Tampa City Council

Thursday, July 14, 2016

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.


[Sounding gavel]

09:04:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Tampa City Council is called to order.

The chair yields to Councilman Harry Cohen.

09:04:24 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much, Councilman Suarez.

I would like to introduce our clerk, Shirley Foxx-Knowles,

who is going to give us our invocation this morning.

We are going to rise for that as well as for the pledge of

allegiance.

09:04:38 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES:
Thank you, Councilman Cohen.

Good morning, honorable council and everyone.

Let us pray.

Dear heavenly father.

Thank you once again for another beautiful, beautiful day




here in the City of Tampa.

Thank you for the opportunity to live and serve in our great

city.

Thank you for your grace and your mercy.

And for all the wonderful gifts you have provided.

You have been so good to us, and we are truly thankful.

Let us remember to pray it forward and show our gratitude by

being kind to one another.

Father, help us to understand that it's only by serving

others in your name that we find love, peace and joy.

Father, on this day, we thank you for all those assembled

here for today's meeting.

We celebrate you this day and for all the days you have

given us.

We will be forever grateful for your love for us.

May we remember that we are all your children and that you

love us unconditionally.

May we continue to work towards being shining examples of

your love.

Make us instruments of your will.

Bless our great country where we are free because of others

that have given so much.

Father, please especially watch over those serving on the

front lines to keep us safe, keep us all in your care.

Thank you, father, for more than we can say.




These things we ask and things thanks we give with humble

heart.

Let us all say amen.

[ Pledge of Allegiance ]

09:06:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Roll call, please.

09:06:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Here.

09:06:49 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Here.

09:06:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Present.

09:06:57 >>HARRY COHEN:
Here.

09:06:59 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Here.

09:07:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Here.

Our first order of business is the addendum to the agenda.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Before we go on, I do have a memo here from Catherine Coyle

concerning item number 7 had for today's agenda.

She is not going to be here.

She's not going to be able to present and Mr. Snelling

contacted us earlier this morning because she is sick as a

dog, as they say, so she won't be able to be here. So I

would like us to get a motion to move that from the agenda.

09:07:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
We can remove it but We reschedule it?

09:07:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
If you know the time and date you want it,

sure.

09:07:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Okay.




Which would be the next regular meeting.

09:07:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
August 4.

Under staff reports.

We have a motion by Mrs. Capin.

Second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion indicate by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Item number 1 is a special recognition to. Do the honors is

Councilman Charlie Miranda.

09:08:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Good morning, honorable members of Tampa

City Council.

It's my pleasure this morning to be here to make a

commendation presentation to the Frank Ray dance studio for

60 years.

Frank Ray was, the children that have gone there and

dedication, the faculty, all the students and the faculty

that are associated with this fine, fine operation have gone

on, and a lot of them have become American Bali, have worked

there, have worked for the southwest ballet center,

International dance center, and all these young individuals

have done very well.

In fact, today is the current owner of the Frank Ray dance

studio, and I have known her for -- she was a little thing.

And I have known her father and her whole family.




And she's a fine person.

In fact her father had a nickname.

Should I say it?

Red eye.

Remember that?

09:09:48 >> Yes.

09:09:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
And he had a horse.

He's the only guy that advertised his business -- true

story, now -- and the directory of the phone company.

And red eye with a horse.

And it wasn't -- he was very successful in inventing a new

way of advertising.

And whether a group of young people, in fact the other young

lady here, her father and I go back about 110 years.

And he's the one that called me and I never played with the

Cubans, but I gave up a whole month for the Cubans.

09:10:34 >> The way I heard that story is my father did call that

pitch, but he just didn't get it right.

(Laughter).

09:10:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Oh, I got it in the right place all

right.

Over center field wall.

But it's an honor to be here to make this presentation.

Because he's a fine, fine individual.

All within the community.




You know, people that go to dance schools and that do art

become much better citizens.

Therefore my downfall.

It's my pleasure to present this to you, and to say a few

words.

60 years.

And I notch you as a business person.

You're kind hearted, a wonderful individual, the whole

family.

Future dancers maybe, up there in New York and Washington,

D.C., they have got a great program there, also.

[ Applause ]

09:11:30 >> Thank you, Councilman Miranda.

And thanks to the rest of you as well.

I humbly accept this and appreciate it, and do so on behalf

of Mr. Frank Ray himself.

He is the one that high pressure the vision 60 years ago to

start a studio when there may have been only a couple in

town at the time, and his legacy, the way he enhanced the

cultural environment here in Tampa, really set Tampa path

for Tampa's cultural astuteness that we enjoy today.

So really the credit goes to him.

I'm happy to, along with Stephani and some of our other

supporters that are here today, I'm happy to represent them.

Yes, we teach dance, but we like to say that we also teach




life skills.

So with that, I once again thank you so much for this honor.

And we truly and humbly appreciate it.

Thank you.

[ Applause ]

09:12:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you very much for appearing before

council.

And she has a wonderful family except for her husband.

Thanks for helping out at frank Ray dance studio, and a

great business, and it's going to continue to be strong.

Next up is our public comment.

These are for those items that are not set for public

hearing.

Anyone that would like to come up and speak before council

may do so at this time.

Again, anything not set for public hearing please come up.

09:13:27 >> Joe Robinson.

If you look at the overhead, I'm here to speak on item 4 and

item 73.

And I will speak to the item on the overhead in a minute.

If you go back to item 4, first I am here to talk about the

agreement with the strategic partners with than the Vinik

project.

Being a mechanical engineer, you know how hot it is outside.

This is a great deal for the City of Tampa.




They have a franchise much like the franchise for the Tampa

Housing Authority.

They need this because the city does not regulate to chill

water but they need to provide chill water.

It's a revenue generator for the City of Tampa.

You have some good terms in there equal to what TECO is

paying, and it has escalation rates in the future.

So I am here to stand let's do that.

Otherwise the product will have all this equipment and

cooling towers and it will not be aesthetic. This makes

more sense.

This is a good engineering way tore do it.

It's as a mechanical professor said, I had to say that and I

want to make sure that Channelside goes forward.

We don't want any excuse for failure.

Now, the other thing is item 73.

Now look at the overhead, if you would.

On the overhead, the federal government, Hillsborough

County, City of Tampa, all good faith effort.

Mrs. Montelione, thanks very much for staying on this, okay?

Good faith efforts may work.

But good faith efforts don't put money in people's pockets.

It's a way to say, yeah, we are going to do something,

there's no guarantee.

As a matter of fact, when I called the city yesterday, a




good faith effort that you are using with engineers and

architect.

But we don't do it.

The City Council, all of these year, we don't have a good

faith effort to engineers, architects,.

You don't have that H.city of Tampa does not have a good

faith effort for CCNA, the negotiations act, like they do

for contractors and subs.

That's a problem.

That is an issue.

They got draftsmen telling me they need to get the draft and

they'll get it done when they get time.

When is the time?

The time is now.

The moment is now.

Good faith efforts don't work.

And if you don't have them at all, engineers like myself

aren't getting any opportunities, and companies are not

responding to e-mails, because the city has a flaw in the

process.

Please take care of this problem and let's make sure the

businesses get opportunities for this billion dollar

corporate growth going on in Tampa.

Thank you.

09:17:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Next, please.




09:17:10 >> Good morning, council.

Rick Fernandez, 2906 north he will more Avenue, Tampa 33602.

That's in Tampa Heights.

I'm the president of the Tampa Heights Civic Association.

On your agenda, doing a little bit of a deep dive here,

relates to agenda item number 464.

It has -- it here today to schedule a hearing, date and time

on a petition for review that has been filed by Sarah roam

your regarding a special use at 2015 north Central Avenue.

She's seeking an adult congregate living facility to be

installed at that location.

The proposed date and time by the clerk's office is August

25 at 10:30 a.m.

We are requesting consideration by council to reschedule

that time.

I don't care so much about the day as I do about the time.

To have the schedule for a time after normal working hours

so the community would be able to actually attend.

You may recall there's some history behind that that Romeo

attempted --

09:18:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'm sorry, I ask you not to get into the

merits of it but your request he would with appropriate but

not talk about the specific facts.

09:18:35 >> Okay.

In any event, not getting into the merits, we do have some




history here that would suggest that the community will show

up in large numbers around this issue, and I frankly would

like to give them an opportunity to do that.

So while I know everyone's time here is very valuable today,

if there would be a way to advance this item on the agenda

to actually consider a different date and time for this

particular matter, we would appreciate it very much.

I don't have anything further although I think there's

someone behind me to come up and speak to the issue as well.

Thank you.

09:19:12 >> Kevin Klahr, 502 east Ross Avenue.

I would like to speak about item number 64 on the agenda

also.

I live directly across the street from the property in

question.

And before --

09:19:32 >> Hold on.

That's a hearing.

09:19:36 >> I would like to also request that the time be changed to

allow for evening input from the community.

Thank you.

09:19:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you, sir.

Next, please.

09:19:46 >> Mickey Jacob, Harbor Island.

I'm here to speak about agenda item number 4, and to jump on




the theme that Councilman Miranda started this morning, this

is a home run for our community.

You have been presented with the technical aspects,

financial aspects, financial aspects of this particular

project.

The benefits are for the development that's being done

around the arena.

I'm here to speak about perception.

Perception benefits to the community to what we are to the

city, and how this is going affect the quality of life.

As an architect I think this is an incredibly important

installation for our city.

It showcases a new vision that we have that we are a forward

thinking city.

They are really looking at new aspects of how we think about

the best way to develop our property within the urban core.

This will make that happen.

It will allow us to do incredibly great design in this

community.

It supports the sustainability aspects that we all talked

about that's so important to our community.

And just for the wellness aspect of the residents that will

live there and how it affects downtown, it will be something

that I think will be looked at from other aspects in terms

of other communities looking at us as to how we are doing




things, businesses that we are trying to recruit here and

people that want to live there.

As an architect it's incredibly exciting.

As a business owner in downtown Tampa, this makes my

neighborhood much better.

It allows for people to come down and actually live in the

area that we are going to work in, and, quite honestly, as a

downtown resident, my neighborhood. This is going to make

my neighborhood a walkable, sustainable, healthy community

that will benefit all kind of people that want to come and

live and work and play there, and also, I think, promote the

fact that our Tampa Bay Lightning will be Stanley Cup

champions for many years to come.

So I urge you to support it.

Thank you for the opportunity to have been be here today.

09:22:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

I'm glad you didn't put any pressure oat Vinik group.

Next, please.

09:22:07 >> Good morning, council.

My name is Morrison, 808 Franklin Street here in beautiful

Tampa.

I also have an office in Tampa so I am speaking as a

business owner, also as a resident.

So I know how much I need to talk about here, but have any

of you read the book the walkable city by Jeff SPECK?




Okay, good.

09:22:32 >> [Off microphone.]

09:22:38 >> Just want to make sure we are on the same page.

09:22:41 >> The Tampa City Council book club.

09:22:42 >> Well done.

Well done.

I want to say two things.

64% of college educated millennials, where they want to live

and only then do they look for a job.

A full 77% of them plan to live in America's urban core.

It also said -- and I thought this was interesting --

understanding the consolidated parks mean that fewer people

can walk to them.

The big parks are great for the weekend but not great during

the week.

And when you think about item number 4, which Jeff Vinik is

proposing, this is going to greatly enhance it by having

rooftop urban gardens, rooftop bars, dog parks.

I wake up every morning on the 27th floor and look out

and see a beautiful city.

And I see buildings that have in one direction or both a

beautiful view with either University of Tampa, or the port,

or the bay, or even the north view is actually quite

beautiful with a lot of greenery.

I think to myself there's a lot of rooftops that go to waste




there.

And Jeff understood this concept of seeing unobstructed

views and enjoying that and I would like to endorse that

because it's a great project, but I would also like to

endorse the concept of the idea of our city getting behind

creating Tampa Bay as a rooftop city.

If you look at the most influential cities in Florida,

Orlando, tourist capital of the world, Daytona, NASCAR

capital of the world, even St. Augustine, oldest city.

Miami.

We struggle with and we need to have something that people

from all around the world would want to come to see, like

the Sydney opera house or the world's largest pool.

If we had Tampa known as the rooftop city where you could

come here.

Imagine all of us being able to go to the Sykes building and

enjoy sunset and music on the top of that building.

Finance we could have not just Channelside but all of

downtown.

And benefit from that.

If just 5% of the workforce that go to the rooftops enjoying

drinks, listening to music, having a meal, we don't even

have to get into an argument about mass transit.

So I am here to support the Vinik project.

I think it's a great thing for our city and I would like to




encourage us to think even bigger beyond.

09:25:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Next, please.

09:25:03 >> Good morning, council.

My name is Freddie Moore, here representing the Tampa

morning breakfast group and the TOBA group.

I'm here to speak on item 73.

And I would like to yield my time.

09:25:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

We don't yield time but go ahead, sir.

Next up, please.

You all can speak individually.

We are not here to yield time to people.

You are not a member of Congress.

If you want to speak to an issue or you want spokesmen to

speak for you, fine. This is your public comment.

If you don't want to speak anymore, that's fine.

Whatever you all want to do.

Finance you want to speak for your group and then everyone

stand up.

09:26:01 >> The reason why we did this is because the last time about

getting more time.

09:26:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
That is correct.

09:26:06 >> That you wanted us to make sure that they yield time to

me S.that appropriate or know.




09:26:12 >> No, Mr. Ransom, we had a conversation prior to a meeting.

We did not have a conversation prior to this meeting.

So if you could, we have a long agenda, and, you know, you

are going to speak to the issue, and we would love for you

to speak to the issue F.each one of you want to speak to the

issue, that's fine, also.

If the council feels they want to allow you more time, that

is up to council to vote on that, not for me to give you --

how much more time do you need, sir?

09:26:43 >> Well, I would like to have at least nine minute to speak,

if you want me to have a little less than that, that's fine.

09:26:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Typically we do three minutes per individual

and then an additional minute during our public hearings of

one minute each.

Again, it's up to council to ask for that.

And if they would like to do that, that is up to them.

Anyone that would like to make a motion to that effect?

09:27:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I'll move to provide Mr. Ransom nine

minutes.

09:27:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Go ahead, sir.

09:27:19 >> Thank you.




I may not take the full nine but I wanted to express our

thoughts for this morning.

I'm representing the Tampa breakfast club.

We presented this council with a number of previous

documents, previous to the ones, to something that appeared

in a '91 case, voluminous document that was read yesterday

that was prepared by Gregory Hart from the MB program for

the administration, city government.

Basically, in reading that document, it does not answer our

question that we asked for to get clarification about.

One was, what is the total budget of the City of Tampa

annually for mass transit, what was the total amount of

money spent by the City of Tampa for goods and services

including construction for the last fiscal years, and we

want to have that broken down demographically by race and

gender so we could have all of us to see and use it as a

benchmark, whether or not there's equity in how the city

spends its money.

Looking at the 91 pages, that doesn't cover any of that,

even though our documents included in the Hart report.

So we are going to ask City Council to please get that

information for us, because we don't have that today.

And when hopefully he may be able to find that information

because we don't have that information.

That information is very important.




It's important because just as we came before you, we

supported that project, and we still do, because Jeff Vinik

made a commitment about our conversation about the MBE

participation.

We are focused on African-American L African-American-owned

companies, but we are not excluding other groups that are

classified in this type of program.

City staff has been working with partners and we applaud

Madison in having a new CEO come on board, and continue to

do what we think are the right things so far.

It's up to council to get with strategic partners on that

project to make sure they are reporting to City Council and

the public how money is being spent demographically by race

and gender as we all agreed that would happen in this

process.

And the City of Tampa has its own budget.

We simply estimated that it's 200 million a year that the

city spends out the door for goods and services and

construction. We put out there the last time we came that

about 12.1 billion, a rough number, for two terms of City

Council member or the mayor, that you might spend out the

door.

We told you last time that maybe one tenth of one percent of

that money may be spent with African-Americans, not 10% of

1.6 billion which again is 160 million, not 10% of 1606




million which is 16 million, not 1.6 million out of 16

million.

Maybe somewhere between 160,000 to 1.6 million maybe spent

with African-American companies, maybe.

We don't know.

We want that information so all of us can see together how

the money is being spent.

That's important because as African-Americans we contribute

to the taxes.

We actually vote for elected officials, and we expect to

have equity, fairness and diversity in what you do as a

city.

We expect you to set the standard for others to follow,

because you represent all of the people in this community.

And that's simply our expectation.

Now, we haven't heard anything of any of the several members

of council that you don't agree with this.

No one has said to us you don't agree with this.

So we all are in agreement.

What we can't see, though, is how to evaluate it.

The actual information Mr. Hart produced speaks to

justifying why they do what they do, how they do what they

do in the city, and all of that does not result in showing

us who they are spending money with demographically by race

and gender.




Can anybody can raise their hand and tell us they saw those

document, we didn't see it, okay.

So it like a lot of information that there's nothing about

what we are talking about today.

And when Mr. Hart comes here today, he's going to tell you

why they do what they do, how they do what they do, and at

the same time, no one is being held accountable, there's no

consequences for failing to have equity, and diversity, and

economic inclusion of African-Americans among others with

the way the city spends money, or possibly its employees.

Something else to add to the list.

The city along with Hillsborough County contributes to the

enterprise business, the economic Development Corporation,

Tampa, Hillsborough County corporation, in job creation

programs.

Everything we do as a city and the county should be

conditional.

We should really try to make sure, that Jeff Vinik is

talking about that we all bought into about a community for

everyone which includes African-Americans among all the

other people in everyone, that all of us can live, work,

play, stay safely here together.

And top do that we must put conditions on those things.

If the city administration fails to respond to this council,

we recommend that you begin denying contracts coming before




you to approve them, unless they find language in those

contracts that is going to result in the bottom line showing

all of us that they are actually spending money.

With a list of people that they have gotten over there,

certified people they have gotten on this that represents

the demographics.

Have a list or have a program unless it's going to actually

work?

So people need to be held accountable.

That includes the mayor.

The mayor is the one who administrators all these funds that

are being spent that you approve in the mayor's budget.

They come back to City Council for cost overruns.

We need to come back and approve to spend more money, come

back and bring contracts to the City Council for approval,

and you don't have to approve any of those contracts if they

don't meet what we are talking about now.

And we think that is reasonable and fair.

Otherwise, nothing will change.

Nothing will change.

And we would appreciate it very much if this council would

tab those kinds of actions, continue to -- you have done up

to this point -- trying to get the information.

We appreciate you doing that.

Please continue to drill down on the very basic information




that appears on this one sheet of paper that's in your

document that no one answered.

There's nothing in that document that respond, and we would

appreciate it if you can get a response.

And when Mr. Hart comes and speak, because we are on record,

our dour ultimate is on record, we are going to be here.

When he comes to speak, if any of you want to ask us to come

up and ask us, did Mr. Hart's report respond to his request

in his document, we he would like to speak to that, if that

is possible.

With that I'll take any questions if you have any.

09:34:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Montelione.

09:34:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
The form that you provided us, it's

fairly well laid out.

It very simple.

Did you provide that to Mr. Hart?

09:34:58 >> He does have it.

If you recall, he has it in his 91 document, the 91 pages

that he submitted as an attachment.

09:35:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
But it's spelled out?

09:35:11 >> no, my letter to you, this letter here, all that you

received, it asks City Council to provide us with

information.

So we certainly think it's reasonable to get a response to

this letter as well.




We come up and make an official public records request and

gone through that problem sees when we did something that's

very basic and very reasonable.

09:35:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I didn't see it so I wasn't sure if it

was provided to you and maybe not to us.

09:35:46 >> No.

09:35:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.

09:35:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other questions?

Thank you so much.

09:35:52 >> Thank you as well.

09:35:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Next, please.

09:35:56 >> Honorable chairman, honorable council members, I'm David

luck with clear village on number 83 when that comes up.

In the last meeting there was some concern about the first

year minimum in the agreement, the idea behind that first

year minimum was that there were some integration costs to

identify properties that were foreclosed and weren't

registered but were unoccupied and we wanted to make sure

where there was a rent-back agreement for the foreclosed

property was somehow occupied that there was not any further

process against those properties.

So the idea was to have that.

There was also some specific work flow relating to

noncompliance that the department wanted, and we wanted to

cover that.




Based on the registry, that's not really an issue.

So the city has the right to modify the agreement and we

made the offer to remove the first year minimum, and I'm

here to answer any questions when that comes up.

Thank you for your time.

09:37:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Are you here to negotiate with us?

Because I think you are supposed to negotiate with the

administration, aren't you?

09:37:20 >> I have already notified them.

09:37:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Just want to make sure, just to clarify.

Thank you for being up here for public comment.

09:37:35 >> Okay, I'm Ed, Ed Tillou, Sulphur Springs.

Okay, one of the speakers before me, two before me, about

Mr. Hart, there was quantification, the search for

quantification.

The thing is that's what you need to make decisions.

Okay.

I distributed this before.

It's more something for the county commission but it's about

a rail commuter rail line.

And I said it was a $400 million bond issue.

But it would actually be 440.

The reason being arrives on the track 20 years and on the

cars 10.

But anyway, I distributed and of course it's annotated for




your clarification, to make it easier for you.

I also hand add round transit guide because you know that of

the seven of you, even though there were eight votes on the

chairmanship that was kind of strange but anyway, 7 of you.

One of you -- and somewhere else -- one of you uses public

transportation but the rest of you don't.

Now, the thing is, to provide for Chevy volts, which I don't

have it this week so you are spared that this week.

But the Chevy volt, there's enough buy-fuel production

potential, but 94 million volts.

Now, the thing is that there's 200 million cars in the

United States.

To start getting serious about carbon dioxide, with I is

triggering the global warming, climatic change.

There's another thing, too.

This was in the paper.

And this shows the lack of understanding of the algae over

on the other coast.

Err R.now, it's not algae.

Algae is a higher life form of a plant.

There is algae but this is not what's involved here. This

is blue green algae.

Now, you have lots of cyanobacteria because you breathe

oxygen, and these came from creatures, hundreds of millions

of years, taking in carbon dioxide and giving off oxygen.




Now, what that indicates, these creatures that take in

carbon dioxide and give off oxygen, this is a response.

This San response of the planet.

It's not just nitrogen in the fertilizer.

That's something that's been beaten on for 20 years and it's

certainly part of the issue, but you have a rip van Winkle

situation, the Environmental Protection Commission over at

the county.

It's like 20 or 30 years ago.

These people have not adjusted, not adapted to these things

and carbon dioxide should be front and center on that.

Carbon footprint.

That would quantify things to make proper decision making.

09:40:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you, sir.

Next up.

09:41:01 >> Good morning, council.

I was born and raised in Tampa.

I'm proud to call Tampa my home.

Later you will hear an update from the Parks Department

regarding the sunscreen to be placed throughout the City of

Tampa, Bayshore, on the Riverwalk, throughout community

parks and pools.

I want to let you know what a great idea I think this would

be for the City of Tampa, the residents of Tampa, and

visitors of Tampa.




As a mom, I put sunscreen on my kids every day before school

or camp.

And have an understanding of the damaging effects of

sunscreen and how we protect ourselves from skin cancer.

When my boys were little, I would head to Bayshore,

sometimes be gone longer and go to a park and then I would

have to run back home.

We were out for longer, and it would be nice to have these

sunscreens placed throughout parks and Bayshore, to put on

sunscreen again.

I was recently in Portugal and I was reading an article in

the Portugal airport about the City of Tampa, and we

continue to attract more and more visitors to the City of

Tampa and these visitors and tourists aren't aware of the

damaging effects of sun or familiar with how hot it is in

Tampa, and it would be nice for those taking a stroll on the

Riverwalk or Bayshore to put on sunscreen by having these

free sunscreen centers throughout the City of Tampa.

Lori with Mise En is willing to donate 20 units to the City

of Tampa, and Tampa General Hospital has expressed an

interest in providing the sunscreen that goes into these

units.

So the City of Tampa Parks Department would just be

responsible for maintaining the units, would be responsible

for installing the units and also refilling the sunscreen




units when they are empty.

I just wanted to let you know it's a great idea, and I'm

looking forward to hearing any updates.

Thank you.

09:43:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Next.

And before you speak, sir, I want to announce anyone else in

the that would like to speak before this gentleman speaks,

if not he will be the last one.

If there are, please stand alongside here.

Anyone else?

Sir, you are next.

09:43:19 >> Taylor Rowell, 3703 west San Juan street, Tampa.

Here I want to talk about item number 4.

But first, thank you for putting the sunscreen in Coronoa

Park, our neighborhood park, and I used it the other day.

I seriously encourage that.

But I'm here to represent in support of the Strategic

Partners' plan to install chill water system for the

project.

Not only are they pursuing innovation and pushing the

envelope for development in the City of Tampa and the

southeast region of our country, but I also want to

encourage you to loon at the City of Tampa's green ordinance

that I helped work with many other community members




including Councilman John Dingfelder back in 2007, 2008.

There are some incentives that the city provides people that

are building, LEED certified buildings and pursuing

sustainability when they are developing multifamily

single-family commercial structures.

Not only that, but the city in the ordinance actually

clarifies that the city should be pursuing these measures as

well.

If we are going to attract corporate entities that we want

to relocate to our city and to our county, we need to be

pursuing sustainability.

Any major tech company, any building in Silicon Valley and

elsewhere that houses a fortune 500 or an up and coming tech

start-up, et cetera, is going to be pursuing energy

efficiency, sustainability, occupant health and things like

that.

So let's use this as an opportunity for Tampa to say that we

represent innovation.

But back to item number 4, with the pursuit of

sustainability and efficiency, this chiller plant also

provides an opportunity for future buildings, not related to

their project to actually pursue efficiency and

sustainability, will promote quality of life for residents

in and around all of this project.

So please support this and please use this as an opportunity




to look at how the city can be more innovative and

encouraged and show the state and the country that we are

progressive, and we are for building health, innovation, and

sustainability.

Thank you.

09:45:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

One last time, anyone else in the public to be speak at this

time for any item on the agenda that is not set for public

hearing?

I see no one.

Before I go forward, Ms. Capin had an issue that she wanted

to ask to be removed for discussion.

09:45:56 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes. Under parks, recreation and cultural

committee, item 13, some clarification on that.

09:46:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Okay, terrific.

So Mr. Maniscalco, we'll talk about that at that time.

Mr. Cohen?

09:46:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
Related to item number 64.

I checked with Mr. Shelby, and there's no reason that that

review hearing can't be held at night.

They asked for August 25th at 10:30.

I am going to make a motion that when we actually set the

public hearing now for September 8th at 5:30 p.m.

09:46:36 >> Second.

09:46:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.




A second from Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Item number 2.

Do we have someone from staff?

09:46:48 >> Elaine Lund, Historic preservation.

You have before you the first reading for the landmark

designation of the theater at 1617 North Franklin Street.

We will be following up at the second reading with a full

presentation on the item.

If you have any questions today.

Thank you.

09:47:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any questions at this time?

Would someone like to take that first item?

09:47:18 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Thank you very much.

Item number 2 is an ordinance being presented for first

reading consideration, an ordinance of the city of Tampa,

Florida amending the North Franklin Street downtown local

landmark multiple properties group to have include the

Rialto theater located at 1617 North Franklin Street, Tampa,

Florida as more particularly described in section 3 hereof

as a local landmark, providing for repeal of all ordinances

in conflict, providing for severability, providing an

effective date.




09:47:42 >> Second.

09:47:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion by Mr. Maniscalco, second by

Mrs. Manatee Monday.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

09:47:51 >>THE CLERK:
Second reading on number 2 will be on August

4th at 9:30 a.m.

09:47:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Item number 3 is a first reading.

I think it's to repair a scrivener's error.

Is that correct?

Mrs. Montelione, please take that item.

09:48:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I move an ordinance being presented for

first reading consideration, an ordinance amending ordinance

number 2016-37 passed and ordained by the City Council of

the City of Tampa own March 21, 2016, which approved special

use permit for a small venue with consumption on premises

only located at 1719 and 1723 West Kennedy Boulevard Tampa,

Florida and 1712 and 1714 North "A" street Tampa, Florida

correcting a scrivener's error by correcting the language in

section 3 of the ordinance, providing for severability

providing an effective date.

09:48:38 >> I have a motion by Mrs. Montelione, a second by Mr.

Maniscalco.




All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

09:48:46 >> Second reading and adoption will be on August 4, 2016 at

9:30 a.m.

09:48:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Item number 4.

Staff?

There's a reason why all the cameras are here.

Someone from staff.

09:49:05 >>SAL TERRITO:
Legal department.

Item number 4 is on first reading for a chiller.

And unless you have questions, I really have nothing to say.

09:49:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I am going to make you describe what a

chiller is.

Mrs. Montelione.

09:49:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I was hoping somebody from finance would

be here, because section 3, when it talks about that each

annual payment shall increase by 3% upon the anniversary

date set this date, unless he section 3-2-B is implemented

and then there's a little bit more of a complicated revenue

agreement.

So I wanted to have somebody hopefully talk about the

revenue.

We have other agreements, franchise agreements in place,




that I know when we put an agreement in place for 30 years,

with this somewhat no changes until the 22nd year, I would

like to make sure that we have got an ironclad agreement and

the best agreement possible.

I mean, I was a member of the USGBD one time years ago, and

believe this is phenomenally a great idea, project.

If it moves the City of Tampa in the sustainable direction

that we need to go with our commercial properties, but I

would like to make sure, you know, that the numbers fly out

in our favor from now until the 22nd year, apparently.

09:50:49 >>SAL TERRITO:
I can explain.

Generally we don't even have flan chase agreements. This

one does. This is a little unusual.

Just like anything else, we have it with TECO, people's gas

and so forth.

And those don't have escalators in them.

So this one does.

And it's a better deal for the City of Tampa.

So we think it's a better deal than we have had with some of

the other franchises that we will be dealing with.

09:51:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.

The questions that I had all related to those numbers and to

the revenue stream.

09:51:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other questions?

09:51:24 >>FRANK REDDICK:
To follow up with Mrs. Montelione, since




it's the first reading maybe someone can find that before

second reading.

09:51:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
That's an excellent idea, Mr. Reddick.

And maybe between now and second reading, someone from staff

can come here and speak to that.

And, you know, the only other question I had was on section

number 4, subparagraph 9, corrosion control, microbio

control shall be nontoxic and not contaminate the soil

surrounding the component.

So there's not a disclosure for those chemicals.

Or reference to what they might be.

I mean other than they should be quote-unquote nontoxic.

09:52:16 >> They will be dealing with that.

This one basically gives them the franchise, explain what

they will need when they come in for permit and so forth.

It will be generally addressed at that time.

09:52:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
So that will be addressed at permitting?

09:52:28 >> It will be a dressed at permitting and monitored by the

department on an ongoing basis.

09:52:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Because I didn't see anything for

monitoring but if that's part of the process the monitoring

will be built in.

But it didn't appear to be in this agreement.

So that was another question I had.

Thank you.




09:52:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other comments or questions before I go

to Mr. Miranda?

09:52:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
No, sir.

09:52:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Miranda.

09:52:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Wait any longer, I might have died.

But anyway --

09:52:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Two questions?

09:53:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
No, not talking about you, talking about

me.

What I am saying is this, that I had a conversation this

morning with Mrs. Little and also Mr. Territo.

And this is the first ever on any franchise where they have

an escalated cost.

All of them.

This is the first one.

There's nothing wrong.

I talked to finance.

And they gave give me all the facts and figures and it's up

to council to say yes or no.

That's it.

09:53:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other comments or questions by council?

I have one question, Mr. Territo, about the escalator

clause.

Because it's something new, what was the decision that made

us do this as opposed to other franchise agreements in the




past?

09:53:47 >> We may have thought it through better this time.

And because it's a 30 year agreement.

I'll take back a little of what I said.

The only permit was TECO because we had a 4.5% provision in

there which is our standard franchise fee.

We put in a one-time 6% jump.

This way we thought better of it and thought, we are going

to do 6% at the starting point and put time involved, 30

years, 6%, 30 years, so that's why we built in this time.

09:54:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Well, you weren't the lawyer on the other

contract, right?

09:54:28 >>SAL TERRITO:
I was on some of them.

Live and learn.

Who would like to move the item?

09:54:33 >>HARRY COHEN:
I move an ordinance being presented for

first reading consideration, an ordinance granting to

Strategic Property Partners LLC its successors and assigns a

nonexclusive franchise to use the public streets, alleys,

highways, waterways, bridges, easements and other public

places in the City of Tampa for the construction,

maintenance and operation of a chilled water distribution

and return system, including all necessary appurtenances to

the delivery and return of chilled water in the City of

Tampa and prescribing the terms and conditions under which




said nonexclusive franchise may be exercised providing for

severability, providing an effective date.

09:55:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

09:55:16 >>THE CLERK:
Second reading and adoption will be held on

August 4, 2016 at 93:07 a.m.

09:55:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you very much.

We go over to our committee reports.

Mr. Charlie Miranda, the chair of our Public Safety

Committee.

09:55:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move items 5 up there 8.

09:55:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a second by Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Next up is parks, recreation, cultural committee.

Mr. Maniscalco, we will talk about item number 13.

09:55:48 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I move items number 9 through 26 with

the exception of number 13 which has been pulled for

discussion.

And item number 12 to be continuously.

09:56:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion from Mr. Maniscalco.

I have a second by Mr. Cohen.

I have a question from the clerk.




09:56:11 >>THE CLERK:
[Off microphone.]

09:56:19 >>Are so item 12 would be continued to August 25th.

09:56:22 >> motion by Mr. Maniscalco.

Second by Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Okay.

Before we move onto the next committee assignment, let's get

some of the answers that Mrs. Capin has on item number 13.

Mr. McDonaugh, are you here to speak on item number 13?

09:56:40 >> I am, sir.

Bob McDonaugh, City of Tampa, economic development

administrator.

Item number 13 is a month to month extension of the existing

ARAMARK contract.

We are asking for a month to month extension of the existing

contract.

09:57:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
When does it expire?

09:57:07 >> At the end of July, I believe.

09:57:10 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
The end of this month.

Okay.

The reason that I have is that it is a term of agreement

shall continue month to month.

I am going to read it.

The term of agreement shall continue month to month basis




beginning July 1, 2016, until such time as the city provides

a contractor with 15-day written notice in advance of its

intention to terminate this agreement, irrespective of

whether or not contractors met all the obligations in this

agreement.

What I have here is, we have a month to month that has no

end.

Okay, let me -- I am going to suggest 90 days.

And at the end of 90 days, it can come back, and we'll

either extend it or there will be a contract for us to look

at.

09:57:59 >>BOB McDONAUGH:
That would be fine.

09:58:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
But it has to be taken up within -- I am

not here to negotiate.

I am here to tell you -- right?

I can't speak for him.

Go ahead, Mr. McDonaugh.

09:58:20 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
I am going to make that motion, that we

allow this month to month basis for 90 days, which would be

October -- starting July 1?

The end of October.

Thank you, Mr. Cohen.

09:58:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Before we take up the motion, Mr. Miranda

has a question.

09:58:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
And I appreciate the comment that Mrs.




Capin made, and whatever other comments were made both

sides.

But I don't want to put -- and I am not against the 90 days.

But I want to make sure that ARAMARK doesn't think 90 days

they are going to put the city in defense that it has to be

done in 90 days and negotiations to work on to make sure the

city gets the best viable contract with ARAMARK.

And I don't want to put the city on the defense or the other

side thinking it's going to be done in 90 days.

That's the only thing I am saying.

And I will vote for the 90 days but I want to make sure that

I don't puppet the city in a defense.

09:59:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Okay, let us run the meeting.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate it.

Go ahead.

Mr. McDonaugh.

09:59:32 >>BOB McDONAUGH:
I am accepting of the council members

suggestion to change the agreement.

09:59:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
So the motion is to continue the month to

month until the end of October, which is October 31.

09:59:51 >>BOB McDONAUGH:
Which at such point if we have not

successfully conclude the negotiation I would come back to

council and ask for an extension.

Month to month agreement.




10:00:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Exactly, yes.

10:00:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
You accept that motion is agreeable, Mr.

Reddick, you were going to second that motion?

Okay.

Let us have Mr. Shelby weigh in.

We have a motion and a second from Mrs. Capin and seconded

by Mr. Reddick.

10:00:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
What you have here is a resolution

approving a specific contract.

That contract, the administration is offering to have that

contract amended, as I understand it.

10:00:30 >>BOB McDONAUGH:
That's correct.

10:00:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
And what you have in front of you is

something that under your committee reports, a resolution

that you can either vote up or down.

My recommendation would be that you continue it to the next

regular meeting and have the administration come back with

the amended agreement, at which point council can -- or not,

either way -- at which point council with choose to vote it

up or down, as opposed to making something contingent on

prospectively.

10:01:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
We will go ahead and clear that particular

motion and then we'll come back top any motion for

continuance.

That motion from Mrs. Capin, and then second from Mr.




Reddick.

10:01:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
I think there may be a concern since it's

the end of July and I would suggest, we do have a regular

meeting -- we have an evening meeting next week, if there's

a time crunch, this could come back then rather than on the

4th, if that would be problematic.

10:01:26 >> That would be acceptable.

10:01:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Before we go on, I have a legal question,

and I guess Mr. Territo, or any other legal department

members can answer this, which is if for some reason it goes

back past that 30 day -- I'm sorry that July date, it's

still automatically going to renew?

Per the contract?

10:01:49 >>SAL TERRITO:
I understand coming back and saying it's 30

days.

Ongoing it's 30 days assigned.

And we are trying to make an end point.

And it still continues even if it doesn't come back, you

know, negotiated and tied up in a BOW before our next

regular meeting.

Correct?

10:02:07 >>SAL TERRITO:
Correct.

The concern was she wanted some kind of end date so it ends

quickly, and I understand that.

The only concern I have, and I brought it up before, I hate




to do this, but the way things work here, you can vote yay

or nay.

You can vote it down unless it comes back and that was the

reason I think bringing it back on that evening meeting made

more sense because the administration has to agree they are

going to change the agreement.

It's totally within your control to say "yes" or "no."

10:02:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I just want to make sure in terms of

procedurally and time frame that the contract still

continues regardless of whatever the negotiated --

10:02:43 >>SAL TERRITO:
I'm not sure -- if there's no extension it

may end and you may not have any service.

That's the concern we all have as well.

I don't know the contract well enough to know if it

continues.

Lots of things do.

I'm not sure if this one does.

10:02:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
That's why I want to make sure we clear it

up.

10:02:59 >>SAL TERRITO:
There is no extension I am being told.

Either dies or goes forward.

10:03:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
If there's an extension, why are they

asking to us extend it?

So there is no extension.

10:03:10 >>SAL TERRITO:
Correct.




10:03:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
I am going to amend my motion for the

administration with Bob McDonaugh be amended with the 90

day, or the end of October, whatever time frame that is, to

come back the next regular meeting, July 21, 5:30 p.m.

10:03:35 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Second.

10:03:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
All in favor of that color motion say aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, thank you, Mr. Territo.

Next up is Public Works Committee, Mr. Frank Reddick is our

chair.

10:03:56 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Move item 27 to 31.

10:04:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have ooh second from Mr. Miranda.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Finance Committee.

10:04:15 >>HARRY COHEN:
Move 32 and 33.

10:04:19 >> Second by Mr. Miranda.

All in favor?

Opposed?

Okay.

Preservation committee, Lisa Montelione.

10:04:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Move 34 through 52.

10:04:30 >> Second.

10:04:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mrs. Montelione.

I have a second by Mr. Maniscalco.




All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

Okay.

Next up is transportation committee.

Yvonne Yolie Capin.

10:04:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Move 53 through 67.

10:04:47 >> Motion by Mrs. Capin.

Second by Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you very much.

We have items 61 through 647 which are items being set for

public hearings.

We have cleared item 64.

If I can get a motion for 61.

Motion by Mr. Reddick.

Second by Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Okay.

Item number 62.

10:05:22 >> Move the resolution.

10:05:25 >> Second.

10:05:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mr. Reddick.

All in favor of that motion?




Item number 63.

10:05:31 >> So moved.

10:05:32 >> Second.

10:05:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion from Mr. Reddick.

Second from Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

We are at 10:04 a.m., and now we can start our 9:30 a.m.

motions.

Can I get a motion to open items 65 through 70?

10:05:55 >> Motion by Mr. Reddick.

Seconded by Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor? Any opposed?

Clerk, if you can swear in anyone that is going to speak on

items number 65 through 70, please rise and be sworn in.

(Oath administered by Clerk)

10:06:23 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Land Development Coordination.

Items 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, all require site plans.

Those have been provided to the clerk.

I am available for any questions.

10:06:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any questions of council?

Does petitioner want to make any comments?

10:06:54 >>JOHN GRANDOFF:
Address suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.

I represent the petitioner in this application, and I




respectfully request your second reading on this item.

10:07:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you, sir.

Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on

item number 65?

10:07:16 >> Move to close.

10:07:17 >> Motion by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Mr. Miranda, if you could take number 65, please.

10:07:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
File AB 2-16-13, an ordinance being

presented for second reading and adoption, an ordinance

repealing ordinance 2011-104 approving a special use permit

S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales small venue on premises

consumption and retail package sales off premises couples

and making lawful the sale of beer and wine at or from that

certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 3225 South

MacDill Avenue, suite 117 Tampa, Florida as more

particularly described in section 3, that all ordinances or

parts of ordinances in conflict are repealed, providing an

effective date.

10:08:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Second by Mrs. Montelione.

Please record your vote.

10:08:09 >>THE CLERK:
It isn't working.

10:08:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Please do a roll call vote.




That's what you see on the screen.

Item number 66.

Staff.

Petitioner?

Buehler?

Sir, come to the podium.

10:08:46 >> Certified planner with the avid group.

Just want to say local brewing company, looking forward to

the opening for business, renovating 4066 Boy Scout road,

and we are here if you have any questions.

10:09:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you, sir.

Any questions from council?

Anyone in the public?

I apologize.

10:09:09 >>HARRY COHEN:
Just the wrong thing is up here.

10:09:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Anyone in the public to be speak on item 66?

Motion to close by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mrs. Maniscalco.

Oh, I'm sorry, Mrs. Montelione.

The ghost did it.

Second from Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Mr. Reddick, if you could please kindly take number 66?

10:09:41 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Move item for second reading and adoption,




ordinance approving a special use permit S 2 for alcoholic

beverage sales large venue restaurant consumption on

premises and making lawful the sale of beverages regardless

of alcoholic content beer wine and liquor on that certain

lot, plot or tract of land located at 4606 west Boy Scout

road Boulevard are more particularly described in section 2

that all ordinances are parts of ordinances in conflict are

repealed, providing an effective date.

10:10:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Second by Mrs. Montelione.

Please record your vote.

It's coming up on the clerk's screen.

Roll call, please.

10:10:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
No.

10:10:34 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Yes.

10:10:35 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes.

10:10:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Yes.

10:10:37 >>HARRY COHEN:
Yes.

10:10:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Yes.

10:10:41 >> Motion carried with Miranda voting no and Maniscalco

being absent at vote.

10:10:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Item number 67.

10:10:50 >> Grace Yang, Gray Robinson law firm, 401 East Jackson

Street, suite 2700 Tampa 3360 the 2. This is for our

microbrewery client on Gandy Boulevard and the expansion




that they are requesting to allow for additional storage

space.

We would greatly appreciate your approval on second reading.

10:11:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any questions from council on this item?

Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on

item number 67?

67?

I see no one.

10:11:22 >> Move to close.

10:11:25 >> Motion from Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Mrs. Capin, if you could take number 67, please.

10:11:34 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
An ordinance being presented for second

reading and adoption, an ordinance repealing ordinance

2015-107 approval a special use permit S-2 for alcoholic

beverage sales large venue, microbrewery, on premises

consumption and retail package sales offpremises

consumption, and making lawful the sale of beer and wine at

or from that certain plot, plot or tract of land located at

4465 West Gandy Boulevard suite 600 Tampa, Florida as more

particularly described in section 3, that all ordinances or

parts of ordinances in conflict are repealed, providing an

effective date.




10:12:11 >> Second.

10:12:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mrs. Capin.

I have a second from Mr. Cohen.

Roll call vote, please.

10:12:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Yes.

10:12:18 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Yes.

10:12:20 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes.

10:12:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Yes.

10:12:22 >>HARRY COHEN:
Yes.

10:12:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Yes.

10:12:27 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried with Maniscalco being absent at

vote.

10:12:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Item number 68.

68.

10:12:33 >> I'm here on behalf of the wine exchange to request your

approval on second reading for small venue consumption on

and off premises of beer wine and liquor.

10:12:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Any questions from council?

Is there anyone in the public that be would like to speak on

item number 68?

68?

10:13:00 >> Move to close.

10:13:00 >> Motion by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mrs. Montelione.




All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Mr. Cohen, if you would kindly take number 68.

10:13:10 >>HARRY COHEN:
I move an ordinance being presented for

second reading and adoption, an ordinance repealing

ordinance number 2007-221 approving a special use permit S-2

for alcoholic beverage sales, small venue on premises

consumption and retail package sales off-premises

consumption, and making lawful the sale of beer, wine and

liquor at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land

located at 1609 west snow Avenue, Tampa, Florida as more

particularly described in section 3, that all ordinances or

parts of ordinances in conflict are repealed, providing an

effective date.

10:13:43 >> Second.

10:13:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion by Mr. Cohen, a second by

Mr. Maniscalco.

Roll call vote.

10:13:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Yes.

10:13:52 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Yes.

10:13:54 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes.

10:13:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Yes.

10:13:57 >>HARRY COHEN:
Yes.

10:13:58 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Yes.

10:13:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Yes.




10:14:00 >> Motion carried.

10:14:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Item number 69.

10:14:05 >> Truett Gardner, for item 69 and 70 are linked.

69 is the PD portion.

07 is development agreement which came in front of you

separately.

And now they are ending up together, if you have any

questions, I am here to answer.

10:14:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any questions from council?

Anyone in the public to be speak on item 69?

I see no one.

I have a motion to close from Mr. Maniscalco, second by Mr.

Cohen.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Mr. Maniscalco, if you would kindly take number 69.

10:14:34 >> I have an ordinance being presented for second reading

and adoption, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

vicinity of 2907 west Bay to Bay Boulevard in the city of

Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1

from zoning district classifications PD planned development,

office, business professional, to PD, planned development,

office, business professional residential, multifamily and

restaurant, providing an effective date.

10:14:56 >> Second.




10:14:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mr. Maniscalco.

Second by Mr. Cohen.

Roll call vote.

10:15:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Yes.

10:15:03 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Yes.

10:15:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes.

10:15:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Yes.

10:15:05 >>HARRY COHEN:
Yes.

10:15:07 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Yes.

10:15:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Yes.

10:15:09 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried unanimously.

10:15:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Item number 70.

The petitioner is here.

Is there any question from council of petitioner on 70,

development agreement?

Is there anyone in the public to speak on item number 70,

development agreement that goes in hand with item number 69?

I see no one.

We have to close the public hearing.

Okay.

Motion to close from Mr. Reddick.

Second from Mr. Miranda on that motion.

10:15:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Please indicate by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Now, Mr. Reddick, there's a motion for the resolution.




Second by Cohen.

All in favor?

Okay, that's it.

Thank you so much.

We cannot start our 10:30 public hearing which is item

number 71.

We are going to move to staff reports at this time.

Item number 72.

Than we have staff here to talk about this contract.

10:16:10 >> Eric Weiss, wastewater department director, here to

answer any questions you have on this item.

10:16:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Terrific.

Any questions of Mr. Weiss on this item?

Can I get a motion to move the resolution?

Motion from Mr. Miranda.

I have a second from Mr. Reddick.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Next up, Mr. Hart.

I thought I saw him come in.

Mr. Hart?

10:16:56 >>GREGORY HART:
Manager, small business, minority business

development.

I have as requested a handout to redistribute for your




reference the reports that I provided on May 5th.

10:17:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Hart, before you begin, if I can make a

suggestion.

As part of our motion that is in here, if you have a copy of

that in front of you, it might be good to go through each

one of those individually.

They are numbered.

And number 1, the contracts that are not clear, how that

language can be incorporated in the contract so that it is

more clear on what the expectations are of a contract to

utilize the WMBE and SBLE program.

That's the first question if you could start with that, that

would be great.

10:18:26 >>GREGORY HART:
Yes, sir, thank you.

Mr. Reddick.

10:18:32 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Let me ask a question to clear the agenda

on one item, and that is, Mr. Hart, we were all handed this

paper today, this morning.

10:18:42 >> I can't hear you.

10:18:44 >>FRANK REDDICK:
We were all presented a copy of this paper

here, requesting that you complete and submit to the

council.

Did you receive this?

10:18:56 >>GREGORY HART:
I do have a copy of that, yes, sir.

10:18:58 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Have you completed it?




We have some information related do that.

We have not completed that as it is presented, no.

10:19:07 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Do you intend to complete this?

10:19:10 >>GREGORY HART:
We intend to provide information that's

relative to that, yes, sir.

10:19:15 >>FRANK REDDICK:
When do you anticipate doing that?

10:19:20 >>GREGORY HART:
I assume that will be presented this

morning.

Anything not addressed, we will certainly fill in the gaps.

10:19:25 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Okay.

All right.

10:19:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Is it in the handout?

10:19:34 >> No, it is not.

The information I presented to you this morning.

10:19:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Wait, so we have to fill in the as you

speak?

I mean, if it was done, why don't we have a copy of it in

here?

10:19:53 >>GREGORY HART:
What I intend to do first and foremost as

chairman Reddick -- excuse me, chairman Suarez directed us

to respond to your motion, and within that is some

supplemental information that will answer some of that,

perhaps not all of it.

Anything that is not addressed, we can certainly come back

or provide it.




Is the overhead working?

10:20:19 >> Yes.

10:20:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Before you go on, Mr. Hart, I want to

clarify.

I think one of the questions that both that I have and that

is part of the motion -- and I think sometimes with our

motions, it's hard to find everything.

I think that the point of the form that was presented to us

by TOBA and the Saturday morning breakfast group was

probably part of the letter that was received and dated May

25th from that organization to us, and that's what's

part of the motion which is later down in the thing.

So I just want to make sure that everyone knows.

I think that he is going to answer it per our motion,

hopefully it's got a lot more information than we have here.

So thank you, Mr. Hart.

I appreciate it.

10:21:10 >>GREGORY HART:
Thank you.

And thank you, chairman Suarez.

The first request motion as you stated with the contract,

and goal setting, participation in how the language can be

incorporated into the contract, is more clear on what the

expectations are of the contractors to utilize MBE and small

businesses.

Our response is as follows.




Our office has provided --

Our office provides contract administration and the

purchasing department, which are the two agencies of the

city, the boilerplate contract language and mandatory

minority and small business program forms to be incorporated

into all solicitation documents.

These documents were revised and updated in the second

quarter of 2016 to provide the necessary clarity and

direction to enforce expectations for compliance.

Quickly those forms include MBE 10 which is the schedule of

all subcontract consultants supplies to the city, it

includes MBE 20 which is the schedule of all subcontractors,

consultants, utilized, MBE 30 which is the schedule of all

subcontractors, consultants and supplier payments, MBE 40 is

the show letter of intent, the terminology that you may be

familiar with, which is the document that is required to

execute the final subcontracts with our small and minority

businesses, MBE 50 which is the compliance guidelines, MBE

70 is the guidelines to implement the minority and small

business initiatives, and then included in that would be the

project participation work sheet.

This is the document that conveys the percentage goal

calculated and agreed upon by the goal set committee.

The committee, the city's committee is comprised of

designees from contract administration, purchasing, city




attorney's office, and of course my office.

Lastly, the MBE, SBLE, WMBE subcontracts availability, this

is a detailed spreadsheet providing the company name,

address, federal ID number, certification classification,

e-mail, phone, fax and contact person for all the

subcontractors.

The additional supplemental document is a PDF form which is

provided.

It is the goal setting source list containing the MBE, SBLE

profile data, used to calculate the goals, the past

services, and delineates by subcontract category what is

expected.

Than the subsequent question in that first motion was what

are the ongoing --

10:24:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Go ahead, Mrs. Montelione.

10:24:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Before you go on to the second part, Mr.

Hart.

So these were revised, updated, second quarter, fiscal 2016,

so that was around, after, before the initial motion that hi

made on May 5th?

10:24:23 >>GREGORY HART:
I believe so, yes.

Would have been back in January, February.

10:24:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.

So when the motion was made on May 5th, we weren't

advised that there were updates or revisions, or at least no




one contacted me since I made the motion to say, you know,

these are the things that have been updated or revised.

So I have a question about the, you know, what it looked

like before and what it looks like now, and how it was

revised.

So it could have been revised, but, you know, rerevise

things with scrivener's errors.

I don't know what was revised or updated or changed to make

the forms that are utilized now better than the ones that

were before.

And then specifically, under the bullet that says project

goals, project work sheet that says the committee is

comprised of designees from contract administration,

purchasing, city attorney, user department, and MBD,

minority business development, your department, there's no

one from the public that's involved to work on that goal

setting committee.

So we have been contacted numerous times.

We have had -- you and I have had discussions over the

years, numerous times.

Why wouldn't anybody from the public or from than the

minority business list of contractors, approved contractors,

certified contractors, why wouldn't they be included in that

goal setting?

And also, wouldn't the EBOAC committee be involved?




Because I don't so them being mentioned here.

10:26:14 >> The goal setting committee is an administrative process.

It includes the subject experts from the various departments

to review material.

It is not a public voting process.

It requires the professional input from the respective

departments.

It's an administrative process.

10:26:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
But the ordinance that was passed in

2008 establishing the citizens task force says that they are

representing a cross section of contract, service providers,

was formed to review the disparity study, and their purpose

is city contract -- not reading the whole paragraph, just

the end of it -- city he's contracting and procurement

activities and monitoring to evaluate whether the city has

strong evidence of its need to utilize race and gender

conscious remedies to ensure its compelling interest and not

acting as a passive participant in a discriminatory

marketplace.

So the spirit and gender embodied in the ordinance is to do

that.

10:27:35 >> No, I disagree.

If you read the charter of the committee, it is not charged

with engaging purposefully in city processes or city policy

formulation.




It is to be an advisory entity that is representative of the

committee, that we can share information and get feedback

on.

10:28:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Well, but that's just the point.

If they are an advisory committee that shares information,

and gets feedback, I think this would be a most appropriate

function for utilization, to get their feedback on what the

goals are, and goal setting.

So that you have individuals who have given of their time to

volunteer to serve in an advisory committee, but when you

are setting goals and looking for advice, you are not

looking for them.

You are only looking to internal developments.

And I think that's perhaps a disservice to the people who

volunteer their time to sit on this committee.

And perhaps I'll follow that up with a motion later on.

And the only other thing I have a question on this

particular item that's in front of us here on the Elmo is

that the official letter of intent, it says to execute

subcontracts with WMBE and SBLEs, but does that cover

everybody?

Or just those two groups?

Women and minority business enterprises and small local

business enterprises.

10:29:40 >> >>GREGORY HART:
The small business and women minority




business program is charged with focusing on businesses that

are certified.

So what's before you is directed and targeted towards those

small businesses and minority businesses that are certified.

That's what our initiatives are designed to provide benefit.

10:30:18 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilwoman Montelione, is that it?

Are there any additional questions from council members?

I'm just asking.

10:30:36 >> The second question from council embedded in their motion

is what outreach efforts the department gives themselves and

what outreach efforts are outlined and affect a contractor

and how that is documented.

Our response is as follows.

Our outreach is designed to facilitate prime contractors

success as achieving the MBE-SBLE goals.

These are the key outreach initiatives, if you will.

And determines what companies are certified.

That's your availability data.

That's your availability pool.

That can be aligned with the subcontract tab specified in

the project work study.

A contract list is developed, and an XL format containing

all pertinent information for available contractors for

direct solicitation by our office and the prime contractor.

Inquiries are often conducted to gauge contractor capacity




and interest in bidding. We also use electronic

notification, that would be your Demand Star wire system,

and that's used to maximize subcontractors.

We also facilitate conferences and provide an overview of

the project goal details, and we outline the actions

required of the prime contractor to achieve goals through

result oriented good faith efforts.

Also, the outreach staff requires prime contractors outlined

on MBE form 50, in a which is included in the packet.

The prime documentation on form 50 and attached as

information to substantiate their efforts.

We perform audit, subcontractor survey and compliance

certifications.

Your packet includes examples of those contract compliance

evaluations.

The third question under the council motion is as follows,

quote, to provide council members with the document entitled

Tampa City Council handout, and discuss some of the things

that we have done better in order to increase the

participation.

Our response, we provided the additional copies of the May

5th handout.

The following are initiatives that we engage in to improve

in and increase participation.

Contract initiatives were developed in fiscal year 2012 to




specifically address deficiencies in city policies and

procedures and to increase participation.

And if you would, you can refer to your exhibit B which is

titled WMBE, SBLE initiatives, economic developments,

inclusion.

Secondly, the procurement processes and the MBE, SB outreach

rule were submitted city-wide for direct target

participation for specific ethnic, gender, underutilized

businesses.

And you can refer to exhibit D titled procurement guidelines

to implement MW-WMBE initiatives.

It's maximized with application of selective MBE procurement

mandates.

Mandates that direct the bid proposal to be solicited using

optimal MBE provisions.

And if you refer to exhibit E, it outlines them.

Another would be that MBE program pushes the NFL with goal

setting.

Our benchmark was 50th thousand.

Most programs do not consider setting goals unless the value

is much higher.

We are pushing the NFL.

A lot of agencies, unless that value is 200, 250,000, they

don't even consider subcontract goals.

We consider them at 50,000.




The City of Tampa also requires a minimum of two certified

companies in order to include those certified companies in

the goal calculation, rather than three.

The standard is three.

Again, we increased the envelope.

Right on the edge there by saying if we have two or more

certified with the requisite skills to do subcontracting, we

include them in the goal.

Most agencies, it's three.

We are right on the cutting edge there.

MBE utilizes the procurement process across all industry

categories of procurement, whereas most agencies limit their

sheltering to a selective service or commodity.

We do it across the board.

You will find that a lot of agencies will only do it for

certain trades or categories.

Again, we push the envelope.

The last, I believe, question under your council motion

request was to have me review and discuss how the

administration can respond or change policy per the

suggestions and points in the letter dated May 25th,

2016, and distributed by the Tampa organization of black

affairs regarding diversity, equity, fairness and inclusion.

Our review of that letter concluded that the minority

development office's authority and purview does not extend




to formulation of city policy cited in that letter.

For example, there was reference performance management

agreement evaluation.

There was a reference to procurement policy, industry

guidelines, city charter and law.

There's reference to local preference, which is generally

prohibited and typically requires federal review.

A change in term of the good faith effort.

We submitted a report on June 23rd to express our

position to any research we have done regarding that, and we

did not recommend change.

There was reference to creating new position and/or

classification.

Those suggestions are not in the purview of our office.

It is an administrative category of consideration.

With regard to the cumulative payment history that was

requested, I have cumulative level bird's-eye view of what

payment history looks like.

Before I highlight some of this information, I would like to

remind and inform and advise the public that numerous years

of data can be found on the city's website under our office

subwebsite with regard to annual award information and

disparate analysis as relates to payment data.

I believe that information is there up to fiscal year 2014.

2015 data is being presented to the administration and




department for final review and comment.

Subsequently, we will be providing to council.

What I would like to highlight here is that we are looking

at payment data.

The request was, what does the payment history look like to

WMBE, women and minority firms, and to some extent small

business firms?

Please be mindful that contracts extend over multiple years.

This is like a financial report.

I could compile this next week and it could be totally

different, because payments and invoices continue to come

into the city, which in terms on the part of the financial

report.

We may have WMBE participation for example that may be 20%

of a contract, depending on the contract, WMBE

participation, may not be accounted for until the second

year of the contract.

I just wanted to put this in perspective.

In terms of WM BE contract participation, American-owned

company represents 25.6% of all dollars paid from certified,

women and minority.

As you go down here you can see the respective ethnic gender

groups and their participation in terms of actual dollars

that went into their pocket in relation to what was received

by all certified firms.




In relation to the contractors, I have the same information

by ethnicity, African-American-owned businesses, in relation

to all dollars received by subcontractors, certified by the

City of Tampa, African-American businesses received 17% of

those dollars.

Cumulatively, with those subcontract and prime contracts,

We have an overall WMBE program level of participation of

9%, of $26 million.

If you are interested, just as a footnote, in the SLBE

program --

10:41:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Before you go forward, could you put that

graphic up again?

I have a very quick question.

On the top to the prime WMBE businesses, prime contractors,

I assume that's what it means by prime, correct?

10:41:26 >> Yes, sir.

10:41:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
You have on there WMBE, 1 loon betters of

all the ones that are above that, correct?

10:41:34 >> >>GREGORY HART:
That is correct.

10:41:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I want to make sure, because when you are

looking at the number it kind of seems to be a mix and match

and might be a little bit, you know, unwieldily to figure

out what that means.

The second one under the total, it looks like of the grand

total of prime contractors, 191 million that I am looking




at?

10:41:57 >> That is correct.

10:41:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
That 12 million 3 hundred and some change

thousand, it's only 6.42% of all prime contractors that are

WMBE contractors.

Correct?

10:42:10 >>GREGORY HART:
That 6% of the 191 million.

10:42:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
That's my point.

10:42:15 >> Minorities and everyone else.

10:42:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
And the 6% is based on those that are above

that.

And I think you have black business enterprises, women,

Hispanic, Native American, Asian-American, and the total of

all those above.

10:42:31 >> That's correct.

10:42:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
The confusing part is what prime contractors

are versus subcontractors and obviously we have more

subcontractors that bid out part of a larger prime

contractors.

And so I wanted to make sure that we got those numbers

correct.

10:42:48 >> That is correct.

10:42:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

I wanted to make sure we knew that.

You have a handout for all of us so we can have it in front




of us?

If not I think we can have somebody cone it for you.

10:43:00 >> >>GREGORY HART:
That would be fine.

10:43:01 >> That would be great.

Thank you.

10:43:28 >> Also with the request for information there was a request

to the city budget in terms of what's available for

contracting with small minority-owned businesses.

And some of the information I want to share with you.

Competitively awarded contracts is the basis of any analysis

of participation by minority, women and small business

firms.

Budgeted items that are earmarked are debt service,

personnel services, mention -- emergencies and so forth are

not considered competitively available to be awarded to any

contractor, and therefore it's not a consideration when we

set goals, or we evaluate what in realistic procurement

terms is available and on the table for the general public,

inclusive of minority and small businesses.

To give you some indication of what I mean by that, there

were requests to look at the city's budget over the last

several years.

And I would just like to highlight for you that there was a

reference, for example, that the city budget was $990

million for the fiscal year.




Well, that's correct and that happened to be fiscal year

2012.

We don't take that $990 million and say there should be some

absolute percent that the city pays based on that whole

number because 370 million, 37% of that budget is

unavailable for contracting.

You have debt service.

Another 50 million, for example.

45 million.

You have grants-in-aid.

You have other uses.

My point simply is, typically -- and I am drawing on my

memory -- the last ten years, the dollars available for

contracting in a competitive process were more like 77

million.

And then based on that 77 million, how much of it resulted

in contracts and had scopes of work that aligned with the

discipline, the experience, the capacity of our minority and

small business firms.

So I wanted to couch this in perspective.

When we look at an opportunity, we push the envelope.

We maximize what's in that procurement to ensure that our

certified firms have an opportunity.

And I have a sheet laid out exactly like this for each

fiscal year to go through.




Again, if you look at fiscal year 2013, total budget,

capital operating budget, approximately $1 million, but

again look at what has to come off the table.

Almost 400 million for personnel.

You have debt service, et cetera, et cetera.

I just wanted to put everything in perspective.

You cannot take a budget and say we want 5%, we want 10%.

It's not based on population.

It's based on the eligibilities, the certification, and the

trade and disciplines for which you have been approved in

your license to engage in, and then whether or not the city

is procuring products and services that align with your

credentials.

Again, I have a couple of others if you care to work with

that and I have copies of that as well.

10:47:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any questions?

Mrs. Montelione.

10:47:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Is there a more recent?

That's 2012?

How about last year?

The most recent one you have.

10:48:02 >>GREGORY HART:
I have 2015.

10:48:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
There we go.

10:48:09 >>GREGORY HART:
And then this I will station, 1.2 million,

operating capital, about 4700 million in personnel services.




83 million.

As you can see going down the line.

Budget reserves, 47 million.

And these are all approximations.

10:48:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.

10:48:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Montelione.

10:48:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I have a couple of questions.

So I have just been wondering why, if all this information

was available to you, why not put it on this form and then

reduce the number of questions that the public has, and that

council has?

10:48:57 >>GREGORY HART:
Well, Mrs. Montelione, all that information

is on the website.

10:49:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I understand that.

10:49:04 >>GREGORY HART:
However anyone wants to compile and slice

and dice it, it's there for them to have do that.

I think the answer simply is that there's a lot of

information, as you well know.

10:49:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
No, no, I know that.

I am just asking why you didn't translate the information to

the form that was provided.

10:49:23 >>GREGORY HART:
I'm providing the same information, and how

our office has it compiled, and catalogued and recorded.

10:49:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.

If that's all you have, I would like to make a motion.




10:49:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Let me ask you if there's any other

questions of council.

Any questions from anyone else of Mr. Hart?

Mrs. Montelione.

10:49:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.

This is one of the rare instances where a department charge

and their purpose, the program is actually codified.

So since City Council has the purview of our code of

ordinances, and we have, to my knowledge, I don't think we

have of we have changed this ordinance since it was signed

by Mayor Iorio in 2008.

I would propose that the legal department work with Mr. Hart

and with the public, specifically TOBA, but there are other

organizations, the women and business organizations that

have numerous members, there's women in construction,

there's a lot of organizations out there that have members

who are in the minority contracting business.

And I would specifically -- and not limited to look at the

provisions contained within the ordinance, section --

different sections.

I am not going to be specific because there's language

filtered throughout the ordinance.

But to work through the current ordinance, and to include

the members of the EBOAC, the Equal Business Opportunity

Advisory Council, is what it stands for, but to work with




the members of the EBOAC to revise or propose

recommendations for revisions to ordinance number 2008-89,

and to propose revisions to the accompanying equal business

opportunity program.

There are several sections that I have highlighted, one of

which is, just when you had put in your notes there, the

administrative authority, powers and duties, section 26.5-3,

section 5, which states that City Council and the EBOAC is

to have a presentation by the administration on a semiannual

basis, and number 7 which states recommend annual goal for

SLBE and WMBE prime and subcontract utilization and report

such recommendations to City Council for approval.

I'm not sure that those goals -- I'm not sure if we have had

an deep dive within the goals of the public as we have had

this year.

There's the goal setting committee outlined in section

26.5-23, and defined just as you said in your report who are

the members of your committee.

So I would like to have that language looked at to add to

who is going to be on that goal setting committee.

And like I said, I don't want to put out too many specifics

because I don't want the general review and updating of this

ordinance to be defined by the things I'm asking for.

I would prefer it to be defined by the things that we have

committees charged with doing so.




So that's my motion.

And it is -- probably going to be a lengthy process so I am

not going to ask for that to be back next month.

But if I have my calendar here --

10:53:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
If you want to do it during a regular

session, a workshop session, then I would suggest -- I was

going to --

10:54:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
October 27th.

Is that our next workshop?

We don't have one before that?

10:54:14 >>HARRY COHEN:
There is one in September, but --

10:54:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I would ask for that to be on September

22nd during the workshop session at 9 a.m.

10:54:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Before we go forward on a second, did you

get the entire motion?

10:54:30 >>THE CLERK:
[Off microphone.]

10:54:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I didn't want to make it specific.

The motion is to have the legal department work with the

administration, namely Mr. Hart's division, and with the

public, with the EBOAC, to develop recommendations to revise

ordinance number 2008-89.

10:54:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Okay.

We have a motion by Mrs. Montelione.

Do I have a second?

I have a second from Mr. Reddick.




Any questions or comments about the motion before we go

forward?

In not, all in favor of that motion, please indicate by

saying aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

10:55:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you, council members.

10:55:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Hart, you have something?

10:55:14 >>GREGORY HART:
If I may.

I appreciate the motion.

I think it has some value.

However, the process may be much lengthier than what you

have framed in terms of a September meeting date.

The reason I say that is, any ordinance that's going to be

revised or dictate a program has to be considered on the

basis of a disparity study, disparity analysis, and requires

in-depth input, conversation, EBOAC and others.

I don't want to raise expectations that -- we'll come back

in September, but I don't know exactly what percent of the

process we'll have some their with you.

10:56:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
That's why we are having a workshop session,

so we can hash out whatever are some of the restrictions,

the problems, and what the process is, so we can move

forward and maybe help clarify some of this, because we are

looking at numbers that we want to increase.




And so we are trying to figure out if there's a way to be do

it through our ordinance.

10:56:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I was going to say the same thing.

That's why we have workshop sessions.

And that's why I wanted to have a workshop session in the

past, so we decided to put it on a staff report item.

So I was hoping that we would be part way through that

process by now.

Thank you.

10:56:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you.

Anything else, Mr. Hart?

10:56:50 >> >>GREGORY HART:
No, sir.

Thank you very much.

10:56:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you very much for peering.

Before we go over to item number 75, let us -- we have one

item that we need to open, which is item number 71.

10:57:01 >> Move to open item number 71.

10:57:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Do I have a second?

10:57:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Oh, second.

10:57:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mrs. Capin.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Is there anyone here to appear before for number 71? They

need to be sworn in.




If the clerk could swear in anyone that's going to speak on

item number 71.

Is there anyone here to speak on that? I think we have one

person here.

I understand it but she needs to be sworn in.

(Oath administered by Clerk).

10:57:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
If you are going to speak on this item, if

you are asking for a continuance?

10:57:49 >> Yes.

I'm Sue Mosley, 501 west Euclid Avenue, and I'm requesting a

continuance.

10:57:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you very much.

Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on

item number 71 on the continuance only?

I see no one.

Move to continue to September 15th at 10:30 a.m.

I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.

I have a second by Mrs. Capin.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Sue Murphy: Thank you.

10:58:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
We have item number 75.

10:58:24 >>JAN MCLEAN:
Office of city attorney here orphan item

number 75.




A list of questions posed by Mr. Miranda asking that I

return with the answers to the questions, specifically

regarding the mitigation credit policy that a place to our

stormwater assessment program.

Waive done is, the first three questions can be addressed by

one answer.

So the first question is why is the amount of mitigation

credit in policy quotations and not in answer ordinance and

why can't it be put in the ordinance?

And what was the basis for the 10% in the policy?

It's been the same 10% since the original stormwater fee was

adopted but they raised or at least reevaluate the credit

percentage.

The policy was adopted by resolution at the time of the

implementation of the stormwater utility.

As we have done in the past, we created the stormwater by an

ordinance, but allows flexibility for the council to come

back without having to open up the ordinance and do any kind

of updates based on technique, methodologies, anything, a

new study, that what the mitigation policy is.

For instance, the 100% as identified in the policy right

now, and that's how we have been implementing it.

There's some significant questions over the course of last

year, especially motivated by the improvement assessment,

that that credit policy be looked at.




We came back and we clarified the process, which is included

in the ordinance, but not the policy with regard to the 10

or the 100%.

Beings it should be done on an very thoughtful basis where

we could defend it because it reduces the amount of revenue

that is allowed from the imposition of the assessment.

So that would address your questions 1, 2 and 3.

Would you like me to gone through it, or stop for questions?

11:00:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Do you need more clarification from her on

this?

Any other questions?

11:00:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
First let me say thank you to her, Jan

McLean, for being very upfront, and I'll let you finish and

then I'll speak.

11:01:08 >>JAN MCLEAN:
The fourth question is what is the basis for

the amount of the credit?

At the time that the stormwater utility was created, therein

was an evaluation of what the city had been doing, because

remember, that was a service assessment.

That was all we had in place right now.

So we come back on an annual basis, and you adopt the

assessment.

We have 10%.

We have 100%.

And at that time, in 2003, that's what was calculated, if




you retain everything on-site, and obviously you were not a

burden to the city system, you got 100% mitigation credit.

The 10% was allocated based on what the city expended for

the maintenance -- maintenance of ponds at the time in 2003.

There are other methods that you can achieve the 10%.

For instance, if you pay to an entity that maintains the

ponds in your subdivision, then you get a 10% credit because

you are paying somebody to maintain the pond and the city

doesn't maintain it.

So in the policy, those are spelled out.

And those are the basis for the current 10% and 100%.

Number 5 question, should it be based on the quantity and

quality of the mitigation firm, so better ponds reduce the

burden on the city system?

Assuming that's correct -- and that's kind of a mix of legal

and engineering -- it could be.

It could be.

We could do a study.

We could identify -- obviously technology has improved,

different methods have been used from 2003 to 2016, and we

could identify, and there are other jurisdictions that do

have increased allocation of the credit.

So, for example, if you have a lined pond that doesn't allow

anything -- and this is where I am going into engineering,

so I am sure my stormwater engineers are cringing, but if




you have a pond that doesn't allow for the percolation of

the water so you can't actually improve the water quality

you might not get as much credit as opposed to another pond

that allows the treatment of that water once it's in the

pond.

Off the top of my head.

So the answer to the question is, yes, you could.

As long as it has some basis on why we would allocate the

credit, in that manner.

Number 6, should the credit amount be the same for the

capital improvement fee and the maintenance fee?

We have in a capital improvement fee.

We do have one, just high pressure a public hearing to

consider in September the proposed capital improvement fee.

But the answer is, yes, when we came back, and we came

before you last year, the mitigation credit policy would be

applied to both, in an equal manner, and the criteria is the

same for improvement, and if it's approved this year it

would be applied likewise.

TV next question is how can anyone receive 100% credit?

As indicated earlier, you receive 100% credit if you place

no burden on the city's system.

You retain all of your water on-site, then we don't charge

you for the stormwater assessment because we are not having

to do the maintenance or address the water quality of that.




So that's how you receive 100% credit.

Shouldn't they pay for a portion of the improvement, for

that improved road they drive on?

And there's some support for that question.

When the stormwater utility was created in 2003, and I

wasn't here, but I looked at all of the records, and you

carry the red book Bible which contains all the documents

from them, roads were not included for a part of each

parcel.

It's part of the stormwater system.

So, for instance, if you kept property A kept all of the

stormwater on-site, we still maintain the road.

And you could, hypothetically, assess each property a base

charge for the maintenance of the road.

That's a whole different system.

It's a whole different a -- fee what assessment.

That's not the way our fee assessment is set up.

It based on the ESUs that you contribute into the system.

So if you wanted to change something like that, we would

have to look at the entire fee assessment structure.

I think that addresses most of the questions -- I mean, all

of the questions.

11:06:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you.

I wasn't here in 2003, I don't believe.

I was here but not here.




That's the Cuban double talk.

But what I am saying is this.

I believe that 2003, although I didn't vote on it, I

remember it, and that was mainly for big area shopping

centers by square foot.

That's one that we addressed that we did one on the outside

without the homes being included.

11:06:58 >>JAN MCLEAN:
2003 stormwater fee was created with the same

assessments, process that you are using now.

11:07:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Although I understand what you are

saying legally, I believe that the 10% has something to do

with the bonding of it so you can have flexibility soap

those who may buy the city bonds, how certain they are going

to get paid.

That's just my feeling.

11:07:24 >> We don't --

11:07:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I understand that.

11:07:27 >> I just want to interrupt that we don't bond the services.

11:07:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I understand that.

But what we are talking about in the future, what we are

trying to do, there are certain areas of the city that will

pay nothing for this because they keep everything, all the

water and everything in their system and I understand that.

The problem is they use the same road that floods that

everybody else uses.




They may not flood, but in other words they are using the

same roadworks that all of us were use, in theory what you

just spoke about.

I voted in the past -- and I know this was not debatable, I

don't think we have anything today in the past or the

future, but I supported most everything that came before us

in a long, long period of time, from the streetcar to 30

million for roads to park for 37 million for one park, to

increase the water rates, to increase, every system in solid

waste because they need it.

But there's a time and place where you have to look at it

and say, what's reality, and what am I doing to my citizens?

But that's not for debate today.

So I am satisfied with the questions and the answers that

you gave.

However, there's one thing I would like to add,

Mr. Chairman.

11:08:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Yes, sir.

11:08:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
You and I had a dialogue, and AP very

good one, and in your letter to me, you said review the

mitigation credit policy, my recommendation would be to

direct us to do during the first council meeting in March

with a report including recommendation, any suggestion and

revision.

What I would like to add is that that be changed, and one




thing, that the mitigation policy recommendation be directed

to return to the first meeting in August and a report

including the recommendations, any suggestions, would be in

March.

11:09:32 >> I'm sorry, could you say that again?

11:09:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
In August, to return to us the direct --

to direct any recommendations that would be -- in other

words, like the Sarasota County that you were so kind when

we had a discussion, that you have given me that I haven't

had a chance to read it yet, those and other areas that may

have the same type of policy but.

Been looked at by this council.

You might have done it but we haven't seen it, that -- and

I'm not questioning your ability to read and understand, but

at the first council meeting in March be the recommendation

directed council meeting to report, and then the

recommendations would come in March.

The implementation.

The recommendations now in August, and the implementation if

any in March.

Because March is a long time away.

That's next year.

I don't know if you have the time to do that.

I really don't.

11:10:33 >>JAN MCLEAN:
Whatever the council directs us, we will do.




The reason that I suggested ma March is because to do that

study and bring back well thought-out recommendations.

I know that the council had questions on how this would be

implemented, and the 100%, the 10%.

So in August we would bring you that examples of other

mitigation credit policies, and then we would studies we

would suggest be implemented with any recommendations in

March.

11:11:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Yes.

11:11:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
And that's in the form of a motion, Mr.

Miranda?

11:11:14 >> Yes, sir.

11:11:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
And a second from Mr. Cohen.

Do you want to do that on August 25th?

Looks like we have a little bit -- on August 25th under

staff reports.

11:11:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Of what you want, Mr. Chairman.

11:11:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
All in favor of that particular motion

indicate by saying aye.

Any opposed?

Are there any other questions of Ms. McLean?

I have one comment of Mrs. McLean.

And we had this conversation last week, I believe, maybe --

I think it was last week.

My days are running together after vacation.




And there has to be -- and I think that this is something

that I have emphasized every time we talked about the

mitigation credit -- we have to have a process that is both

open, fair and doable for someone who go ahead and build or

rebuild and repurpose their property to make them more

enable to less runoff into our system.

By doing that, it will have less pressure on our system.

Less pressure on our system means we aren't going to get as

much assessment if we get a mitigation credit, but

conversely it should have less of a burden on us so we won't

have to worry about what that dollar amount is.

I think that we don't do enough in government to actually

figure out how we can make people's ability to build or

rebuild a better process so that they don't have to pay as

much investment but they are putting it into their own

property.

That makes it valuable to them and actually relieves us the

pressure of having to provide more stormwater relieve.

I know that there are other technologies out there much more

than there were in 2003 that we can probably look at to

suggest and put together a list of them.

Not suggesting that you have it done by August 25th, but

that's definitely something that we need to actually

concentrate on.

This is not your responsibility per se.




That's going to be engineering, and we are going to have Ms.

Duncan up in a moment, and she can talk a little bit about

how it affect streets and other things, but in addition we

need to talk to everyone else in the public works department

to find out what can we do to actually suggest these ways of

building and changing the ways that they do things in order

for them to get some kind of mitigation credit.

So that's my charge to you, is if that is something that is

doable.

I would like that to be something that you continually think

about.

Okay, any other questions or comments from council?

Thank you very much, Mrs. McLean.

We appreciate it.

Next up we have item number 76.

And that is Mrs. Duncan.

I mentioned your name but not in vain.

Here you are.

11:14:15 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
Transportation and stormwater services.

I do have a Power Point, brief Power Point presentation for

you this morning, and I have got a paper copy of that as

well, if you would like that.

I'm here with Ed Johnson this morning, CRA manager of East

Tampa.

I have worked with ed on this particular project and many




other projects in the East Tampa area.

You asked for an update on this project that we have

underway.

It is what we call the last project with the Department of

Transportation

The limits of this project extend all the way from Columbus

Drive to Hillsborough Avenue.

This is a key corridor within the East Tampa community, key

corridor for transportation network, generally a two-Lane

road, up to about 26th Avenue, a 4-Lane divided roadway,

and we have been working together with CRA to see how we can

improve safety and also provide some incentive opportunities

to create a better realm for the corridor, bring in more

interest in the economic development opportunities.

This particular corridor came to our attention because there

were quite a few accidents, severe accidents in a short

period of time.

We took a look at our accident data, and this is just a

little extract from the data we get.

Basically wanted to make the point that this is higher than

the normal corridor.

We had 14 severe or fatal crashes in the last three years.

Nine of those had an incapacitating injury.

Five were fatal.

And about half of those are occurring at the intersection




where there's most conflict of vehicles interacting with

each other.

So obviously, as we are quite familiar, speeding is the main

reason that we are seeing contributing factors to these

crashes.

As I said, more than half are occurring at the

intersections.

We had seven pedestrians and two bicycles involved in those

crashes.

And so the opportunities that we have to reduce intersection

crashes is to construct around about.

We had quite a few discussion was the CRA about this type of

treatment, and I do say that we are researching many more

roundabouts throughout our cities in Florida.

Eights priority of the Department of Transportation to start

building them on state highways, and we are doing the same

with our city streets.

We have lots of information, we created extreme significant

safety impacts, and they do have anesthetic opportunity as

well with landscaping to be put in the center.

So we have three roundabouts proposed along this corridor.

One at 271st street, one at Lake Avenue, and one at

Osborne.

Currently, lake and Osborne are signalized.

We have a two-way stop at 21st street.




We also are proposing to road diet portions of the corridor

that are four laned, road diet those down to two lanes, with

either ascent 2004 way left Lane or median and a left turn

Lane depending on the location.

This project will also allow for implementing bicycle

facility.

We have a lot of bicycles utilization in this area.

We want to make a safer opportunity for those bicycle users.

We have a mixed speed limit within this corridor.

We are going to reduce that within those limits to 30 miles

an hour.

Also, we will be putting in new sidewalks, filling in

sidewalk gaps that are missing, putting in proper pedestrian

ramps to bring it up to ADA compliance.

It's going to be a lot safer when we get finished with the

project.

I just want to say a little bit about the benefits of the

roundabouts.

As I mentioned, there are great benefits torn reducing the

conflict points developed.

Reducing the number of crashes.

It brings in traffic calming, reduces speed in the

roundabouts to 20 miles per hour, gives more refuge for the

pedestrians to cross the roadway.

They are crossing with vehicles going at a lower speed, and




again aesthetic opportunities for the corridor.

The reduction of accidents is significant.

We have got lots of data state wide and nationally to

support.

Generally speaking, if we go from the stop controlled to

roundabout, you can see the numbers on your handout there.

Significant reductions in injuries, 828% severe injury, 44%

for overall crashes.

We have seen a significant reduction in crash rates.

If you can bear with me for a moment with the color.

11:20:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Duncan, Averil quick question.

Do we have any data on 407th street prior to putting

roundabouts in and after?

Jean Gene we do have data.

I don't have that available.

But I would be glad to look into our system and see what we

can provide.

11:20:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
You can send that to each one of us because

I think it's important.

I enjoy on 40th because of the roundabouts.

I think it's a really good thing to have.

But it was actually emphasize the point you are making.

Jean Gene yes.

We have a local comparison, national and state criteria. So

very quickly, the point of this graphic is to show a typical




intersection, if you look at all the possible movements

vehicles could make.

There's basically 32 points of conflict that the vehicles

could have, vehicle to vehicle.

Those months. Are generally high speed.

You see many people whizzing through the intersections at

high speed, making a right or left turn.

They are high angle which means T-bone, specifically a 90º

angle which is the most severe, and then high energy as

well.

With changing that intersection configuration to a

roundabout, we reduce the number of conflict points that

those vehicles can have, while putting those vehicles at a

lower speed with each other, lower angle, so therefore the

crash impact is less, and obviously lower energy.

So again, national statistics are showing that this

transition is at 75% reduction across the board of crashes

that would happen at that particular intersection.

So similar data.

If you look at the conflict points the pedestrian could have

with the vehicle, that pedestrian attempting to cross a

roadway, there are 24 different points of possible conflict

with the roundabouts put into place, and reduce those points

to 8.

Obviously less direction to look at, less conflict to be




concerned about, safer for the pedestrians, and there's also

a refuge in that center of the crossing path, as well as a

much slower speed.

Again, lots of information to show how much safer the

roundabouts are.

I think you have all seen this graphic at some point in time

of how survival rate is increased by reducing the speed

limit.

And we will be reducing the speed limit on the corridors

down to 30 miles per hour.

Again, I threw in some more slides.

I don't want to belabor that point.

We did have a public meeting on this project the summer of

2014.

Along the corridor.

We plan to have another public meeting this fall, within the

next couple of months.

And share more details about the plan, and have

conversations with the public, in cooperation with the CRA.

And just a little bit of information about our schedule.

We are fortunate enough to have a significant amount of

funding from the Department of Transportation for this

project, for the design.

We have taken some opportunities to grab ahold of and use

those to fund the right-of-way acquisition that we need




which wasn't planned so that was a nice little windfall, and

of course somebody CRA money as well, and looking to start

that construction spring of 2019.

And complete that in the fall of 2020.

That's the information, and I will be glad to answer any

questions.

Perhaps ed Johnson might be able to answer as well.

11:24:16 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The reason why I wanted you to come before us and put this

item on the agenda is because I recall that for several

years this was brought before the committee, and then the

CRA board, and a lot of people have forgotten that this was

going to go through.

In the future.

And there's been a lot of discussion about it I think it's

good that you are moving in this direction but I have a few

queues questions.

The stretch from Columbus Drive to Hillsborough -- and I

know you are going to get right-of-way acquisition -- how

many businesses or homes will be affected by this

right-of-way acquisition?

11:25:16 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
Well, I don't know if I have any number for

you.

There's a handful.

I can get you that information.




We know exactly what we call corner clip that we need,

mainly at the intersection.

I could certainly get you that information, tell you exactly

which businesses or which residences.

But we do have a handful that will be needing corner clips

from, or we might be doing kind of a land swap with one or

two as well.

11:25:53 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Okay.

I hope you can get that information.

I think that's going to be needed.

Because once it starts, the one on 407th street, I still

get complaints today about the roundabout on 40th Street.

And as you know, when it was first put in place, there was a

lot of confusion, a lot of people hadn't seen around about

in their life and they were unable to adjust to it and there

was a lot of wrecks that took place and the same thing when

they did a roundabout on 22nd, there was a lot of confusion,

a lot of calls came into the office, and we had the plus and

minuses, folks that don't like it.

Now, we are looking at 34th, and all this is part of the

reason why I want to have this open discussion.

I'm starting to field the calls, and that this might happen.

And I see where you are going to have a public hearing

sometime in 2016.

11:27:11 >> uh-huh.




11:27:15 >>FRANK REDDICK:
I would hope it will be sent out to all

those residents, the 34th street corridor.

You have quite a few from Columbus Drive all the way to

Hillsborough, and I would also like to suggest to you that

you probably need to meet with -- you or Mr. Johnson need to

meet with the people at Florida sentinel so they can have a

dialogue and get a clear understanding and they can

publicize that in the newspaper, and have that message put

out for discussion, because I don't know about my colleagues

but 90% of calls come to my office, and puts that stress and

frustration on the aide where all this comes about.

So I want to make sure that we have a better way of

communicating prior to doing this before August 19th.

And that's why I again just want to ask you to come before,

bring this up, and become aware of that, and they know --

because you want to start sometime, whether you buy the

right-of-way acquisition or something, and that's when the

questions start coming in, what's going on, what are they

doing?

And so we can have a great way of communicating with those

wherein on the affected outcomes and what have you, and what

happens on roundabouts.

Because I guarantee you, those people that's been at the

public meeting, when it was discussed with the East Tampa

Partnership, the CRA, those people, back in 2014, and now we




are in 2016, they probably forgot about it.

I forgot about it till I heard about it.

And that's why I asked you what's going on.

So I just wanted to share that, and hope that we can do a

better job in informing the community that this is going to

take place.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:29:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
I want to piggyback on something that

Councilman Reddick alluded to, and that is the educational

component of drivers understanding how to move through a

roundabout.

My biggest concern would be, I have no doubt about the

statistics that are cited about their safety benefits, and I

definitely have moved toward understanding why they are a

good traffic solution.

But when I go through roundabouts, what I observe is that

most drivers do not understand what the rules are of who has

the right-of-way.

And, you know, we are not used to roundabouts in Florida.

They don't exist in any large number.

And people don't know that the person inside the circle has

the right-of-way.

They are completely at a loss as to how to handle the

roundabout, and it creates a very, very dangerous situation.

And I know myself if I am driving through it, I'm more




concerned about everybody else who is coming through it, not

knowing and crashing right into me, when I know I am in the

right and exercising the right-of-way.

So I want to urge you and I want to let everyone know that I

think we should take this all to the MPO, we have got to

have an educational campaign explaining to everybody what

the rules are, and hoe has the right at any given time,

because it looks to be me like bumper cars half the time

when going through it.

So I just want to echo that.

11:31:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Capin.

11:31:35 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes, thank you.

You know, I have been a proponent of roundabouts from the

beginning six years ago.

Now, so I am glad to be see it coming around.

But, yes, I can see the education -- and around and around,

yes.

But here is the thing.

You said that -- there's two things here, two questions I

have.

We had the FDOT here, CRA, last month or the month before,

Jean talked to us about the TBX.

And I asked this question about it's a 20 year plan and did

the people who moved in 18 years ago or 16 years ago, were

they aware that this plan was in place?




And the lady, I forgot her name, turned around to look at

her colleague, and they didn't have an answer.

The answer was, well, the realtors, they are responsible for

information, which is true.

But they have to have the information.

So, you know, she stated that most of the people that bought

there were investors.

I don't care what they were.

They bought.

And they needed to be informed.

Then it came out two days later in the "St. Pete Times," a

statement of quote from her, saying that, in a, they did not

make that information public because they didn't want people

to be concerned.

That's not the answer she gave us here.

So my concern is this.

In reference to what Mr. Reddick said, these people need to

know what is coming their way, and they need to be notified.

Also, I suggest that we let the board of realtors know at

every point where we are going to expand or take any

property, or expect to be taking them.

It's very important because people don't know.

He's stating this is two years ago and they forgot.

So what if somebody brought it -- bought it, bought that

business, and then they are going to have to sell it, you




know, two, three years down the road?

So it's very, very important knowledge, information, so that

being said, I think we need to -- maybe ask the board of

realtors to work something out, because people need to be

informed when they make -- these purchases are sometimes

their largest lifetime purchase.

Then the other thing is, now you said that this roundabout

came to your attention because of all the accidents that

were there, the crashes, and the fatal crashes.

Is there any other intersection in the city that has caught

your attention?

11:34:26 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
Yes, we are regularly reviewing our data and

looking to see what our highest priority locations are every

year. This particular corridor we have been working

together with part of the CRA master plan.

So through that cooperative working relationship, and their

interest in making some upgrades to this corridor, we look

at the accident data out there.

So yes, it does need to be safety.

So we have a regular process that we are reviewing that

accident data to see where do we need to spend our money to

make those locations safer.

11:35:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Which ones do we have this year that are

going to be in the budget this year?

11:35:08 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
I have to get back to you on that.




We have quite a few.

Quite a few.

Not necessarily building roundabouts but doing other things

to them to make them safer.

So there's a mix of treatments that we are using for

roundabouts.

11:35:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Around about in some of these intervention

sections would be really impossible of the.

I understand that. But I am curious as to where else caught

the attention that we might be able to do a roundabout,

because they are much safer.

Because even if they are confused, they are moving a lot

slower.

They are moving a lot slower when they get into the

intersection.

And they learn.

If you go through that round about three times, you are

going to learn exactly how to get in and out of it.

11:35:55 >>FRANK REDDICK:
If you don't get in a car accident the

first time.

(Laughter).

11:36:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Roundabouts are proven to be safer.

That's a given.

I brought this up six years ago, and I can't remember the

city.




Of course not the size of Tampa.

The mayor in that city took every red light camera out of

their intersections and installed roundabouts.

Of course, it was somewhere out where there was a lot of

land.

But they took all the traffic lights out and placed

roundabouts, because they are proven to be safer.

There's in a doubt about it.

So, anyway, thank you.

And I appreciate it.

And I would like to be see that data on what is coming up,

those intersections that you all are concerned about.

11:36:41 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
Okay.

11:36:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Cohen again.

11:36:44 >>HARRY COHEN:
I just wanted to mention to the other

council members that there's an idea germinated up through

the sunset homeowners association to put around about on Bay

to Bay so there's been thought given to a lot of places.

11:37:00 >> That would be great.

11:37:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Nip other questions or comments for Mrs.

Duncan?

Thank you, Mrs. Duncan.

We really appreciate your report.

11:37:08 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
I'm on the next item as well.

Before you go forward, and I apologize.




Go ahead.

11:37:18 >>JEAN DUNCAN:
Yes, the next item was regarding the

question about impact fees that have been received and

utilizing those to kick start the Gandy Dale Mabry

intersection.

Excuse me, Gandy Westshore.

I do have a short handout that I will give to all to take a

look at.

I believe this item came up, and I believe Mr. Steenson from

our Gandy area, there was a development agreement of some

sort that was generating some dollars for the Interbay

impact fee district.

So the question was, how could those moneys that are being

collected, how are they being spent, and can that money

connect start the project we have planned for Westshore and

Gandy?

Basically, I'll just put this on the Elmo for others to see.

We have an impact fee fund for each of our six impact fee

districts.

For the Interbay impact fee districts essentially all of the

money that we have been collecting has been earmarked for

this intersection improvements, which is basically putting

additional rest turn lanes onto Westshore, for folks to get

through the intersection, and along Westshore, south of

Pearl Avenue, south of Gandy.




So the simple answer to, you know, where are the moneys

going, how are they being spent, they are going into an

impact fee fund that is exclusively reserved for projects in

the Interbay impact fee district which is generally south of

Kennedy Boulevard, the southern part of our city, and

essentially almost all of the moneys are earmarked for

particular intersection projects.

So the next part of the question had to do with can we kick

start the schedule?

And this is the existing schedule that we have.

Our estimated cost of the project is slight ly more than we

have available right now, about $7.4 million.

Right now, we are finishing up our design.

We will be done with that 2018.

We are looking at right now 8 parcels that we would need

some portion of land from to widen the area.

And so we'll see some acquisition to finish our design.

And then we'll plan to go into construction from 2019.

And again we have got a portion of this project paid for by

the DOT, about 1.3 million.

The thing that is going to accelerate this project is not

adding 200, 300, 400 that you from a development agreement.

It's going to be actually the Tampa Hillsborough Expressway

Authority elevated Gandy project.

That project is planned to start in 2018.




And we have had a number of conversations with them.

We have been designing first the concept and then the actual

design of this intersection for several years now

anticipating at some point in time this elevated Gandy

project would come back, anticipating those tiers coming

into our intersection and planning for that project.

So Tampa thing that's going to really impact our project is

than the elevated Gandy project is we are going to merge our

design project with theirs, it's going to reduce the number

of right-of-way takings, going to reduce our costs from the

7.47 down to a little over 4 million.

And schedulewise, it will have a few months of increase as

far as starting sooner, but the significant impact it's

going to have is going to be on the cost that we will now

not have to spend because we are getting some efficiencies

by teaming up with them, saving on mobilization and M LT

which significantly reduces our costs for the right-of-way

takings.

The answer to our question is we will accelerate slightly,

save a significant amount of money, but not because of the

development in that area.

11:42:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Thank you for bringing that.

And the recent development is what the brought the attention

to it.

The reason development was going to be the answer to the




problem on Westshore and Gandy.

So thank you for that.

11:42:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Other questions of Ms. Duncan?

Thank you so much.

We appreciate it.

[Off microphone.]

Okay, Mr. Bayor.

11:43:04 >>GREG BAYOR:
Good morning, council.

Not to make light, but I guess my Power Point is up in the

sky.

After our initial presentation to the administration, I'm

very happy for the approval to move ahead.

We are working on multiple options right now.

It's a complex issue that we are working our way through

that.

Palm Beach County has five.

Miami Beach installed 50.

Manhattan beach in California has five for their program.

And the city of Boston has gone in, 220 parks.

We have also received approvals for risk and legal.

One thing we found is there is a wide variety of formulas

that are out there

Tampa General Hospital, and we'll seek other medical

professional advice out of that.

And we found several brands, and several amounts of




sunscreen, from a thousand to 4,000, and how many to use a

year, subject to how often people will use them.

You know, we have what to apply, and what do you do if it's

ingested or in your eyes?

We would also like to develop a partnership program.

Here is the dilemma.

It's where do we start?

Logically we can start with areas of activity with exposure

to the sun, beaches, boat ramps, outdoor fitness areas,

piers, playgrounds, pals, splash pads, tennis courts.

I'm thrilled to be director of 336 sites that we probably

should consider.

There's water in every park except the parks and add 248 to

that.

So that's where our dilemma is.

Where do we start this?

That's what we are working on now, to present several

different options, probably starting with the most active

areas first, and get approval to move,.

11:46:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Cohen?

11:46:05 >>HARRY COHEN:
I think that's wonderful news.

I think everyone is thrilled that we are going to be able to

do this program, and reduce skin cancer and other sun

maladies that come from too much exposure.

Where have you actually put this out as a prototype to try




it?

11:46:25 >> We have not snoop but I know it's in Corona park,

correct?

11:46:30 >> I think it's next to the park.

11:46:32 >>HARRY COHEN:
And you are not operating the equipment

there, and not a part of it.

Do you expect to put somebody out as a prototype at some

point?

11:46:42 >>GREG BAYOR:
My impression is based on the fact that we

all agreed and addressing how much will be put out.

11:46:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
What sort of timetable are we looking at?

Pa.

11:46:54 >>GREG BAYOR:
Approximately maybe 100 or more.

We are plodding a long, but I would suggest August --

11:47:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
I guess where I am going is I think that a

program this size is going to be very effective.

It would be wonderful if we knew that within six to nine

months, by next summer we could have sunscreen dispensers

out all over the city.

I mean, that he would be to me a very doable goal.

How do we make that happen?

How do we make sure that it doesn't just sort of get lost in

the clouds somewhere and we turn around and a year from now

we don't actually have any dispensers out there are?

11:47:48 >>GREG BAYOR:
Well, I'm really good about -- (Laughter).




11:47:54 >>HARRY COHEN:
Would you suggest that we ask you to come

back in three months and give you an update as to where we

are?

11:48:01 >>GREG BAYOR:
That's fine.

11:48:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Montelione.

11:48:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I'm glad that you are looking for

sponsorship.

And you mentioned how many we will allow.

And I prefer to go the Boston method and go all in, with all

330 sites, and probably most of the locations within each

site.

So it's going to be more than just the number of parks or

opportunities we have.

It could be double that number.

So do you have to go to the RSP to find out what it's going

to cost before you start soliciting sponsorships, or can you

start soliciting sponsorships so the impact of the budget is

less, and you don't have to wait for an appropriation in the

budget in order to make this happen?

11:48:45 >>GREG BAYOR:
Well, we'll when we know what the costs are,

and it's significant.

11:49:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
But there are other cities doing this.

We can on the back of a napkin, you know, estimate, and

folks who might be interested, companies who might be

interested in sponsoring this, you know, health insurance




companies, or -- I don't want to mention any particular

names, but, you know, there are companies out there who

might want to put their name on it and say, well, an

estimation based on Boston numbers with 220 units is X, and

then they experienced, you know, operating costs of Y, and

just float the idea to these companies, because I don't want

us to put out the RFP, get a contract with someone, and then

have to wait for budget appropriation because we didn't do

the advance of getting the sponsorship in, you know, in

advance.

I know what you need is another staff member.

You said that you are only one person right now working on

this in order for anything to move faster than the hands-on,

the quicker it might go.

11:50:19 >>GREG BAYOR:
I --

11:50:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
If we hear of anyone that's interested

we will send them your way.

Thank you.

11:50:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
I think sponsorship is wonderful.

I wonder if we can do it as Mrs. Montelione said, look at it

in advance, and have a list of sponsors that have pledged to

be part of it.

And when we have all the data, all the information, then we

have a number of -- an amount of pledges, and we make it

public so everyone knows who pledged.




You know, it's a great idea.

Not only is it good for people to put on the sunscreen but

it makes people very aware of where they are at and what's

happening to their skin.

And which you don't think about a lot of times when you are

out there.

We should have them on every corner I don't.

This is Florida.

But I just felt maybe the pledges would give us an idea of

how much are out there willing to be part of this.

11:51:31 >>GREG BAYOR:
What comes to mind -- and I can't obviously

comment on the results -- --

11:51:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Thanks so much.

11:51:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Bayor, some of the things that have been

discussed, the difference between Boston and Tampa is

significant, okay?

You know, because they probably get less use during the

wintertime.

It's just a guess.

I may be wrong.

But during the wintertime that we will have all year round.

And I think that you are right.

One of the things that I have heard, too, is that depending

on the time that the product sits within the dispenser could

actually reduce the effectiveness of that particular SBF.




And it's something to look at when you talk about formula,

what's the most resilient to heat as opposed to sun only.

The difference for us is the heat index is much more

important here and humidity is much more important than just

the sun.

If it was just the sun, we could measure it just like they

would do in California.

But California has nowhere near the humidity that we have.

And you only have to gone out side for a minute to

understand that humidity does have a reduction on the lotion

that you are using and how many times you are going to have

to have or how many supplies you are going to have to have.

You mention board of director where to start.

Curtis Hixon park is a great place to start.

It is a great public park.

It is the most used of our large parks.

But it also is the one that has the least amount of shade of

any of our major parks out there.

And because of that reason, it really is in need of that.

So if it's 3, 5, 10, 15 dispensaries that are used in Curtis

Hicks own based on whatever is sun is going to be, I think

it's extremely important because the main thing we hear

about at Curtis Hixon park almost all the time, people

complain about that.

For me, I think that's one of the first places to start.




And in addition, I really believe that you have to figure

out, once you know what that RFP looks like in terms.

Formula, the dispensaries and so on, those sponsorships are

extremely important.

And there are numerous companies that will probably want to

be involved in that.

And I think you being one of the top people that we have in

terms of looking for sponsorships in the parks, we know you

have a very good relationship with the Cal Ripken

foundation.

There's in a reason why we can't have him sponsor for every

ballpark that we have.

I think that he would understand especially he has a little

bit more skin on top of his head that is exposed to the sun.

No offense to anyone on council. Anyway, we'll go to Mrs.

Capin and then Mr. Cohen is going to go ahead and do the

motion to bring it back.

11:54:34 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
See how much help you are getting from us?

We are already telling you where to go, how to go, what

the --

11:54:42 >> We have never done that.

11:54:44 >> We need portable units.

We have 5,000 people.

So we are already considering all the avenues.

11:54:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Terrific.




Mr. Cohen, would you like to make your --

11:55:02 >>HARRY COHEN:
Sure.

I just want to close it out by mentioning that Councilman

Maniscalco and Councilman Suarez and I were at the opening

of the new segment of the Riverwalk, and we took a little

stroll, and it was blistering hot and the sun was beating

down on us, and you can only imagine how many people get out

onto the Riverwalk or Bayshore, or any of the other major

attractions that we have and realize just how hot it is

after a few minutes.

11:55:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
It does not agree with me at all.

11:55:42 >>HARRY COHEN:
I will tell you it was blistering hot.

11:55:46 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
I have a sun umbrella.

11:55:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
Within that, I do think this is a great

idea.

And we want to make sure that we show progress and we

monitor it.

I would like to ask that had you come back on November

3rd under staff reports, give us a progress report, let

us know how this is progressing, and let us know what

decisions have been made tentatively in terms of where we

might want tone deploy them, how a sponsorship program might

work and what the plan is to get them in place as quickly as

possible.

11:56:20 >> Second.




11:56:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion from Mr. Cohen.

A second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bayor, I appreciate it.

Next up is we have item number 79.

11:56:38 >>JULIA MANDELL:
City attorney.

As per previous discussions with City Council, I am

providing you with an ordinance which would have the effect

of amending your charter to a referendum process to add in

language into the charter relating to City Council having --

and I will read the language, it's pretty simple -- it would

add the following language into your charter.

In addition the City Council shall have the right to request

the internal auditor to perform additional internal audits

to be super majority vote of City Council as provided for in

the ordinance.

As you may recall there was a lot of discussion as to the

parameters relating to the internal auditor's request, and

with this language it would then, assuming this language

goes forward and goes Ford to the referendum process, it

would have the effect of then allowing council to pass an

ordinance to provide for this process, which would allow for

greater debate.




I'm available for any questions.

If you read this on first reading it would go into effect at

reading and after that time GOP through your normal

ordinance signing process, and get past that process, then

it would go over to the supervisor of elections to be part

of the ballot.

Thank you.

11:58:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.

The language that actually appears on the ballot, as you

read it, you actually stopped when you said, as provided for

pursuant to an ordinance.

11:58:25 >>JULIA MANDELL:
The direct language that --

11:58:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I'm just wondering if that phrase --

because when folks are reading the ballot, and reading the

language, I mean, sometimes people are mystified by what

something means.

So is the part where it says as provided pursuant to an

ordinance subsequently adopted necessary?

Do we -- could we just end the sentence at "should the

charter be amended to allow City Council the right to

require the internal audit department to perform additional

internal audits by a super majority vote of City Council,

period.

11:59:10 >>JULIA MANDELL:
My concern with just using the period at

that moment is you are putting within your charter a




provision that you will actually adopt an ordinance to --

11:59:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Right.

But that's the mechanics of making it work.

Does it have to be on the ballot and does the voter have to

vote on the mechanics?

11:59:31 >>JULIA MANDELL:
I think in order to be very clear -- the

reason I draft it the way I drafted it was because it was at

the moment in time, this language is adopted that you can

start asking for the audit.

We need to then go to the secondary step.

And so in order to provide those who are voting on this the

full knowledge of what's occurring, that's why -- and as I

said, I could take out the "subsequently."

I just thought that was much clearer than just saying

"ordinance."

So if you want to tap that out, that's fine.

But I think you really do need to have --

12:00:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I am just worried that citizens reading

that and voting on it will think that it's old, that it's

already there.

When you say as provided pursuant to an ordinance

subsequently adopted --

12:00:21 >>JULIA MANDELL:
I don't have any problem taking out the

term subsequently adopted.

I do think it might be an impairment to your obligation to




make clear to the voters what it is they are voting on to

take out pursuant to an ordinance.

To take out subsequently adopted, I thought that made it

more clear to a voter than just saying pursuant to an

ordinance.

But I can take that part of it out but I really can't

recommend you take out --

12:00:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I prefer things to be in plain English

language, not necessarily legalese.

So if it's clear to the voter that this is something that

will have to be adopted by ordinance if it's voter approved,

however we can work clearly and simply get there --

12:01:11 >>JULIA MANDELL:
I put that language in because I thought

it did make it clearer, but that's fine.

I don't have be a problem with taking out subsequently

adopted but I think you have to have the language to be

clear to the voter.

12:01:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
All right.

I would prefer just pursuant to an ordinance and drop the

"subsequently."

12:01:28 >>JULIA MANDELL:
And that would be a change you can make

between first and second reading so if City Council would be

like to move that forward in that manner.

12:01:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
If I can get a motion to extend time till

12:30.




I have a motion from Mr. Cohen, second by Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Anything else?

12:01:47 >>JULIA MANDELL:
I don't have anything else.

I think it is the will of council to review that

subsequently adopted.

I would ask you make that part of your motion.

12:01:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other comments or questions before we

move forward on this particular item are?

When would you come back?

12:02:09 >>JULIA MANDELL:
What you would do is ask a change between

first and second reading from the ballot language provision

which would be section 2 that we remove the word

"subsequently adopted" if that's the will of council.

12:02:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Montelione?

12:02:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I was going to make the motion.

12:02:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I think that would be proper at this time.

12:02:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.

I move that we adopt the language provided in the ordinance

provided by Ms. Mandell dated July 12, 2016, with the change

to be made between first and second reading to remove the

words "subsequently adopted" and second reading.

I'm sorry, I have to read the title.




My apologies.

It's in the addendum from the memo.

Okay.

I move an ordinance relating to the government of the city

of Tampa, Florida submitting to the electors of the city a

proposed amendment to the revised charter of the City of

Tampa of 1975, as amended, regarding charter section 5.01,

"departments" and more particularly City Council

interactions with the internal audit department providing

for referendum, and providing an effective date.

12:03:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion from Mrs. Montelione.

I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Thank you very much.

12:03:46 >>THE CLERK:
[Off microphone.]

12:03:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Thank you very much.

Item number 80.

Staff.

12:03:59 >> Chuck Weber, what you want department director, here to

give an update on West Tampa project, the time Lane

specifically.

The project is in the 2017 proposed budget and subject to

approval, it could be completed as soon as March 2017.

With that I'll take any questions.




12:04:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any questions from staff?

Mr. Miranda.

12:04:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I just want to say thank you, Kansas.

(Laughter)

12:04:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other comments or questions to staff?

Thank you very much.

We appreciate it.

Number 81.

I think that's your item, Ms. Glover.

12:04:47 >> Good morning.

Christine Glover, internal audit, City of Tampa, internal

audit.

I'm here to respond to your questions regarding the solid

waste and abuse hotline, process has been provided to you.

Hotline has been in place since January of 2013.

We received 24 calls.

Those calls have been investigated to some degree, and 22 of

those calls were not founded and two were founded.

I think that answers -- and I also provided you the type of

calls that we received, and subject to your questions.

12:05:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you for providing this

information, Ms. Glover.

How is this advertised -- and this is for employees only?

Employees only can use this hotline?

12:05:54 >> Correct.




12:05:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
How is this advertised and circulated

ong the employees that this hotline is available to them?

12:06:01 >> On the bulletin board, we have flyers, and always we

question management, interview to make sure they are aware

of the hotline.

12:06:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
When we hire new employees as part of HR

orientation that this hotline exists?

12:06:22 >> I'm not sure about the answer to that question.

12:06:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Is it on, when you sign into your

computer in the morning, is there a bulletin of information

that's available, things coming up, retirement parties, and

holiday, and et cetera, is it there?

12:06:41 >> It is not.

I think that but it's on our internal intranet.

12:06:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I guess the reason I am asking those

questions, do you know how many employees we have at the

City of Tampa?

12:06:57 >> About 4200.

12:06:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
46,200 and this has been in place since

2013 and we have had 24 calls total?

12:07:06 >> I can share some data with you from other jurisdictions.

The city of St. Petersburg has a hotline as well, and they

have had it since May of 2008, they have only received 23

calls and one call was founded.

Pasco County also had a hotline.




It's been in place since January of 2015, and as of June,

they honestly high pressure three calls.

12:07:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I find that very curious.

Okay.

Well, I find it curious because I think each one of us at

some point in time in five years have heard from employees

that they have got a complaint, or that they have seen

something that doesn't seem right, or, you know, we have got

unions who hear from their union members on a regular basis

of things that they would wish the union would take up.

But to have only 24 calls since 2013, and five jurisdictions

also have the same type of results, either there's a

perception by the employees that this is not confidential

and that they are going to receive some kind of ram fakes of

employment from speaking out, or it's not publicized.

I don't know what Pasco or Pinellas or anybody else does to

publicize than the opportunities to employees and to really

stress that it's -- finance there was found to be

ramification, that their supervisor, or whoever was dealing

out the ramification, would be in trouble as well.

So I think this is work we need to do.

And I ask you, and maybe Kimberley Crum from HR to help us

work through what those issues are, because I think it's a

valuable tool for transparency and efficiency in government.

And I think it's underutilized.




So there's got to be a way that we can work through this.

The only other question before I hear from my colleagues to

see what they think is in the two founded cases, one

employment was terminated, so I think it shows it works.

And the other is required code change was made and was

handled by legal.

So Mr. Shelby reached out and I think he spoke with Mrs.

Mandell, and we are not sure what the code change was.

Mr. Shelby is not aware of it.

Mrs. Mandell is not aware of it.

Can you tell me what the code change was?

12:10:06 >> This particular incident related specifically to

handicapped parking, and it was investigated by than the

director hop actually was reported at that time in 2013 when

it occurred, and he worked with -- because we keep this in

our workplace, our automated workplace response, he got that

from somebody else investigated, they have to give us a

response that we kind of close it out, and said that our

legal department representative Julie Hardy is working with

us to make changes to clarify the city code related to

handicapped parking.

12:10:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
So it was an employee that reported --

handicapped parking?

12:10:57 >> On the street.

As a matter of fact, just so you know, when the hotline is




through a contract theory we have, is it's not directly into

the city.

They can do so anonymously.

We get an e-mail with the merits of the information.

The employee goes back to them at a certain period of time

to get an update that we can provide an update so we don't

necessarily communicate with that employee.

In this particular incident, Mr. Shelby called me yesterday,

an employee parked on the street in a handicapped spot, and

received a ticket at 8:47.

And quoted Florida statutes that allow four hours of free

parking for handicapped.

But he was ticketed at 8:47 and the employee doesn't report

to work till 8:00.

12:11:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.

So a full hour.

12:11:58 >> What needs to be clarified in the code, I'm not sure

about that.

12:12:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
That's clear enough.

Thank you.

So we fixed whatever the discrepancy was.

I'm pleased with that.

You know, TV curiosity to me -- and I think the work we need

to do is in publicizing this to employees, and really

having, you know, the opportunity for people to know that




this is available to them.

Because you have two examples of things that, you know, show

that it worked.

So I'm sure there's other people out there who have things

to say that we might be able to act on.

12:12:44 >> Well, overwhelmingly, what we tend to get in the hotline

is disgruntled employees or poor communication in the

department, not necessarily for fraud, waste and abuse.

And of course there are other avenues where employees feel

that they have been miss treated, go directly to human

resources, or rather than going through the hotline.

I personally have received a customer service communication

from an employee about a concern that they had.

But this is not really the only avenue.

And lake I said, not fraud or waste.

12:13:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Maybe we need to expand the occur pew

out side of waste.

12:13:29 >> Well, we don't dump it.

When we get it, we still handle it.

Even refer it where the case where the employee was

terminated, it was actually referred to HR and they did the

investigation.

So we don't throw it away just because it's not fraud, waste

and a because.

We still refer it out and we have to get a response back in




order to close out the case.

12:13:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Miranda, Mr. Reddick.

12:13:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank you for everything you have done and

continue to do on a daily basis and to me it's not the

number of calls you get.

You get a thousand of them or two thousand of them and most

of those will be somebody that's upset with somebody else,

had a bad day at the house or bad day at the office or bad

day at City Hall.

Most of them don't like us.

So, I mean, it's the number of calls that you investigate,

and there's a couple of them that have been done and

prosecuted out of the system.

And rightly so.

But Pasco, Pinellas, evidently the trend is the same that we

have had.

Very small calls, but the ones that are there are the ones

that are valid.

And than the way you explained it, from what I got it,

really don't even know who the employee is.

Nobody really knows.

So everything is there, and I understand, but somebody

that's in a workplace, no matter if it's in this city or

anywhere, don't know how to report something, they shouldn't




be working for that place.

They have got to be playing stupid.

And we have done that.

I mean, it's there.

And it works.

I don't see us making any changes myself.

12:15:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Reddick.

12:15:23 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you, chair.

You know, one of the things that bothers me is that we are

lacking a program that Bobby Bowden, Fred Hearns, used to

run in the city where people have these complaints, they go

directly to their department, and then complain, and

investigated.

I see all the time of people saying they work for the city,

they don't know where to go, and they don't trust going to

human resources people, and I don't blame them.

But they don't know where to go, and they don't have the

programs like they have -- and human affairs or something

like that, and Fred Hearns, the way he receives valid

complaints and they are investigated, and I got more than 23

calls or complaints.

You ought to see all the letters I got from employees

complaining about something going on, and so I think -- I

don't know the reason why they didn't continue when Fred

Hearns was here and Bobby Bowden was running those programs.




But the numbers, I mean, they had a hey number being

investigated and people felt comfortable, and we don't have

that program where we can go like go to Bobby Bowden or Fred

Hearns, and anything that can be done, we need to find out

why Tampa city took away that investigative power, and I

just can't recall.

I know Bobby Bowden for many years and Fred Hearns did it

for many years, and both of them retired, and it seems like

that program has disappeared or that department has

disappeared.

So that's the problem, I think

I mean, calling and making complaint.

I think they had it perceived where you go to the department

of community affairs, and file a complaint, and they

investigate it.

I think that's what's lacking in the city getting rid of

that department.

12:18:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other questions or comments from council

of Mrs. Glover?

Thank you, Mrs. Glover.

Thank you for your patience.

I think we do need to have a motion to move item number 82

to August 25th.

I have a motion from Mr. Maniscalco, second from Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.




Any opposed?

Okay.

Do we have anybody from staff to talk about item 83?

Okay.

Here is the problem.

We have item 837 which has some change concerning the

contractual obligations that we were supposed to be entering

into.

Of course, as you remember last time we voted, did it not

get enough votes in order to move forward and keeps getting

put onto our agenda each time.

I was expecting someone from staff would be here to discuss

this item primarily because anytime a significant change is

being done we like to know about it.

Mr. Shelby, you were going to say something.

Was the legal department supposed to be here to talk about

this?

12:19:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I don't know.

I still see Mrs. Mandell, and I do know you have --

12:19:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
And find out if she wants to speak to this

item because I do have some questions specifically about the

changes.

12:19:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Thank you.

Mrs. Mandell, I don't know if you were also here to speak

about number 83.




12:19:44 >>JULIA MANDELL:
I wasn't specifically.

This item had previously come to council and there was not

action able to be taken because it was a tie vote.

Since that time, the vendor has said that they would be

willing to amend their agreement in order to take out and I

not familiar so I would have to ask for more

information -- to remove a provision in there that they

would receive a guarantee of $85,000.

They have removed that.

What you have in front of you is a substitute resolution to

approve that, if you so choose, to move forward with an

agreement with that substitution in it, so they would remove

that provision, and you can take a vote up or down whether

or not you want to proceed forward with the contract given

that revision to the contract.

12:20:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a legal question for you concerning

the change of a contract, after a discussion before council,

does that not essentially prejudice other people that had

bids, primarily because now you have changed the contract

and the rules of the game.

12:21:01 >>JULIA MANDELL:
We need to talk about that with our

purchasing attorney, and that particular change does not

change the underlying RFQ that was put out there, and so

when you get into contract negotiations after you closed out

and take your bidder in contract negotiations that is part




of the contract negotiation that you can move forward with.

But again, City Council has the right to vote the contract

up or down with that revision.

So that's where it stands now.

12:21:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Montelione.

12:21:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.

I feel the same way that since we discussed this the first

time.

The issue of tracking, and what we actually needed within

this contract was the 2011-2012, you know, when we had so

many properties in foreclosure, that following up on them

and keeping track of them was very, very difficult for the

employees that we had.

Being that the economy is recovering, I see around my own

neighborhood all those other vacant properties that I pass

by on a regular basis are now being rehabbed, and the

plywood coming off the windows, and they are being put back

into service and offered for sale.

So for the amount of work -- and we had Mr. Slater here last

time we discussed this -- they can handle it in-house.

I don't know why we need to contact the vendor when it's

something that we are cable, willing and able to do.

12:22:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Any other comments or questions concerning

that?

Okay, we have item number 83.




Is there anyone that would like to make a motion on this

particular item?

We need someone that is willing to make a motion if we get a

second.

12:23:20 >> I would like to make a motion approving the proposal with

a substitute resolution between the City of Tampa and clear

village.

12:23:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mr. Maniscalco.

Do I have a second?

I have a second from Mr. Miranda.

All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.

Opposed?

12:23:39 >>THE CLERK:
Reddick, Suarez and month loan voting no.

12:23:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Okay.

We are tied again.

Not tied again.

We are tied.

Okay.

It comes back to the next regular -- she had to go to

another event.

I would make a suggestion that staff, since you are the only

senior staff, actually the only staff in the room right now,

I would make a suggestion that either they come up with a

better way of presenting this to us, in a way that we can go

forward, or not do something with it or not bring it back up




on the agenda.

And I will insist that if it comes back on this agenda

without an explanation in terms of what's going on, I am not

going to allow it on the agenda next time.

12:24:31 >>JULIA MANDELL:
Very good .

12:24:34 >>: We have information reports and new business by council

members.

Mr. Miranda.

12:24:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I have been asked to make a request to

invite troops and organizations dedicating to honoring the

military with a August presentation August 25th at

9 a.m. for a ten minute presentation.

I have a second from Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

Okay, anything else, sir?

12:25:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
That's it.

12:25:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mr. Reddick.

12:25:08 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Be patient with me.

I have Mrs. Capin's.

First, on behalf of Councilwoman Capin, confirm the

commendation presented to the recognition of a family

reunion taking place this month in Tampa.

12:25:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mr. Reddick.

Second from Mr. Cohen.




All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

12:25:43 >>FRANK REDDICK:
And the second item is zip code

approximate 33602, 333603, 333605, and also provide

veterinarian care on a case-by-case basis, all provided by

the humane society of Tampa, and for information, please

call 813-442-2279.

And want to --

12:26:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
How many pockets do you have?

(Laughter).

12:26:30 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Some disturbing news that I had a chance

to see and read in the newspaper when we were off, and the

situation in Ybor City, I would ask to -- like to ask Ms.

Lattimore to come to council on a staff report to give us an

update about the contract regarding security incorporated

and what they plan -- how they plan to evaluate their

contract as we move forward with be the city.

12:27:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion from Mr. Reddick.

Second by Mr. Cohen.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

12:27:16 >>FRANK REDDICK:
The second item is, I would also like for

code enforcement to appear to the council to give us an

update report on on the river, the feature story with the

water damage, potholes, and the mold and mildew, and




hopefully code enforcement get an update under staff

reports.

12:27:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
We have a motion by Mr. Reddick.

Second from Mr. Miranda.

All in favor of that motion?

12:27:52 >>FRANK REDDICK:
The last item, I want to request a

ten-minute presentation for the press program coordinated on

August 25th at 9 a.m.

Motion by Mr. Reddick.

Soaked by Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

Anything else, sir?

Okay.

Mr. Cohen.

12:28:12 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have a couple of items.

First of all it is that time of year when we are going to

set our budget public hearings.

After much discussion of our various schedules and keeping

in mind our need to coordinate of what we are doing on the

calendar with the school board and what the county are

doing, I am going to ask council to set the first public --

budget public hearing on Wednesday, September 7th at

5:01 p.m.

12:28:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.




Second from Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

12:28:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
And then to set the second public budget

hearing for Wednesday night, September 21st at 5:01 p.m.

12:28:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

12:29:03 >>HARRY COHEN:
And then Councilman Reddick and I were both

interviewed on a story that aired last night on one of the

local networks related to nightclub safety.

And there have been so many bad incidents that have occurred

in this country over the last couple of weeks that it is

almost impossible to quantify all of them, because they all

involved different elements of society.

But prior to when we went on break, of course there was the

incident that occurred in Orlando that led to such a tragic

loss of life, and it did cause, think, some of us to reflect

on the need to review our safety and security procedures

that are in place in nightclubs across the city.

So I was going to ask the legal department, TPD, and also

representatives from than the YCDC and the SoHo business

alliance, and anyone else who might be appropriate, to come

to come here under staff reports on September 1st and

give us an update on the procedures that we are following,

and any recommendations that any of them might have on




things we can do to make and keep patrons safer who are out.

12:30:23 >> Second by Mr. Reddick.

All in favor of that motion?

Anything else, sir?

12:30:29 >>HARRY COHEN:
I also wanted to just note for the record

the passing of my good friend Daisy Frank a few weeks ago.

I would like to ask that council send a letter of condolence

to her mother, the clerk of the circuit court, pat Frank,

and also that I make sure to invite anyone in the public

that would like to attend her memorial service on July

20th at the Tampa Museum of Art at 6 p.m.

12:30:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Motion by Mr. Cohen.

Second by Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed? Thank you, sir.

Mr. Maniscalco, anything?

12:31:06 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
No, sir.

12:31:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Mrs. Montelione?

12:31:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Yes, sir.

And I am going to have to ask for your patience as well.

12:31:13 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Do we want to add more time?

12:31:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Well, we are already at 12:35.

12:31:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
Why don't we add two more minutes?

12:31:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
12:37?

12:31:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
12:37.




Seconded by Mr. Cohen.

All in favor?

Go ahead.

12:31:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Mr. Cohen, if you can do an assist with

the calendar here.

I would like to ask neighborhood empowerment to give us a

report on the collection, we approved a couple of the

committee's report for the continuously demolition of homes

and mowing and clearing, and I know we just talked about

that back from a few years ago we had a lot of those go out.

I would like to have a report on the number of liens related

to code enforcement, removal of accumulations, mowing or

demolition of property, the amount of money that's

collected, and have that broken down between the demolition

and the demolitions are much more expensive, and if we

coffee that August 25th at 9:00 a.m. under staff

reports.

12:32:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
We have a motion by Mrs. Montelione.

Second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Thank you.

12:32:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Also related to the subject we spoke

about before, earlier today, the minority business, I would

like the chair of the EBOAC committee to appear before

council to report on their recent meeting, and if the




provisions contained within the ordinance have been met.

Do we have a date?

Why don't we go with the 25th?

12:33:13 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
We have a motion from Mrs. Montelione, a

second from Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Go ahead, ma'am.

12:33:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Also related to a subject we just heard

about a few minutes ago, the abuse hotline, if I could ask

for Kimberley Crum from human resources Franked

communications Mrs. Bowman to appear and discuss under staff

reports efforts to pro promote the hotline.

September 1st would be lovely.

9:00 a.m.

12:33:46 >> Motion by Mrs. Montelione.

Second by Mr. Maniscalco.

All in favor of that motion?

Any opposed?

12:33:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
That would be it.

Thank you so much.

12:33:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ:
That is it.

I need a motion to receive and fail.

I have a motion by Mr. Miranda, second from Mrs. Montelione.

All in favor of that motion?

Anyone in the public that would like to make a general




comment at this time?

I see two ladies up there.

Do you want to say anything or is this just entertainment?

Great, there you go.

And if there is nothing else before City Council, we are

adjourned.





DISCLAIMER:

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