a minute, this
10:24:44 falls in the tier associated with a small
10:24:48 residential property.
10:24:51 So this means you would be considered in that
10:24:56 tier, and you would pay less than 1.0 equivalent
10:25:03 stormwater unit.
10:25:04 Okay.
10:25:07 So now, let's take that same example and decide
10:25:14 we're going to -- the resident there is going to
10:25:17 add 200-square-foot patio in the back, paver
10:25:22 patio.
10:25:23 We've had this question.
10:25:24 Does that mean their equivalent stormwater unit
10:25:29 will go up and they will pay more?
10:25:31 No.
10:25:31 It's still based on residential.
10:25:35 It's still based on your footprint or your area
10:25:39 under the roof, and that's what tier you're
10:25:42 included in.
10:25:43 So they will not go to the next tier or the medium
10:25:53 residential.
10:25:54 All right.
10:25:57 Let's say that they decided to add a second story
10:26:02 with the same footprint, same area under the roof.
10:26:07 Will they move to the next tier?
10:26:09 No.
10:26:10 Because it has the same impervious area footprint.
10:26:17 All right.
10:26:19 But let's take that same residence and now they
10:26:21 decide to add a bedroom on the side of the house,
10:26:27 additional area under roof, additional footprint,
10:26:32 and that was 200 square feet.
10:26:35 In that case, they would move in that following
10:26:40 year when the property appraiser includes that
10:26:46 additional square footage on their roll, in their
10:26:52 database, then you would move to the additional,
10:26:55 to the medium size residential.
10:27:00 So I want to summarize, because it's been a little
10:27:07 unclear in the questions I've seen come in.
10:27:12 For residential, it's all about the increase in
10:27:15 the roof area or the footprint and not about the
10:27:21 total impervious area.
10:27:23 The total impervious area has been factored in in
10:27:27 this analysis.
10:27:27 So with that, I'll move on to how they determined
10:27:36 the one ESU.
10:27:40 >> That's the question I was going to ask.
10:27:42 Baird Baird you have a question?
10:27:45 >> No, go right ahead.
10:27:51 >> Brad Baird: Was that clear?
10:27:54 Okay, let's talk about the common index going to
10:27:57 the one ESU.
10:27:58 We take that data, put it aside, and in the
10:28:03 analysis we took a subset of those 80,000 parcels
10:28:11 and there is a statistical number you have to do
10:28:14 to meet the 95% confidence interval and all that.
10:28:20 We took a subset of that and looked at the total
10:28:24 impervious area.
10:28:26 Not only the footprint but the driveway, the
10:28:30 sidewalks, the patios.
10:28:32 And then the analysis showed for a median building
10:28:42 footprint 1667 square feet.
10:28:44 You see it on the picture there.
10:28:45 And the median other impervious area was 1643
10:28:52 square feet for a total of 3310 square feet which
10:28:58 is what that common unit is for one equivalent
10:29:05 stormwater unit.
10:29:06 I tried to do that as simply as possible so
10:29:15 that -- going forward, now, on the next slide.
10:29:18 >> Excuse me. Mr. Suarez.
10:29:21 >> I want to make sure I'm right about this.
10:29:25 The reason why you did that is so that you could
10:29:29 have sort of what the average -- for the 80,000
10:29:36 properties that you surveyed, correct?
10:29:40 >> For the total amount of parcels in the city,
10:29:42 which is approximately 120,000.
10:29:44 >> So the methodology was about the whole number
10:29:46 of parcels, meaning that you figured, here is what
10:29:49 the median is.
10:29:50 And now we're saying, all right, this is based on
10:29:53 the median.
10:29:55 >> Based on all that data --
10:30:01 >> And you do that in order to come up with the
10:30:04 1.0 ESU as well.
10:30:06 >> Yes.
10:30:07 >> I want to make sure.
10:30:08 The methodology we're talking about, not everyone
10:30:10 is necessarily going to be charged for -- I mean,
10:30:14 most people and most people in the neighborhood I
10:30:17 grew up with are going to be in the lower or the
10:30:19 small end of it.
10:30:22 Most of the folks that I run into because most of
10:30:26 them have smaller homes and smaller footprints in
10:30:28 terms of the other impervious area.
10:30:33 >> Brad Baird: Most fall in the small and medium
10:30:36 range.
10:30:36 So go -- going to the next slide.
10:30:42 This is more about -- this is what we took.
10:30:44 We took that data, and then developed the tiers on
10:30:47 that basis.
10:30:48 Starting with single-family residential, you'll
10:30:55 see that the range for a small residential is 100
10:31:02 to 1300 square feet.
10:31:03 I won't read all these off.
10:31:05 But just to stick with the single-family medium,
10:31:12 1301 to 2200 square feet.
10:31:15 Large, 2201 to 4,000 square feet.
10:31:19 And then very large is greater than 4,000 square
10:31:23 feet of footprint, not total impervious, again,
10:31:27 the footprint.
10:31:28 Similarly, the data was used to develop ranges for
10:31:34 the multifamily tiers.
10:31:36 And, obviously the numbers are going to be lower
10:31:41 with multifamily because of the size of those
10:31:44 residences average less.
10:31:46 Moving on to condominiums, the proportionate share
10:31:52 of the complex type is factored with each owner in
10:31:57 the condominium, and different types are
10:32:01 residential, nonresidential and mixed use for
10:32:05 condominiums.
10:32:05 And then everything else that's not in those three
10:32:09 categories falls under a general category.
10:32:13 And in the general category, we take the actual
10:32:18 total impervious area and divide it by 3310 and
10:32:24 that's how you determine how many ESUs are
10:32:27 associated with that property.
10:32:29 I hope I did a better job explaining that than in
10:32:37 the briefing.
10:32:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: You did.
10:32:41 >> Brad Baird: Thank you.
10:32:42 Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:32:44 Moving on, I'll first talk about the service
10:32:47 assessment, much like we did in the previous two
10:32:51 presentations.
10:32:51 And I've said it before.
10:32:54 I'll say it again.
10:32:57 We need to take care of our existing system first.
10:33:01 We need to maximize the existing system capacity.
10:33:04 We need to maximize the treatment capabilities of
10:33:11 those ponds, and further, an increase in the
10:33:15 service assessment will allow us to change the way
10:33:18 we do business from being reactive to proactive.
10:33:24 So these are the categories listed there.
10:33:28 These are the ditches, ponds, pipes that we need
10:33:32 to keep clear and clean and with the ability to
10:33:38 handle the most stormwater that they can.
10:33:40 The big three, as I call them, the big three,
10:33:50 ditches, ponds and outfalls.
10:33:52 Starting with outfalls, you have to take care of
10:33:54 the downstream part of the system.
10:33:56 To get all the flow out to the water bodies.
10:34:03 And you guys have received complaints in these
10:34:09 areas, in particular ditches.
10:34:11 I've received complaints from several of you on
10:34:14 major ditches and outfalls that may be getting
10:34:19 mowed but they have a lot of brush in the ditch
10:34:23 that needs to be taken out.
10:34:25 And we are just simply not getting to it at the
10:34:33 requested service point.
10:34:35 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
10:34:37 You had talked in your previous presentation about
10:34:40 our compliance with our discharge permits from the
10:34:46 federal government.
10:34:47 You were going to get to that?
10:34:50 >> Brad Baird: Yes, I was just going to talk
10:34:53 about that.
10:34:53 All of these activities that you see listed, if we
10:34:58 don't address them at a better service level, at a
10:35:00 higher service level, we will continue to fall
10:35:03 more and more behind and jeopardize our citywide
10:35:10 stormwater permit.
10:35:10 It's issued by the southwest Florida water
10:35:15 management district, and at some point we are in
10:35:20 danger of a consent order, which is additional
10:35:26 cost, as you know.
10:35:26 So it's important that we raise these service
10:35:29 levels to where we can start taking care of the
10:35:32 backlog not only catching up but starting to chip
10:35:39 away and get ahead in some of these areas.
10:35:42 That's what we've done in ditches, for example, we
10:35:47 want to change it from a ten-year cycle to
10:35:49 seven-year cycle.
10:35:51 Outfalls from 15-year cycle to a five-year cycle.
10:35:55 We're getting around to every outfall, taking out
10:35:57 the barnacles, the muscles that clog up those
10:36:00 outfalls.
10:36:01 One other item I want to address before I move to
10:36:07 what the costs are associated with raising the
10:36:11 service levels is a couple of questions came up as
10:36:15 to the miscellaneous line item.
10:36:17 That's the one that is the second to the bottom
10:36:23 there.
10:36:24 What is that line item all about?
10:36:26 What I did is I went back and got our spread
10:36:32 sheets and lists associated with that
10:36:34 miscellaneous line item and just listed a few out
10:36:38 of hundreds of examples.
10:36:40 I just wanted to rattle off a few of them.
10:36:43 Large oak tree lifted gutter so water doesn't
10:36:52 drain.
10:36:52 I've kind of taken them word for word in most
10:36:55 cases off the list.
10:36:57 Paving block inlet throat causing large amounts of
10:37:00 water to stand.
10:37:01 Shallow ditch system is partially blocked by a
10:37:03 telephone pole.
10:37:05 Drainage system includes driveway culverts at the
10:37:08 wrong elevation.
10:37:09 Nuisance ponding due to shallow ditch elevations.
10:37:12 Low driveway and low point in roadway to
10:37:15 accommodate recent paving activities.
10:37:17 Low point in street holding water, standing water
10:37:20 in gut we are no positive relief.
10:37:23 Very flat, no drainage.
10:37:25 High spot in asphalt.
10:37:27 Water stands in driveway, can't make it to inlet.
10:37:30 Oak tree uprooting pavement.
10:37:32 Curb and gutter is settling.
10:37:34 Old damage curb.
10:37:37 Failing 12-inch pipe under roadway.
10:37:39 That happens to be el Prado.
10:37:41 Live oak tree destroyed drainage system.
10:37:43 Those are the kinds of things that we will be able
10:37:46 to address, address more of them with an increase
10:37:48 in service level under the miscellaneous line
10:37:51 item.
10:37:51 I wanted to make sure I clarify what kinds of
10:37:55 things we're talking about there.
10:37:56 Next slide shows the cost increases proposed for
10:38:06 raising each of these service levels.
10:38:08 So, for instance, ditches, which would be proposed
10:38:16 to go up from 1.25 million up to a little over 2
10:38:21 million annually.
10:38:22 Ponds would increase to over $2 million.
10:38:29 Actually, that's probably our largest -- that is
10:38:32 our largest increase percentage-wise.
10:38:34 Outfalls would triple, which makes sense.
10:38:41 If you're going from every 15 years to every five
10:38:45 years, you know, you're doing them three times as
10:38:48 much.
10:38:49 And so forth on down the list.
10:38:52 If you total up, if you total up those increases,
10:38:58 it results in an estimated service assessment
10:39:02 going from $36 a year to $82 a year.
10:39:07 Or $6.83 a month.
10:39:12 So with that, I'll move into item 67, the
10:39:23 improvement assessment.
10:39:24 Again, your last motion asked us to present
10:39:29 scenario B or the phasing in of this assessment.
10:39:32 So the rest of this presentation will focus on
10:39:37 scenario B.
10:39:39 The improvement assessment area, which is called
10:39:45 the central and lower basin improvement area.
10:39:51 It's one improvement area.
10:39:52 It is generally south of Fowler.
10:39:56 If you'll look closely, you can see an orange line
10:40:01 on Fowler avenue.
10:40:02 I can't stress enough that we have flooding issues
10:40:10 throughout the improvement area.
10:40:12 We have small, medium, and large efforts
10:40:16 throughout the improvement area.
10:40:17 And that's important, because, you know, a lot of
10:40:22 the focus was on south Tampa.
10:40:25 Actually, our worst flooding was in West Tampa.
10:40:28 But, you know, we've had a lot of issues, a lot of
10:40:35 comments, I should say about people saying, well,
10:40:40 why should I pay this?
10:40:43 We don't have as much or I have very little
10:40:45 flooding in front of my house and I'm subsidizing
10:40:50 other areas that have real issues.
10:40:52 I would submit, again, we have enough flooding to
10:40:56 go around.
10:40:57 We have flooding in all neighborhoods.
10:40:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Montelione.
10:41:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, to that point,
10:41:05 Mr. Baird, we've received -- and I just want to,
10:41:08 for the general public, we've received many
10:41:12 letters and comments regarding this issue in
10:41:18 addition to the folks who are going to speak
10:41:20 during public comment.
10:41:21 And I read all of them and highlighted some of the
10:41:25 issues.
10:41:25 As you and I discuss, they fall into three
10:41:31 categories.
10:41:32 One of those categories I'd like for you to
10:41:33 address, because it seems that people are not
10:41:36 disputing that we have a stormwater or flooding
10:41:42 problem in various areas throughout the city.
10:41:46 What a lot of people want to know is typically
10:41:52 what's in it for me.
10:41:53 So if, as you said, West Tampa was particularly
10:42:02 affected by floods, what are the projects -- and
10:42:10 you don't have to address that in maybe this part,
10:42:12 you may be getting to this later on, but what are
10:42:15 the projects that are going to be implemented to
10:42:18 address the flooding in West Tampa?
10:42:20 Because -- sorry, Mr. Cohen, because your district
10:42:25 is south Tampa.
10:42:27 It seems that a lot of people mention south Tampa
10:42:30 in their comments, and, you know, feel that --
10:42:34 well, south Tampa is getting all the attention,
10:42:37 and south Tampa is getting all the projects.
10:42:40 I have a list of capital projects, but maybe the
10:42:44 general public isn't well versed in projects that
10:42:48 will take place in other parts of the city,
10:42:51 particularly North Tampa and where I represent or
10:42:54 West Tampa where Councilman Maniscalco represents.
10:43:01 >> Brad Baird: Addressing West Tampa, for
10:43:03 example, in the Rome and Cass area and generally
10:43:06 south of cypress, I don't want to characterize it
10:43:09 all of West Tampa has equal, you know, amount of
10:43:13 flooding.
10:43:14 That certainly wouldn't be true.
10:43:17 In that area, one of the major projects is cypress
10:43:21 box extension or Cypress Street project, which is
10:43:25 listed as a $40 million project to extend the box
10:43:29 culvert down Cypress Street to the west and down
10:43:33 Cass Street as well and include in -- tieing in
10:43:38 and including those laterals, if you will, to
10:43:40 drain that area.
10:43:41 As we speak, we're putting in just a very
10:43:47 downstream part of that at north boulevard and
10:43:51 cypress, but the rest of it will, you know, be in
10:43:53 the neighborhood of $40 million.
10:43:55 So that's one example.
10:44:00 You know, there are others.
10:44:03 In addition to that, don't forget the small yellow
10:44:06 dots.
10:44:06 I want to make this point, are small and medium
10:44:10 projects throughout the city for the next five
10:44:14 years.
10:44:14 We're not showing the dots for the following 25
10:44:21 years on that map.
10:44:22 I think if we did, the entire City of Tampa would
10:44:24 look like it was pure yellow.
10:44:26 We have another 25 years of small and medium
10:44:32 projects.
10:44:32 In addition to those microprojects, if you will,
10:44:36 that I listed a couple of slides ago, if I could
10:44:46 have the next slide again.
10:44:48 Under scenario B, the phased-in full funding would
10:44:57 include six or I include five major projects, and
10:45:02 then item 3, what I called the capital improvement
10:45:07 plan, which is those small dots on the map.
10:45:11 It's the small and medium projects on that map.
10:45:13 So capital improvement plan estimated at 61
10:45:18 million.
10:45:19 The upper peninsula flooding relief at about 40
10:45:25 million, but only 18.5 would be city share.
10:45:28 Part of it paid by F.D.O.T. and part of it paid by
10:45:31 the southwest Florida water management district.
10:45:33 That was factored in.
10:45:37 That was factored in the financing and the slides
10:45:43 that Sonya little will get up and talk about.
10:45:46 Then North Tampa closed basin where we don't have
10:45:50 outfalls.
10:45:51 We essentially have a bowl.
10:45:56 Council member Montelione, that's in your
10:45:58 district.
10:45:59 That's $5 million.
10:46:00 Cypress Street outfall extension, as I mentioned,
10:46:04 $40 million effort.
10:46:06 Southeast Seminole Heights flooding relief, which
10:46:09 we are just finishing up on the modeling work is
10:46:11 30 million.
10:46:12 And then lower peninsula flooding relief.
10:46:15 And this is from Euclid all the way down to the
10:46:21 Air Force Base is estimated to be $75 million.
10:46:27 So with that, I'll turn it over to our CFO, I
10:46:30 think.
10:46:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Maybe Ms. Little can address
10:46:34 this, did I hear you say 40 million, 70 million,
10:46:38 40 million and then North Tampa closed basin is 5
10:46:41 million?
10:46:43 >> Brad Baird: Yes, ma'am.
10:46:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Maybe we can address the
10:46:48 disparity between the districts and areas, because
10:46:53 5 million for North Tampa closed basin and 40, 50,
10:46:56 and 70 million, there is a big difference there.
10:46:59 >> Brad Baird: Yeah, and that one involves either
10:47:03 expansion of or the addition of a pond in an area
10:47:07 that does not outfall to anywhere.
10:47:10 And would include some land acquisition to make
10:47:13 that happen.
10:47:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's fine.
10:47:16 I'm just saying there is a tremendous disparity
10:47:18 between what is being spent in the areas.
10:47:20 >> Brad Baird: I understand.
10:47:21 I'm glad you brought up that point because we have
10:47:23 projects that have been done and funded by the
10:47:27 general fund in areas, like Drew Park, in areas
10:47:32 like your district where we have the duck pond,
10:47:35 doughnut pond, where significant funds were spent
10:47:39 to alleviate those problems.
10:47:41 We have more to do is what I'm telling you.
10:47:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: Brad, before Ms. Little come up,
10:47:50 let me ask you a question, because we're throwing
10:47:52 around a lot of millions of dollars.
10:47:54 We can spend $300 million, and that's not going to
10:47:59 alleviate the flooding problem we have in the City
10:48:02 of Tampa, correct?
10:48:03 >> Brad Baird: That's correct.
10:48:04 It's not going -- this -- this will alleviate,
10:48:09 greatly alleviate all the big stuff, but it's not
10:48:13 going to solve all of our problems.
10:48:14 It's not going to make it perfect, where, you
10:48:17 know, we have rains like we had this August, and
10:48:20 the water goes away in five minutes.
10:48:22 I don't want to give anybody that impression.
10:48:24 What it will do is make things a lot better.
10:48:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's the reason I want to raise
10:48:30 the question.
10:48:31 I didn't want nobody to get the perception that
10:48:33 this will be talking about $251 million that
10:48:37 you're not going to see on TV no more flooding.
10:48:41 With a storm brewing out there now, might hit
10:48:46 Florida next week, prior to us doing this, but
10:48:50 even if we do this in the next five years, there's
10:48:53 still going to be flooding.
10:48:55 >> Brad Baird: You'll still see nuisance
10:48:57 flooding, but the sights of cars floating down the
10:49:02 streets will be a lot less, if not eliminated.
10:49:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
10:49:06 Just wanted to make that clear.
10:49:08 Ms. Little.
10:49:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Mr. Baird, on here, this is the
10:49:17 Mayor's plan.
10:49:18 He approved this, correct?
10:49:20 >> Brad Baird: The Mayor is supportive of this.
10:49:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The head administrator.
10:49:26 >> Brad Baird: It was requested by City Council
10:49:27 to come back with information to present, to
10:49:30 present the data to you guys.
10:49:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The data.
10:49:33 But the plan, the beginning, this was initiated by
10:49:41 the Mayor.
10:49:43 >> Brad Baird: It was actually initiated by City
10:49:45 Council.
10:49:46 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Explain.
10:49:59 >> BRAD BAIRD: In the May meeting, you all asked
10:50:02 us to come back with a plan to address flooding
10:50:06 throughout the city, which we did.
10:50:08 We came back with a plan on the different
10:50:11 scenarios.
10:50:11 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Was there a consultant hired for
10:50:13 this?
10:50:14 >> Brad Baird: There was a consultant hired to
10:50:20 oversee the analysis back in 2003, and we have
10:50:24 retained their services to answer questions in
10:50:27 that area on the methodology.
10:50:29 But not to develop this plan.
10:50:33 Staff put together a plan at the request.
10:50:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The Mayor has not weighed in on
10:50:41 this.
10:50:42 >> Brad Baird: No.
10:50:44 I've kept him up to speed as to what scenarios we
10:50:47 would present.
10:50:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The reason is, I received an
10:50:49 e-mail from your executive aide, and I looked at
10:50:53 everyone that was on the e-mail, and the Mayor was
10:50:57 not on there.
10:50:58 And I wondered about that because he is the head
10:51:04 administrator, in my opinion.
10:51:07 And everyone else.
10:51:08 That is what he does.
10:51:09 I just wanted to bring that up.
10:51:12 Thank you.
10:51:14 >> Brad Baird: Thank you.
10:51:22 >>SONYA LITTLE: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Council
10:51:23 members, Sonya little, revenue and finance.
10:51:26 Continuing on with the presentation, I wanted to
10:51:30 provide you with, now that we know how we do the
10:51:33 calculation, the assessment methodology, what the
10:51:37 tiers mean to residential condos and general use
10:51:44 properties, we wanted to tell you from a
10:51:47 residential perspective, because that's where we
10:51:48 get the most of the inquiries of what does it mean
10:51:51 to our residents.
10:51:52 The next few slides will go over what you have
10:51:55 seen before in the last presentation, but it was
10:51:59 extremely comprehensive because we presented
10:52:02 several different scenarios, funding options.
10:52:04 This time, because we're focusing on funding on
10:52:09 the improvement side for $251 million in capital
10:52:14 improvements and assuming that the service
10:52:18 assessment will be increased to accommodate the
10:52:21 improved service levels that brad spoke to you
10:52:24 about, the 251 million phased in over time under
10:52:28 scenario B.
10:52:30 If I can have the slides brought up, here we have
10:52:34 what brad just spoke to you about, the
10:52:36 $251 million in improvement.
10:52:40 That would be related to the improvement
10:52:41 assessment.
10:52:43 But to tie all of that in for both the service
10:52:46 assessment and the improvement assessment over
10:52:51 time, beginning November 2015, should Council
10:52:56 decide to move forward with the assessments that
10:53:01 had been mentioned to cover both the improved
10:53:04 level of service for the operations and
10:53:07 maintenance of the system and to fund the
10:53:09 $251 million in capital projects.
10:53:12 So if you'll bear with me one moment, this relates
10:53:16 to a typical small size single-family unit with a
10:53:21 building footprint of 100 to 1300 square feet, and
10:53:27 if you'll recall, where brad walked through the
10:53:30 different tiers, the four tiers on slide six for a
10:53:34 small, medium, large, and very large, this sheet
10:53:38 provides the dollar amount of what that means to
10:53:41 each one of those tiers.
10:53:44 Starting out with small, full funding, 251 million
10:53:48 and the service assessment at $50.02 to
10:53:52 accommodate the improved level of service, no
10:53:56 assessment for the improvement portion of the
10:54:00 assessment for a small, typical single-family home
10:54:05 in November of 2015, it would be an assessment in
10:54:11 total annually of $50.02 or $4.17.
10:54:15 Now, you'll notice that the top line, the service
10:54:19 assessment remains constant for purposes of this
10:54:23 illustration, but obviously it would carry on.
10:54:27 We'll still have a system.
10:54:28 And then the improvement assessment incorporates
10:54:32 $200 million in bond proceeds, $25 million that
10:54:40 are assumed grant receipts, and also $25 million
10:54:44 in pay -- or cash on hand from the assessment to
10:54:48 address the entire capital program over the life
10:54:51 of the program.
10:54:55 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen.
10:54:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Just for clarification on what
10:54:58 you're presenting here, this is the total
10:55:00 assessment.
10:55:01 This is not the increase over what is being paid
10:55:05 now, because there's already a service assessment
10:55:08 in place.
10:55:09 So, for example, the $4.17 per month total
10:55:13 assessment that's being proposed, that's not an
10:55:16 increase over zero.
10:55:17 That's an increase over the current assessment.
10:55:20 >>SONYA LITTLE: Over the current $3 per month
10:55:22 assessment.
10:55:23 >>HARRY COHEN: Got it.
10:55:24 Thank you.
10:55:25 >>SONYA LITTLE: Correct.
10:55:25 For the small category.
10:55:28 Then if you go on to 21, again, I want to be clear
10:55:37 that we showed how the improvement assessment
10:55:40 would be phased in over time.
10:55:45 After 2021, it would be constant for the life of
10:55:48 the outstanding financing.
10:55:50 So taking that same model for a typical small
10:55:55 family, single-family parcel and looking at the
10:55:59 medium, and if you will recall, really the
10:56:01 medium-size single-family parcel is the driving
10:56:04 force between -- for how these tiers are modeled
10:56:10 because it's equal to one ESU, equivalent
10:56:13 stormwater system, and under that scenario, for a
10:56:17 medium-size single-family parcel with the building
10:56:21 footprint of 1,301 to 2,200 square feet, again, if
10:56:28 you'll draw your attention to 2015, having the
10:56:32 same service assessment would equate for that type
10:56:36 of parcel at $82 annually with no improvement
10:56:40 assessment coming online until 2016.
10:56:45 And in 2016, the improvement assessment built out
10:56:49 to accommodate the $251 million in capital
10:56:55 improvements would start at $53 per year or
10:56:58 $11.25 per month in total.
10:57:04 The 61.72 in 2017 coupled with the $82 service
10:57:11 assessment for a total of $143 per year or
10:57:15 $11.98 per month, and then so on and so forth
10:57:21 through '21 and beyond.
10:57:23 Now, we have done the same thing for a large
10:57:31 parcel, which --
10:57:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Excuse me for a second.
10:57:34 Let me say to the audience, you're going to have
10:57:36 an opportunity to speak once they finish the
10:57:40 presentation.
10:57:41 All the mumbling and jumbling going on out there,
10:57:46 cease because we're limiting public comment.
10:57:51 Respect the speaker.
10:57:53 Thank you.
10:57:53 >> Chair, before we go on, can I ask a quick
10:57:56 question?
10:57:56 I want to follow up on what Mr. Cohen said in
10:57:59 terms of what the assessment is, let's say on the
10:58:02 current service assessment.
10:58:03 I'm not sure, remember the number in terms of the
10:58:06 small, medium, large scenario.
10:58:09 Let's say on the medium parcel, what is most of
10:58:14 the assessment now?
10:58:15 I can't remember what the number is.
10:58:19 Do you know that?
10:58:19 >>SONYA LITTLE: That one is the one that everybody
10:58:21 talks about, because it's equivalent to one ESU,
10:58:25 and that is the $36 currently, annually, or $3 per
10:58:29 month.
10:58:30 Under what you're asking, councilman Suarez, the
10:58:33 $3 per month current assessment that residents in
10:58:37 the medium category or medium tier paid for the
10:58:43 year, it would increase just over $3.80 per month.
10:58:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just wanted to clarify that.
10:58:51 I know that councilman Cohen was fairly clear, but
10:58:54 I wanted to get that monthly assessment out.
10:58:56 Because, you know, there are ways that we pay for
10:58:58 things, and sometimes it's easier to understand it
10:59:01 when we're talking about monthly, because I know
10:59:03 that for me, I like it that way, because I know
10:59:06 exactly what I have to budget each and every
10:59:08 month.
10:59:08 Thank you, chair.
10:59:10 I appreciate it.
10:59:16 >>SONYA LITTLE: So keeping in line with that line
10:59:20 of questioning for a large parcel that would be
10:59:25 applied toward a building footprint of 2,201 to
10:59:29 4,000 square feet, the associated ESU in that case
10:59:33 would be 1.66, so, obviously, larger than our base
10:59:38 medium of 1.0 ESUs.
10:59:41 The service assessment that is currently being
10:59:45 paid that our residents paid in this tier in 2014
10:59:51 was 59.76.
10:59:54 In order to accommodate the improved level of
10:59:56 service beginning in 2015, it would go from
11:00:00 roughly $4.98 per month to a monthly assessment of
11:00:06 $11.34 starting in November 2015.
11:00:12 And beyond.
11:00:14 Scenario B, 4,000 square feet and beyond.
11:00:23 Right now, the annual assessment for this category
11:00:29 or tier was $101.52, which equates to $8.46 paid
11:00:36 now with the improved level of service in 2015,
11:00:41 the monthly payment would go from the $8.46 per
11:00:46 month to $19.27 per month for those parcels
11:00:50 greater than 4,000 square feet.
11:00:52 And in the footnote, you'll see the corresponding
11:00:57 ESU at 2.8, two times over the base medium size
11:01:03 single parcel.
11:01:03 Now, the last time we met with you, we had several
11:01:12 scenarios we presented to you and on that slide we
11:01:16 presented last time, it incorporated each one of
11:01:18 those scenarios.
11:01:19 We've removed scenarios A and C, so that it's
11:01:25 easily seen in comparison to our tiers, what this
11:01:29 means.
11:01:31 Again, we'd like to mention that we do know that
11:01:34 several of these jurisdictions are considering, as
11:01:38 well as we, increases to their stormwater
11:01:42 assessments or fees.
11:01:44 That being said, this is what we know today as far
11:01:48 as what they are currently charging and moving
11:01:52 forward with scenario B with a total assessment.
11:01:56 It gives you an indication of where we would size
11:02:00 up to everyone else.
11:02:01 And, of course, if this doesn't account for the
11:02:04 phasing in over time, but if we compare ourselves
11:02:07 to the first two years compared to our peers, this
11:02:12 is where we currently -- how we currently compare
11:02:15 to those other jurisdictions.
11:02:16 And I'd be happy to answer any questions related
11:02:28 to the calculation.
11:02:31 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
11:02:31 Maniscalco.
11:02:33 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Quick question.
11:02:34 $251 million that we're asking of the taxpayers.
11:02:39 Because of something like this, you know, as
11:02:41 always, the burden is always passed on to the
11:02:44 taxpayer.
11:02:45 What about BP settlement money that the city would
11:02:47 be receiving?
11:02:48 Why is that -- all peanuts compared to
11:02:51 $251 million, would help -- could be added to help
11:02:54 reduce this cost in the long term.
11:02:57 Is that something being considered or not at all?
11:03:00 >>SONYA LITTLE: It is something -- I have not been
11:03:04 part of any of those discussions, councilman, as
11:03:06 far as the BP settlement is concerned.
11:03:09 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: All right.
11:03:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen.
11:03:12 >>HARRY COHEN: I would just say that I think it
11:03:15 would be appropriate, perhaps at the end of this
11:03:19 discussion, if someone wanted to make a motion to
11:03:22 have a discussion about that money.
11:03:25 Councilman Reddick mentioned earlier the hurricane
11:03:30 that is churning out in the Atlantic, and one of
11:03:32 the things that I had said when we had the
11:03:37 discussion August 6th is that this entire
11:03:41 program that we are talking about -- and this was
11:03:43 pointed out by Mr. Baird -- is strictly about
11:03:47 dealing with sort of regular rain events and the
11:03:51 sort of flooding that happens on a regular basis
11:03:55 in the city.
11:03:55 It absolutely does not deal with storm surge or
11:04:00 the type of really cataclysmic damage that can be
11:04:04 done by a major storm event.
11:04:05 In terms of the BP money, given that it really
11:04:11 came from an event in the Gulf of Mexico, there is
11:04:17 some direct relation to both this type of
11:04:20 stormwater spending, I think, but also the
11:04:23 large -- the amelioration of some of the larger
11:04:26 issues that we could confront, particularly storm
11:04:28 surge, which is not addressed in this current
11:04:31 plan.
11:04:32 And that might be something that we need to look
11:04:35 at separately.
11:04:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Suarez and we would like to
11:04:42 hear from the public.
11:04:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Along the same lines my colleague
11:04:45 mentioned, I think BP settlement is somewhere in
11:04:47 the $27 million range, if I recall to the city.
11:04:51 >> Net to the city, 20 million.
11:04:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That is going to be paid out on an
11:04:55 annual basis over the course of let's say a
11:04:57 30-year period.
11:05:01 >> No, sir, one time.
11:05:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One time.
11:05:03 We have a one time amount.
11:05:04 Once we get that, we have to make a determination
11:05:06 what we'll use that for.
11:05:08 Now, you know, that generally goes -- those kind
11:05:10 of settlements generally go into general revenue,
11:05:12 correct?
11:05:14 >>SONYA LITTLE: Typically, yes, sir.
11:05:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The settlement does not have an
11:05:19 earmark what we can and can't be use it for,
11:05:21 correct?
11:05:22 >>SONYA LITTLE: It does not.
11:05:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The reason I was asking, the point
11:05:26 that you made, Mr. Cohen, in terms of, you know,
11:05:33 storm surge and other things, being the insurance
11:05:36 industry, we're tracking all these storms all the
11:05:38 time.
11:05:39 We don't know what will happen next.
11:05:40 We have luckily not been hit by a major hurricane
11:05:43 since the 1920s.
11:05:45 We've only had some major scares.
11:05:47 Charley was the latest.
11:05:48 But the one that we had that brought a lot of rain
11:05:50 and water was the HELENA in 1985.
11:05:55 I'm very cognizant of the fact that storm surge is
11:05:57 the biggest problem right now, because there are
11:05:59 arguments that storm surge is not paid for through
11:06:03 flood insurance or through other means.
11:06:05 You're stuck with no money.
11:06:07 FEMA sometimes can provide the dollars in order to
11:06:10 help pay for losses but sometimes it doesn't.
11:06:14 I just wanted to make sure -- I know that we
11:06:17 haven't seen the money yet from BP I assume.
11:06:20 Have we gotten the money?
11:06:21 >>SONYA LITTLE: We have just recently received the
11:06:23 money.
11:06:23 We've not had any meetings at this point to
11:06:26 determine how those funds will be utilized.
11:06:29 It's being held in trust right now.
11:06:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Right.
11:06:32 I didn't think it had been released yet to us, but
11:06:34 we just received it now.
11:06:35 >>SONYA LITTLE: Just probably last week.
11:06:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, chair.
11:06:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Miranda.
11:06:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11:06:51 As all of us know, we all met with Jan and Sonya
11:06:55 and brad regarding this.
11:06:57 I said to myself, self, what are you going to do
11:07:02 with this thing?
11:07:02 You look at it, first of all, thank all the good
11:07:06 citizens who came out for and against, I assume.
11:07:10 I look at it this way.
11:07:11 I don't know.
11:07:12 I'm not a lawyer but I look at the assessment of
11:07:17 16.19 million, and when you have to pay somebody
11:07:20 to collect it, because it goes into your ad
11:07:25 valorem tax bill, and you pay the tax collector at
11:07:28 that point, I believe $323,800, if my math is
11:07:34 correct.
11:07:34 On the $21.3 million, you pay a total of
11:07:39 $5,026,000 or roughly $5.3 million in total.
11:07:45 If that weight could be shifted somewhere else,
11:07:52 like Tampa Bay water pass through so much and Doug
11:07:56 bell is a good friend of mine and they have a lot
11:07:58 of good people working there, I like to think
11:08:01 differently, outside the box.
11:08:03 I like to create things that happen so we get what
11:08:05 we need and don't pay as much for it.
11:08:07 That's the way business works.
11:08:08 When you look at this country, why is Bernie
11:08:11 Sanders drawing the kind of crowds that he's
11:08:13 drawing?
11:08:14 Why is Donald Trump drawing the crowds that they
11:08:16 are drawing?
11:08:17 It's not because they are the best.
11:08:19 It's because people are tired of what's going on
11:08:21 all over the governments of this great country.
11:08:24 So when you look at these things and you start to
11:08:27 analyze, and this city has something that no city
11:08:31 has, not only the residents who live here are
11:08:34 great, but it's got this.
11:08:36 This is not a diamond.
11:08:37 If it wasn't, I wouldn't be sitting here.
11:08:40 I would be selling it.
11:08:41 This is liquid gold or clear gold.
11:08:43 It's called reclaimed water.
11:08:45 I've asked some of you, some of you, not all of
11:08:49 you, that we have four enterprise funds of which
11:08:53 is water, wastewater, parking, and storm -- I
11:08:57 mean, solid waste, so create a fifth.
11:08:59 And I would just dingling here and writing things
11:09:03 down and everybody says everybody likes the
11:09:05 initials call it the wisp.
11:09:07 Water, wastewater, parking, storm assessment and
11:09:13 solid waste.
11:09:13 And that one, you put your money into, like maybe
11:09:17 part of the $5 million you could save by not
11:09:21 having somebody collect it, send it out in the
11:09:24 bills that you normally do.
11:09:25 That's one.
11:09:26 Two, part of that money settlement with BP maybe,
11:09:31 30 or 40 percent of that, about 10 million or 10
11:09:34 million, 20 is 50% of that.
11:09:36 And then you shift the amount and thank to Mayor
11:09:41 Buckhorn and the last term that he's been Mayor,
11:09:45 we've gone from 10 million to $22 million in the
11:09:48 budget regarding the public improvements into
11:09:52 neighborhoods.
11:09:52 And I think that figure is about accurate, but I
11:09:54 may be a few million off because all by memory.
11:09:57 However, like I said earlier, everything depends
11:10:01 on what happens in the stock market in part.
11:10:05 Because the stock market doesn't hold to what we
11:10:08 projected, our projection will be wrong at the end
11:10:11 of the year because you have that service that you
11:10:13 have to make and the debt service payments to
11:10:16 retirement funds.
11:10:16 And that's based on the availability of others,
11:10:19 not us.
11:10:19 So when you look at all these things, I really
11:10:23 believe in paying as you go.
11:10:26 We're talking about borrowing -- I may go over the
11:10:30 five minutes, if I may have that.
11:10:32 If not, cancel me out, but I would like to have an
11:10:35 extension because my mind is catching up to my
11:10:37 little body.
11:10:38 So when you do these things and you get energized
11:10:41 and these things energize me because it's
11:10:45 something that is almost impossible, but it has
11:10:47 some ray of light to making it work.
11:10:49 When you borrow $195 million, and you finance it
11:10:53 for 30 years, guess what that payment is going to
11:10:57 be?
11:10:58 $175 million in interest.
11:10:59 Or roughly.
11:11:01 If you go at 4%, then you get 20% less of that
11:11:05 money.
11:11:05 So these things that come to my mind are things I
11:11:11 like to work out, because I think to creative
11:11:14 thinking, like I know you have, because you're
11:11:17 much smarter than I am, Sonya, all of you, in
11:11:20 fact, I'm a little guy here thinking out of the
11:11:22 box, but I really believe that we could work this
11:11:26 out and do it without borrowing the money.
11:11:31 Head start of 20, $25 million, which I think we
11:11:34 can -- because you're not going to start this
11:11:36 tomorrow.
11:11:37 If this Council were to pass this today, it ain't
11:11:39 going to be tomorrow.
11:11:40 It will be at least a year from now.
11:11:42 So you put that money in one year and wait one
11:11:45 more year, and all this is based on gamble and
11:11:48 percentages.
11:11:49 This doesn't happen every year.
11:11:51 Maybe it happens to some degree, but not to this
11:11:54 degree.
11:11:54 But never does that happen for a long time.
11:11:58 We haven't had a drought in the City of Tampa in
11:12:00 eight or nine years.
11:12:01 But believe me, what el niño gives, La Niña takes
11:12:06 away.
11:12:06 And that's going to come, because that's how the
11:12:09 Earth rotates and it works.
11:12:11 So when these things happen, I firmly believe that
11:12:15 you can generate these funds and grants.
11:12:19 I've heard through sources, oh, if you don't do it
11:12:22 this way, you'll lose your grant.
11:12:24 Let me explain something.
11:12:25 Grant is your money, my money, the taxpayers'
11:12:27 money, that we give to the federal government, to
11:12:29 the state, to S.W.F.W.M.D. and to others.
11:12:32 Why can't they make it, instead of giving you
11:12:37 whatever they are going to give you, 15 or 20
11:12:38 million, that they do in increments every year?
11:12:41 It is the same money.
11:12:42 They are not going to lose anything.
11:12:44 In fact, they'll make money because they'll get
11:12:46 the interest on the money.
11:12:47 We're not.
11:12:48 If they were to slice it up in a yearly payment to
11:12:50 you, I think you can work on this on projections
11:12:53 of the city, what's the first need?
11:12:56 Do that one.
11:12:57 And I understand that what about me?
11:12:59 Listen, everybody is going to get it.
11:13:01 Just going to take a little longer.
11:13:03 The City of Tampa wasn't built overnight, and
11:13:07 hopefully we can solve it to make it a better
11:13:10 place.
11:13:10 However, you have to realize that we're just a
11:13:13 little bit above sea level and water just about
11:13:15 all the way around us.
11:13:16 When the tide rises, the water comes in, there's
11:13:19 nowhere for the water to go.
11:13:21 No matter what size of pipes you put on, if it
11:13:24 can't go out somewhere, guess what happens?
11:13:26 You're still going to flood.
11:13:28 So I can't control nature.
11:13:30 No one can control nature, because it happens.
11:13:32 I want to solve some of the problem and to
11:13:35 Mr. Brad Baird's credit, he said it.
11:13:38 I can't solve it 100%.
11:13:40 And he's right.
11:13:41 He's 110% right.
11:13:43 And what I like to see somehow, get the
11:13:47 administration, this body together to work
11:13:49 something out, I hate to pay money on something
11:13:53 that I think, maybe I'm wrong, but that I think
11:13:56 can be done by not going out and bonding that
11:13:59 money.
11:13:59 Because you're going to lose, if you bond
11:14:02 $200 million, you're going to lose 5 million
11:14:05 paying somebody else to collect it.
11:14:07 That's the way it is.
11:14:08 That's the way the law is written.
11:14:10 I don't think that the law says you can't do it
11:14:13 any other way.
11:14:14 You can do it, I believe and maybe legal scholars
11:14:17 here can tell me you're wrong, Miranda.
11:14:22 If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
11:14:23 However, I think if you pass something that you
11:14:25 put on an extension, just like pass-through, just
11:14:28 like they do on water, you can save even at 16.1
11:14:31 million, you can save $323,800 on that one item
11:14:36 alone.
11:14:37 And if you save that money, and you do it on the
11:14:39 big bond, you save an additional 5.26 thousand
11:14:44 dollars or total savings of roughly $5.3 million.
11:14:48 You put that to start plus some of the BP money,
11:14:53 plus some of Mayor Buckhorn is doing a fantastic
11:14:56 job in bringing more money into the neighborhood
11:14:58 every year, and you have a fantastic head start to
11:15:01 get something done to this city so we can solve
11:15:04 some of the problems.
11:15:05 You're not going to solve 100% of them, but you'll
11:15:08 stop.
11:15:09 The car won't flood at the engine.
11:15:12 It will just go to the hubcap.
11:15:13 [ LAUGHTER ]
11:15:14 I'm going to be straight up with people.
11:15:16 That's how it is.
11:15:17 The hubcap you can drive, but the engine you
11:15:20 can't.
11:15:20 That's my statement, and I don't know how to work
11:15:24 this whole thing up.
11:15:25 That's up to all of us and all of them.
11:15:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Miranda.
11:15:32 I think after we hear from the public, maybe we
11:15:34 need to make a recommendation to staff to come
11:15:37 back with a different funding method.
11:15:41 We don't have to move forward with this today, and
11:15:45 I agree with you.
11:15:46 So maybe --
11:15:51 >> Would you mind if I give you for additional
11:15:53 information purposes, after hearing your
11:15:56 statement, Councilman Miranda, just a bit of
11:15:58 clarification as far as the analysis was
11:16:01 concerned.
11:16:03 We did contemplate the tax collector route versus
11:16:08 billing, and from that perspective, what it does,
11:16:11 if we do move forward in finance and pay go is a
11:16:15 different thing, and I'll let my colleagues talk
11:16:18 about the impact on being able to deliver projects
11:16:20 on a pay-go basis, but if we're talking about
11:16:23 financing one versus the other as part of the
11:16:29 property tax bill versus on a monthly statement,
11:16:33 then it impacts the credit rating on the financing
11:16:37 vehicle, which increases the cost to the city on
11:16:41 the actual financing.
11:16:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: People -- they are going to get
11:16:50 you one way or another.
11:16:53 >>SONYA LITTLE: Exactly.
11:16:53 That part was contemplated.
11:16:55 And then part number two, in order to mitigate the
11:16:58 cost, instead of taking the full $200 million in
11:17:02 financing, we did stagger it between -- assume we
11:17:07 would stagger it between two different bond issues
11:17:10 and also using a bank line of credit at a
11:17:13 short-term rate of roughly 5 or less to fill the
11:17:17 gaps so we're not doing $200 million in one fell
11:17:20 swoop, because we wouldn't be able to spend it all
11:17:23 in one fell swoop.
11:17:24 It's financing a program with a construction
11:17:27 period of about five years.
11:17:29 And so those two components, I did want to make
11:17:32 clear that we did consider those two components,
11:17:34 but respectively really understand where you're
11:17:38 coming from, but those were the factors considered
11:17:43 when we're talking about financing.
11:17:45 Pay-go is a whole different story.
11:17:48 If you want the projects done now, within a
11:17:51 three- to five-year period, this is our only
11:17:54 option.
11:17:54 We have to use some type of financing vehicle to
11:17:57 get.
11:17:59 Pay-go will not get us there.
11:18:01 Stretch it over 30 years, that's a different
11:18:03 story.
11:18:04 Pay-go may work.
11:18:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: Additional comments?
11:18:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
11:18:12 I was going to say this.
11:18:16 You can't spend that kind of interest money
11:18:21 because you're not getting your value on your
11:18:23 return, even though it's 30 years.
11:18:25 And if you go pay-go, you can do projects one at a
11:18:28 time and continue because that money is still
11:18:31 going to be coming in.
11:18:32 I'm not counting on the BP money, but counting on
11:18:36 that portion of the 5 million that you're saving,
11:18:39 5 million that you've got -- I don't know what the
11:18:42 administration is willing to do or not do, maybe
11:18:44 they are willing to do none, maybe they are
11:18:46 willing to do more than I talked about.
11:18:48 I never talked to the Mayor about this or anyone
11:18:50 else.
11:18:50 I think there is a way of doing this thing that
11:18:56 will certainly save money.
11:18:57 I'm all about saving money.
11:19:00 I call myself EL cheapo, which means tight WAD.
11:19:07 [ LAUGHTER ]
11:19:07 That's just me.
11:19:09 I like to see things done in a mannerism where
11:19:13 they are completed and you start another project.
11:19:15 You said it right.
11:19:17 You can't do all these projects and start them all
11:19:19 at the same time.
11:19:19 You'd have gridlock throughout the city.
11:19:21 Nobody could move.
11:19:22 No matter if you had all the money or not the
11:19:24 money, you still can't do it.
11:19:27 Why not spread it out and get it done without
11:19:29 paying $175 million in interest?
11:19:32 That's all I'm saying.
11:19:34 >>SONYA LITTLE: Yes, sir.
11:19:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
11:19:35 Ms. Montelione, you had a comment and then the
11:19:42 public --
11:19:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I want to say before the public
11:19:45 speaks, and as we do with quasi-judicial hearings
11:19:49 and testimony, some of the letters that I read
11:19:55 ventured into territory that has nothing to do
11:19:58 with the stormwater assessment.
11:19:59 And one in particular really bothered me.
11:20:06 It's someone who says that we are voting on our
11:20:10 own pay raises.
11:20:11 And I would like to say that this is not what this
11:20:16 is about.
11:20:16 Another one mentioned something about greed and it
11:20:22 says, mismanagement.
11:20:27 And I would venture to say that the staff members
11:20:32 of the City of Tampa are some of the most
11:20:36 dedicated and thoughtful people that I've had the
11:20:40 pleasure to know.
11:20:41 So if anyone who is going to comment ventures into
11:20:44 that territory, it's really not going to help your
11:20:48 argument.
11:20:48 I just want everybody to keep that in mind.
11:20:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
11:20:54 Let me set the parameters before we move forward
11:20:56 with public comment.
11:20:57 We're speaking on 65, 66, and 67.
11:21:00 You have three minutes.
11:21:02 Now, if you start talking about a dog-and-pony
11:21:06 show, I'll turn your mike off and ask you to sit
11:21:08 down.
11:21:09 We want to make that very, very clear.
11:21:11 65, 66, and 67.
11:21:14 You have three minutes.
11:21:16 >> One clarification, so we're consolidating three
11:21:19 public hearings at three minutes instead of three
11:21:22 minutes for each public hearing.
11:21:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Correct.
11:21:24 All right.
11:21:26 First speaker.
11:21:29 Please state your name and address.
11:21:33 You have three minutes.
11:21:33 >> Mr. Chairman, members of the City Council, Ron
11:21:36 Weaver, 401 East Jackson Street, across the
11:21:39 street, and also a home in South Tampa, 4403 West
11:21:42 Dale.
11:21:43 Three weeks ago, I could not get into work because
11:21:46 of the flooding.
11:21:47 My grandsons live on a pond in North Tampa, but
11:21:52 I'm still not believing that because of that we
11:21:54 should say whatever today when it comes time to
11:21:56 fairness.
11:21:57 And there are five kinds of fairness today with
11:22:03 respect this issue has more potential of unifying
11:22:05 and dividing us perhaps than any issue I've seen
11:22:07 in years.
11:22:08 It needs to unify us.
11:22:10 Number one is timing.
11:22:11 I think the timing of this much change needs to be
11:22:14 phased in at least three more years, considering
11:22:16 what is at stake.
11:22:17 Number two, the difference between a
11:22:19 million-dollar condo and $100,000 cost, the
11:22:22 imperviousness, the imperviousness, the
11:22:26 imperviousness is not fair.
11:22:29 If you include reasonable property tax as a
11:22:32 supplement, you need to assess four or five
11:22:35 different ways that are fair to everybody who has
11:22:37 $100,000 house or a million-dollar condo and
11:22:40 whether they are located in one area of south
11:22:42 Tampa or East Tampa or North Tampa in a way that
11:22:44 also cuts along, not just the plain of -- to ramp
11:22:48 it up and the fairness to those who have
11:22:51 differentiations in value, not just coincidence of
11:22:53 impervious surface, although I know the
11:22:56 correlation, and I understand the legal
11:22:57 correlation.
11:22:58 I believe that brad and Sonya have done a
11:23:00 magnificent job.
11:23:01 You have no better folks in the country to do this
11:23:03 for you than they have just done.
11:23:06 Number one, it's short on time.
11:23:07 Please ramp it up over three more years.
11:23:10 Number two, fairly find a way, maybe property tax,
11:23:13 maybe you use something like the assessment we
11:23:15 used this morning.
11:23:16 I drive in.
11:23:17 I see a gentleman picking up the trash by my
11:23:20 office building across the street.
11:23:21 Today you approved $1.8 million assessment of
11:23:24 downtown Tampa.
11:23:25 I think you need to take the six or eight hundred
11:23:27 businesses that are most affected and the six or
11:23:29 eight hundred homes most affected by this
11:23:33 particular calamity we had three Mondays ago and
11:23:37 then two days later and then four days later and
11:23:37 specially assess them the way you specially assess
11:23:41 downtown for its great needs, like cleaning up the
11:23:41 street as I drove in this morning.
11:23:42 Number four, the CIT tax, we divided up four
11:23:46 different ways to pay for the stuff we had to pay
11:23:49 for it together.
11:23:50 Number one, little football, little controversial.
11:23:53 It passed.
11:23:53 There were a lot of schools, because the school
11:23:56 referendum passed six months before.
11:23:59 We didn't have the courage to pass a school
11:24:00 referendum for money, but we did have one to pass
11:24:03 for football, plus schools, plus public works,
11:24:05 plus some roads.
11:24:06 I think we need to assess each other fairly on all
11:24:09 four or five plains.
11:24:10 Time, not regressive, everybody who really
11:24:14 benefits pays more, and number four, we unify with
11:24:17 this issue instead of dividing.
11:24:19 Thank you.
11:24:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
11:24:21 [ APPLAUSE ]
11:24:27 >> Good morning.
11:24:28 My name is clay Watkins.
11:24:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ladies and gentlemen, you know
11:24:31 your patience runs thin after a while.
11:24:33 We have to be making, interrupting people to ask
11:24:37 you to be courteous, we'll end up ending this
11:24:43 thing sooner than you want it to end.
11:24:45 So I want everybody to have an opportunity to
11:24:48 speak, pro or con, and those in the audience, want
11:24:53 to you respect.
11:24:53 We can find a solution to this.
11:25:01 And that is 12:00.
11:25:02 That means we adjourn.
11:25:05 And you'll be sitting in that line.
11:25:09 We have 18 people down stairs in the Mascotte
11:25:10 Room.
11:25:11 So don't put me in that position to move in that
11:25:16 direction.
11:25:16 Go ahead, sir.
11:25:18 >> Clay walk-up.
11:25:19 117 south Clark avenue.
11:25:21 I apologize for speaking out of turn earlier.
11:25:23 I didn't know how you all work.
11:25:25 Obviously, we do have problems with the storm
11:25:27 sewers and we can't wave a magic wand and make it
11:25:31 go away.
11:25:31 I appreciate you finding ways for a resolution to
11:25:37 the problem.
11:25:38 For those who say my street doesn't flood, we
11:25:40 shouldn't pay for it, we are a community, we are a
11:25:42 city.
11:25:43 This is a citywide problem.
11:25:44 We all need to take care of it.
11:25:46 My community happens to be low crime but I still
11:25:48 pay for police even though I don't need as much as
11:25:50 other parts of town may.
11:25:52 We do need to resolve the problem.
11:25:54 Picture here shows my street.
11:25:56 This was not taken on the first of August.
11:25:58 This happens multiple times a year my street
11:26:03 floods like this.
11:26:03 The storm sewers work in reverse in my
11:26:06 neighborhood.
11:26:07 They back up such a force they blow the manhole
11:26:10 covers off the storm sewers and I've seen water
11:26:13 rise up four feet out of the ground like an
11:26:15 artesian well.
11:26:17 It's antiquated, overburden and needs to be
11:26:21 repaired.
11:26:22 On my street, south Clark, is one of the major
11:26:25 sanitary sewer lines of Tampa.
11:26:27 I've looked down into this manhole when the city
11:26:29 was out there working on it.
11:26:31 It is a huge flow of raw sewage running under my
11:26:34 street.
11:26:34 You get floodwater above that raw sewage and you
11:26:36 have a chance of that backing up, inundating the
11:26:40 sanitary sewers, and then you've also got the risk
11:26:42 of that sewage getting out into the neighborhood
11:26:45 and doing a lot more damage than the 12 homes that
11:26:47 were flooded on August 1st.
11:26:49 You've got raw sewage throughout the entire south
11:26:51 Tampa neighborhood.
11:26:52 So if, and I hope to God that you all do get the
11:26:55 financing together to resolve these problems.
11:26:57 I hope that south Clark and Cleveland will be a
11:27:01 priority repair and addressed area, because it
11:27:05 does have more than just home flooding issues.
11:27:09 There is a health issue here with that sanitary
11:27:11 sewer line running right underneath the street.
11:27:14 So I beg you to find the funding.
11:27:16 I'm willing to pay it.
11:27:19 I hope others are.
11:27:20 We need to get this resolved.
11:27:22 Let's make the city a better place.
11:27:23 Thank you.
11:27:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
11:27:24 Next.
11:27:25 >> Good morning, honorable City Council members.
11:27:34 My name is Deboshi Goche.
11:27:39 I reside with my wife only at 2612 east -- road,
11:27:47 Tampa, Florida.
11:27:48 And I have a son who is in college, but,
11:27:51 unfortunately, both my wife and myself, we are
11:27:57 disabled and we are on fixed income.
11:27:59 We have been to this country since -- we raised
11:28:08 two children.
11:28:09 One is a daughter.
11:28:10 She is on her own.
11:28:12 My son is in college right now and I'm supporting
11:28:14 him.
11:28:15 My wife and I, since my wife and I both are
11:28:19 disabled, we receive our SSI, which is a very --
11:28:29 income.
11:28:29 I appreciate the stormwater thing, but I also want
11:28:38 to impress upon you, all of you, impose a great
11:28:45 hardship, financial hardship to us, and I'm sure
11:28:51 to other people who are in my shoes.
11:28:52 So I object for myself and for my family for this
11:29:03 increase $36 to $82.
11:29:09 I rest my case, your honor.
11:29:27 >> Thank you.
11:29:27 My name is Carl W. Cosio.
11:29:32 My family has been in Tampa over a hundred years.
11:29:37 I'm upset since Nick Nuccio left, you know what
11:29:44 I'm talking about Charlie.
11:29:45 I have no grievance with you people.
11:29:47 I wish the best of you in life, but I am shocked
11:29:50 and upset how we have misused our money since Nick
11:29:54 Nuccio left and Dick Greco.
11:29:57 You people have squandered our tax dollars for
11:30:01 other needs instead of using it for the needs you
11:30:04 collected.
11:30:05 Very good example about this tax, about the water
11:30:07 problem and the pothole problem.
11:30:09 In 1967, you raised the sales tax for gasoline a
11:30:13 penny.
11:30:14 You know that, Charlie.
11:30:19 1967.
11:30:21 In '85, you pumped -- and this is not an
11:30:26 exaggeration.
11:30:27 Go to marathon and Philips petroleum down there,
11:30:30 you have pumped over 5 trillion gallons of diesel
11:30:34 and gasoline.
11:30:35 One penny of that is $500 billion.
11:30:39 Where did that go between 1967 and 1985?
11:30:44 From 1985, you raised it again.
11:30:49 To this year.
11:30:51 Since then, you pumped more than
11:30:57 50 trillion gallons of diesel and gasoline because
11:30:59 I know.
11:30:59 My brother worked at the refinery.
11:31:01 He's one of the best people there.
11:31:03 Worked with Joe Garcia, Port Authority lawyer.
11:31:06 You know who I'm talking about, Charlie.
11:31:08 Great mathematician, my brother.
11:31:09 Very special person at the University of Florida.
11:31:12 We figured it all out.
11:31:15 I'm not educated, but I kept the numbers with me.
11:31:17 Where did that money go?
11:31:21 You don't know.
11:31:23 It's like Jesse James robbing the bank.
11:31:26 I don't know what happened to the money.
11:31:27 Now you want to raise the sales tax again, and
11:31:30 we're going to pump another 50 billion, trillion
11:31:33 gallons of diesel and gasoline?
11:31:35 Where is it going?
11:31:37 We're talking about trillions and you can't even
11:31:41 keep counting.
11:31:42 There's no mathematical formula.
11:31:44 We've collected more money than ten cities around
11:31:47 the state.
11:31:48 And we can't even fix a $10,000 pothole.
11:31:52 Very good example of how you create our streets.
11:31:56 I'm upset with what's going on with our money.
11:32:03 I want the Justice Department to come in here and
11:32:05 find out what happened to our money.
11:32:07 The Justice Department instead of the police
11:32:08 department mistreating you about illegal bicycles.
11:32:11 No headlights and gets a ticket, I want to know
11:32:16 what the Justice Department will do about our
11:32:18 money.
11:32:18 I want to ask for an authorization to do it.
11:32:21 I don't think you should raise any more taxes
11:32:25 until you can find out what happened, 150 billion
11:32:28 trillion dollars about this.
11:32:29 This is nothing but Jesse James taxing by a
11:32:33 government that can't protect our taxes.
11:32:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, sir.
11:32:36 That's it.
11:32:38 >> I want to see you personally, Charlie, about
11:32:40 this, because you've been the longest member on
11:32:42 the City Council.
11:32:42 I like you.
11:32:43 You don't like me -- it's true.
11:32:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
11:32:52 The next speaker.
11:32:56 >> I want to show one thing.
11:32:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: No.
11:32:59 >> This is how I feel our taxes are being used.
11:33:01 I want this all over the --
11:33:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Remove him.
11:33:06 You're wasting time.
11:33:14 >> I'm going to run against you Charlie.
11:33:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I hope you do.
11:33:18 >> God bless you all.
11:33:19 No, no, no to sales tax.
11:33:27 >> Good morning.
11:33:29 Dave Caban.
11:33:32 I am a native of Tampa.
11:33:34 Grew up in East Tampa and been a resident of West
11:33:36 Tampa for the last 15 years.
11:33:38 I am on the Board of Directors for the south Tampa
11:33:40 chamber, I'm going to read a letter from our board
11:33:43 as well as our members from the chamber in regards
11:33:46 to the stormwater assessment.
11:33:48 On behalf of more than 500 business members,
11:33:50 nonprofits and associations who are part of the
11:33:53 south Tampa Chamber of Commerce, we would like to
11:33:54 encourage the Tampa City Council to vote to
11:33:57 approve the increase in stormwater fees.
11:33:58 It is evident that the recent flooding has a
11:34:01 direct impact on the businesses and residents of
11:34:03 our community.
11:34:05 Something must be done to improve these
11:34:06 conditions.
11:34:07 This is not a south Tampa problem.
11:34:09 This is a whole Tampa Bay problem.
11:34:11 Through the public outreach, the south Tampa
11:34:14 chamber was able to speak to several members of
11:34:16 our association.
11:34:17 They were directly impacted.
11:34:19 What these business owners had mentioned was a
11:34:22 reported loss of direct business.
11:34:25 But what was most concerning to them was the
11:34:28 employees who could not come to work that day or
11:34:31 could not be paid for the time that they were
11:34:33 supposed to work who lost income and wages.
11:34:35 We have to come together as a community to
11:34:38 actually create opportunities for people who are
11:34:40 on fixed incomes or hourly wages to not lose that
11:34:44 opportunity.
11:34:45 As a community, we should do that.
11:34:47 These lost wages far surpass the amount of these
11:34:50 property owners would be paying with the proposed
11:34:52 increase in assessments.
11:34:54 Even if a resident was not affected by the recent
11:34:59 flooding, our citizens from across the city need
11:35:01 to be able to drive to other streets to get to
11:35:03 work, schools, grocery stores and pharmacies.
11:35:06 We see all of these roads as pass-throughs through
11:35:09 these intersections to get to where we need to go.
11:35:12 South Tampa is in the heart of Tampa Bay, and our
11:35:14 roads are used for commuters from all over the
11:35:16 city.
11:35:16 Tampa, Hillsborough County, to gain access to
11:35:20 downtown, Westshore, St. Petersburg, MacDill Air
11:35:21 Force Base, et cetera.
11:35:23 Most alarming during the recent storms was the
11:35:26 closure of the Gandy bridge, effectively cutting
11:35:31 off major evacuation routes.
11:35:33 Now we're in hurricane season with another
11:35:35 hurricane potentially going to hit the State of
11:35:37 Florida.
11:35:38 Those people may not be able to evacuate.
11:35:40 Obviously, this is not going to be able to change
11:35:42 today but I do think we have to take an assessment
11:35:46 to figure out how we can help these people in the
11:35:48 future.
11:35:48 We greatly appreciate your time and hope that you
11:35:50 will approve some of these assessment fees to get
11:35:53 the job done.
11:35:53 Thank you.
11:35:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
11:35:54 Next.
11:35:59 >> I'm Warren Dixon.
11:36:00 Some of you know me.
11:36:01 I am an attorney, however, I'm here in my own
11:36:04 capacity and not representing any board or
11:36:06 organization that I might be a member of.
11:36:08 I live in Tampa Palms.
11:36:10 You're considering imposition of ad valorem taxes
11:36:16 to fund the stormwater improvements.
11:36:19 I'm going to address not the service assessment,
11:36:23 but only the capital improvement assessment.
11:36:26 I agree that there needs to be increases in the
11:36:29 service assessment and we all benefit from it.
11:36:31 But state law requires that before you impose ad
11:36:38 valorem -- non-ad valorem taxes, all of the
11:36:42 properties that you're taxing have to benefit from
11:36:45 that.
11:36:45 Tampa Palms and there may be other communities
11:36:49 near where I am, has 104 stormwater ponds built at
11:36:57 the expense of the property owners.
11:37:01 70% of those are funded by and maintained by the
11:37:04 CDD.
11:37:06 We pay property taxes to maintain those.
11:37:09 If the ponds are interconnected by drains, and
11:37:13 they are, only those that run under a street are
11:37:16 maintained by the City of Tampa.
11:37:18 The rest are maintained by the CDD.
11:37:21 I would suggest to you that the 10% rebate that we
11:37:29 get on our fees for having those stormwater ponds,
11:37:35 that $3 a year, doesn't really amount to very much
11:37:40 and that we are not benefiting.
11:37:43 In fact, we are helping the city at our expense by
11:37:49 having built our stormwater systems in the first
11:37:53 place, funding them out of the CDD bonds, those
11:37:59 are now paid off, and by uniformly establishing
11:38:07 the same assessments based on size, the ESU, you
11:38:13 are inappropriately punishing, and this is where
11:38:18 it comes from, Lisa, the people who already spent
11:38:21 a lot of money and have, therefore, a much lesser
11:38:26 impact on the City of Tampa stormwater such that
11:38:33 the benefit to such communities is so attenuated
11:38:37 it may be nothing in imposition of ad valorem
11:38:40 taxes for the capital improvements elsewhere are
11:38:43 not appropriate and may be illegal.
11:38:45 Thank you.
11:38:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
11:38:47 Next.
11:38:53 >> Hello.
11:38:54 Phil Garcia.
11:38:55 7207 South Westshore Boulevard.
11:38:57 I've come to you to talk about the flooding that
11:39:05 we have not just in the recent storm, but here is
11:39:10 the last -- of the last year.
11:39:13 This is in front of my house.
11:39:17 When this happens, I get water -- excuse me.
11:39:19 I'm sorry.
11:39:19 I get water underneath my home.
11:39:21 Sideways.
11:39:23 I get water underneath my home, and it never goes
11:39:28 away.
11:39:29 Six months out of the year we have standing water
11:39:31 under my house.
11:39:32 Me and my wife, we have both become ill.
11:39:35 I've talked to many, many people, and it just came
11:39:38 to the point that the people helping me asked me
11:39:40 to contact the Mayor's office and the media.
11:39:45 I didn't think it should come to this point.
11:39:47 We've been paying for stormwater recovery since I
11:39:50 think 2001.
11:39:51 Unfortunately, it has never come to Port Tampa,
11:39:54 city of Port Tampa, nor did I see us represented
11:39:58 on that map.
11:39:59 You know, I'm at a point where our health is in
11:40:05 danger because of the standing water.
11:40:07 I get promises but nothing gets done.
11:40:12 And this has been happening for the last three
11:40:15 years.
11:40:15 This is a river that runs down the street, not
11:40:20 only -- not only when it rains like it has been,
11:40:25 but every time we get a significant amount of rain
11:40:27 and it happened -- Mr. Cohen, I sent these to your
11:40:33 office.
11:40:33 You've seen most of them.
11:40:35 I need some help.
11:40:37 My neighborhood needs some help.
11:40:39 You know, nobody knows what to do.
11:40:42 We call in.
11:40:43 Stormwater says they'll help us, but they don't.
11:40:46 Three blocks behind my house, they said that -- I
11:40:50 met with an engineer from the city.
11:40:52 They sent him out.
11:40:53 And a lady picked up her dog and said she
11:40:57 witnessed an alligator living in the water of the
11:40:59 retention ditches that never go anywhere.
11:41:03 I don't have any answers.
11:41:07 I don't mind paying more money.
11:41:10 None of us do, but we need Port Tampa addressed.
11:41:13 Thank you.
11:41:17 >> Thank you very much.
11:41:17 Next.
11:41:21 >> Good morning, Council.
11:41:23 Steve Michelini here on behalf of the SoHo
11:41:26 business alliance.
11:41:27 In a regularly scheduled meeting, the membership
11:41:31 voted unanimously to endorse a pending stormwater
11:41:35 assessment fee.
11:41:36 We believe in order to address the historic
11:41:38 inadequacies of the existing stormwater system,
11:41:41 facilities need sufficient funding and needs to be
11:41:44 applied correctly to alleviate this problem.
11:41:49 Indeed, recently, the 35 businesses along Howard
11:41:51 from Kennedy to Bayshore were all impacted and
11:41:55 represented by the alliance and they could not
11:41:58 conduct their commercial activities due to the
11:42:00 flooding.
11:42:01 Our businesses found that employees could not get
11:42:04 to work.
11:42:05 Customers could not avail themselves of the
11:42:07 businesses.
11:42:08 The businesses had to close, and all too many
11:42:11 motorists were stranded in and around the South
11:42:14 Howard area.
11:42:15 Businesses experienced thousands of dollars in
11:42:18 lost revenue.
11:42:18 Employees lost wages.
11:42:19 Properties were damaged as well as city streets
11:42:21 and utilities.
11:42:22 The total cost of the losses of these have yet to
11:42:24 be realized.
11:42:25 However, immediate attention to the matter is
11:42:28 critical to the recovery and restoration of normal
11:42:30 business affairs.
11:42:31 With fees like this, good stewardship and it is
11:42:35 important to be fiscally responsible of every
11:42:38 dollar and the mantra with which we should endorse
11:42:41 this fee.
11:42:42 We encourage the city to set a reasonable
11:42:44 timetable where the fee would no longer be
11:42:46 required.
11:42:47 Granted, old utilities need immediate attention.
11:42:51 However, this should not be a case forever.
11:42:53 At some point, the increased fee should no longer
11:42:55 be necessary as the issue should be addressed and
11:42:57 resolved.
11:42:58 By setting a reasonable timetable, by revising and
11:43:02 revisiting the fee, you safeguard the public trust
11:43:06 and do not become dependent upon this to satisfy
11:43:08 future city budgets.
11:43:10 As an association dedicated to improving the life
11:43:12 and lifestyle in Tampa, we respectfully request
11:43:16 the need for these fees and endorse them with a
11:43:21 condition that they have a specific timetable and
11:43:22 a sunset.
11:43:23 And a measurable results be attached to them.
11:43:25 Additionally, the fee should be revisited and
11:43:28 audited to ensure that the fees and funds are
11:43:31 addressing the needs as they are specified.
11:43:33 Specifically, a 30-year term allows the city to
11:43:38 rely on that business, rely on those fees and make
11:43:42 it part of the budget.
11:43:44 If you set five-year increment reviews of this
11:43:48 where you determine City Council through a regular
11:43:51 budget process as you do with other budgets, you
11:43:53 determine when those fees should be expired or
11:43:56 when they -- or if, in fact, they should be
11:43:59 renewed. That puts the burden back on the city
11:44:01 and back on the administration to prove that they
11:44:04 are doing exactly what they said they were going
11:44:06 to do.
11:44:06 So the assessment we're in favor of.
11:44:08 The process of how that's collected and how it's
11:44:11 renewed, we would like to see that revisited in
11:44:13 the -- and the Council to weigh in on that issue.
11:44:16 Thank you.
11:44:20 >> Good morning, City Council.
11:44:21 My name is Marlin Anderson.
11:44:22 5007 West San Jose Street.
11:44:26 President of the Sunset Park Homeowners
11:44:28 Association.
11:44:29 I'm not here to speak on their behalf because we
11:44:32 have not taken official position on this issue.
11:44:34 However, I did just meet with the board, and I got
11:44:37 a consensus from the board that they really favor
11:44:41 increasing the stormwater fee that we're paying.
11:44:43 I can tell you on the way over here, it rained
11:44:47 hard.
11:44:47 I was driving my car.
11:44:49 Here is my umbrella.
11:44:50 I used that to get from my car over to the
11:44:53 building here.
11:44:54 I think all of us are a little exhausted with all
11:44:59 the rain we just went through.
11:45:01 We had another board meeting I was going to attend
11:45:03 a couple of weeks ago.
11:45:04 It rained.
11:45:05 I thought, geez, I want to get to my car, you
11:45:07 know, it's like, I don't want to get my car
11:45:10 flooded out.
11:45:10 Then I get the Chairman of the board says, you
11:45:12 know, Marlin, let's cancel this board meeting.
11:45:15 This is another board that I'm on.
11:45:16 Because it's like this is too much.
11:45:19 This is just a regular rainstorm.
11:45:21 This is not any big deal, but it was enough to get
11:45:24 us worrying, right?
11:45:25 So because of all this, I really am so happy that
11:45:30 you guys are going to do something about this.
11:45:31 I really am.
11:45:33 Brad Baird and Jean Duncan and also Alexander
11:45:37 Awad, I applaud what they are doing because we've
11:45:41 talked about the flooding let's say on Dale Mabry
11:45:43 and Henderson for decades, and nothing has ever
11:45:46 been done.
11:45:47 Something is going to finally get done.
11:45:49 Here is what I'm going to say, and I thought I
11:45:52 would never say this to City Council, but here it
11:45:55 goes.
11:45:55 City Council, please raise my taxes.
11:45:58 Please raise my taxes to pay for this stormwater
11:46:05 improvement that we so desperately need.
11:46:08 Thank you very much.
11:46:12 >> Thank you.
11:46:13 Next.
11:46:13 Good morning.
11:46:19 >> Good morning.
11:46:38 >> Hi.
11:46:39 I'm Joe Fortin.
11:46:41 Reside at 1211 east Idlewild, representing Hampton
11:46:45 terrace neighborhood.
11:46:46 The maps that I got from the EPA office from the
11:46:53 Hillsborough County, the first map I want you to
11:46:57 look at is the one that shows if you look at the
11:47:01 Hillsborough River, where it says area flooded
11:47:03 1960, that's from hurricane Donna.
11:47:07 That was the last major hurricane to hit this
11:47:10 area.
11:47:11 You can see the significant flooding in the
11:47:14 Seminole Heights area.
11:47:16 By the way, that's why I put this slide up here,
11:47:18 because I'm only focusing on Seminole Heights.
11:47:21 That's my only concern.
11:47:22 There is a reason why they call it the heights.
11:47:26 Obviously, these maps also show square feet above
11:47:29 sea level.
11:47:31 I know it's kind of small, but you're looking at
11:47:34 50, 40, some areas as much as 60 feet as you get
11:47:39 into East Tampa above sea level.
11:47:41 That's why they are the heights.
11:47:44 With the flooding you had from hurricane Donna, if
11:47:48 you look at the second map, the Army Corps of
11:47:51 engineers came in after Donna and put the
11:47:54 reservoir up in North Tampa to alleviate the
11:47:59 Hillsborough River from cresting in the future.
11:48:02 The second map is from hurricane Helena from '85.
11:48:09 This was done in '89.
11:48:11 You can see that the river did not flood with
11:48:16 Helena.
11:48:16 The reason why is because the valve was opened,
11:48:19 the river flooded the wetlands in North Tampa,
11:48:24 which are -- that's what it's designed to do.
11:48:27 My main concern, my main objective -- objective to
11:48:35 this is, you know, based on the fact that we're so
11:48:37 far above sea level, we don't have a flood
11:48:41 problem.
11:48:43 I live right down the street from Lake Roberta.
11:48:46 Six years ago, with a grant, they put all new
11:48:50 drains in lake Roberta.
11:48:52 We, as a neighborhood, we rake it every time we do
11:48:55 lake cleanup the first week of the month, keep the
11:48:58 drains clean.
11:48:59 It drains.
11:49:01 This past rain that we had in August, we didn't
11:49:06 have any flooding.
11:49:07 There was water in the road, but it drained.
11:49:10 In my time, I just want to say, I'd like you to
11:49:15 exclude southeast Seminole Heights from this study
11:49:20 area.
11:49:21 And the fact that there's nothing on hear saying
11:49:24 what they are going to do to it either.
11:49:27 That information is not done yet.
11:49:28 Your representative told you that from the city
11:49:32 that they are still working on it.
11:49:33 Thank you.
11:49:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Montelione.
11:49:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
11:49:40 I got an e-mail from Neil Mobley in reference to
11:49:43 my e-mail yesterday, copied below, here is a photo
11:49:45 of the street in front of my house taken just now
11:49:48 on August 15, 2015.
11:49:49 I'm told that there is a vote scheduled for
11:49:53 August 27th on stormwater plan.
11:49:55 I support stormwater improvements.
11:49:57 My request is that improved drainage on Roberta
11:50:00 circle in Seminole Heights be included in the
11:50:03 plan.
11:50:03 Roberta circle -- encircles a stormwater retention
11:50:08 pond.
11:50:08 In heavy rains, the pond overflows at its eastern
11:50:11 edge and floods the street to a depth to 12 to
11:50:13 18 inches.
11:50:14 The deepest point happens to be at the end of my
11:50:18 driveway.
11:50:18 Thank you for considering my request.
11:50:20 So I'm not sure how far your house is --
11:50:23 >> I'm sorry I didn't clarify.
11:50:25 We really don't have a problem with the service
11:50:27 assessment.
11:50:27 The service assessment we're all for.
11:50:30 We totally understand that everyone needs upkeep
11:50:34 and maintenance on the current stormwater.
11:50:36 The new improvement assessment, there is nothing
11:50:39 else that you can do to the city, to lake Roberta,
11:50:43 to improve the drainage.
11:50:45 They put all new pipes all the way to the
11:50:47 Hillsborough River.
11:50:48 It's a direct shot through the river.
11:50:50 Unless you're going to eat up every road from lake
11:50:54 Roberta to the Hillsborough River and put bigger
11:50:59 pipes in, it's just not going to solve the
11:51:01 problem.
11:51:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I just wanted to point out that
11:51:06 you're experience may not be the experience --
11:51:08 >> I did talk to Neil.
11:51:09 The water did recede.
11:51:11 He didn't specify how long it sat.
11:51:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me interrupt you.
11:51:14 We thank you for your response but we need to move
11:51:17 on.
11:51:17 The next speaker.
11:51:20 >> Good morning.
11:51:21 Thank you very much for hearing everybody's
11:51:23 request.
11:51:24 My name is Larry Patterson.
11:51:25 1510 west park lane.
11:51:28 My property doesn't hardly flood.
11:51:31 I've known three people in the family that have
11:51:34 had three cars totaled because of water problems
11:51:36 in the south Tampa.
11:51:37 I know it is a major problem down there, every
11:51:39 time I drive down there, I find a different way
11:51:41 down.
11:51:42 You know, we've had the problem since Bob Buckhorn
11:51:45 was working for Sandy Freedman.
11:51:47 It's nothing new.
11:51:48 I'm sure you'll hear pros and cons on both sides
11:51:51 about how.
11:51:52 The gentleman sitting next to me, Mr. Michael
11:51:55 badgette, said basically the same thing.
11:51:58 The fees are going from $36 to $180 a year.
11:52:02 He says it's 500% increase.
11:52:04 And that's what -- maybe you can figure out a
11:52:07 different way to distribute the increase.
11:52:09 Instead of me -- if I had to pay a property tax,
11:52:12 everything is based on my property value, not on
11:52:14 tier one, tier two, tier three.
11:52:17 It's based on the property value.
11:52:18 So that's 36%, $36 is only, you know, 3.6% of my
11:52:25 income towards property taxes and now it's going
11:52:28 up to 180 to 18%.
11:52:31 That's a drastic increase.
11:52:33 What shocked me was when I asked the city, and
11:52:37 they've all been wonderful people.
11:52:39 They've all come out to try to address my ditch
11:52:42 along the property line, the outfalls, whatever
11:52:45 the cause, they put rocks there to try to
11:52:47 eliminate the determination of my property and
11:52:50 they have done a wonderful job, and they have all
11:52:52 been very helpful.
11:52:53 But what shocks me, as I'm looking through this
11:52:56 current service level of what you guys -- what the
11:52:59 department does with my money, I'm looking at only
11:53:02 3.5% of that money going to pumps.
11:53:06 And then I'm looking down here at miscellaneous at
11:53:08 19% of my budget that's going to whatever it goes
11:53:13 to.
11:53:14 I don't know.
11:53:14 I don't see anything on administrative cost, labor
11:53:19 cost, nothing else broken down.
11:53:20 I've called the city about this a number of times.
11:53:22 I've called the department about the stormwater
11:53:25 sewage a number of times.
11:53:26 You know, I can only see 3.5% for pumps and 6.4%
11:53:31 going up.
11:53:32 If everything went across the board, I don't know,
11:53:34 I would think I would need a lot more engineers
11:53:37 figuring out what's going on with the city and
11:53:40 maybe a different plan like Charlie Miranda said,
11:53:43 all these different options are out there.
11:53:45 I can only hope that you guys think about it and
11:53:49 move ahead in a positive manner.
11:53:50 And here is the gentleman's letter.
11:53:55 Michael -- I want to say it was -- Michael, here's
11:54:03 what he said.
11:54:04 Down here at the top, here is his proposal.
11:54:07 Basically along the same line, maybe you guys can
11:54:11 figure out a different way.
11:54:12 It would be nice and lovely.
11:54:14 I appreciate your time.
11:54:16 Thank you very much.
11:54:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
11:54:17 Next.
11:54:21 >> Hi.
11:54:21 My name is Patricia SEREMI.
11:54:24 I'm calling about the Town N' Country area.
11:54:26 West Hillsborough, west of the veterans
11:54:32 expressway, we get a lot of flooding on west
11:54:36 Hillsborough, Hanley road, and that area has not
11:54:39 been addressed.
11:54:40 In other words, if we go ahead and --
11:54:48 >> I think the area you're talking about is not in
11:54:50 the City of Tampa.
11:54:54 >> Well, we still have --
11:54:56 >> I'm sure you do.
11:54:57 You're welcome to tell us about it.
11:54:59 >> Right.
11:55:00 But I'm saying, this is also going to affect us,
11:55:03 too.
11:55:03 So, in other words, you're going to do the fees
11:55:08 which we're going to have to pay, and we're not
11:55:11 getting --
11:55:16 >> If I may, Hillsborough County raised their fees
11:55:18 a few months back.
11:55:21 So you're not going to pay what we're talking
11:55:23 about here today because you don't reside in the
11:55:26 City of Tampa.
11:55:27 You reside in unincorporated Hillsborough County.
11:55:31 You will only pay the fee that is levied by
11:55:33 unincorporated Hillsborough County.
11:55:36 The board of county commissioners is who you need
11:55:39 to speak to.
11:55:40 Even though your address may say Tampa, you're in
11:55:43 unincorporated Hillsborough County.
11:55:44 You will not be assessed what we're talking about
11:55:46 here today.
11:55:46 >> Okay.
11:55:47 That's good.
11:55:50 [ LAUGHTER ]
11:55:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next speaker.
11:55:52 >> Hello.
11:55:53 I'm her husband, by the way.
11:55:55 My name is Gene SEREMI.
11:55:57 I've been a lifelong resident again of Town N'
11:55:59 Country.
11:56:00 I know here what you guys just said.
11:56:04 We're not addressing the unincorporated area.
11:56:06 But I heard talk earlier about Drew Park, which is
11:56:09 only a mile away from where we are impacted.
11:56:11 That being said, it's good news that we're not
11:56:14 going to be assessed these other fees.
11:56:16 All I want to say, because I know you guys are
11:56:19 busy and everything, is they -- a lot of the
11:56:25 different areas, like South Howard, Euclid,
11:56:28 University of Tampa, and I was in the national
11:56:33 guard, we went out on storm duty and everything.
11:56:36 I was here Donna, hurricane Andrew and so forth.
11:56:38 All those areas have been impacted.
11:56:41 If the money is going to be allocated, so be it.
11:56:46 I hear they want to probably approve it.
11:56:48 If that's being said, all I ask from you people
11:56:50 here is to make it fair.
11:56:52 Some areas that's not being addressed, some areas
11:56:55 are.
11:56:56 Apparently, they highlighted areas that right now
11:56:59 they are prioritizing it.
11:57:00 I think that some of the other areas they need to
11:57:03 look into and make it fair.
11:57:04 Distribute the money where people need it.
11:57:06 I guess I have to talk to some other commission
11:57:08 about the county and everything.
11:57:10 You all know where that is?
11:57:13 >> Two blocks.
11:57:15 >> 601 east Kennedy boulevard.
11:57:17 The copper-colored building down the street.
11:57:21 >> It wasn't a waste.
11:57:22 I learned a lot here.
11:57:23 When they had the advertisement in the newspaper,
11:57:25 we thought that, you know, it was everything
11:57:27 because we get billed from the City of Tampa even
11:57:30 though I live in the county for water.
11:57:32 Thank you very much.
11:57:37 I'll address it elsewhere.
11:57:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
11:57:39 Next.
11:57:49 >> I guess it's good afternoon almost.
11:57:51 Hello.
11:57:51 Debra LECANTO, 5704 north river shore, 33603.
11:57:58 I have owned my home for the last 13 years.
11:58:00 I'm here today to express flooding at the 5600
11:58:03 block of north river shore drive.
11:58:05 Unlike many residents of the Tampa Bay area, the
11:58:07 flooding is not caused because of drainage.
11:58:09 The drainage is in the right-of-way, as you can
11:58:10 see at 5614 north river shore drive.
11:58:13 The homeowner has put up curb, stones, and filled
11:58:17 in the drainage, gully and plants.
11:58:19 There are no curbs along the road of north river
11:58:22 shore from Powhatan to Hillsborough.
11:58:24 That is half a mile long road.
11:58:26 With the exception of the drainage grills that are
11:58:30 on river shore.
11:58:31 The -- this has caused major flooding, damage to
11:58:35 the road which the City of Tampa has continued to
11:58:37 repair at the corner of Powhatan and north river
11:58:39 shore.
11:58:40 It also caused damage to the sidewalk which is
11:58:42 part of the linear park in this area.
11:58:44 I was asked -- I brought this to stormwater, and
11:58:49 this has been an ongoing problem for five years.
11:58:51 I was told that it was zoning because of the curb
11:58:53 issue.
11:58:53 Again, it's kind of the round and round I keep
11:58:56 getting.
11:58:56 I would ask that you address the problem with the
11:59:00 drainage grill and the ditch as well as others
11:59:02 that may have the same concern.
11:59:03 This is the picture -- this is the picture of what
11:59:07 it looks like now.
11:59:08 It's a beautiful area, but however the drainage
11:59:13 ditch is in the middle of that right-of-way.
11:59:16 So the water is not able to come down south of
11:59:18 Powhatan through river shore.
11:59:20 What it's doing, it's all puddling up in front of
11:59:23 my neighbor's house and my house because of all
11:59:25 the stones that the person has put up.
11:59:27 I would appreciate that you would reconsider or
11:59:30 somebody would consider looking at this.
11:59:32 Here is a picture of the house next door to that
11:59:34 one and the drainage ditch.
11:59:36 This is the house directly next to this one.
11:59:40 You can see that the drainage ditch is there.
11:59:42 This is how the other house used to look five
11:59:44 years ago, and there was no flooding.
11:59:46 Now we're going to be paying for more road service
11:59:49 and paying for a new sidewalk on the linear park.
11:59:51 This is the street here that I'm talking about.
11:59:56 You can see the curb right there.
11:59:58 All the water puddles right into that.
12:00:00 And the Hillsborough River is to the right of
12:00:02 that.
12:00:02 This is another part of north river shore that
12:00:07 does have the proper drainage and curbing.
12:00:09 This is the curbing at the other end of north
12:00:12 river shore where you can see where the curb goes
12:00:14 directly into the drainage.
12:00:15 Again, I would ask that you consider looking at
12:00:19 this area, the flooding.
12:00:21 The flooding is because it's caused because of
12:00:23 somebody else.
12:00:24 I would say that I am in favor for the tax
12:00:27 increase because I am a resident of the area, and
12:00:30 I think it's important that we do this for all of
12:00:32 us.
12:00:33 I would also ask, because I am an advocate for
12:00:36 seniors, that you would consider any senior that
12:00:38 owns their home at the 100% or 125% of poverty to
12:00:41 possibly be exempt.
12:00:42 We'd like to keep the seniors in their homes, and
12:00:45 without these extra costs and fees that we already
12:00:48 added for garbage and et cetera that you would
12:00:51 consider them.
12:00:51 Thank you.
12:00:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Council, we are at 12 --
12:00:56 >> Make a motion to extend until 1 p.m.
12:01:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion to extend to 1 p.m.
12:01:09 Motion by Mr. Suarez.
12:01:11 Seconded by Mr. Cohen.
12:01:14 All in favor, aye.
12:01:15 Motion carries.
12:01:16 Now, do we have -- how many people we still have
12:01:21 down in the Mascotte Room?
12:01:27 Let me say this.
12:01:34 We still maintain the crowd down in the Mascotte
12:01:46 Room.
12:01:46 What we're going to do is probably, based on the
12:01:46 time, we'll try to continue and allow you the
12:01:46 three minutes, but we might shorten it to two.
12:01:46 We still have overflow crowd.
12:01:48 We just want to put you on notice of that.
12:01:50 Next speaker.
12:01:55 >> Good morning, Council.
12:01:57 Thank you for letting me speak today.
12:01:59 My name is Alfred Poole, residing at 4208 West
12:02:03 Kentucky Avenue.
12:02:03 Thank you, Mr. Miranda, for your comments earlier.
12:02:07 When I received the stormwater assessment notice,
12:02:10 I was not pleased.
12:02:12 But it did lead me to do a little research on the
12:02:14 city Council and what it does.
12:02:16 You have a tough job.
12:02:17 I have a better appreciation of your efforts.
12:02:20 Nevertheless, the Tampa area is flat.
12:02:23 It's been that way for a long time.
12:02:25 When it rains it takes a while for the water to
12:02:27 soak in.
12:02:30 Stamped on approving stormwater abatement has been
12:02:33 a huge focus of our city leaders, using other
12:02:37 people's moneys to subsidize a few to the expense
12:02:40 of many.
12:02:41 Raymond James stadium opened in 1998 despite
12:02:45 former Tampa mayor Bill Coe trying to stop the
12:02:48 deal claiming giving such a sweetheart deal to a
12:02:52 private business violated Florida State
12:02:54 Constitution.
12:02:56 Local taxpayers pay most of the expenses on it.
12:03:07 Having to pay more taxes is not something to be
12:03:09 proud of.
12:03:10 Just because Clearwater or Tallahassee or Winter
12:03:13 Park are being taxed at a higher stormwater
12:03:16 assessment rate is no reason to add taxes to the
12:03:21 citizens of Tampa.
12:03:21 Maybe they aren't paying for an aquarium,
12:03:24 convention center, movie theater, stadium,
12:03:26 streetcar study, Riverwalk, et cetera, et cetera,
12:03:29 et cetera.
12:03:34 These assessments will hurt small businesses that
12:03:35 have large buildings.
12:03:37 This is government overreach into the pockets of
12:03:39 taxpayers.
12:03:40 Fixed income families will also suffer.
12:03:42 Those living in modest housing will see a 25%
12:03:46 increase in their property tax burden.
12:03:49 Please do not approve the stormwater assessment
12:03:51 increase especially the additional improvement
12:03:53 assessment.
12:03:55 Funds are transferred from one account to another,
12:03:58 repurposed.
12:03:59 My suggestion is to play the shell game with the
12:04:03 peas that the taxpayers are already giving instead
12:04:05 of taking more peas, like using City of Tampa
12:04:09 public art funds for stormwater projects instead
12:04:12 of painting murals on parking garages.
12:04:17 Thanks for listening.
12:04:18 Also, I live close to Lois Avenue. The project
12:04:25 there has helped.
12:04:28 If you are off of Lois any distance, it's pretty
12:04:31 much the same.
12:04:32 Thank you.
12:04:32 >> Good afternoon, Al Steenson, 4100 west Leila
12:04:47 Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33616.
12:04:52 My wife and I bought a house at 4100 west Leila.
12:04:58 We are both in our 80s.
12:05:00 We don't relish this increase in the assessment.
12:05:03 Nor do we relish the add-on.
12:05:06 However, having said that, we don't relish this
12:05:12 either.
12:05:14 This is my driveway on August the 1st.
12:05:18 Notice the gentleman over here is carrying a
12:05:21 little pale, and he just happened to have these
12:05:25 stanchions in his yard, for some kind of athletic
12:05:28 event.
12:05:28 We actually closed this street off.
12:05:31 Right here is south park.
12:05:33 We actually closed this street off.
12:05:34 Why?
12:05:35 Because down here, you can see there's a pinkish
12:05:39 looking house down here.
12:05:40 The water was waist deep.
12:05:44 I'm 5-foot 10.
12:05:54 Why did we as a neighborhood close the street?
12:05:56 Why?
12:05:57 To protect anybody from getting down there.
12:06:00 Now why do we have a waist-deep water at the
12:06:03 corner of Clark and Lois?
12:06:05 I mean Leila and Lois?
12:06:09 Why? Our geography, number one. Tides.
12:06:12 August 1st had a full moon high tide.
12:06:14 We can't do a thing about that.
12:06:16 The other factor involved in this is a neglected
12:06:19 stormwater system.
12:06:25 As I just said, we can't change the tides.
12:06:29 And what disappoints me and discourages me is the
12:06:34 fact it took us ten years to get here.
12:06:37 The last increase was 2005.
12:06:39 If we had thought outside the box, and added some
12:06:46 increments over the last ten years, we would be
12:06:51 here.
12:06:52 We would be there.
12:06:52 We wouldn't be here talking about it this morning.
12:06:55 And many of the improvement levels would already
12:07:00 be in place.
12:07:02 In my view, doing nothing is not an option.
12:07:05 However, if we are going to move forward with this
12:07:08 improvement assessment, I would think it's
12:07:12 absolutely mandatory that the process remain
12:07:17 completely transparent, everybody being held
12:07:20 accountable and also public input.
12:07:26 And that's basically all I have to say.
12:07:29 Thank you very much.
12:07:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:07:33 Next speaker?
12:07:47 Good afternoon.
12:07:48 I live at west Pearl Avenue just down the street
12:07:51 from Al Steenson.
12:07:53 >> State your name.
12:07:54 You need to state your name for the record.
12:07:57 State your name for the record.
12:07:58 >> William Atkins, 4101 west Pearl.
12:08:03 I moved here in 79.
12:08:07 MacDill Air Force Base and retired from there.
12:08:09 1979, Dale Mabry and Neptune, Dale Mabry and
12:08:12 Henderson, Bayshore, Davis Island to Bay to Bay
12:08:17 constantly flooded.
12:08:19 2003, they get that stormwater assessment that's
12:08:23 supposed to resolve that problem.
12:08:25 It's still there.
12:08:28 I was watching on the news August the 3rd, the
12:08:31 mayor was on national TV, NBC national news, that
12:08:37 no amount of money is going to fix this problem.
12:08:41 That's what we are standing right now.
12:08:45 I want to know if we are going to spend the money,
12:08:47 we need to see improvement.
12:08:49 The first stormwater assessment didn't do anything
12:08:51 in my eyes.
12:08:53 I go to the grocery store.
12:08:55 I pay the bill.
12:08:56 I got groceries.
12:08:57 I pay the electric bill, I got electricity.
12:09:00 Pay the water bill, I got water.
12:09:03 I expect storm assessment fee, I got nothing.
12:09:07 It's still flooded.
12:09:10 I just want ton see if we are going to use this
12:09:12 money, I want to see improvements.
12:09:16 I don't want saying it's going to work and it's
12:09:21 not happening.
12:09:22 The paper today, the infrastructure, it's not
12:09:27 going to fix the flooding.
12:09:29 If we are going to spend the money, I want to be
12:09:31 see action.
12:09:32 That's all I have to say.
12:09:33 Thank you.
12:09:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:09:35 Next speaker.
12:09:36 >> My name is Don Ford, 6309 south Tamron Avenue.
12:09:44 I think each and every one of you know me.
12:09:46 I have been in here before.
12:09:47 You know me, don't you, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Miranda,
12:09:50 Mr. Reddick, Mr. Cohen?
12:09:53 Yes, you know me.
12:09:56 Okay.
12:09:58 I lived there for 27 years at that address.
12:10:02 There's a drainage ditch one house over on Elrod
12:10:06 Avenue.
12:10:07 That ditch has been dredged one time in 27 years.
12:10:12 The Robinson lake across from the high school has
12:10:16 really never had any attention.
12:10:18 And that's our retention pond.
12:10:20 And if that lake can't take any water, where is it
12:10:25 going to go?
12:10:26 It's going to back up.
12:10:27 That's where it's going.
12:10:29 And I caught two catfish a foot long on my
12:10:33 driveway on August 1st.
12:10:35 Swimming upstream, 60 feet off the road.
12:10:39 And there's just something that's got to be done.
12:10:43 And nothing has been done before in 27 years that
12:10:46 I have lived there.
12:10:47 And as far as Ms. Montelione talking about the
12:10:52 leaf blowers and what have you, that's not going
12:10:54 to correct things.
12:10:55 What you need to do, people are in the green
12:10:58 industry need to have been pay a business tax in
12:11:00 the City of Tampa.
12:11:02 That should be mandatory.
12:11:03 I don't care where they come from.
12:11:08 Pasco, you operate over there, you have got to
12:11:09 have a business tax.
12:11:11 It's a sticker on your windshield.
12:11:13 If you don't have that sticker, you're fined.
12:11:17 First time 500.
12:11:18 Second time a thousand.
12:11:19 The third time it's 5,000.
12:11:21 That will put a stop to these lawn people blowing
12:11:23 that crap into the streets.
12:11:26 You guys got to do something about that.
12:11:28 That's a lot of money.
12:11:30 There's over 5,000, I guarantee you, operating in
12:11:33 the city limits without paying a business tax.
12:11:37 So you have got to do something about it.
12:11:40 That's a lot of money.
12:11:41 Collect it.
12:11:42 I paid mine.
12:11:44 Always have.
12:11:45 City and county.
12:11:46 And there's no reason not to.
12:11:49 So I don't have much else to say.
12:11:51 But I want you all to know I do know what it's
12:11:54 like, especially, Mr. Reddick, I know what it's
12:11:57 like to be discriminated against.
12:11:58 That's all I have to say.
12:12:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, sir.
12:12:02 Next speaker.
12:12:02 >> Mark Stewart.
12:12:07 Business owner at 10916 North Nebraska Avenue.
12:12:10 I filed a written objection under bay manufactured
12:12:16 homes.
12:12:16 And the only thing I see in the stormwater
12:12:17 assessment, they did make an allowance, and I want
12:12:22 to talk about our case in specific.
12:12:24 We own a large parcel of property with a business
12:12:27 on it.
12:12:28 When we opened it in 1990, we spent extensive
12:12:31 amount of funds to develop stormwater drainage and
12:12:34 retention.
12:12:35 We have a system that 25 years later works
12:12:38 perfectly.
12:12:39 There's not a gallon of water leaves our property
12:12:41 to go out to the street.
12:12:43 We have about a four and a half foot drop from our
12:12:48 southeast corner to our northwest corner.
12:12:51 The retention pond works wonderfully.
12:12:54 We just wonder why they didn't make some type of
12:12:57 allowance on the ESUs on their own stormwater
12:13:07 drainage.
12:13:07 We thought if we could get some type of partial
12:13:10 credit for doing that.
12:13:11 And we watched the neighborhood, in our
12:13:14 neighborhood in 2006, two blocks to our north,
12:13:19 bravo developed a parcel and they also put in a
12:13:22 retention pond that works very well.
12:13:24 But a few years ago somebody came in and built a
12:13:29 new store on a grass lot on the corner of Fowler
12:13:32 and Nebraska.
12:13:33 There's no visible retention or swales of any sort
12:13:37 of drainage retention.
12:13:39 When they build in a grass lot.
12:13:43 A few years ago the business to our immediate
12:13:46 south that borders our business, property sold,
12:13:51 and they took a business that was similar to ours
12:13:53 off of it, and on the weekends, massive amount of
12:13:57 paving crews come in that paved over the entire
12:14:01 lot on Saturday and Sunday and opened up a car lot
12:14:05 within a few days.
12:14:07 Now all of their water fortunately, our retention
12:14:11 will handle it, flows into our retention.
12:14:14 So we are just wondering why, because we own a
12:14:18 large parcel, that we are going to be paying some
12:14:22 30-plus thousand dollars in stormwater assessment
12:14:28 when we are not contributing to any of the
12:14:30 problems that we are managing our own on-site.
12:14:33 So just a calculation that this doesn't seem like
12:14:37 they figured something in there.
12:14:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:14:43 Next speaker.
12:14:43 >> Good afternoon.
12:14:49 My name is Charley Singleton.
12:14:52 I'm speaking on behalf of my mom.
12:14:54 Her name is Josephine Folks.
12:14:56 She lives at 4224 east Chelsea street, Tampa,
12:15:00 Florida 33610.
12:15:02 And I'm speaking on behalf of my aunt Lila Mosley,
12:15:07 4226 east Chelsea street, Tampa, Florida 33610.
12:15:13 Collectively, we are asking for the repeal of the
12:15:16 city ordinance.
12:15:19 This 2003 city ordinance unjustly overtaxed the
12:15:23 poor and people on fixed income.
12:15:27 My mom, she's 84 years old.
12:15:29 And she's sick.
12:15:31 She can't afford homeowners insurance and she
12:15:34 can't afford an increase on her property taxes.
12:15:38 If she fails to pay her property taxes, a lien
12:15:45 will be placed on her property and eventually
12:15:46 taken away from her, and this is wrong.
12:15:49 Climate change is real.
12:15:51 Global warming is real.
12:15:54 The urgent need to increase revenues for
12:15:56 stormwater management is a clear indicator that
12:16:01 this is a state government problem.
12:16:04 I think it is appropriate for the City Council,
12:16:08 the county board of commissioners, to collaborate
12:16:11 with the Florida State government to generate a
12:16:14 budget.
12:16:17 Form management and improvements of Florida's
12:16:20 structures, thereby allocating the appropriate
12:16:22 funding from the federal government which will
12:16:26 cover the urgent demand for revenues.
12:16:30 The repeal of 2003 city ordinance will provide
12:16:33 financial relief for thousands of Floridians.
12:16:36 Thank you.
12:16:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:16:40 Next.
12:16:40 >> Good afternoon.
12:16:45 My name is Andrea Braboy, a homeowner on Vernon
12:16:51 way in the New Tampa area, specifically in Tampa
12:16:53 Palms.
12:16:55 The my greatest point about this issue today is
12:16:59 that we need not want you this massive expense.
12:17:11 Let's take a step back and look at what we are
12:17:13 doing.
12:17:13 It happens to be in everyone's best interest to
12:17:15 have professional consultants look at our
12:17:17 stormwater situation.
12:17:19 I don't believe that professional consultants
12:17:23 would think that this 100 square foot residence
12:17:27 would have the same ESU assessment as an 1800
12:17:30 square foot residence.
12:17:31 The same is also true for 2000-foot residence as
12:17:38 opposed to 4,000 square foot residence.
12:17:42 The other thing I would like to say about the
12:17:44 current assessment, if I can use your document
12:17:46 projector, if that works.
12:17:50 >> It's upside down.
12:17:53 >> If we need some help take a good look how we
12:17:58 are spending our money right now.
12:18:00 This is the current level.
12:18:02 I'm suggesting that maybe we are not getting the
12:18:05 best bang for the buck out of the money we are
12:18:07 already spending, when the large item on this
12:18:10 budget is miscellaneous, maybe we need to look
12:18:14 more closely at what we are doing now and what we
12:18:17 can be doing now, the pay-as-you-go solution that
12:18:22 was mentioned earlier.
12:18:23 We have a law already in place that governs what
12:18:28 should and shouldn't be placed in our stormwater
12:18:32 system.
12:18:32 The fines associated with it, $75, $450, are just
12:18:40 who find it easier to dump, pay the $450, of what
12:18:44 it is and keep going.
12:18:45 You have to have much stiffer fines to keep people
12:18:48 from putting leafs in the pond.
12:18:52 The other thing I would like to bring up is
12:18:56 alternate ways of paying for this.
12:18:59 One of the things that was suggested was at least
12:19:05 start to look like other cities.
12:19:10 Upside down again.
12:19:12 Okay.
12:19:13 That are nothing like Tampa.
12:19:14 These other cities are very different from us in
12:19:16 geographics and demographics.
12:19:18 Perhaps we should look at having stormwater
12:19:21 districts in separate areas if we need to, find
12:19:25 other ways to pay for it.
12:19:26 But there are creative ways that we can deal with
12:19:28 this.
12:19:29 Then in my last second I do want to say please
12:19:32 don't put homeowners in a position where you are
12:19:35 going to tax us out of our homes.
12:19:37 You leave us no choice but to try leave the city
12:19:43 in some neighborhood.
12:19:44 We don't want that but you leave us no choice.
12:19:47 Thank you for your time.
12:19:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:19:50 Next speaker?
12:19:51 >> 4104 north lance.
12:20:11 I own four homes in the Seminole Heights area.
12:20:14 and I believe you have a picture here, built in
12:20:20 1908.
12:20:21 And you can see that the stormwater comes off that
12:20:27 roof, comes onto the ground and under the house as
12:20:31 a stormwater retention pond.
12:20:33 And it's not impervious.
12:20:35 Yet the assumption is just by looking at the roof
12:20:38 that the footprint is impervious.
12:20:41 So now under that assumption, which is false, they
12:20:47 say it's going to cost me $9,607 for going into
12:20:53 the stormwater.
12:20:56 On the top part of it, I wish that the wastewater
12:21:00 people could get with the stormwater people and
12:21:03 tell me how to operate.
12:21:05 They did a flow function chart.
12:21:10 They should know I am not contributing to the
12:21:12 wastewater.
12:21:12 They sent people out.
12:21:13 They opened up manholes.
12:21:19 Put dye in and didn't find any dye because of the
12:21:22 septic tang.
12:21:23 I handle the wastewater on the property.
12:21:25 The same thing is true for the rain that hits the
12:21:29 roof.
12:21:29 I am not contributing to any water on the street.
12:21:32 The water -- I think most people would agree that
12:21:38 water does not run uphill.
12:21:40 So maybe I should get a credit.
12:21:47 They want an engineering study for a house built
12:21:50 in 1908 to get a credit.
12:21:56 You see it has an open footprint, and the surface
12:22:02 is permeable.
12:22:04 So why not come out and look at it.
12:22:07 See for themselves that it doesn't apply, that
12:22:12 this will not be assessed $9,000.
12:22:16 That's my argument.
12:22:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:22:19 Next speaker.
12:22:19 >> I'm Jeanelle Hires, 6004 River Terrace, but I
12:22:32 am here to represent my church.
12:22:34 I'm a trustee of Faith Baptist Church.
12:22:38 And we are in southeast Seminole Heights, in the
12:22:42 poorest neighborhood.
12:22:43 We are at the corner of 12th and Osborne, 1901
12:22:47 east Osborne.
12:22:52 We have a very small church.
12:22:54 Our footprint hasn't changed since 1947.
12:22:57 More than half of our property is covered in
12:22:59 grass.
12:23:02 We have no standing water.
12:23:04 We are a small church.
12:23:05 We have been paying stormwater.
12:23:07 And we don't mind paying our fair share.
12:23:10 But we are a small congregation.
12:23:14 We have about 30 people that attend.
12:23:16 Our average collection is less than $500.
12:23:21 Our tax assessment was raised 150%.
12:23:29 And the people that go to my church live in that
12:23:32 area.
12:23:34 And they are the ones that are going to have to be
12:23:36 paying this increase.
12:23:38 They also live there, so they will have to be
12:23:42 paying the increase on their property, which seems
12:23:45 very unfair to me.
12:23:47 It seems like double taxation on people.
12:23:51 So I think you should give a special consideration
12:23:56 to churches that are struggling to keep alive with
12:24:02 increasing their taxes.
12:24:04 Thank you.
12:24:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:24:08 Next speaker.
12:24:09 >> My name is Richard Nordstrom.
12:24:26 I live at 4317 south Lois in Tampa.
12:24:30 What's troubling me is we are doing a special tax
12:24:34 assessment to pay for one particular service of
12:24:37 the city.
12:24:39 Right now, my tax bill for the City of Tampa was
12:24:43 $174.
12:24:44 You want to increase it $180 just to pay for
12:24:49 stormwater services.
12:24:52 What's going to be next?
12:24:53 The police department assessment?
12:24:56 A sewer assessment?
12:24:58 What other assessments are you going to pass to
12:25:01 raise a tax bill so the City of Tampa makes more
12:25:06 money?
12:25:12 Other tax districts are only paying five to six
12:25:16 dollars a month.
12:25:17 You want to raise it to $200 almost a year just to
12:25:22 have stormwater improvement.
12:25:25 I have lived in this city since 1955.
12:25:31 I have lived in the south side of Tampa since
12:25:33 1955.
12:25:37 You have covered through allowing businesses and
12:25:40 homeowners, a lot of the open culverts that used
12:25:44 to run in South Tampa.
12:25:45 They have all been covered, piped over, whatever,
12:25:50 and all that stormwater has got nowhere to go.
12:25:55 The bay when it rises in a one every 300-year
12:26:00 event like it did this past month, has nowhere to
12:26:05 go.
12:26:06 So you can throw all the money, you can throw in
12:26:09 all the size pipes you want and you are not going
12:26:12 to stop the problem.
12:26:14 It is still going to be there.
12:26:16 As a child growing up, I could tell you that
12:26:21 Hesperides and Fairoaks would flood.
12:26:24 Still does.
12:26:25 I can tell you that Clark used to flood.
12:26:29 It still does.
12:26:30 I can tell you that Neptune and Dale Mabry and
12:26:36 Henderson and Dale Mabry flood.
12:26:38 It still does.
12:26:40 That was even despite the federal people improving
12:26:46 Dale Mabry, improving the intersection of Neptune,
12:26:50 and Henderson.
12:26:52 It still floods.
12:26:53 It didn't do any good.
12:26:56 So this is just an effort in futility.
12:27:00 It will not do any good for a 300 or 100 year
12:27:05 event.
12:27:07 What you see normally every day is not a problem.
12:27:11 When you have a hurricane come in, you stay at
12:27:13 home.
12:27:13 You don't go out and travel.
12:27:15 You don't try and get to work.
12:27:17 Because you know it's going to be a catastrophic
12:27:19 event.
12:27:21 So just a catastrophic event.
12:27:27 Don't tax us hoping it will go away because it
12:27:30 won't.
12:27:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:27:33 Next speaker?
12:27:39 >>GINA GRIMES: Hill, Ward, Henderson, 101 East
12:27:41 Kennedy Boulevard.
12:27:42 I represent Asbury automotive of Tampa and
12:27:47 Precision Motor Cars.
12:27:48 They own three or four dealerships along Dale
12:27:51 Mabry Highway just north of the stadium and on
12:27:53 west Hillsborough.
12:27:57 Nobody here I think is faulting the city for what
12:28:00 they are trying to do.
12:28:01 You have a system that's outdated and everybody
12:28:03 admits it's been poorly maintained.
12:28:06 Even the city staff.
12:28:07 And yet city staff has done a great job, and they
12:28:13 are very reasonable.
12:28:15 And it's not what you are doing, it's the way you
12:28:17 are going about it that's problematic.
12:28:19 You have given your staff a monumental task to
12:28:21 accomplish basically one or two months time frame.
12:28:25 When that happens, you are going to have problems.
12:28:27 And the proposal in the form that it's in right
12:28:30 now is fundamentally unfair and in my view there
12:28:33 are legal defects as well.
12:28:37 Generally, the service assessment, most people
12:28:40 don't seem to have a problem with it even though
12:28:42 my plant will be paying a 225% increase for one of
12:28:46 their dealerships, their assessment is going from
12:28:48 about 5500 a month to -- or 6500 a year to $15,000
12:28:53 per year.
12:28:56 They have been basically given 20 days notice to
12:28:58 address that issue.
12:28:59 But put that aside.
12:29:00 Let's talk about the improvement assessment
12:29:02 because that's the large earth's of the two
12:29:03 assessments.
12:29:04 We heard a lot about how the improvement
12:29:06 assessment affects residential property, that we
12:29:08 heard very little about how it affects commercial
12:29:11 or nonresidential property.
12:29:12 And that issue is not been sufficiently evaluated.
12:29:17 $9 a year service improvement sound reasonable
12:29:21 as far as a single-family home goes but to
12:29:25 commercial property it's very unreasonable.
12:29:26 One of my client, one of their parcels has 1846
12:29:30 ESUs assigned to it, the same as 1 4
12:29:33 single-family homes for one automotive dealership,
12:29:37 they are going to be paying $18,000 a year and
12:29:39 half a million dollars at the end of the 30-year
12:29:41 term.
12:29:42 And the budget is 251 in bun parcel is going to be
12:29:46 paying a half million dollars.
12:29:48 That's not reasonable.
12:29:50 Specific objections specifically, the notice, I
12:29:53 think, is defective.
12:29:55 It was misleading.
12:29:56 There were two legal notices combined back to back
12:30:00 on one single page.
12:30:01 And while that necessarily in and of itself isn't
12:30:03 a problem, you have the fact that the larger
12:30:07 assessment was on the back.
12:30:10 In addition to that procedural defect, you have
12:30:14 procedural defects in the notice, in the mailed
12:30:16 notice, newspaper notice, they were inconsistent
12:30:19 with one another, they are inconsistent with code.
12:30:21 It spelled out the details.
12:30:23 Let's go on to talk about the mitigation credit.
12:30:25 A couple other people addressed that issue.
12:30:27 The mitigation credit process that you have is
12:30:30 inadequate.
12:30:31 You have to pay the assessment and then go back
12:30:33 and get mitigation and get a refund from the tax
12:30:37 collector.
12:30:37 That's not fair.
12:30:38 The credit process you have to hire an engineer,
12:30:41 submit it, and then you have to pay the city to
12:30:43 review the study to give you the mitigation
12:30:46 credit.
12:30:46 The staff says you get 10% credit, but the
12:30:49 mitigation policy says you should get credit for
12:30:51 whatever the value is of your improvement not
12:30:54 being done.
12:30:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: We thank you.
12:30:58 >>GINA GRIMES: Thank you very much.
12:30:59 We would like these resolutions to be deferred and
12:31:03 for you to give additional time for everyone to
12:31:06 evaluate it and for the process to be more fair.
12:31:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: Next speaker?
12:31:13 >> My name is Joel -- 1911 East Bougainvilla
12:31:20 Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33612.
12:31:22 We pointed to my situation several years to the
12:31:36 department of storm and roads on Bougainvilla.
12:31:47 Staff came down to the address.
12:31:49 And I have -- essentially what was happening that
12:31:56 the traffic on 21st street and Bougainvillea
12:32:03 would flood.
12:32:05 And the traffic was on the property.
12:32:13 So what I had to do with the highway department,
12:32:18 they told me I can build a temporary fence along
12:32:26 my property, not allowing the vehicles to cross
12:32:30 over the property.
12:32:32 And of a that, this corner right here, this is
12:32:46 where it floods.
12:32:49 Here is the finished product.
12:33:15 There was already a big puddle here.
12:33:20 They are avoiding that.
12:33:24 So my thing, I complained to increase the taxes.
12:33:31 And people are elderly.
12:33:34 My mom live in this house.
12:33:35 They are on fixed income.
12:33:38 People on fixed income in this area.
12:33:42 This should have been addressed years ago.
12:33:44 And I brought it to the attention to you all and
12:33:47 sent letters as well.
12:33:49 And now it's going to increase.
12:33:52 If they are going to increase, please work in the
12:33:54 area that is really having these big problems.
12:34:02 That's all.
12:34:02 Thank you.
12:34:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:34:05 Next speaker.
12:34:06 >> Good afternoon.
12:34:10 Mike Peterson, Greater Tampa Association of
12:34:12 Realtors.
12:34:13 I don't envy you today.
12:34:15 Or many other days.
12:34:19 You know, most people are claiming there isn't a
12:34:25 problem and even some expected the need to raise
12:34:29 some fees.
12:34:30 But I think what's involved, and it happened
12:34:32 pretty fast, and this whole process is pretty
12:34:35 fast, is the original structure adopted in 2003
12:34:37 had some flaws but was small enough so it didn't
12:34:43 seem to raise to the level of people wanting to
12:34:46 oppose.
12:34:46 But now you start applying increase not only to
12:34:49 the service fee but now using the same structure
12:34:51 to apply the new improvement fee, and suddenly you
12:34:54 have got people looking back at, wait a minute, is
12:34:57 this really the best approach we could take for
12:35:00 assessing this kind of money for this kind of
12:35:03 service?
12:35:04 And so as many have already mentioned, we are
12:35:07 asking that you consider delaying this matter to
12:35:10 see if we can get it right this time, because you
12:35:12 are talking about locking this in for a long time.
12:35:15 And it's just a magnitude of some of the perceived
12:35:21 inequities and the amounts that cause real
12:35:23 concerns, much like you do, we represent a rather
12:35:25 diverse membership.
12:35:26 So I have got some people asking, well, wait a
12:35:28 minute, my area doesn't seem to have the amount of
12:35:33 projects or problems that another area may have.
12:35:37 Wouldn't this be better handled more like an
12:35:39 impact fee with different zones and variable ways?
12:35:42 I understand there's complications from the
12:35:44 administration of that.
12:35:46 Some are saying, well, even if you stay with the
12:35:49 structure, the fee structure, measuring impervious
12:35:52 surface, that's fine for that, but there is an
12:35:56 equity that has to do with valuations where people
12:35:59 in condominiums are paying -- a relative payout
12:36:05 winds up being much smaller in a much smaller
12:36:11 value single-family home, and then based on their
12:36:14 income levels.
12:36:14 So I have no magic answer.
12:36:17 I'm not saying there's a quick way to fix it.
12:36:19 But it seems to have skewed enough with folks to
12:36:24 probably it's worthy of delaying this and taking a
12:36:26 good hard look to see if this is the best way to
12:36:30 go.
12:36:30 Councilman Miranda's idea today is the first one I
12:36:34 heard like that.
12:36:35 I don't know if that can carry the day but it's
12:36:37 the kind of thing that probably ought to be worked
12:36:39 into a discussion that we are probably not ready
12:36:43 to bring to a close today.
12:36:44 And that's the position of the greater Tampa
12:36:46 association of realtors.
12:36:47 Thank you.
12:36:48 (Bell sounds)
12:36:51 >> Good afternoon.
12:36:55 I'm Melissa Bertoch.
12:36:59 As you are all aware we do have a bit of a water
12:37:02 issue.
12:37:03 How far, we can't cure it overnight.
12:37:05 And I am in favor of -- the financial portion of
12:37:09 it is really not clear for me.
12:37:13 Because they are talking about building this on a
12:37:15 2003 footprint.
12:37:16 Okay, that's fine.
12:37:17 Now they are going to reassess it after the tax is
12:37:21 approved or implemented?
12:37:23 Well, what about all the new developments that
12:37:25 have happened?
12:37:26 Are they going to get hit, you know, and not be
12:37:28 aware of what's coming?
12:37:31 We have a lot of new construction that's coming
12:37:33 where the impact fees can come.
12:37:35 And we need to really assess where the money is
12:37:37 coming from.
12:37:39 They are talking about the tax only lasting for
12:37:41 six years.
12:37:42 But their plan goes on for 25 years.
12:37:47 Is this something that's going to actually end?
12:37:51 And they talk about increasing every year.
12:37:54 Is the maximum amount the maximum amount it can
12:37:56 increase every year?
12:37:58 I'm not sure.
12:37:59 And this is why it needs to be deferred.
12:38:01 Because everyone needs to understand what's going
12:38:03 on and where the money is coming from and what our
12:38:07 liabilities are.
12:38:07 Thank you.
12:38:07 >> Hello, Tampa City Council.
12:38:18 My name is John O'Neill.
12:38:19 I live at 3118 south vineland, Port Tampa, and
12:38:26 Port Tampa has a lot of problems but I am a guy
12:38:29 who likes to live ...
12:38:35 Last month I was in my front yard, and I was fine
12:38:45 with that because I knew what I was getting into.
12:38:47 Tampa, especially South Tampa, really floods all
12:38:50 the time but there is not much we can do about it.
12:38:55 I had a gentleman to my left, the water got to go
12:38:58 somewhere and sometimes it can go out.
12:39:03 There is not much we can do about it.
12:39:04 I am really don't approve or don't support this
12:39:10 tax increase.
12:39:11 There is a lot of stuff I think can be done, and a
12:39:15 lot of people have alluded to -- many people, not
12:39:21 all, but many people have alluded to.
12:39:24 There's 30 line items that seem to be really out
12:39:29 of whack and they need to be readdressed in order
12:39:34 to help some of the areas that really need the
12:39:36 help.
12:39:37 South Tampa, there's not much we can do.
12:39:41 If they can do something somewhere else, they can
12:39:44 take that money and help them, because I don't see
12:39:47 a lot of changes happening.
12:39:49 Thank you.
12:39:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:39:52 Next speaker.
12:39:56 >> Patrick Mantega, 10905 -- Drive, Temple
12:40:01 Terrace.
12:40:02 I have commercial property in Tampa.
12:40:05 The amount of money the city would like to gather
12:40:09 with this tax to make it into a property tax would
12:40:12 require a 1 mill increase.
12:40:15 That's a lot.
12:40:16 And it's something that if that was put before
12:40:18 you, I don't think there would even be much of a
12:40:21 discussion.
12:40:22 There would be a no vote today.
12:40:23 Just because it's worked differently doesn't mean
12:40:28 it's any better.
12:40:29 This is a lot of money.
12:40:31 It deserves public hearings.
12:40:32 It deserves workshops.
12:40:34 It deserves discussion.
12:40:36 We need to understand what really we are trying to
12:40:39 accomplish, and the best way to get the money to
12:40:44 accomplish that and I don't think we have had that
12:40:46 kind of discussion.
12:40:46 The 2003 plan was done at a time when it wasn't
12:40:52 that much.
12:40:53 It didn't seem to catch attention but now you are
12:40:57 doubling down on the size and you are certainly
12:41:03 creating a new beast and trying to fund capital
12:41:08 improvements with it.
12:41:09 I think it would be wisest to postpone this,
12:41:14 continue maybe what you are currently collecting
12:41:17 and during that year take the time to sit down and
12:41:20 talk with your people, talk with the city, let's
12:41:22 figure out a way of making things better but not
12:41:26 in this way.
12:41:27 This is a bad tax.
12:41:28 Bad tax for the City Council to pass, and I hope
12:41:32 you reject it.
12:41:33 Thank you.
12:41:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:41:34 Next speaker?
12:41:35 >> Susan Long, 920 East Broad Street.
12:41:44 I hate taxes, I don't care what they are, property
12:41:46 tax, sales tax, any of them.
12:41:48 I assume everybody feels the same way.
12:41:50 However, one person, Mr. Steenson, stood up and
12:41:54 said too bad we put this off ten years.
12:41:57 I disagree.
12:41:58 Too bad we put it off 30, 40, 50 years.
12:42:01 When I moved to Tampa in 1982 we had that problem.
12:42:04 We have the same problem today.
12:42:06 My particular section of Seminole Heights, I
12:42:10 don't, to my knowledge, is not going to have any
12:42:12 improvements made.
12:42:14 My house doesn't flood.
12:42:15 Part of that is because it's 18 inches above
12:42:18 grade.
12:42:18 That helps.
12:42:19 But we measure the severity of the storm by the
12:42:22 number and height of the white caps in the
12:42:25 intersection in front of my house.
12:42:29 We watch our trash barrels go down the street to
12:42:32 the river, up the street north.
12:42:37 This needs to be done.
12:42:39 I do have some serious concerns, though.
12:42:42 I have friends and acquaintances that I know who
12:42:44 truly cannot afford this.
12:42:45 I'm talking about people with residences.
12:42:48 They truly cannot afford another 100, 150, 180.
12:42:54 It needs to be some way that if people that don't
12:42:59 have enough money to pay it or pay all of it that
12:43:01 there's some waiver.
12:43:02 I understand when they die or leave or something,
12:43:05 somebody has to move in, that can afford to it.
12:43:11 Shouldn't go on forever for that pose of property.
12:43:14 If they can show for a few years that they can't
12:43:17 afford it.
12:43:17 I don't want to see people driven out of their
12:43:20 homes because they can't afford the increase.
12:43:21 I don't think that's useful to you.
12:43:23 Certainly not useful to me.
12:43:25 For my part, I don't want to pay it, but I think
12:43:28 it's necessary, and I will pay it.
12:43:30 Thank you.
12:43:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:43:33 All right.
12:43:33 Before you speak, how many other people that are
12:43:37 sitting down plan on speaking?
12:43:40 Anyone else?
12:43:42 All right.
12:43:43 We got about 15 minutes left.
12:43:49 And I am trying to see how many more people.
12:43:56 So raise your hand again.
12:44:00 All right.
12:44:00 You will be the last person.
12:44:01 Okay?
12:44:04 Next.
12:44:04 >> My name is Larry Landers, 4510 North Boulevard
12:44:09 in south Seminole Heights.
12:44:11 And to the gentleman that came earlier and said
12:44:14 that we don't have an issue in Seminole Heights,
12:44:17 we do have an issue in Seminole Heights.
12:44:20 On a block between west Curtis and west Chelsea,
12:44:25 we have a standing water issue.
12:44:27 And the issue is because we don't have any drains
12:44:30 at all.
12:44:31 And I realize that stormwater is a very, very
12:44:38 difficult issue to deal with, it's very difficult
12:44:40 to sort out as far as volumewise, rain water,
12:44:45 impervious areas.
12:44:46 That's very, very difficult area to assess.
12:44:52 The financial component of it, I really do think
12:44:55 we need to take a look at the financial component,
12:44:58 and I think we need to exhaust every possibility
12:45:02 to try to get that into an area that people can
12:45:05 afford a little better.
12:45:07 In my area, I would just like to -- I have
12:45:11 complained to the city for over 20 years, because
12:45:14 I have lived there for 25 years, and I have had
12:45:18 engineers come out on the ground and tell me, when
12:45:21 well, Mr. Landers, we just don't have the money in
12:45:24 the budget to fix your issue.
12:45:27 And I realize that whatever we do, we are going to
12:45:29 have to pay some money for it.
12:45:31 And now that we are talking about getting money
12:45:34 into the budget, I would like to know how do we
12:45:37 determine those areas that looks like big ticket
12:45:43 areas like South Tampa and some other areas.
12:45:46 I want to know how do we determine what areas
12:45:51 get -- will get the stormwater.
12:45:54 How do we determine who gets how much stormwater
12:45:59 you have to have standing.
12:46:01 I have standing water in my driveway right now
12:46:03 from just the rain that we got this morning.
12:46:05 So who determines who gets the help in what areas?
12:46:11 And I think we need to identify those areas and
12:46:14 just take a look at the financial component of it.
12:46:17 Thank you very much.
12:46:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:46:19 Next speaker?
12:46:20 >> My name is Edward Johnson.
12:46:27 I live on 2414 east drest Avenue.
12:46:36 And the poor section of town where I have
12:46:41 experienced stormwater flooding, discussed
12:46:48 foreclosure, and you were saying, Mr. Baird, that
12:46:53 you think the people at that section of town the
12:46:57 poor neighborhood should -- they don't make as
12:47:07 much money.
12:47:08 Me, myself, I'm on SSI, $733 a month.
12:47:14 And I am scared about paying taxes as it is, and
12:47:20 now with the stormwater taxes added onto it, it's
12:47:23 even more harder.
12:47:24 Now, I do agree with you as you spoke, you said
12:47:27 that using the roads in neighborhood, that is
12:47:35 true.
12:47:36 I do bus 12 can't go to the mall.
12:47:40 But I can go to WalMart, and streets like
12:47:44 Linebaugh, it's flooded, and buses have to
12:47:48 reroute.
12:47:49 I understand that.
12:47:52 I don't feel bad about the taxes hoping helping on
12:47:55 those roads, but the amount is what's troubling.
12:47:59 And I don't see where you can say the people in
12:48:02 the poor neighborhoods should be able to meet if
12:48:07 amount that even the affluent neighborhoods are
12:48:11 paying if they don't make that type of money to
12:48:14 match that income.
12:48:16 That's what I would like to say.
12:48:17 Thank you.
12:48:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:48:18 >> Oh, one more thing.
12:48:20 Thank you to what Mr. Reddick was saying about let
12:48:27 people take care of their part of town, which is
12:48:30 the problem we had since it no longer floods in
12:48:35 front of my house.
12:48:36 You park in retrospect you will need a boat to get
12:48:40 to the front door.
12:48:45 We have no floods, whatever.
12:48:47 And I think it would be even more right that we
12:48:51 pay our taxes up to that, and even though, you say
12:48:59 the A flight attendant neighborhood.
12:49:01 But we can't match that amount.
12:49:02 Thank you.
12:49:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:49:04 Next speaker?
12:49:16 >> First time coming before a board like this.
12:49:19 Very interesting.
12:49:20 My name is Chuck Richards, pastor, El-Bethel
12:49:23 Baptist Church, 6611 north 15th street.
12:49:27 I hope if this does go through -- and I am kind of
12:49:30 doubting it will go through because I believe what
12:49:32 I see, if you are wondering about the
12:49:36 effectiveness of this plan, okay.
12:49:41 South Tampa is flooding ever since I was in second
12:49:46 grade.
12:49:46 Okay, we knew that.
12:49:47 It's something that's gone on for years and years.
12:49:50 That's not to say that there's not a problem, nor
12:49:54 that something shouldn't be done about it.
12:49:58 But when you look at the size, the amount of
12:50:02 increase, talking of a 400 percent, there should
12:50:06 be some kind of a red flag in someone's mind that
12:50:08 says, what we have been doing all along that we
12:50:12 are looking at up to a 400 percent increase, and
12:50:16 somehow this money is going to make it all go
12:50:18 away.
12:50:20 A lot of people are in doubt about what's
12:50:23 happening to the money, because -- the first time
12:50:29 we were here she said, what's in it for me?
12:50:33 I wish that was your biggest problem, to try to
12:50:36 solve.
12:50:37 Because your biggest problem is that 95% of the
12:50:41 people don't believe this is going to be resolved
12:50:46 by this plan, money being thrown at it.
12:50:53 So I think you are going to have a tough sell on
12:51:00 it.
12:51:01 The thing about good stewardship.
12:51:03 It's been this way for so many years.
12:51:06 Unless you have some plan that you can put up and
12:51:08 say, this is going to be handled in this new way,
12:51:15 a new approach, that will take care of the
12:51:17 problem, it's going to be very slow.
12:51:21 And this money that you are asking for, at the end
12:51:25 of it, does it go away?
12:51:30 Do we take it off of the fees?
12:51:40 Once started it goes on continually and it has no
12:51:42 end.
12:51:42 The people that are moving in now, the new
12:51:44 buildings that are going up, extra money that's
12:51:47 coming in from those, with the present plan you
12:51:51 have right now.
12:51:52 And if that doesn't handle it, I don't see it
12:51:54 being handled in anything that I see here, and I
12:51:59 don't believe I am standing alone.
12:52:01 Thank you.
12:52:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:52:02 Next speaker?
12:52:05 >> Joseph Capitano, Sr., 3111 south -- anyway, I'm
12:52:20 here -- (Laughter)
12:52:30 Anyway, like what Mr. Peterson from the board of
12:52:40 realtors, I think there's a definite need, I have
12:52:42 no problem with it and come up with a fair
12:52:45 solution.
12:52:46 I think that one example that has not been
12:52:49 addressed is Ybor City.
12:52:53 Back in I think 2005 we taxed ourselves, we took
12:52:58 our TIF money, we spent million $8 million.
12:53:01 We didn't have a problem this time.
12:53:02 So before this thing hits everyone, I think we
12:53:12 studied further as to how we raise this money.
12:53:14 I don't think it's fair the way it's being done
12:53:17 and I think we need to ask you people to oh slow
12:53:19 this thing down and take a better look at it and
12:53:21 have more discussion about it.
12:53:23 Thank you.
12:53:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
12:53:25 Next speaker.
12:53:26 >> Good afternoon.
12:53:29 Andy Scaglione.
12:53:31 Short and sweet.
12:53:34 I appreciate trying to improve our stormwater
12:53:38 system.
12:53:39 But I really have a problem with the notice.
12:53:44 I got a sampling of our 8,000 members, also
12:53:49 friends, and they didn't even know about this
12:53:52 improvement assessment that was on the second
12:53:54 page.
12:53:57 In the future if we are going to do this large of
12:53:59 a tax proposal, there needs to be a separate
12:54:02 sheet, not the back of a notice on the front.
12:54:07 So that's a real biggie with transparency.
12:54:13 I won't get into some of the other things that
12:54:15 Mike and Gina talked about, Peterson and Gina
12:54:21 Grimes.
12:54:21 And I'm also -- it makes me feel like the old
12:54:24 saying, do not let a good crisis go to waste with
12:54:29 the recent floodings that we had.
12:54:35 In conclusion, I just think we need to postpone
12:54:38 this adoption.
12:54:38 Let's get it right.
12:54:40 And I heard some excellent suggestions today, the
12:54:44 part about Councilman Maniscalco the BP money.
12:54:50 Let's show the taxpayers they got something for
12:54:52 that BP money instead of just going into the
12:54:55 general revenue fund.
12:54:57 I think that would be a real kick start for this
12:55:00 program.
12:55:00 Councilman Miranda, music to my ears being very
12:55:04 conservative financially, that pay as you go.
12:55:08 When you pay all these fees, for attorneys, and
12:55:13 all the fees that are generated, you don't get
12:55:17 that back.
12:55:18 That's just spent money.
12:55:19 Those are expenses.
12:55:20 So I like the idea of pay as you go.
12:55:26 Debt is not always your friend.
12:55:28 So that's about it.
12:55:29 Thank you very much for your consideration.
12:55:30 >> Joe Robinson, licensed professional engineer.
12:55:43 This is bad science.
12:55:45 You did not take a 2003 study and then enforce
12:55:50 2015 fees.
12:55:51 You need to go back and update the 2003 study to
12:55:55 2015.
12:55:56 You heard people say that has not been done.
12:56:01 It's bad science to go forward.
12:56:03 You have got a 2006 stormwater.
12:56:07 Bad science.
12:56:08 You need to bring that stuff up to date with the
12:56:10 best engineers.
12:56:11 We are looking at it.
12:56:13 Things have changed in the fiscal environment.
12:56:15 That's the first thing.
12:56:16 The second thing is besides the bad science, it
12:56:20 appears that the low-income and -- income and
12:56:23 minority people in East Tampa already paid for
12:56:29 that.
12:56:29 People with wood frame houses that sit off the
12:56:32 ground have pervious area underneath it.
12:56:35 My house sits off the ground.
12:56:46 You are going to have to get an engineer like me
12:56:48 to go and calculate it.
12:56:51 It's bad science.
12:56:53 It's so bad of a science that I believe that the
12:56:58 complaints filed with the EPA on the way to the
12:57:01 current love income areas.
12:57:04 We are looking at filing a complaint on this whole
12:57:07 process.
12:57:07 The reasonable thing to do is to move forward with
12:57:10 your assessment.
12:57:12 It's already in there.
12:57:13 Let us get the assessment.
12:57:14 Why?
12:57:15 Because all of that operation stuff.
12:57:18 But the issues deal with the capital improvement
12:57:21 which is trying to piggyback on bad science from
12:57:24 2003, is not the way to go.
12:57:27 There has not been a lot of professional
12:57:29 engineers, nor the city has enough people like
12:57:32 they did in -- I have $4 million of the city
12:57:38 stormwater.
12:57:39 They couldn't even come up with a project.
12:57:43 I have done this stormwater stuff.
12:57:49 I now they want to come and assess everybody with
12:57:53 bad science.
12:57:53 Let's get some engineers to update this study.
12:57:56 Let's take into consideration what everybody said
12:57:58 in this room.
12:57:59 And then let's move forward with something that
12:58:02 makes sense.
12:58:03 Or I expect the lawyers will have a field day on
12:58:07 whether this is legally doable or not because it
12:58:10 based on bad science.
12:58:12 So let's get some engineers.
12:58:14 Update the 2003 study.
12:58:19 Maybe 2006, that's still nine years ago.
12:58:22 Things have changed, environmental conditions have
12:58:26 changed, the city's landscape has changed, and
12:58:35 what is that all about?
12:58:37 It's going to assess the whole City of Tampa and
12:58:39 don't segregate.
12:58:42 >> Alan Kahana. 320 Blanca.
12:58:54 That's a hard act to follow.
12:58:56 First, Charlie, I think you had a great idea for a
12:59:00 program to come up with a solution for something
12:59:02 that is more affordable and come up with a program
12:59:05 for collecting our fees based on something more
12:59:08 than just ESUs.
12:59:10 ESUs based on hardened surface does not make
12:59:14 sense in our city.
12:59:15 It really puts the burden in the wrong place.
12:59:17 So we need to sit down and come up with a program
12:59:19 that spreads that burden more evenly across people
12:59:23 in our city.
12:59:24 One thing that seems obvious to someone perhaps in
12:59:29 construction but did not take into account any
12:59:34 grass area, still contributes to our stormwater
12:59:36 problem.
12:59:36 We all know that because the EPA, EPC are
12:59:41 concerned about the runoff that contains nitrates
12:59:44 from our fertilizers, and yet we are somehow
12:59:47 giving 100% credit, if you will, for unhardened
12:59:50 surface which makes no sense in this calculation.
12:59:53 And so again, somehow we need to take a break,
12:59:57 take a knee, reevaluate how we are going to assess
13:00:01 this.
13:00:01 We all know we have a problem.
13:00:03 We all know the solutions for problems.
13:00:06 In Ybor City, we had terrible flooding.
13:00:10 I have been down there since 1983.
13:00:13 And when we finally came up with a real program,
13:00:16 which incorporated improvements to 15th and
13:00:21 finally 16th street we have zero flooding now
13:00:23 so I'm a believer there's solutions.
13:00:27 No, they are not going to be perfect.
13:00:29 If a hurricane comes next Tuesday, and I think our
13:00:32 full moon is on Monday and it's a high tide, no
13:00:35 matter what we do, we are never going to solve the
13:00:38 problem.
13:00:38 So we are not looking at those singular events.
13:00:41 And so again I applaud you for thinking out of the
13:00:45 box but do not go with the plan that's there just
13:00:48 in terms of collection of funds to pay for it.
13:00:50 Let's come up with something that's a bit more
13:00:52 equitable.
13:00:53 Thank you.
13:00:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
13:00:55 Next speaker.
13:00:56 >> Gill Brooks, 302 north Albany which is North
13:01:05 Hyde Park.
13:01:07 I have several concerns about this proposal.
13:01:09 The first one, the stormwater initiative type
13:01:13 thing.
13:01:14 I have no problem with it.
13:01:18 It's the regular maintenance, I have no problem
13:01:20 with.
13:01:20 But we were promised in North Hyde Park several
13:01:23 years ago that we would have a Cypress Street fix.
13:01:27 The money was line drawn through and went to 40th
13:01:31 Street.
13:01:32 You are going to take and sit there and assess me
13:01:34 again for something.
13:01:36 How do I know that it isn't going to have a line
13:01:39 drawn through in the five years and say, oh, no,
13:01:42 South Tampa needs it more.
13:01:44 The other problem I have is it's a low-income
13:01:48 area.
13:01:49 You are talking 8,000 percent increase on some
13:01:53 people's taxes.
13:01:57 My property taxes personally will go up over 30%.
13:02:03 I'm a widow. If this is a general item, a general
13:02:08 budget item, I would get exception for being a
13:02:11 widow of a veteran who was wounded.
13:02:13 But I don't get those with the stormwater
13:02:15 assessment.
13:02:19 I'm worried about my neighbors.
13:02:20 They are in their 80s.
13:02:22 They are retired schoolteachers.
13:02:25 You know, like I said, when is it going to stop?
13:02:31 The Crosstown expressway.
13:02:32 I was here when they passed that.
13:02:34 They said it would go away when it was paid off.
13:02:36 We are still paying for the Crosstown.
13:02:40 Thank you.
13:02:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
13:02:44 Council, if you all have no objections, we will
13:02:50 stand in recess until 2:15.
13:02:53 If you have no objections.
13:02:55 2:15.
13:02:56 It's 1:03 now.
13:03:00 And we stand in recess until 2:15 and come back
13:03:03 and take up this item.
13:03:06 Thank you.
13:03:13 (City Council recess)
13:03:17
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.
13:03:24
13:49:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: We'll get restarted again.
14:18:47 Roll call.
14:18:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
14:18:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
14:18:53 >> Capin?
14:18:54 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
14:18:56 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.
14:18:56 >> Montelione?
14:18:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
14:19:00 All right.
14:19:02 We heard public comments, and you want to remind
14:19:05 us, we take each item individually, correct?
14:19:10 >>JAN McLEAN: Yes, sir.
14:19:11 Jan McLean, City Attorney's office.
14:19:13 Put us back in context of where we are, the
14:19:17 procedure, and we are at a point that Council is
14:19:23 supposed to have further discussion on the three
14:19:25 items.
14:19:25 We could do that, and then when you're ready for a
14:19:28 vote, to call up for the one item, number 65 and
14:19:31 vote on that, and then we would close the public
14:19:33 hearing and move on to the next item.
14:19:38 >>HARRY COHEN: Can I ask you for a clarification
14:19:42 on -- we have three separate items, correct?
14:19:44 >>JAN McLEAN: Correct.
14:19:45 >>HARRY COHEN: The first one is the method of
14:19:48 collection, so it's whether or not to collect any
14:19:50 assessment from the tax collector or whether to do
14:19:53 something different, correct?
14:19:54 >>JAN McLEAN: It's the notice to the tax collector
14:19:56 that we are going to use him to collect for the
14:19:59 improvement assessment.
14:20:03 >>HARRY COHEN: The second one is just the
14:20:07 maintenance assessment, correct?
14:20:08 >>JAN McLEAN: Correct.
14:20:09 >>HARRY COHEN: It stands alone.
14:20:10 >>JAN McLEAN: Yes.
14:20:12 >>HARRY COHEN: It includes the money that -- in
14:20:14 other words, it starts at zero in the sense that
14:20:17 we have to adopt something in order to even
14:20:19 maintain parity with where we are right now.
14:20:24 >>JAN McLEAN: The resolution right now include the
14:20:26 max, the 82, which you had directed us to do
14:20:29 previously, so if you're going to do anything
14:20:30 other than that, you would have to direct us to
14:20:33 revise the resolution and bring it back to you,
14:20:37 which we can do readily.
14:20:38 It doesn't take very much setup to do that.
14:20:43 Right now it stands at the $82.
14:20:44 >>HARRY COHEN: The third thing is the improvement
14:20:46 assessment fees, correct?
14:20:48 >>JAN McLEAN: Correct.
14:20:49 >>HARRY COHEN: That is not actually scheduled to
14:20:51 take effect until over a year from now, correct?
14:20:55 >>JAN McLEAN: It's not imposed or collected until
14:20:58 a year from now but you're setting the rates in
14:21:00 the schedule you directed us to include in the
14:21:04 resolution.
14:21:06 >>HARRY COHEN: I understand that.
14:21:07 What I'm saying is, there is no -- whether we do
14:21:11 that now or not, it's going to be some time before
14:21:14 it would appear on the tax bill, so there's leeway
14:21:17 with that one.
14:21:18 Whereas, with the maintenance fee, there is not.
14:21:22 >>JAN McLEAN: Correct.
14:21:23 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay.
14:21:24 Got it.
14:21:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Capin.
14:21:26 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I think if we pass the resolution,
14:21:29 we pass the resolution.
14:21:30 I don't know what the leeway is.
14:21:30 >>JAN McLEAN: Whether you pass it or not.
14:21:32 >>YVONNE CAPIN: You pass the resolution.
14:21:34 >>JAN McLEAN: I'm sorry.
14:21:35 I heard the question to say do you have to pass
14:21:39 that resolution now?
14:21:42 If you're going to -- you have to pass the
14:21:50 resolution for the service assessment now so that
14:21:51 it can go into the tax bill this year.
14:21:53 You do not absolutely have to pass the resolution
14:21:57 for the improvement assessment now for it to go
14:22:01 onto the bill next year.
14:22:02 You do, though, have to pass the first one, as you
14:22:06 asked me, for the notice so that you can use that
14:22:09 collection methodology for next year.
14:22:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: On the first one, how much time do
14:22:21 we have?
14:22:21 How much time for notice?
14:22:24 I read here December 31.
14:22:26 >>JAN McLEAN: We have to advise the tax collector
14:22:29 by the end of the year, December 31, that we're
14:22:32 going to use that method to collect.
14:22:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
14:22:37 So we're in August.
14:22:38 So we have a little bit of time should we decide
14:22:40 that.
14:22:42 >>JAN McLEAN: True.
14:22:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: What I understood, the third
14:22:50 resolution -- okay.
14:22:55 The third part, that -- when I heard councilman
14:23:02 Cohen say we have leeway, I think isn't it true if
14:23:06 we pass a resolution, what's the leeway?
14:23:10 Is it that it's not going to be effective for a
14:23:13 year or is it a leeway that we can change it?
14:23:18 What's the leeway we were referring to or that you
14:23:21 answered to?
14:23:23 You said yes, there's leeway.
14:23:27 >>JAN McLEAN: For scheduling purposes.
14:23:29 That's why I was trying to explain the question
14:23:31 that I heard from councilman Cohen was, do we have
14:23:35 leeway in time to adopt the resolution for the
14:23:37 improvement assessment prior to it being imposed
14:23:41 for next year.
14:23:42 I should have repeated the question back.
14:23:44 You have to adopt number 65, the notice to use
14:23:49 that uniform collection methodology if you're
14:23:53 going to adopt a resolution for the improvement
14:23:55 assessment.
14:23:56 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Do you have to, for the service,
14:23:59 for number two?
14:24:00 >>JAN McLEAN: No.
14:24:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: It's on the rolls.
14:24:04 >>JAN McLEAN: Correct.
14:24:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you for the clarification.
14:24:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
14:24:08 That's exactly what I was going to say.
14:24:10 65 and 67 are married in a way.
14:24:12 Because if you don't not pass 65, 67, you've got
14:24:15 to vote, but it's moot.
14:24:17 It ain't going nowhere.
14:24:18 You have no way to collect it.
14:24:20 You can't spend it.
14:24:21 >> Correct.
14:24:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Then 66 is a service assessment
14:24:23 that would go to $82 a year, and that's the one
14:24:27 that stands by itself.
14:24:30 That's how I look at it.
14:24:32 >>JAN McLEAN: Right.
14:24:33 Yes, because it already has the collection
14:24:35 methodology.
14:24:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Right, correct.
14:24:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Well, let me ask the question, I
14:24:39 think I heard you correctly when you stated to
14:24:42 Ms. Capin that we have until December 31st to
14:24:46 notice the tax collector that we want to use this
14:24:49 methodology.
14:24:50 >>JAN McLEAN: We have until December 31st to
14:24:53 advise the tax collector by adopting a resolution,
14:24:56 so you would have to adopt a resolution in enough
14:24:58 time for us to advise the tax collector that
14:25:01 that's what your action was.
14:25:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
14:25:06 If we wanted to, if this Council today say to you
14:25:09 that we want to modify the methodology that would
14:25:14 be more fair, equal to those assessed by this, you
14:25:19 still have time to make the adjustment.
14:25:22 >>JAN McLEAN: If you wanted to modify the
14:25:24 resolution for the improvement assessment?
14:25:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: If we approve number 65, that
14:25:30 means we're agreeing to the methodology, the
14:25:33 formula that you used in order to advise the tax
14:25:36 collector, is that right?
14:25:36 >>JAN McLEAN: No.
14:25:38 You can adopt number 65.
14:25:40 Because it stands on its own.
14:25:42 If we adopt a resolution for additional
14:25:44 assessment, which in this case would be the
14:25:46 improvement assessment, we're going to use that
14:25:48 collection.
14:25:49 But if you never adopt a resolution or you change
14:25:51 the one that's on there, you already have made the
14:25:55 determination that you're going to use uniform
14:25:58 collection methodology, which is the tax
14:25:59 collector.
14:26:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: Well, let me go back, take a step
14:26:04 back to the comments that Mr. Miranda made.
14:26:06 When he stated about using -- not just tax
14:26:14 collector, paying extra -- but using other
14:26:20 resources to collect within house or somewhere
14:26:24 where we won't be burdened with that high
14:26:26 responsibility of paying out, could that be done
14:26:28 if we wanted to do that?
14:26:31 >>JAN McLEAN: It could be done legally.
14:26:33 I would have to look to our finance department or
14:26:37 the utility department, depending on what your
14:26:40 direction to staff would be, as to how we would
14:26:44 look to collect it.
14:26:46 There are other methodologies, but we don't have
14:26:51 those in place right now.
14:26:52 The only other method that we use is for
14:26:55 government properties where we send the bills
14:26:57 directly to them.
14:27:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
14:27:00 All right.
14:27:01 >>JAN McLEAN: And there's ramifications.
14:27:03 I know that -- I don't mean to go beyond the scope
14:27:08 of your question, but there are ramifications to
14:27:10 those other methods of collection which Sonya had
14:27:13 indicated earlier.
14:27:18 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
14:27:19 But if we had until December 31st to notify the
14:27:24 tax collector, that gives staff additional time to
14:27:28 vet some of the resources prior to
14:27:30 December 31st, correct?
14:27:34 >>JAN McLEAN: Yes, sir.
14:27:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
14:27:37 All right.
14:27:37 Mr. Cohen.
14:27:38 >>HARRY COHEN: Yeah, so on that, can I -- on that
14:27:40 line of thinking, which is where I seem to hear
14:27:43 everybody going.
14:27:45 I want to just ask if maybe we could look at it
14:27:49 this way.
14:27:50 66 is an item that really stands on its own.
14:27:53 65 and 67 really go together, and it's clear that
14:27:56 we are not under time pressure to make a final
14:28:00 decision on some of the details surrounding both
14:28:04 65 and 67.
14:28:06 Points that Mr. Miranda made earlier about whether
14:28:08 you pay as you go or you want to finance.
14:28:12 There is the collection methodology.
14:28:14 There are all these different things that came up
14:28:16 that nonprofits and churches and whether or not --
14:28:21 and I think these could all be looked at maybe in
14:28:24 a workshop between now and October or November,
14:28:30 and we could look at all of this, and we still
14:28:33 wouldn't fall behind on any kind of schedule in
14:28:34 terms of what we ultimately wanted to do.
14:28:38 The only thing we have to deal with today is 66,
14:28:41 because that is the service assessment, and that's
14:28:43 something that would start October 1st.
14:28:45 Unless there's someone that wants to do it
14:28:51 differently, I think 65 and 67 we could put on a
14:28:56 workshop and ask all these questions.
14:28:58 We could go around and talk about it today, what
14:29:00 we would want to hear about it.
14:29:03 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
14:29:04 Item 65 is the first task we have.
14:29:10 I'll accept a recommendation of whatever the
14:29:15 Council chooses to do.
14:29:16 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, I guess I would make a motion
14:29:19 that we set items 65 and 67 for a workshop.
14:29:23 I'm looking for my calendar.
14:29:26 >> Chair, if you don't mind, before we go forward
14:29:29 with that, why don't we clear the service
14:29:33 assessment now.
14:29:34 As an example so that we can continue on that
14:29:38 because I think that the biggest issue, as
14:29:40 everyone has stated, are the other two items.
14:29:44 I think most of us, this is a guess of mine, would
14:29:48 be in agreement of allowing the increase on the
14:29:51 service assessment as opposed to the other
14:29:55 stickier issues that we have on the improvement
14:29:57 assessment.
14:29:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Before we do that, could we take
14:29:59 these out of order?
14:30:00 >> Yes, sir.
14:30:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
14:30:03 Ms. Capin and then Mr. Miranda.
14:30:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The service assessment also has an
14:30:10 increase.
14:30:14 >>HARRY COHEN: But we would discuss that.
14:30:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: We discussed it, but we're talking
14:30:17 about people that are in need, and we're going
14:30:27 ahead and looking at an assessment that is also an
14:30:33 increase, and we're not looking at it further.
14:30:39 It just is a thought that I think maybe we need to
14:30:44 think about, where we're heading with that one,
14:30:46 too.
14:30:49 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me go back to Mr. Suarez, I
14:30:52 didn't know if you were finished or not.
14:30:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was going to mention one thing.
14:30:56 The only difference between the improvement
14:30:58 assessment and the service assessment is that
14:31:00 we're under a time constraint more so, so that we
14:31:02 can start collecting quicker the improvement
14:31:06 assessment.
14:31:07 I understand what everyone is saying in terms of
14:31:09 maybe there is another method, maybe there are
14:31:11 other things we can talk about, some of the things
14:31:13 Mr. Miranda brought up, some of the other issues
14:31:15 brought up by members of the Council and others in
14:31:17 the public.
14:31:18 But the service assessment, I think we can
14:31:20 probably make a vote, if not now, I think we have
14:31:22 one more -- you put in one more meeting to allow
14:31:26 us to be still on the same time frame, and I think
14:31:30 that meeting would be -- drop-dead
14:31:32 September 3rd?
14:31:34 >> Yes, you would continue the public hearing
14:31:36 on -- for instance, if you wanted to continue to
14:31:39 discuss 65 and 67, my recommendation would be to
14:31:42 continue the public hearing until the third.
14:31:47 That would give you along the same schedule.
14:31:49 If there are -- there are certain questions that I
14:31:53 can hear that are arising that are similar to what
14:31:57 came out of some of the conversation that was put
14:32:00 forward to you today, that maybe answered from a
14:32:06 legal perspective.
14:32:07 But, of course, you know, if we want to have the
14:32:10 conversation in the course of a workshop to better
14:32:14 explain those issues to you as far as not for
14:32:18 profits or low income, things like that that I'm
14:32:21 hearing, those might be straightforward.
14:32:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: My only point about saying about
14:32:27 the service assessment, I don't think that's going
14:32:29 to change because the assessment is already on the
14:32:31 books.
14:32:31 We're not changing the assessment itself and the
14:32:33 way that it's collected or the way that it's
14:32:35 figured.
14:32:36 All we're doing is allowing for an additional cost
14:32:40 to come into the service assessment.
14:32:42 Correct?
14:32:45 >>JAN McLEAN: You already have the collection.
14:32:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It's an easier thing.
14:32:49 We can either decide to do it today or next week.
14:32:51 We only have the seven-day time frame so that we
14:32:54 can keep on track, so the tax collector can still
14:32:57 do their job and still collect later on.
14:32:59 That's the only point I was making.
14:33:01 >>JAN McLEAN: If I might, the adoption of 65 does
14:33:04 not commit you to anything.
14:33:05 We've actually been in front of previous Councils
14:33:09 on other issues on not ad valorem assessments with
14:33:13 regard to other canals, for instance.
14:33:17 And that particular Council adopted a resolution
14:33:20 stating that they were going to use the uniform
14:33:23 methodology and they were going to look at an ad
14:33:26 valorem assessment, but it never passed.
14:33:29 But they put in place the collection methodology
14:33:33 on that schedule.
14:33:35 So I'm just saying, if you wanted to, you could
14:33:38 adopt that today, and then that would be one item
14:33:40 of business that would already be completed.
14:33:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to be make a
14:33:47 statement, under the current service level of 8.4
14:33:50 million, that's what you have on the books now,
14:33:52 correct?
14:33:52 That's being collected through the tax?
14:33:58 >>JAN McLEAN: No.
14:34:00 That's what the cost of the program is,
14:34:01 approximately 8.4.
14:34:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What program do you have now
14:34:04 that the tax collector is collecting your money
14:34:06 for stormwater?
14:34:07 >> The service assessment.
14:34:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Which is 8.4 million.
14:34:10 So that means you're paying $168,000 to have that
14:34:14 collected.
14:34:14 Is there any way that we can break that marriage
14:34:17 off so that some 10 or 15 houses maybe can get
14:34:22 additional services with that money?
14:34:25 >>JAN McLEAN: I have not looked at that agreement,
14:34:27 so I don't have that answer for you.
14:34:28 I'm sorry.
14:34:29 I'll be glad to go back and look at it, but I
14:34:34 don't know the answer.
14:34:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not trying to monkey wrench
14:34:37 it because I like the service assessment.
14:34:39 I don't like paying out money to collect something
14:34:41 that I can collect myself.
14:34:48 >>JAN McLEAN: You have that collection methodology
14:34:49 in place for the service assessment right now.
14:34:51 I don't think that you can revise the agreement
14:34:56 and not have the service assessment go forward.
14:34:59 I can look at it to see what the next iteration of
14:35:03 it is.
14:35:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That means if I have that
14:35:06 agreement and you go to 16.19 million assessment,
14:35:10 I'm going to pay $328,800 in lost money that I
14:35:14 never recover.
14:35:17 >>JAN McLEAN: I have to admit that I do not know
14:35:20 the terms of the agreement and it sounds like you
14:35:22 do as far as the increase and how it would affect
14:35:25 what we pay to the tax collector.
14:35:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me follow up with
14:35:35 Mr. Miranda's question.
14:35:36 Since you have not been able to study the
14:35:38 agreement, then could we table this to September
14:35:42 the 3rd in order for you to review the agreement
14:35:44 to determine and answer Mr. Miranda's question.
14:35:49 >>JAN McLEAN: You could continue the hearing and
14:35:50 we can come back and answer it if we don't have
14:35:53 somebody that already has the answer for you.
14:35:55 I don't have it.
14:36:00 >> Councilman Miranda, if I understand your
14:36:03 question, you were looking for ways to decrease
14:36:06 that processing fee.
14:36:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, ma'am.
14:36:09 >>SONYA LITTLE: Okay.
14:36:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We're already billing in the
14:36:12 Water Department.
14:36:13 Brad did a great job when he was head of the
14:36:16 department.
14:36:16 Doing a better job now because everybody is
14:36:18 looking at him so he has to really produce.
14:36:21 And that water service bill, if we use -- if we
14:36:25 buy water from an agency outside of the City of
14:36:27 Tampa, pass through so much.
14:36:30 Gets mad at me because I never have a pass-through
14:36:32 charge, but those are the things that I'm looking
14:36:35 at to save money so I can give more value to the
14:36:39 dollar that we're spending.
14:36:40 That's all.
14:36:42 >>SONYA LITTLE: The way that it was structured, I
14:36:47 believe in having it part of the property tax bill
14:36:50 was more for security purposes, more so that more
14:36:52 likely that the property tax bill will be kept
14:36:57 current.
14:36:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with that.
14:37:01 Even that, you don't have 100% surety that
14:37:03 everybody pays their tax bill.
14:37:06 You're still going to have a loss.
14:37:08 Sooner or later, and I understand what you're
14:37:09 saying.
14:37:13 >> If I could follow up, too.
14:37:15 It opened up a scope of discussion that we hadn't
14:37:17 had previously.
14:37:18 And I was conferring with our counsel, your
14:37:21 notices have gone out that have identified that
14:37:24 that would be the collection methodology for this
14:37:26 upcoming year.
14:37:27 The notices, if you convert, just say, for
14:37:30 instance, hypothetically you convert to the
14:37:33 utility director utility bill, that would be going
14:37:36 to different people, and you have it set up at
14:37:40 least for this next fiscal year.
14:37:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with your counselor on
14:37:45 this methodology presently.
14:37:46 That doesn't mean you can't renotice.
14:37:48 You're not talking about 65 and 67.
14:37:50 You're talking about 66.
14:37:51 66 is only the service of what we have now.
14:37:56 >>JAN McLEAN: I understand.
14:37:57 My recommendation is if you're going to change the
14:38:03 methodology -- and I'm going out on a limb here,
14:38:06 but that's -- my recommendation if you want to
14:38:08 change the collection methodology, that you do it
14:38:10 for the next fiscal year.
14:38:12 At this point in time, even for the service
14:38:14 assessment, you have that in place.
14:38:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not going to argue with
14:38:17 that point.
14:38:19 You're the lawyer; I'm not.
14:38:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: So let me be clear before we move
14:38:26 forward.
14:38:27 Still, to make sure that we have all of the
14:38:33 answers from the questions particular so what
14:38:35 Mr. Miranda had posed, continue this to
14:38:39 September 3rd, will that cause a problem?
14:38:42 With the service agreement?
14:38:46 >>JAN McLEAN: No.
14:38:46 You could continue the public hearing on all three
14:38:48 of the items to September the 3rd.
14:38:50 I've got that calculated within the calendaring.
14:38:53 But that would put us at the backstop on having to
14:39:00 take an action on the service assessment for the
14:39:02 upcoming year.
14:39:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: The question that Mr. Miranda
14:39:07 raised just drew my curiosity here.
14:39:10 The more I think about it, the more I want to at
14:39:14 least have it vetted to see if there's that
14:39:17 possibility.
14:39:17 So that's the reason why I'm raising the question.
14:39:20 Give everybody an opportunity to go back and
14:39:23 review the service agreement to make sure you're
14:39:28 100% accurate that this can be done or cannot be
14:39:31 done.
14:39:32 And I'm thinking one week to let this Council know
14:39:37 whether we can do this or not.
14:39:40 I agree with what Mr. Miranda is saying.
14:39:43 If it wouldn't cause a problem and a hardship to
14:39:49 your staff or to anyone else, I would like to make
14:39:57 sure that those possibilities, whether they are
14:39:59 available or not, we at least would have an answer
14:40:02 to it.
14:40:03 Because, right now, it seems like there's
14:40:06 uncertainty here, so I just want to be 100%
14:40:13 accurate.
14:40:13 Because I do agree.
14:40:14 If we can save a dollar here, save a dollar there,
14:40:18 I'm all for that, but I want to make sure we
14:40:21 vetted this and make sure that we reviewed the
14:40:24 service agreement one last time.
14:40:29 Last time you looked at the service agreement?
14:40:38 >> With the tax collector.
14:40:39 No, I have not been involved with that agreement.
14:40:41 I would have to pull that up and look at it.
14:40:46 >> I just wanted to clarify something regarding
14:40:49 using, for instance, or, for example, utility bill
14:40:54 for a collection method, it's a different set of
14:40:58 customers, if you will, because we serve for both
14:41:01 water and wastewater 25% of our customers are
14:41:04 outside the city limit.
14:41:07 That's one.
14:41:09 Two, we would have to -- for those who receive a
14:41:14 mitigation credit, we'll have to pull those out
14:41:17 manually with the current billing system we have
14:41:20 which is 27 years old.
14:41:21 And there would be cost associated with doing both
14:41:26 of those and separating out those customer
14:41:29 classes.
14:41:30 I just wanted to point that out.
14:41:32 It wouldn't be --
14:41:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Nothing is free in life.
14:41:39 Even the air you breathe.
14:41:40 You have to clean it once in a while.
14:41:43 Let me say this, he's right you have customers
14:41:45 outside the limit.
14:41:46 But that's also easily identified because they pay
14:41:48 1.25 more for water than we do so the computer
14:41:51 would pick it up immediately.
14:41:52 >>BRAD BAIRD: Yeah, that part you could separate
14:41:55 out fairly easily, but those that receive the
14:41:58 mitigation credits, that would not be easy.
14:42:00 That would have to be done manually, possibly with
14:42:05 a new billing system that will go in place in
14:42:07 about two years, you could do that.
14:42:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, I'm not debating
14:42:11 Mr. Brad Baird, but mitigation credits are
14:42:14 received, they are given to -- somebody --
14:42:19 collector given the credits now, yes or no?
14:42:22 >>BRAD BAIRD: Yeah, I mean the credits -- you
14:42:25 don't collect them --
14:42:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We would know immediately who
14:42:28 to credit because he's got them.
14:42:31 >>BRAD BAIRD: Right.
14:42:31 You would have to go through the utility.
14:42:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: How can I be right and wrong at
14:42:35 the same time?
14:42:36 >>BRAD BAIRD: You would have to go through the
14:42:37 utility customer list manually to do that.
14:42:40 Yeah, it can be done.
14:42:41 I just wanted to point that out.
14:42:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand.
14:42:47 Thank you.
14:42:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen, you had a motion.
14:42:51 Let me just say, I do agree with your motion
14:42:54 because at the end, some of the public speakers
14:42:57 this morning, they raised some questions that I
14:42:59 had not thought of and I think we should have open
14:43:04 discussion in a workshop pertaining to the item.
14:43:06 You had a motion.
14:43:07 Did you get a second?
14:43:10 >>HARRY COHEN: I don't know.
14:43:11 If you don't mind, I'll make a slightly different
14:43:15 motion or withdraw it.
14:43:19 >> Next week would not be a workshop.
14:43:22 It would be a continued public hearing.
14:43:27 >>HARRY COHEN: I am not in favor of putting off
14:43:32 the decision on the service assessment.
14:43:34 We have a problem in this city that is enormous,
14:43:39 and we are in a situation now -- and I'm just
14:43:42 talking about number 6, 66, the service
14:43:44 assessment.
14:43:45 65 and 67 I think are another matter.
14:43:48 But the service assessment, we've already sent out
14:43:52 the notice for this year.
14:43:54 It is due to be part of this year's budget
14:43:57 effective October 1st.
14:43:59 If we do not pass it, we don't even have at this
14:44:03 point a mechanism to get the $30 that we've been
14:44:05 getting since 2003.
14:44:08 So in my view, there was very little opposition
14:44:14 this morning to the concept or to the entire
14:44:19 program of the service assessment.
14:44:20 The main issue this morning that was brought up
14:44:22 was on 65 and 67 on the improvement assessment,
14:44:25 the issue of whether or not the way in which it
14:44:29 was going to be assessed was fair.
14:44:31 Councilman Miranda brought up the questions
14:44:36 regarding the financing or not having the
14:44:39 financing of the program, that doesn't apply to
14:44:41 66.
14:44:42 66 is just the fee that's being paid to clean the
14:44:45 streets and the gutters and the outfalls and the
14:44:50 pipes and the ponds and the ditches.
14:44:52 So, you know, I think we should go ahead with
14:44:57 that.
14:44:57 Put some certainty to what we're doing immediately
14:45:01 to address some of our flooding problems, and then
14:45:04 have a workshop discussion.
14:45:05 I looked on the calendar.
14:45:06 We have plenty of workshop time in the remainder
14:45:09 of this year.
14:45:10 We can answer and really analyze Councilman
14:45:12 Miranda's questions, but we can also at the same
14:45:15 time assure our citizens that we did do what
14:45:21 needed to be done in terms of the maintenance and
14:45:23 operation of our current system to do everything
14:45:26 we can to at least start to address some of the
14:45:31 low-hanging fruit that exists in dealing with this
14:45:33 problem.
14:45:33 Having said that, I want to make a motion that 65
14:45:36 and 67 be closed and moved for a workshop
14:45:42 discussion on Thursday, October 22nd.
14:45:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: She said it has to remain open.
14:45:50 >> Let me clarify if you're going to take any
14:45:52 action on those items, the notice -- the public
14:45:56 hearing needs to stay open.
14:45:58 >>HARRY COHEN: Clearly, we wouldn't.
14:46:00 We would basically be saying we're not going to
14:46:02 deal with them prior to the workshop.
14:46:07 >>JAN McLEAN: That's correct.
14:46:08 You could continue the public hearing and you
14:46:10 could make a determination as to whether you
14:46:11 wanted to take an action on either one or both of
14:46:15 those.
14:46:16 >>HARRY COHEN: I understand, that's fine.
14:46:17 We could do that.
14:46:18 I think we should take 66 today.
14:46:20 It really is an entirely separate issue, and if we
14:46:24 failed to deal with that, I really think today
14:46:27 would have been a step backward rather than a step
14:46:29 forward.
14:46:30 And, again, listening to the public comment this
14:46:33 morning, there were an awful lot of people who
14:46:36 said I'm fine with the service assessment.
14:46:39 What I'm really here to talk about are the
14:46:41 questions of the improvement assessment.
14:46:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: You had a motion for 65, 67.
14:46:45 >>HARRY COHEN: Motion 65, 67, workshop
14:46:48 October 22nd.
14:46:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Continued.
14:46:52 >>HARRY COHEN: Continued.
14:46:53 Thursday, October 22nd.
14:47:01 We could do it in September.
14:47:06 But I wanted to give staff.
14:47:11 >> My niece is getting married on the 17th in
14:47:14 Pittsburgh.
14:47:17 >> I would like to ask a clarifying comment about
14:47:20 the closing -- hang on a second -- versus open,
14:47:25 keeping it open and continue it.
14:47:27 We don't do business in the workshop area.
14:47:29 We're just going to gather information.
14:47:31 Meaning that if we had to -- we'd have to go to
14:47:35 another regular session, correct, in order to take
14:47:37 action?
14:47:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, the issue here is
14:47:41 notice.
14:47:41 You had multiple letters sent to everybody.
14:47:43 That is a notice train for a public hearing.
14:47:46 That has to be continued.
14:47:49 You cannot go to a workshop and then take action
14:47:52 and bring it then back to a regular meeting.
14:47:54 My suggestion would be, if you wish to keep a
14:47:56 public hearing, keep it on a regular date.
14:47:59 Perhaps October 15th, Mr. Cohen, if that's okay.
14:48:03 No, not even the 15th.
14:48:05 Whenever you wish.
14:48:06 But the point is, though, that in order to
14:48:09 preserve due process, you have to maintain a
14:48:12 continuous notice train so that everybody who is
14:48:15 out there today, everybody who is listening on
14:48:17 television will know, the people who receive the
14:48:20 legal notice in the mail, when the next date and
14:48:22 time you'll be taking up the action.
14:48:24 >> The question was, though, was keep it as a
14:48:29 continued public hearing, have a workshop and then
14:48:31 have another regular session to decide what we
14:48:34 want to do in terms of the improvements.
14:48:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Your workshop would then have to
14:48:40 be -- you would have to have a continued public
14:48:43 workshop -- excuse me, a continued public hearing
14:48:45 on your workshop day.
14:48:47 You cannot separate this with a workshop.
14:48:50 You continue it from a public hearing to a public
14:48:51 hearing.
14:48:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That's what I want to clarify.
14:48:54 When we talk about workshops versus open public
14:48:56 hearings, we start mixing and matching, and I
14:48:58 wanted to get it straight as to what we actually
14:49:00 are going to be doing because if we have a
14:49:03 workshop and we can't have a workshop and then we
14:49:06 have to close the public hearing, that same day
14:49:08 after gathering information at a workshop.
14:49:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The issue is ultimately you can
14:49:14 close the public hearing, but the realization, the
14:49:16 reality is, then you have to renotice by mail to
14:49:19 everybody.
14:49:20 So that's why you want to continue the notice.
14:49:23 October 1st would be all right --
14:49:29 >>HARRY COHEN: October 1st, 9 a.m under staff
14:49:31 reports -- excuse me, 9:30 because that's when we
14:49:34 would do a public hearing.
14:49:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen, seconded by
14:49:37 Mr. Miranda.
14:49:38 Any discussion of the motion?
14:49:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No, I got it.
14:49:44 >>THE CLERK: [INAUDIBLE]
14:49:50 >>HARRY COHEN: 9:30 a.m.
14:49:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: All in favor of the motion, aye.
14:49:53 Opposed?
14:49:54 The motion carries.
14:49:55 Mr. Miranda and then Ms. Capin.
14:50:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
14:50:01 I'm sorry I've taken a couple of cracks at this.
14:50:05 No one ever said that -- he's a counselor, he
14:50:12 knows better than I do on that agreement, service
14:50:15 agreement of $168,000 for one year.
14:50:19 This is reviewed every year.
14:50:20 Then the service agreement is done every year?
14:50:24 >>JAN McLEAN: I am not involved in the contract
14:50:26 between the city and the tax collector.
14:50:28 I do not know what the terms and conditions of
14:50:32 that is.
14:50:32 All I know is right now is that you have already
14:50:36 made the determination that you're going to use
14:50:37 that methodology for this fiscal year, and your
14:50:40 notices are based on that.
14:50:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.
14:50:42 The notice is based on one year, so that means --
14:50:45 >>JAN McLEAN: Correct.
14:50:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: At any time can the Council
14:50:48 change that procedure going forward?
14:50:49 I see the counselor saying yes, I believe.
14:50:52 So I have no problem with that either,
14:50:53 Mr. Chairman.
14:50:54 I have no problem with 66 at all.
14:50:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
14:50:57 Ms. Capin.
14:50:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I was just thinking that we have
14:51:02 on here September the 3rd.
14:51:04 So we have a week to look at that further.
14:51:12 I'd like to have that week.
14:51:13 September 3rd is next week for 66 and consider
14:51:18 what we have in front of us.
14:51:24 There was no harm for next week, right?
14:51:26 >>JAN McLEAN: That's true.
14:51:27 We can continue the public hearing for 66 to
14:51:30 September the 3rd.
14:51:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: That was basically to review the
14:51:34 service agreement and see if there was -- to
14:51:36 answer some of the questions.
14:51:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Exactly.
14:51:39 It was so we would understand the contract.
14:51:41 Even that's better.
14:51:42 That would be my motion.
14:51:46 Motion 66 continue to September 3rd.
14:51:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: Would you hold your motion.
14:51:59 Ms. Montelione request to speak.
14:52:01 >> MIKE SUAREZ: I'm not going to talk about 66
14:52:04 right now.
14:52:05 We can go back to the discussion, if that's okay
14:52:08 with Councilwoman Capin.
14:52:10 Since we are now setting something up for the
14:52:12 improvement assessment for later on, on
14:52:15 October 1st, I believe, I'd like to make a
14:52:19 motion for staff to come back with specific
14:52:22 answers about some of the things that were brought
14:52:23 up today so that we do not continue to have
14:52:25 questions come up that we cannot answer or have
14:52:28 answered by staff so that we can go forward and
14:52:31 really have a clear idea of it.
14:52:34 First, I make a motion that staff comes back with
14:52:39 a longer time frame for collection of the
14:52:42 improvement district, meaning more of a glide path
14:52:48 going forward instead of it being seven years till
14:52:51 the final top end, make it a ten-year or a
14:52:56 nine-year, something like that.
14:52:57 I want to see the differences in that.
14:53:00 Number two, I'd like to see -- and I think
14:53:03 Mr. Miranda mentioned this, about different
14:53:07 collection method that deals -- that comes through
14:53:10 the enterprise funds that we currently already
14:53:13 collect for.
14:53:14 I know he mentioned it and it may have been an
14:53:17 offhand thing, and I won't speak for him, but in
14:53:20 terms of how we collect in terms of other
14:53:23 enterprise funds and how we are able to bond
14:53:24 through those enterprise funds.
14:53:26 And for both of those questions, the difference in
14:53:30 terms of costs for us in terms of going forward
14:53:33 with the assessment that was brought forward today
14:53:35 and those alternative methods.
14:53:38 Because I think we need to look at that to find
14:53:42 out if there is a real cost to doing it
14:53:44 differently than what staff has suggested to us
14:53:47 because without that, I think that we are not
14:53:49 doing our due diligence, and I think that we need
14:53:53 to look at it.
14:53:54 Mr. Miranda brought up a very good point about the
14:53:57 amount of money it costs to collect.
14:53:59 There are some things we can't stop, and he also
14:54:01 mentioned this, which is we bond something out,
14:54:03 the guys in New York will collect their money no
14:54:05 matter what.
14:54:06 So I think we need to make sure that we look at
14:54:09 other alternative ways of getting the improvement
14:54:13 assessment funded and funded fully, because we
14:54:16 cannot keep punting this down the road.
14:54:18 We have to figure out a way of doing this.
14:54:20 Keep delay only means that -- I think me and
14:54:24 Mr. Baird talked about this yesterday -- el niño
14:54:26 is coming again this coming winter, which is going
14:54:28 to probably cause much more difficult weather
14:54:33 events here in Tampa.
14:54:33 So those are my -- that's my motion with those
14:54:36 three segments, I believe.
14:54:39 >> Second.
14:54:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Do you want me to restate?
14:54:44 >> This is on items 65 and 67.
14:54:50 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I was asked to delay my motion
14:54:52 until he spoke.
14:54:53 He makes a motion --
14:54:56 >>FRANK REDDICK: His was about 65 and 67.
14:55:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I can hold my motion.
14:55:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No, you were very clear.
14:55:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I don't mind waiting either way.
14:55:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: Capin was talking about 66.
14:55:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We were talking about the other
14:55:10 ones.
14:55:18 >>HARRY COHEN: I would like to second it but ask
14:55:20 you for a friendly amendment with that.
14:55:22 Let me ask for a couple of other pieces of
14:55:24 information.
14:55:24 The issue regarding nonprofits and whether or not
14:55:27 there's a way that churches and synagogues and
14:55:30 other nonprofits can be exempted, the question
14:55:34 also that has not been raised, what type of
14:55:39 collection method could we consider using that
14:55:42 would be deductible under a person's federal
14:55:45 income tax?
14:55:46 Your property taxes are deductible under your
14:55:50 federal income tax.
14:55:51 And any type of assessment that we're going to put
14:55:54 in, if it's something that falls into that
14:55:57 category might actually be less of a burden.
14:55:59 So those are the two things --
14:56:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I will accept those amendments to
14:56:03 my motion.
14:56:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Is all right.
14:56:05 Further discussion on this motion?
14:56:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: -- oh, microphone, sorry.
14:56:19 I saw that look, sandy.
14:56:21 There seemed to be a lot of discussion from the
14:56:25 public this morning and some folks are still here
14:56:33 about the equity of how the formula of ESU is
14:56:39 arrived at.
14:56:40 There was a lot of confusion.
14:56:41 I know Mr. Baird tried to clarify, but I think
14:56:46 that I still am hearing questions from the public
14:56:51 and some of them are in writing, and, you know,
14:56:54 they are all part of the public hearing now, so
14:56:56 you can look them over.
14:56:58 But there are questions as to whether you brought
14:57:02 up government property and they billed
14:57:06 differently.
14:57:07 Government property is part of the formula for
14:57:15 coming up with ESUs?
14:57:18 And they also have to pay the assessment even
14:57:21 though they are a piece of government property,
14:57:23 they are not exempt.
14:57:28 >> That's correct.
14:57:28 We bill them directly because you can't lien
14:57:31 government property so we send them their bill,
14:57:33 but they are subject to the assessment.
14:57:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Are those properties also
14:57:39 considered in the development of the formula?
14:57:43 >>JAN McLEAN: Yes.
14:57:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because there was some
14:57:46 confusion as to that, and I was asked questions
14:57:49 directly related to whether or not they are part
14:57:51 of the formula.
14:57:52 >>JAN McLEAN: Right.
14:57:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
14:57:54 And I would -- yes, no, maybe?
14:58:00 Oh.
14:58:00 Okay.
14:58:01 I would also ask that another issue that came up
14:58:10 this morning was, what projects are going to be
14:58:15 included in the next five years in the C.I.P.?
14:58:22 And we already have lists.
14:58:24 I have two different lists, actually.
14:58:25 One is dated the 18th and the other one is
14:58:28 dated, I think the 22nd -- wait, here it is.
14:58:32 The other one is dated the 27th.
14:58:35 So I'm not sure what the difference is between the
14:58:39 two lists, but I think we should have a detailed
14:58:44 discussion over which projects are to answer those
14:58:48 questions for the public, included and which ones
14:58:50 are not, because we did not talk about specific
14:58:53 projects today.
14:58:54 I think that's it for now.
14:59:02 The other discussion made before, instead of
14:59:05 having one motion with ABCDEFG parts that each one
14:59:11 be taken separately, but that would be up to you,
14:59:14 sir.
14:59:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I try to speak clearly when I can
14:59:19 and I think the clerk does the best they can and I
14:59:21 usually go back and look at my motion to make sure
14:59:23 it's correct.
14:59:24 I'll keep it as it is rather than go back and
14:59:27 repeat it all.
14:59:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I also offer those friendly
14:59:32 amendments for the list of projects to be
14:59:35 discussed as part of the plan and, again, more
14:59:39 clarification on the methodology, not the
14:59:45 collection methodology to be clear, but the
14:59:47 methodology of how the ESUs are determined and
14:59:53 if there is a more equitable way, because people
14:59:57 were talking about that a lot this morning.
15:00:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Will accept it and Mr. Cohen's
15:00:06 friendly amendments would be three and hers would
15:00:08 be four, if that helps clarify the record.
15:00:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: That's enough amendments.
15:00:15 Motion from Mr. Suarez, seconded by Mr. Cohen with
15:00:24 the amendment as well as additional amendments of
15:00:27 Ms. Montelione.
15:00:29 All in favor say aye.
15:00:30 Opposed.
15:00:32 >> May I have the floor once again before
15:00:39 Ms. Capin talks about September 3rd, I just want
15:00:43 to remind Council what other discussions we will
15:00:46 be having on September 3rd.
15:00:48 So it may not be the best day to bring up another
15:00:56 lengthy discussion.
15:00:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: This would be brief because all
15:01:01 they are doing is reporting back to us the service
15:01:06 agreement.
15:01:07 >>JAN McLEAN: If I may, your public hearing --
15:01:09 you're continuing the public hearing.
15:01:10 So you would be considering item number 66 and the
15:01:15 questions thereto.
15:01:16 It would be open, so open for public comment,
15:01:21 again, still, so just to take that into
15:01:26 consideration as far as time scheduling.
15:01:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: It will be limited to what we're
15:01:31 discussing, and that's basically the service
15:01:32 agreement.
15:01:33 Mr. Cohen state, there was not a lot of discussion
15:01:38 about the service agreement, so we shouldn't have
15:01:40 a problem.
15:01:40 We're limiting it to the service agreement and
15:01:43 they can't go into 65 and 67.
15:01:45 Just 66.
15:01:47 >> We're paid by the hour anyway.
15:01:52 >>JAN McLEAN: I just wanted to bring that to your
15:01:54 attention.
15:01:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: Staff, put you on notice.
15:01:56 A brief, concise and short report, we can get
15:02:03 through it.
15:02:12 >> That's my motion.
15:02:13 Number 66 to September 3rd, continue.
15:02:18 9:30 a.m.
15:02:19 >> Second.
15:02:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: We have a motion from Ms. Capin.
15:02:22 Seconded by Ms. Montelione.
15:02:24 All in favor, aye.
15:02:25 Opposed?
15:02:26 >> No.
15:02:34 [ LAUGHTER ]
15:02:34 Anything else for items 65, 66, and 67?
15:02:42 Staff, we thank you.
15:02:43 We need to open up 71 and 72.
15:02:58 >> Move to continue --
15:03:06 >> Second.
15:03:08 >> Oh, oh, oh.
15:03:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: All in favor say aye.
15:03:13 >> Move to continue 71 to September 3rd at --
15:03:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: All in favor?
15:03:23 >>THE CLERK: [INAUDIBLE]
15:03:34 >> Oh, September 10th, excuse me.
15:03:36 At 6 p.m.
15:03:38 September 10th at 6 p.m.
15:03:41 >> Was there a vote on the previous one?
15:03:43 Is that a motion now?
15:03:46 Does there need to be a vote, madam clerk?
15:03:53 >>FRANK REDDICK: The motion was no objection.
15:03:58 All right.
15:04:08 Can we get a motion on those items again?
15:04:14 >>HARRY COHEN: I move to reschedule -- excuse me,
15:04:17 continue item 71 to September 10th at 6 p.m.
15:04:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
15:04:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: We have a motion from Mr. Cohen.
15:04:23 Seconded by Mr. Miranda.
15:04:25 All those in favor of the motion say aye.
15:04:27 Opposed?
15:04:28 All right.
15:04:29 Motion carries.
15:04:30 Item 72.
15:04:35 Before you speak, all those who will speak on item
15:04:57 72, would you please stand to be sworn in?
15:05:01 [Oath administered]
15:05:18 >>SHAUN AMARNANI: Good afternoon, City Council.
15:05:18 Shaun Amarnani, City of Tampa Attorney's Office.
15:05:19 This is a review hearing on a petition filed for a
15:05:19 decision of the Variance Review Board on a
15:05:21 property located at 2627 West Prospect Road.
15:05:24 This will be a de novo hearing.
15:05:27 I have passed out a Variance Review Board
15:05:30 procedures statute under Chapter 27, Article 2,
15:05:35 Division 3.
15:05:36 I highlighted the variance criteria under 27-80.
15:05:39 City Council should be authorized to grant
15:05:42 variances when the applicant has demonstrated
15:05:44 practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships
15:05:46 and that the request ensures the public's health,
15:05:51 safety, and general welfare are protected.
15:05:55 City Council shall base its decision of finding on
15:05:58 the criteria under 27-80.
15:06:01 Additionally, City Council may impose reasonable
15:06:04 conditions to ensure that the public health,
15:06:06 safety and general welfare should be protected and
15:06:09 substantial justice done.
15:06:10 Now, Eric Cotton will present a staff overview.
15:06:16 Thank you.
15:06:18 >>ERIC COTTON: Eric Cotton, Land Development
15:06:20 Coordination.
15:06:21 I have been sworn.
15:06:22 Before you, as Mr. Amarnani said, this is a
15:06:26 petition for Variance Review Board for a property
15:06:29 at 2627 West Prospect Road.
15:06:31 The original applicants for the variance review
15:06:38 board case Spencer and Jamie Wike.
15:06:40 The request is to waive a section of 27-290, which
15:06:46 limits the height of an accessory structure to
15:06:49 15 feet.
15:06:50 The applicant was seeking to go from 15 to
15:06:52 20 feet, additional 5 feet in height.
15:06:54 The VRB heard the case on June 9th and voted to
15:06:58 approve the request finding there was a hardship
15:07:00 on the property.
15:07:01 Just some background, the property zoned RS-60,
15:07:04 which is residential single-family, and it was
15:07:05 originally built in 1925.
15:07:08 The current property -- the property owners
15:07:10 purchased the property in 2011.
15:07:11 Just to give you a general idea of the site, the
15:07:24 site is highlighted in red.
15:07:25 It's on prospect road a little bit east of south
15:07:30 MacDill.
15:07:31 I apologize for the size of this.
15:07:36 I'll try to blow it up as much as possible.
15:07:39 The accessory structure in question is shown in
15:07:41 the bottom corner here.
15:07:42 The height again limited to 15 feet.
15:07:46 The applicant is trying to do two story and go up
15:07:50 to the 20-foot height.
15:07:51 Does Council have any questions for me on the
15:07:55 zoning?
15:07:55 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions?
15:07:58 >>ERIC COTTON: I'll be here for any questions.
15:08:10 >> My name is marianne parsons.
15:08:13 I reside at 2629 West Prospect Road.
15:08:20 I'm here for the review of the variance.
15:08:24 VRB case 15-51.
15:08:30 The variance request stated was to increase the
15:08:32 height of the accessory structure.
15:08:34 Again, they needed the additional height to create
15:08:37 living space on a second level.
15:08:39 Some background.
15:08:41 My home is immediate west to the variance request.
15:08:44 My parents, Fred and marianne Rodgers bought our
15:08:48 home in 1969.
15:08:49 My husband and I bought our home the year after my
15:08:52 dad died in 1993, so I have been in the
15:08:56 neighborhood a long time and know the history of
15:08:59 the home.
15:09:00 A number of years ago, the home directly north of
15:09:04 me, we're separated by an alley, put forth a
15:09:08 variance request.
15:09:09 And we didn't understand the procedure or the
15:09:12 effects of the variance, and didn't oppose it.
15:09:17 A very large structure was built, and it
15:09:19 definitely impacts our yard.
15:09:23 Even with an alley separating us, the larger
15:09:27 structure affects the light and openness.
15:09:29 This taught us that the code is in place to keep
15:09:32 buildings to scale in the neighborhood and for
15:09:34 mutual enjoyment.
15:09:39 It is due to this experience that we have opposed
15:09:40 this variance.
15:09:41 The variance request in question relates to code
15:09:42 section 27-290 which states an accessory structure
15:09:45 shall not exceed 15 feet in height.
15:09:47 Again, stated, we're not a historic district.
15:09:51 Code section 27-80, which was already read, talks
15:09:57 about how a VRB can approve variances, and it
15:10:04 needs to be for demonstrated practical
15:10:08 difficulties or unnecessary hardships.
15:10:10 As evidenced by the DVD of the hearing, there was
15:10:15 no presentation of hardship.
15:10:18 Mr. Michelini, their agents, briefly mentioned
15:10:21 that the size of the wide swath constrained them.
15:10:25 I looked at the property records.
15:10:28 The majority of the houses are on one lot.
15:10:30 That certainly is in the unique or singular issue.
15:10:34 They also added to a pool to the backyard, so if
15:10:38 you're constrained in size, that was self-imposed.
15:10:41 Again, that would not justify a variance.
15:10:43 The fact that the Florida building code would not
15:10:47 make it feasible to build a second-story living
15:10:50 space within the 15 feet height limitations would
15:10:53 affect all residential buildings, thus it would
15:10:56 not be unique or singular.
15:11:00 Adding living space in their home as part of the
15:11:03 project like adding on to their regular house and
15:11:06 there was no hardship presented that they needed
15:11:07 additional living space in addition to the
15:11:10 addition they are making.
15:11:11 The remainder of Mr. Michelini's presentation
15:11:14 addressed three issues, that the Wike's building
15:11:19 would be in keeping with the neighborhood, that
15:11:21 they could build a 15-foot flat roof structure
15:11:23 with a five-foot parapet so they might allow the
15:11:29 height variance because it would look better and
15:11:31 get the 20 feet.
15:11:32 Third, historical preservation rules allows for
15:11:35 greater height in the general code might change in
15:11:38 a few years and allow for additional height.
15:11:40 None of these are relevant arguments, because the
15:11:43 VRB is not an architectural review committee.
15:11:46 As stated earlier, the VRB is only authorized to
15:11:49 grant variances due to practical difficulties or
15:11:51 unnecessary hardships.
15:11:52 However, since the VRB did approve it, I'll
15:11:56 address each of those three issues.
15:11:57 Mr. Michelini noted that there are three -- I'm
15:12:00 sorry, five larger structures bordering our alley.
15:12:03 I've walked our alley.
15:12:05 There are four.
15:12:06 And three of them are on sunset.
15:12:08 Two of them have been added with variances.
15:12:10 It's been in the last few years.
15:12:14 They are not in keeping with this block's
15:12:17 neighborhood.
15:12:18 I grew up here, both my home and the Wike's home
15:12:22 have single-story garages as did most of the
15:12:25 homes.
15:12:25 In support of the two-story structures being in
15:12:28 keeping with the neighborhood, Mr. Michelini
15:12:30 presented pictures to the board of 2526, 2530,
15:12:35 2608, 2610, and 2630 Prospect Road and stated that
15:12:41 they showed two-story structures facing the alley.
15:12:45 This was an inaccurate statement.
15:12:47 The VRB would not have known that we are on the
15:12:54 north side and those addresses are on the south
15:12:56 side of prospect.
15:12:57 The lots on the south side don't have an alley.
15:13:01 They go all the way back to Neptune, so they are
15:13:04 not -- it was inaccurate, and I think the
15:13:06 misstatement of facts was misleading for the VRB
15:13:09 members.
15:13:10 Again, because the VRB is only authorized to grant
15:13:14 variances for hardship, I don't think this should
15:13:16 have been a valid argument, even if it was true.
15:13:19 The second issue Mr. Michelini raised is that they
15:13:23 would be allowed to build a 15-foot flat roof
15:13:26 structure with five-foot parapet thus creating the
15:13:29 20-foot structure as could be seen on the DVD, he
15:13:32 presented drawings showing what it would look like
15:13:35 and the architectural drawings of what they want
15:13:37 would be more attractive.
15:13:38 This is where most of the discussion stayed, and I
15:13:46 assume it's why the VRB approved the variance,
15:13:49 based on the fact, if the Wikes could get 20 feet
15:13:54 under the code that covers parapets, they might as
15:13:56 well allow a more attractive structure.
15:13:58 However, I think there are two flaws to this
15:14:02 logic.
15:14:03 First and foremost, a precedent would be set that
15:14:04 anyone living in the City of Tampa should be
15:14:06 granted a variance for a 20-foot accessory height,
15:14:10 no matter what architectural style is actually
15:14:12 going to be built based on the argument that you
15:14:15 could have a 15-foot flat roof plus a five-foot
15:14:18 parapet.
15:14:20 This would completely eliminate the need for coax
15:14:24 section 27-290 which restricts accessory structure
15:14:27 height to 15 feet.
15:14:28 One of the VRB members actually commented on the
15:14:30 fact that the 15-foot height limitation for an
15:14:34 accessory structure precluded the ability to
15:14:36 create second story living spaces and believed
15:14:39 that was the intent of the limitation.
15:14:41 This is entertained by the Florida building code.
15:14:44 According to the Florida building codes
15:14:46 residential section, it is not feasible to add a
15:14:50 second story because of the ceiling height
15:14:52 requirements, allowing the variance would set a
15:14:54 precedent that essentially overrides any
15:14:57 limitation intended for second-story living
15:15:00 spaces.
15:15:01 The truth is, the Wikes could build a design in
15:15:04 keeping with the architectural style and be within
15:15:06 the code.
15:15:07 It just wouldn't afford them the second floor
15:15:10 living space.
15:15:10 The argument for building the flat roof and
15:15:13 parapet would gain them nothing.
15:15:15 It wouldn't provide the height for second level
15:15:17 living space and it wouldn't match the
15:15:20 architectural style of their house.
15:15:21 Even though VRB said it would be less attractive
15:15:28 for me, it would probably take away from the
15:15:29 value.
15:15:30 This architectural argument seems not only
15:15:32 irrelevant but a very serious precedent to set.
15:15:35 The last topic discussed at the VRB hearing
15:15:39 concerned the code itself and the possibility,
15:15:40 even probability that the code may change in a few
15:15:44 years.
15:15:44 Members discussed among themselves and with
15:15:46 Mr. Michelini changes to the building codes in
15:15:50 historic districts such as Hyde Park and Seminole
15:15:52 Heights, and how it's having an influence on how
15:15:56 people believe the general code should be changed.
15:15:58 They felt the code may be changed in a few years
15:16:00 and allow for taller accessory structures.
15:16:03 This discussion should have been completely
15:16:05 irrelevant to the hearing.
15:16:06 The law is what the code says today.
15:16:10 I used to be a tax advisor.
15:16:13 That is my background.
15:16:14 I could never go to a client say, give a gift, we
15:16:17 won't file a gift tax return because I think the
15:16:21 internal revenue code is going to change in the
15:16:23 future.
15:16:23 It would be illegal.
15:16:24 I apply current law to current facts, and I
15:16:29 believe the VRB should do the same thing.
15:16:32 The code was written to protect the light and
15:16:39 scale of structures in the neighborhood.
15:16:40 I oppose the variance request as it will box in my
15:16:45 backyard and negatively affect the enjoyment of my
15:16:50 property and even reduce the value of my home.
15:16:52 I presented my reasons for believing the variance
15:16:54 was granted erroneously.
15:16:57 We need to follow the law and only grant variances
15:16:59 in true cases of hardship for needs, not want
15:17:06 therefore I respectfully request that the City
15:17:07 Council overturn the VRB's granting of variance
15:17:11 15-51.
15:17:13 Thank you for your time.
15:17:26 >> Council, I would like to draw your attention
15:17:29 to, first of all, this is the subject property.
15:17:44 This is the subject property that we're talking
15:17:47 about.
15:17:47 The request was for an accessory structure to be
15:17:55 built back in this area of the property.
15:18:01 And that is right back in this rear corner here.
15:18:07 Which meets the setback for an accessory
15:18:12 structure.
15:18:12 The discussion regarding a flat roof versus a
15:18:18 pitched roof involved what you could build by
15:18:21 right.
15:18:21 And you could build a 20-foot structure by right
15:18:24 in that corner.
15:18:27 The challenger in this case asked if you build a
15:18:32 gabled structure, which is what we were proposing
15:18:36 would you put any windows on that side of the
15:18:39 structure?
15:18:39 And there was some discussion among the board
15:18:41 members, and they asked us to commit to no windows
15:18:44 on the west side of the structure, which we agreed
15:18:46 to.
15:18:46 The proximity of the two properties causes some
15:18:52 issues as well.
15:18:55 If you look on the left side here this is the
15:19:00 challenger's property that currently does not meet
15:19:04 the code.
15:19:05 This is the driveway of the Wikes.
15:19:10 This is their house and their driveway which goes
15:19:12 to this property.
15:19:19 This property doesn't meet setbacks.
15:19:21 This area is where we are proposing to put the
15:19:28 detached structure.
15:19:30 If you look at this photograph, you can see that
15:19:36 there is fairly heavy landscaping and vegetation
15:19:41 on the west side.
15:19:42 This is the area where we're talking about the
15:19:51 structure.
15:19:52 It has little or no impact on the adjacent
15:19:55 structure to the west.
15:19:55 The house is forward.
15:19:56 It's all the way up here.
15:19:58 It's not anywhere near the rear property line
15:20:00 where this petition is asking for relief.
15:20:03 We prepared a diagram showing the relative
15:20:11 differences between what could be built by right
15:20:15 and what could be built with a variance.
15:20:17 We're proposing the pitched roof with the gable.
15:20:24 The dashed-in line is what you could build by
15:20:27 right.
15:20:27 And then we showed on here the relative heights
15:20:30 and how that related to the house.
15:20:31 When I talked about other structures that have
15:20:41 garage apartments, it's not that unusual for -- to
15:20:47 have garage apartments.
15:20:48 This is 25, 30.
15:20:53 This is 2610.
15:20:54 This is 2608 prospect.
15:21:04 2530 prospect.
15:21:12 I think you get the idea.
15:21:17 This is 2526 prospect.
15:21:19 Some of these have had variances.
15:21:21 Some of them are historic structures.
15:21:23 They've been there since the buildings were
15:21:26 originally built.
15:21:27 It was generally recognized as a pattern of
15:21:29 construction during the '20s to enable property
15:21:34 owners to have garages underneath and a separate
15:21:38 area on top.
15:21:39 Now, some of those are apartments.
15:21:40 Some of them are work spaces.
15:21:42 Some of them are a combination of the two.
15:21:45 But what we were trying to do here was to emulate
15:21:50 what was happening in the neighborhood.
15:21:51 The discussion regarding Hyde Park and Seminole
15:21:55 Heights was that these areas were being recognized
15:22:00 as additional work area spaces.
15:22:05 And to that end, you know, the codes recognized
15:22:08 that.
15:22:08 They were changed.
15:22:09 The City Council voted on making those changes.
15:22:11 And the variance review board said, oh, yeah, this
15:22:15 may come in the future, but we didn't file a
15:22:18 petition based upon that.
15:22:19 That was a VRB discussion.
15:22:20 They recognized that, yes, there were a number of
15:22:26 incidences.
15:22:26 The properties that we showed you the pictures of
15:22:28 along the alley, they all had variances to do
15:22:33 exactly what we're requesting.
15:22:34 And they were recognized as being consistent with
15:22:37 the neighborhood.
15:22:37 The rear of the property, they have trees, and
15:22:41 they have a swimming pool, which would be
15:22:43 impacted, if it were going on the other side of
15:22:46 the property.
15:22:47 If you look at the front of their property,
15:22:49 there's no way to get a driveway in.
15:22:53 Here is the existing driveway, and that's the only
15:22:58 side they can get back to the rear of the
15:22:59 property.
15:23:00 So, in terms of the discussion regarding the
15:23:08 various issues regarding this property, it has
15:23:11 little or no impact on anyone else.
15:23:13 It's near the edge, the rear of the property.
15:23:15 It meets the side and rear property setbacks.
15:23:18 And we were asking for relief for the gable-style
15:23:21 roof as opposed to a flat roof, which as the
15:23:24 challenger in this case pointed out, probably is
15:23:26 not consistent with the design of the structure
15:23:29 itself.
15:23:29 Anyway, the WIKES are here.
15:23:36 They would be happy to answer questions.
15:23:37 They have letters of support from some of the
15:23:39 neighbors regarding this, and we only have the one
15:23:42 opposition.
15:23:42 With respect to the request.
15:23:45 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Montelione.
15:23:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
15:23:48 Eric, is there a definition of what a hardship is
15:23:52 in the code?
15:23:52 Because most people when they hear the word
15:23:56 "hardship," the location of the property generally
15:24:09 isn't the first thing that comes to mind.
15:24:12 >>ERIC COTTON: Eric Cotton, Land Development
15:24:14 Coordination.
15:24:15 In the actual chapter 27 where the Variance Review
15:24:18 Board criteria is located, the definition of
15:24:21 hardship is not in there.
15:24:22 Hardship is determined by the Variance Review
15:24:23 Board.
15:24:25 If you noticed in the staff reports, whenever
15:24:27 Council has done reviews of decisions, staff
15:24:30 doesn't make a recommendation either for or
15:24:32 against.
15:24:32 You'll see comments from natural resources or from
15:24:35 transportation, but a determination of hardship,
15:24:36 because there isn't a definition, is left up to
15:24:39 the Variance Review Board.
15:24:40 There are five criteria that the applicants needs
15:24:42 to address.
15:24:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.
15:24:45 No, I get that.
15:24:47 But to me, the hardship, as it's stated in the
15:24:52 application, is that the property is located in a
15:24:57 fully developed subdivision.
15:24:59 And that the proposal to remodel the existing
15:25:04 family residence and add a second story to the
15:25:07 residence, redevelop the accessory.
15:25:10 I don't -- I don't see any of those as hardships.
15:25:14 Hardship is to me, you know, my mother is aging.
15:25:20 My sister has some debilitating disease.
15:25:30 Those types of things are hardships.
15:25:37 >> Council Member Montelione, draw your attention
15:25:40 and for the record, 27-80, it has alleged hardship
15:25:44 or practical difficulties.
15:25:45 That are unique or similar, so it has the extra or
15:25:49 practical difficulties.
15:25:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Still, practical difficulty,
15:25:54 adding a second story to a house or to an
15:25:58 accessory structure isn't to me a practical
15:26:02 difficulty.
15:26:04 It's something that somebody wants, and because of
15:26:06 the location, they can't have, but it doesn't seem
15:26:10 to me to meet the criteria of a hardship or a
15:26:14 practical difficulty.
15:26:16 >>SHAUN AMARNANI: I just wanted to clarify that
15:26:18 for the record.
15:26:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Amarnani gave you the
15:26:23 criteria for each of you, that is on page 4 of the
15:26:26 5 items.
15:26:28 The hardship is not to the person making the
15:26:30 request.
15:26:30 The hardship -- I just wanted to bring to your
15:26:37 attention, the hardship is not -- I just wanted
15:26:48 Council to be clear, when you address the question
15:26:50 of a variance, it's a variance to the code
15:26:52 regarding the property in question.
15:26:54 It's not the owner of the property.
15:26:55 It's not the personal hardships, the personal
15:26:58 difficulties.
15:26:58 This runs with the land, and it's relative to the
15:27:01 property itself.
15:27:02 And that is your basis to apply the criteria to
15:27:05 the property in question.
15:27:07 That's your scope of your inquiry, or it should
15:27:14 be.
15:27:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.
15:27:22 Anything else?
15:27:24 >> Well, the criteria really speaks to, you know,
15:27:27 is it practically difficult to meet the code in
15:27:30 this case or is there a fairness issue involved?
15:27:34 And in our particular petition, the fairness issue
15:27:37 is, we can build a higher structure, more
15:27:39 obtrusive with no restriction regarding windows on
15:27:43 the west side which was a concern of the
15:27:45 petitioner, and the difference is a flat wall
15:27:49 that's massive and three feet from the property
15:27:52 line versus a more aesthetically pleasing wall and
15:27:56 a gabled roof that sweeps away from the property
15:28:01 and is less obtrusive.
15:28:07 The argument is, if you follow the he had could,
15:28:09 the code makes it more of a difficulty for any
15:28:11 adjacent property owner and not this petitioner.
15:28:13 The Wikes were trying to make something more
15:28:20 sensitive, less obtrusive, and interfere to a
15:28:23 lesser degree with the adjacent property owner.
15:28:26 In the course of the discussion, the only question
15:28:28 was, will you put no windows on the west side?
15:28:32 We said, fine.
15:28:33 Then after it was granted, then the appeal was
15:28:36 filed, so we're here today.
15:28:38 The Wikes are here.
15:28:40 I guess they would like to say something to the
15:28:43 board.
15:28:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
15:28:44 Anybody in the public wishing to speak on this
15:28:46 item?
15:28:51 >> Hi.
15:28:52 Jamie Wike, I live on west prospect.
15:28:56 We're adding on to our house.
15:28:58 We have two kids.
15:28:59 We live in a 3/2.
15:29:01 We have a growing family.
15:29:02 Hopefully more kids on the way.
15:29:03 The accessory structure is to be a garage, mainly
15:29:09 for storage and kids' bikes and things like that.
15:29:12 I work for home.
15:29:13 So above that is to be an office instead of
15:29:15 working on the dining room table where I am
15:29:18 currently.
15:29:18 For us, we're a little bit confused on where the
15:29:21 sort of opposition is because the code does allow
15:29:24 us to build a 20-foot box just out right which is
15:29:30 what we would have to do if we don't get the
15:29:32 variance or if the variance is reversed.
15:29:35 To us -- [INAUDIBLE]
15:29:37 [coughing]
15:29:39 More attractive structure.
15:29:41 Actually less obtrusive, smaller and can
15:29:43 accommodate two floors, which would accomplish the
15:29:45 storage and the room above it as well.
15:29:49 If not, it will just be a larger 20-foot structure
15:29:53 because it will have to accommodate storage and
15:29:55 living space all on one level.
15:29:56 Our neighbors, we live in a very small house
15:30:01 compared to all of the homes around us.
15:30:03 The other neighbors we talked to are excited about
15:30:06 it, especially the guy trying to sell his house
15:30:09 across the street.
15:30:09 He appreciates the fact that we want to up the
15:30:11 property value of our home.
15:30:13 We're very accommodating.
15:30:15 We've talked to the neighbors behind us, and she
15:30:18 was concerned because she will be looking directly
15:30:19 at it.
15:30:20 You know, we said we would put in landscaping and
15:30:23 do whatever would make her comfortable.
15:30:26 Everyone else around us has felt pretty good about
15:30:29 it.
15:30:30 As Steven mentioned in the last meeting that we
15:30:34 had, it was asked that we not put windows on that
15:30:38 side of the structure.
15:30:39 We were happy to accommodate that.
15:30:40 And then we had an approval it was unanimous.
15:30:43 We were very excited and then 10 or 15 days later,
15:30:46 we received the letter to come here.
15:30:52 >> The only comment Spencer WIKE, 2627 west
15:30:56 prospect.
15:30:56 Our other neighbors have put in writing that they
15:31:03 are excited and definitely under the perception
15:31:05 that it will increase our property values.
15:31:10 To marianne's argument, she was fearful that it
15:31:12 would decrease our property values.
15:31:14 I think that our neighbors disagree with her
15:31:17 comment.
15:31:18 Obviously, we disagree with the comment.
15:31:20 It's a lovely neighborhood and we intend to stay
15:31:22 there for a long time.
15:31:23 For us, this is a solution to keep us in the
15:31:26 existing house that we like and accommodate our
15:31:29 growing family.
15:31:31 Thank you for your consideration.
15:31:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from Council?
15:31:35 Anything else, Mr. Michelini?
15:31:43 >> Council, we appreciate your consideration, I
15:31:48 still have some time left.
15:31:49 But we appreciate your consideration.
15:31:52 I think that, you know, at the Variance Review
15:31:53 Board hearing, we presented an effective and
15:31:56 reasonable case, and we would respectfully request
15:32:00 that you uphold the VRB's decision.
15:32:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any additional comments?
15:32:13 >> Just for clarification, I didn't request the
15:32:15 lack of windows.
15:32:15 That was actually the VRB.
15:32:17 Marianne parsons.
15:32:19 2629 prospect.
15:32:20 Also, talking about the side, which would be the
15:32:23 east of the property, the side of my house has
15:32:27 been that way since my family bought it from the
15:32:30 Dillons in 1969.
15:32:32 We haven't done anything to encroach.
15:32:34 That comment about the driveway, they have a big
15:32:39 oak tree.
15:32:40 They have actually moved the driveway over closer
15:32:43 to our house.
15:32:44 So that has moved.
15:32:46 And they are not intending to put a car in the
15:32:49 back of the garage.
15:32:51 The drawings show that.
15:32:52 Also, it's making it sound like they can't do the
15:32:56 20-foot gable, then they have to build a square
15:33:00 15-foot flat roof and add a five-foot parapet.
15:33:05 Architect wouldn't do that.
15:33:09 Why?
15:33:10 It's not giving them the additional living space
15:33:13 they want.
15:33:14 So it's not really logical.
15:33:16 By the way, the letters of support were from the
15:33:19 two variances behind us in the alley.
15:33:22 Mr. Michelini called my neighbors.
15:33:26 In fact, one that they were referring to, who were
15:33:28 willing to write me letters of support, but I was
15:33:31 trying to make it not adversarial.
15:33:35 One of my neighbors showed me his phone where his
15:33:41 phone was being blown up for letters of support.
15:33:43 That being said, decision on VRB if left standing,
15:33:47 it has a much broader impact than just our block
15:33:50 on prospect.
15:33:51 A precedent will be set that the VRB is authorized
15:33:53 to grant variances for other than just cases of
15:33:57 hardship or practical difficulties as defined in
15:34:00 section 27-80.
15:34:01 They will then have authority to grant variances
15:34:04 for wants, not needs.
15:34:06 The other effect of this ruling is a precedent of
15:34:09 allowing second-story living space on accessory
15:34:12 structures.
15:34:12 Code section 290 specifically limits the structure
15:34:15 height to 15 feet.
15:34:17 The Florida building code makes it unfeasible to
15:34:19 create second-story living space within that
15:34:22 confine.
15:34:22 Section 27-158 provides for an exception to add a
15:34:27 parapet still is in keeping that the inside living
15:34:31 space is limited to 15 feet.
15:34:34 By applying the total height argument to include
15:34:36 an outside parapet, it completely changes the
15:34:41 intent of limiting the living space of an
15:34:43 accessory structure to one story.
15:34:45 I again respectfully request the Council vote to
15:34:48 overturn this variance.
15:34:49 Thank you.
15:34:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anything else?
15:34:52 [microphones not on]
15:35:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion carries.
15:35:13 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'd like to move that we hold up
15:35:15 the Variance Review Board finding on VRB 15-51.
15:35:20 >> Second.
15:35:20 >>FRANK REDDICK: [microphone not on]
15:35:38 [ LAUGHTER ]
15:35:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: [INAUDIBLE]
15:35:49 [microphone not on]
15:35:52 All in favor of the motion, aye.
15:35:57 [microphone not on]
15:36:12 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Good afternoon, councillors.
15:36:15 I was just reporting back as I said I would
15:36:18 earlier today.
15:36:19 I checked the City Code, we have nothing that
15:36:22 regulates the use of leaf blowers directly.
15:36:25 I even went ahead and confirmed with our code
15:36:27 enforcement supervisors to be sure I didn't miss
15:36:30 anything.
15:36:30 They confirmed we do not regulate leaf blowers.
15:36:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: [microphone not on]
15:36:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If there is what we saw this
15:36:45 morning and I probably still have it in the pile
15:36:46 of papers somewhere, there is a regulation against
15:36:49 putting anything into the stormwater system such
15:36:52 as leafs.
15:36:53 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Which is 21-9, which is part of
15:36:55 the ordinance that we're changing, but, yeah, 21-9
15:37:00 regulates, restricts people from putting that
15:37:03 debris into the stormwater system and actually
15:37:07 19-53 prevents people from sweeping it out into
15:37:12 the street or putting debris into the streets.
15:37:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So wouldn't that be the same --
15:37:18 I mean, if you have a leaf blower, that's not --
15:37:21 you know, it doesn't have a bag on it, so the
15:37:24 leafs aren't collecting in the bag like lawn
15:37:26 mowers do.
15:37:28 And, I mean, I see folks all the time just blowing
15:37:35 everything out, especially the commercial
15:37:38 landscapers blowing everything out into the
15:37:40 street.
15:37:40 And I've had to roll up my window because of my
15:37:43 allergies, even doing it on public right-of-ways
15:37:50 in the median, because the dust and the leafs and
15:37:52 everything is up in the air.
15:37:55 I'm sitting there at a traffic light, and they are
15:37:58 blowing the median and everything is in the
15:38:01 street.
15:38:01 I mean, it -- as we have with a lot of things, not
15:38:06 a lot of enforcement.
15:38:09 I'd like to see how we can either enforce or
15:38:18 somehow require -- I don't know, landscape
15:38:27 companies to be more responsible and to not
15:38:30 pollute our stormwater system.
15:38:33 I don't know how we can do that.
15:38:37 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Well, that's part of the goal of
15:38:38 the change that I brought forward this morning
15:38:41 because, I mean, I'm sure that the stormwater
15:38:43 department or code enforcement, one of the two,
15:38:46 someone is going to be letting these companies
15:38:48 know that, you know, number one the -- it will be
15:38:52 a immediate citation if one of their people do it,
15:38:55 plus it puts them on notice that the next time one
15:38:58 of their employees gets cited for blowing into the
15:39:01 stormwater system, that it will be a $450 citation
15:39:06 against that company.
15:39:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Maybe we need to send the
15:39:12 companies who are paying the business tax related
15:39:13 to landscaping a notice and a letter reminding
15:39:19 them of that policy.
15:39:20 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Yeah, I think there's been talk
15:39:23 of educating those different businesses of this.
15:39:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, thanks.
15:39:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
15:39:29 I think what Mr. Mueller is saying, it's there,
15:39:32 maybe it has, maybe it hasn't.
15:39:34 My opinion, I don't think it has been to any
15:39:36 degree enforced.
15:39:37 However, there was no mechanism for charge of some
15:39:42 type of payment or go to jail and don't pass go,
15:39:46 that kind of stuff.
15:39:47 Now, if this passes, if you have a $75 first time
15:39:52 and it goes up after $450, which I think is fair
15:39:55 and equitable, hit somebody with 450 in the
15:39:58 beginning is kind of hard.
15:39:59 And a lot of times it's not the companies.
15:40:01 It's the homeowners that are doing it.
15:40:03 I see it all the time just like all of us have
15:40:07 seen it.
15:40:08 I agree with what Mr. Mueller is saying.
15:40:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, sir.
15:40:13 >>ERNEST MUELLER: Thank you, folks.
15:40:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: New business.
15:40:15 Mr. Miranda?
15:40:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: None, sir.
15:40:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Just one item, sir.
15:40:19 Just to reiterate, something that was mentioned
15:40:21 today about Mr. Germany who had passed away, John
15:40:24 Germany, one of the founders of the Holland and
15:40:26 knight law firm, member of the greatest
15:40:28 generation, somebody who served in World War II in
15:40:30 a tank company and also served in Europe and then
15:40:33 got shipped over to the Pacific.
15:40:34 Thankfully the war ended while he was over there,
15:40:38 and was just a great civics person for Tampa,
15:40:43 somebody that did so much for this city, this
15:40:45 state, and he's going to be greatly missed.
15:40:47 And just our thoughts and prayers are with their
15:40:51 family.
15:40:52 We hope that most people, if they want to do
15:40:54 something to remember him, go to the library,
15:40:55 check out a book and read.
15:40:57 That's something he felt was extremely important.
15:40:59 Thank you, chair.
15:41:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Capin?
15:41:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Nothing.
15:41:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen.
15:41:03 >>HARRY COHEN: No new business.
15:41:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Maniscalco.
15:41:07 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Yes, I have one item.
15:41:08 I would like to make a motion to ask the
15:41:10 administration to provide a written report and
15:41:12 appear before Council on September 17th under
15:41:15 staff reports to inform Council of the details of
15:41:17 the BP settlement, including how the monies can be
15:41:20 spent and if the administration has any
15:41:22 recommendations.
15:41:23 >> Second.
15:41:25 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any particular department in
15:41:27 administration?
15:41:27 Revenue and finance.
15:41:34 All right.
15:41:34 You have a motion from Mr. Maniscalco.
15:41:37 Seconded by Mr. Cohen.
15:41:38 All in favor of the motion --
15:41:40 >> And the Legal Department as well
15:41:42 [microphone not on]
15:41:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Maniscalco.
15:41:50 Seconded by Mr. Cohen.
15:41:52 All in favor of the motion, say aye.
15:41:54 Opposed?
15:41:56 All right.
15:41:57 Anything else, sir?
15:41:58 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Nope.
15:41:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Ms. Montelione.
15:42:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I wouldn't want to have revenue
15:42:03 and finance come and say, oh, that's a legal
15:42:06 question.
15:42:06 We've run into that before, haven't we?
15:42:10 I have one.
15:42:13 There's an item that I moved at a previous meeting
15:42:17 to schedule a discussion or a staff report for
15:42:22 historic properties and the incentives related to
15:42:27 historic properties in Tampa Heights.
15:42:29 There is going to be a workshop on
15:42:31 September 24th.
15:42:32 So rather than have that staff report come on
15:42:36 September 3rd, I'd just like to make it part of
15:42:40 the discussion of the workshop on
15:42:42 September 24th.
15:42:43 >> Second.
15:42:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Got a motion from Montelione.
15:42:45 Seconded by Mr. Suarez.
15:42:47 All in favor, aye.
15:42:48 Anything else?
15:42:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, I'm looking at the
15:42:54 calendar.
15:42:55 We don't have anything scheduled for the
15:43:03 workshop -- oh, wait -- no, never mind.
15:43:06 I might not be here on that day.
15:43:09 I was going to schedule something for October
15:43:11 workshop.
15:43:12 December -- November and December, we don't have
15:43:15 any workshops, so it looks like -- I'll have to
15:43:21 wait until after the first of the year.
15:43:23 I'm sorry.
15:43:24 I should have looked at those dates beforehand.
15:43:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.
15:43:28 Good idea.
15:43:28 Motion to receive and file.
15:43:32 I'm sorry.
15:43:32 I'm sorry.
15:43:33 >>THE CLERK: I have three items.
15:43:36 >> When did you get elected?
15:43:39 [ LAUGHTER ]
15:43:41 >>THE CLERK: First is to receive and file proof of
15:43:43 publication in the Hyde Park development
15:43:45 agreement.
15:43:45 >> Move to receive and file.
15:43:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Cohen.
15:43:52 Seconded by Ms. Capin.
15:43:53 All in favor aye.
15:43:54 Motion carries.
15:43:55 >>THE CLERK: The other two items I have on
15:44:00 August 6th, Council has scheduled appeal
15:44:03 hearings regarding grand tree removal at 5119 West
15:44:12 Neptune Beach Park Homeowners Association is now
15:44:17 withdrawing its objections to that, so we need to
15:44:19 remove that from the public hearing.
15:44:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Suarez, seconded
15:44:26 by Mr. Cohen.
15:44:27 All in favor of the motion, aye.
15:44:29 Motion carried.
15:44:29 >>THE CLERK: The other one, we have another one
15:44:32 for the same location before a different
15:44:35 applicant, and we set it for October 1st.
15:44:38 She's not going to be available that date, so
15:44:40 we're looking at setting it October 15th.
15:44:44 >> So moved.
15:44:44 >> Second.
15:44:45 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Suarez.
15:44:46 Seconded by Mr. Cohen.
15:44:47 All in favor of that motion say aye.
15:44:49 Opposed.
15:44:50 Motion carries.
15:44:51 >>THE CLERK: That's all I have.
15:44:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion to receive and file from
15:44:56 Ms. Capin.
15:44:57 Seconded by Mr. Cohen.
15:44:58 All in favor, aye.
15:45:01 We stand adjourned until 5:30.
15:45:03 (City Council meeting adjourned.)
15:45:03
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.