📝 City Council Meeting Transcript

TAMPA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOPS
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026, 9:00 A.M.

DISCLAIMER:
THIS FILE REPRESENTS AN UNEDITED VERSION OF REALTIME
CAPTIONING WHICH SHOULD NEITHER BE RELIED UPON FOR COMPLETE
ACCURACY NOR USED AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT.
ANY PERSON WHO NEEDS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THE
PROCEEDINGS MAY NEED TO HIRE A COURT REPORTER.

[ SOUNDING GAVEL ]
9:05:51AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY.
WELCOME TO TAMPA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP.
I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
WHO HAS THE INVOCATION THIS MORNING?
EVERYBODY STAND FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE, PLEASE.
[MOMENT OF SILENCE]
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE?
[PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]
9:06:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU.
CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
9:06:38AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
HERE.
9:06:39AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
HERE.
9:06:41AM >> HURTAK?
YOUNG?
9:06:42AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
HERE.
9:06:43AM >>LUIS VIERA:
HERE.
9:06:43AM >>BILL CARLSON:
HERE.

9:06:45AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HERE.
9:06:46AM >>THE CLERK:
WE HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM.
9:06:47AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK IS HERE.
SHE JUST STEPPED OUT FOR A MOMENT.
BUT SHE WILL BE BACK ANY MINUTE.
FIRST UP ON THE AGENDA, WE'RE GOING TO TALK TO MS. ABBYE
FEELEY.
9:07:01AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL.
ABBYE FEELEY, ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY.
THIS MORNING, WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE FEE STUDY, TO
WORKSHOP THE FEE STUDY THAT WAS COMPLETED BY RAFTELIS.
WITH US THIS MORNING IS JOE WILLIAMS FROM RAFTELIS, TRISTEN
TOWNSEND FROM RAFTELIS, AS WELL AS JC HUDGISON, OUR BUILDING
OFFICIAL AND -- CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL AND CONSTRUCTION
SERVICES MANAGER.
I NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE COFFEE.
ERIC COTTON, DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION MANAGER, DENNIS
FERNANDEZ, OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION MANAGER, AND BRANDON
CAMPBELL, OUR DIRECTOR OF MOBILITY.
SINCE THE FEE STUDY INCLUDED ALL OF THOSE AREAS.
I'M GOING TO TURN OVER TO JOE.
JOE IS REALLY GOING TO PRESENT TO YOU ON THE STUDY WHAT WE
DID, HOW WE DID IT, WHAT IT SHOWED US.
AND WE DO HAVE A RECOMMENDED FEE SCHEDULE.

AS I MENTIONED TO YOU IN PREVIOUS UPDATES, THAT SCHEDULE
INCLUDES WHAT WE CALL KIND OF LEVEL SETTING AND PRACTICALITY
OF SOME OF THOSE FEES.
THESE FEES ARE ONLY RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE YOU TODAY.
WE'RE HERE TO START A DIALOGUE, TO HAVE A CONVERSATION, TO
TALK ABOUT WHAT THOSE FEES ARE.
LIKE I SAID, HOW THEY WERE DETERMINED, WHERE WE'RE GOING
WITH THIS, WHAT IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE OVER
A NUMBER OF YEARS.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WILL BE HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING ON
OCTOBER 21st AT HANNA CITY CENTER.
WE HAVE SET UP A WEBSITE ON THE FEE STUDY THAT HAS THE
DOCUMENT OUT THERE.
WE'VE ALSO SET OUT SOME CORRESPONDENCE TO OUR ADVISORY
GROUPS THAT OUR TEAMS MEET WITH ON A REGULAR BASIS AS WELL
AS ALL OF OUR ACCELA USERS IN ANTICIPATION OF SHARING THIS
INFORMATION.
WE ALSO HAVE DANA CROSBY WITH US TODAY FROM THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS IN RELATION TO
HOW THIS RELATES TO SENATE BILL 180 AND US INCREASING THE
FEES.
THE WAY WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS IS FOR A MARCH 1st
EFFECTIVE DATE, WHICH WOULD GO IN WITH THE WATER AND
WASTEWATER FEE INCREASES THAT YOU ALL HAVE ALREADY APPROVED,
AND IT IS A MULTIYEAR.

AND I'LL LET JOE GO INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT, BUT FOR
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, IT'S OVER FIVE YEARS, AND FOR
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION, HISTORIC PRESERVATION IT WOULD BE
THREE YEARS.
WE ALSO HAVE SOME COMPARISON FOR YOU TODAY OF HOW WE ARE IN
RELATION TO OTHER CITIES, WHAT'S GOING ON, AND WE'LL GO FROM
THERE.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JOE.
WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS WORK THROUGH THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION
AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO WORK AS A TEAM TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
9:09:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BEFORE WE TURN IT OVER, COUNCILWOMAN
HURTAK.
9:09:39AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I JUST WANTED TO SAY, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU
SEND US ALL THOSE INVITES SO WE CAN PUT THEM ON OUR
CALENDARS.
9:09:45AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
YOU GOT IT.
9:09:47AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THANK YOU.
9:09:47AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GOOD MORNING, JOE.
START WITH YOUR NAME, PLEASE.
9:09:50AM >> GOOD MORNING.
JOE WILLIAMS FROM RAFTELIS.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.
IT'S BEEN GREAT EFFORT WORKING WITH THE CITY AND THE VARIOUS
DIVISIONS, DEPARTMENTS ON FULLY -- TRYING TO FULLY

UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO PROVIDING THESE
SERVICES.
SO IF WE CAN JUMP INTO THE PRESENTATION.
PERFECT.
TAKE YOU THROUGH THE SCOPE A LITTLE BIT.
THERE IS A GOOD AMOUNT OF SLIDES.
I'LL TRY TO DO THIS IN ABOUT 15 TO 20 MINUTES.
9:10:25AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE GOT IT.
GOOD TO GO.
9:10:27AM >> WE'LL TRY TO DO THIS IN ABOUT 15 TO 20 MINUTES.
THERE IS A GOOD AMOUNT OF INFORMATION, BUT LEAVE SOME ROOM
FOR QUESTIONS, NOT GO --
9:10:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HEY, THIS IS YOUR SHOW.
9:10:38AM >> -- IN PURE DETAIL.
THAT'S THE IDEA WE HAVE.
WE DEFINITELY WANT TO ANSWER GOOD QUESTIONS.
SO, WHEN WE FIRST GOT ENGAGED, WE REALLY WERE FOCUSED ON THE
BUILDING FEES, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DIVISION, AND THEN
TALKING THROUGH WITH ABBYE AND OTHERS.
THERE WAS A DESIRE ALSO TO LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION,
THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARDS, THE CITY CLERK FEES FOR
PETITIONS RELATED TO A LOT OF THESE FEES THAT WE WOULD BE
UPDATING AND THE MOBILITY RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THERE'S SOME ADMINISTRATIVE RELATED FEES IN THEIR DEPARTMENT
THAT HADN'T BEEN UPDATED IN MANY YEARS EITHER.

TALK ABOUT A LOT OF THESE FEES EVEN DATE BACK TO THE EARLY
2000s.
2000, 2006 IN SOME CASES, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES WAS A LITTLE
BIT MORE RECENT, BUT THEY ARE STILL PUSHING A GOOD EIGHT
YEARS OR SO SINCE REALLY BEING UPDATED.
HOW DID WE GET HERE?
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, AGAIN, BACK IN 2021, THEY DID A MAJOR
UPGRADE TO THEIR BILLING SOFTWARE, THEIR PERMIT SOFTWARE.
AGAIN, WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THEIR EXISTING FEE
STRUCTURE.
WON'T DWELL ON IT TOO MUCH, BUT THERE'S THOUSANDS OF
INDIVIDUAL RATES ON THEIR VARIOUS SCHEDULES.
ONCE THAT WAS CREATED IN THE NEW SOFTWARE, IT WAS REALLY
HARD TO UPDATE AND MANAGE OVER TIME, SO WE HAVE GONE THROUGH
A MAJOR SIMPLIFICATION EFFORT, TRY TO MAKE IT SO IT CAN BE
UPDATED MORE EFFICIENTLY EACH YEAR GOING FORWARD.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S VARIOUS POLICY DIRECTION OVER
TIME, AGAIN, COVID WAS A HUGE FACTOR AND A LOT OF THIS ON
KEEPING FEES LEVEL, NOT LOOKING AT SPECIFIC INCREASES DURING
A CHALLENGING TIME.
THAT HAS CONTRIBUTED AND CHANGING LEGISLATIVE LANDSCAPE.
THE FLORIDA STATUTES SECTIONS RELATED TO ESPECIALLY THE
BUILDING FEES HAS BEEN UPDATED TREMENDOUSLY THE PAST FIVE OR
SIX YEARS.
IT'S CREATED A LOT OF ADDITIONAL REGULATION, TIMELINES,

THINGS ON JC'S DEPARTMENT THAT HAVE REQUIRED INCREASE IN
STAFFING, INCREASES IN OTHER COSTS TO ADMINISTER A SIMILAR
LEVEL OF EFFORT AND TO MEET ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
HE'S HAD THAT ISSUE AND THEN THE PERMIT ACTIVITY AGAIN,
SPIKED EARLY IN THE COVID YEARS AND THEN IT STARTED TO
NORMALIZE AGAIN NOW.
ALSO HURRICANE ACTIVITY.
THERE IS A NATURAL EBB AND FLOW IN THE PERMIT ACTIVITY AND
SORT OF ON A SLIGHT, SLIGHT REDUCTION IN THAT AREA RIGHT
NOW.
THAT LEADS DIRECTLY TO PERMIT REVENUES.
SO OUR APPROACH, AGAIN, STUDY APPROACH, WE WANT TO LOOK AT
WHAT IS THE FULL COST OF ADMINISTERING THESE DEPARTMENTS.
WHEN SOMEONE COMES IN FOR A SPECIFIC TYPE OF PERMIT, WHAT IS
ALL THE STAFF EFFORT AND NECESSARY OVERHEAD COSTS OF
OPERATING A DEPARTMENT THAT GO INTO PROVIDING THESE EFFORTS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED IN THE STUDY.
WE'VE WORKED WITH STAFF ON AN INITIAL PHASING PLAN.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT CERTAIN FEES WHERE WE CALCULATED THE COST
THAT STAFF FELT WAS RELATIVELY HIGH, AND THE RECOMMENDED
PLAN, SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN SET BELOW THE ACTUAL COSTS
THAT WE'VE CALCULATED.
AGAIN, THERE ARE SEVERAL FACTORS THAT GO INTO THAT.
DO HAVE SOME LATITUDE WITHIN YOUR FEE SETTING TO SET FEES
BELOW THE ACTUAL COSTS.

AGAIN, WE MET IN DETAIL ON EVERY WORK FLOW, EVERY FEE WITH
STAFF ON UNDERSTANDING WHAT GOES INTO EACH ONE OF THESE
THINGS, WHO IS INVOLVED, HOW MUCH TIME ARE PEOPLE SPENDING
ON AVERAGE CASES, AND THAT'S HOW WE'VE DEVELOPED THE FEE
STUDY.
SO, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, REALLY WHAT I'LL HIT ON HERE,
THIS IS THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ADMINISTERING IF THERE'S NEW
CONSTRUCTION, CHANGES ON PROPERTIES FOR ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES, ADDITIONS OF POOLS, MAJOR CONSTRUCTION TYPE
THINGS, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, AND THIS IS PRETTY STRICTLY
GOVERNED BY FLORIDA STATUTES, ESPECIALLY ON THE REVENUE
EXPENSE SIDE AT THIS POINT.
IT'S ABOUT 100 EMPLOYEES AND $22 MILLION ANNUAL BUDGET RIGHT
NOW.
ON THE LEFT SIDE, YOU'LL SEE A SMALL, RELATIVELY SMALL
SNAPSHOT OF THE EXISTING FEE SCHEDULE.
9:15:34AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
PRINTED BY OUR CFO.
9:15:37AM >> IT'S SMALL ON PURPOSE.
WE DON'T WANT TO YOU TRY TO READ ALL THE FEES.
AGAIN, THIS IS, IF YOU OPENED UP ONE OF THE SCHEDULES ON THE
CITY'S WEBSITE, THERE'S PROBABLY SEVEN DIFFERENT FILES THAT
EACH HAVE FIVE TO TEN PAGES OF FEES THAT LOOK JUST LIKE
THIS.
IT'S ALL TIED BACK TO THE INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS CODE,
CONSTRUCTION TYPES, OCCUPANCY TYPES AND HUGE RANGE OF FEES.

AGAIN, VERY HARD TO ADMINISTER AND UPDATE.
IT TOOK A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT OF MASSAGING OF THE DATA TO
GET IT TO WHERE WE FELT COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING A NEW FEE
STRUCTURE, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE ON THE SLIDE HERE,
RESIDENTIAL GROUPING AND COMMERCIAL GROUPING.
THE FEES WE'RE SHOWING YOU ARE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
THERE ARE SOME DISCOUNTED RATES WITH A VERY SIMILAR
STRUCTURE FOR OTHER TYPES OF PHASED BUILDINGS OR SHELL
BUILDINGS OR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS, THINGS THAT ARE RELATED,
BUT RELATIVELY LOWER EFFORT FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT
BASED ON ALL THE PLAN REVIEWS AND INSPECTIONS THAT GO INTO
THINGS.
SIMPLIFICATION OF THE FEE STRUCTURE.
REVENUE ENHANCEMENT, I'LL TOUCH ON THIS ONE A LITTLE BIT.
BASICALLY, WHAT'S HAPPENED IS OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS,
AGAIN, WITH ALL THE ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN
INTRODUCED, THE DEPARTMENT HAS GROWN.
SO THERE'S BEEN A GROWING STAFF TO MEET ALL THE TIMELINES,
THE REGULATIONS, ALL THOSE THINGS THAT GO INTO IT.
REVENUES HAVE STAYED ABOUT STABLE, EVEN SLIGHT DECREASES THE
PAST FEW YEARS.
AGAIN, THIS IS A DEPARTMENT WHERE IF NOBODY PULLED A PERMIT,
THERE WOULD BE ZERO DOLLARS COMING IN.
ON THE UTILITY SIDE, YOU AT LEAST HAVE BASE CHARGES.
PEOPLE NEED TO USE WATER.

IT'S CONSISTENT REVENUE.
HERE, THEY CAN GO FROM ZERO TO, YOU KNOW, 20 MILLION IN ANY
GIVEN YEAR.
NOW, YOU'RE TYPICALLY OPERATING IN THE 14 TO $16 MILLION
RANGE THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS.
AS WE SHOWED YOU, JC HAS A BUDGET OF 22 MILLION FOR THIS
UPCOMING YEAR.
IT'S BEEN AT THAT LEVEL FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS OR SO.
SO WE NEEDED REVENUE ENHANCEMENT.
WHEN WE SIMPLIFIED THE FEE STRUCTURE, WE MADE IT SO THAT
WHEN WE SET THOSE RATES, THERE WAS ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT
WAS GOING TO BE GENERATED, AND THEN THAT SORT OF STRUNG
THROUGH THE PROCESS.
THEN WE HAVE EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL PERMIT FEES WHICH ARE
MORE FIXED FEES FOR SERVICES, IF YOU COME FOR A MECHANICAL
PERMIT OR PLUMBING PERMIT, SIMPLE PLUMBING, THERE IS A FIXED
FEE FOR IT.
THOSE FEES ARE INCREASING AS WELL.
THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
THERE'S RESUBMITTALS, ADDITIONAL PLAN REVIEW FEES, THINGS
LIKE THAT.
SO WE'RE GETTING ADDITIONAL REVENUE FROM A FEW DIFFERENT
AREAS.
SO THIS IS -- A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS, THERE IS THE
ENHANCEMENT FUND AND THERE'S THE PRIMARY OPERATING FUND THAT

JC HAS.
THIS IS REALLY A PICTURE OF THE PRIMARY OPERATIONS FUND.
YOU CAN SEE IT IS LESS THAN 22 MILLION.
THE ENHANCEMENT FUND IS AN ADDITIONAL SURCHARGE ADDED ON TO
THE BUILDING PERMIT THAT COVERS A LOT OF THE TECHNOLOGY
VEHICLE RELATED COST OF THE DEPARTMENT.
SO THIS IS REALLY JUST THE OPERATING FUND.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN 2026, THE REVENUES, WHICH ARE THE
LINE, THE GREEN LINE, ARE PRETTY WELL BELOW THE EXPENSES FOR
THE DEPARTMENT.
AGAIN, IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT FOR A COUPLE, FEW YEARS NOW, BUT
WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY IS DURING COVID AND KIND OF THAT TIME
WHEN ACTIVITY WAS HIGHER AND BEFORE A LOT OF THE NEW
REGULATIONS CAME, THE DIVISION WAS OPERATING AT A SURPLUS,
HAD ACCUMULATED A FAIRLY STRONG CASH RESERVE POSITION, AND
THE PAST FEW YEARS REALLY SPENT IT DOWN.
WE SHOW THAT YOU ON THE NEXT SLIDE.
IT'S BEEN SPENT DOWN.
WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE THE '27 BUDGET, IF THERE WERE NO
RATE ADJUSTMENTS, IS SHOWING WE PROBABLY WOULD BE RELYING ON
THE GENERAL FUND TO SUPPORT THE DEPARTMENT.
SO NOW WE HAVE THESE RATE ADJUSTMENTS IDENTIFIED.
WE'RE HOPING TO NOT BE IN THAT SITUATION BEGINNING IN 2027.
SO THAT'S THE SLIDE.
YOU CAN SEE DOWN BELOW, $5 MILLION IN A CASH RESERVE

POSITION FOR A $20 MILLION DEPARTMENT.
FLORIDA STATUTES ALLOWS YOU TO HAVE A RESERVE BALANCE UP TO
THE AVERAGE OF THE PRIOR FOUR YEARS OF BUDGETED EXPENDITURES
FOR THAT DEPARTMENT.
AGAIN, WE COULD HAVE A BALANCE CLOSER TO 15 TO 16 MILLION
PER STATUTES, BUT WE'VE SPENT IT DOWN, KEPT FEES LOW OR
LEVEL OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS.
SO WE'RE KIND OF JUST AT THAT POINT WHERE WE NEED TO START
MOVING BACK IN THE OTHER DIRECTION TO BE A FULLY SUSTAINING,
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND.
THAT'S ONE SPECIFICALLY SET FOR THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND,
SUPPOSED TO OPERATE LIKE A BUSINESS.
SUPPOSED TO GENERATE THE REVENUES TO COVER THE COST OF
OPERATIONS.
THAT IS THE GENERAL INTENT.
SMALL LIST OF EXAMPLE FEES, AGAIN, THIS IS DEMONSTRATED TO
SHOW YOU THERE IS A WIDE RANGE OF DIFFERENT IMPACTS.
IN THE FULL REPORT, THERE ARE EXHIBITS.
THERE ARE LONGER FEE TABLES SHOWING YOU ALL THE DIFFERENT
FEES.
WE WANT TO JUST SHOW A FEW EXAMPLES HERE.
NOT GOING TO GO INTO GREAT DETAIL, BUT THERE IS A RANGE.
IT'S NOT ALL 15%.
SOMETIMES IT'S 30%.
SOMETIMES IN RARE CASES THERE'S SOME SMALL DECREASES.

AGAIN, THAT GOES INTO SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF ON
TRYING TO KEEP REASONABLE FEES IN CERTAIN AREAS, CONSISTENCY
FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS.
JUST A HIGH LEVEL EXAMPLE, AGAIN, WE WORKED WITH THE
DEPARTMENTS, DETAILED REVIEWS, DETAILED WORK FLOWS, AND THIS
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL SERVE TWO PURPOSES.
WE SUMMARIZED IT TO A PRETTY HIGH LEVEL.
INTAKE AND PROCESSING.
THIS INCLUDES CORRESPONDENCE WITH APPLICANTS ALONG THE WAY.
PLAN REVIEW, INSPECTION TIME, AND THEN SOME VEHICLE USAGE
TIME.
AND THERE ARE OTHER OVERHEAD FACTORS KIND OF BUILT INTO
THERE.
SO THIS ONE, WE CALCULATED A FEE OF $480 WORKING WITH STAFF.
THIS IS ONE OF THE FEES WHERE IT IS VERY HOMEOWNER
APPLICATION BASED WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO BE GETTING A SHED
OR ANOTHER SMALL STRUCTURE ON THEIR PROPERTY.
IF WE ARE SETTING THE FEE TOO HIGH, THERE'S SOME LEVEL OF
CONCERN THAT PEOPLE WILL STOP COMING FOR PERMITS.
THEN IT'S GOING TO BE A MORE COSTLY EFFORT TO PURSUE
AFTER-THE-FACT PERMITS, TRYING TO GET THEM TO PAY, COMPLY.
IT'S MUCH BETTER FOR THE DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY OVERALL TO
HAVE THE PERMITS COME UP FRONT AS THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO, MORE
EFFICIENT, BETTER PROCESS, SO THAT IS CONSIDERED IN NOT
GOING TO THE FULL FEE IN THE SITUATION.

AND THERE ARE A FEW OTHER FEES LIKE THAT ALONG THE WAY,
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.
SO THAT'S KIND OF A FIRST PASS.
THESE ARE INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE'RE ALL HERE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK AND THEN THE COMMUNITY
MEETINGS TO GET ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK AS WELL.
WE HAVE SOME COMPARISONS.
REALLY THE HIGHLIGHT HERE, YOU'LL SEE THAT WE ARE GOING TO
BE INCREASING FEES FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY, BUT WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'RE GOING OUTSIDE OF A
LOT OF OUR NEIGHBORS OR OTHER AREAS IN THE STATE.
A LOT OF THESE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE ON THE COMPARISON DO
HAVE A FEE STRUCTURE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE IN ALIGNMENT
WITH THE MOST RECENT FLORIDA HOUSE BILL 803 UPDATES.
THEY LIKELY WILL BE PURSUING UPDATES TO THEIR FEE SCHEDULES
AS WELL OR MAY ACTIVELY BE.
SO WE'LL SAY THAT.
THERE IS A LOT OF CHANGING LEGISLATION WHERE BUILDING FEES
ARE BEING UPDATED ALL THROUGHOUT THE STATE RIGHT NOW.
JUST A FEW MORE EXAMPLES.
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE, WE CAN COME BACK TO
THEM.
9:24:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE HOLD THE QUESTIONS UNTIL AFTER YOU ARE
FINISHED.
9:24:45AM >> GO THROUGH TOO MANY OF THE DETAILS NOW.

THAT'S REALLY THE BUILDING FUND, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
DIVISION AS WE CALL IN TAMPA.
THE NEXT ONE IS DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION.
9:24:58AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE
PLACE TO PAUSE FOR QUESTIONS?
9:25:03AM >> I THINK WE COULD, YEAH.
9:25:05AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
9:25:07AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT HAD THE
REALLY, REALLY SMALL FONT?
9:25:13AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THE DENNIS FONT.
9:25:15AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THE DENNIS SLIDE.
9:25:18AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THE DR FONT.
9:25:20AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THE THING THAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT THIS IS THAT
AS THE BUILDING GETS LARGER, THE RATE GETS SMALLER.
I REALLY DON'T WANT TO BE INCENTIVIZING LARGER RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES.
COMMERCIAL, THAT'S FINE.
BUT RESIDENTIAL, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS BUILD MORE
HOUSING HERE.
SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO BE SMALLER BY NATURE.
ANYTHING THAT'S ABOVE 5,000 SQUARE FEET, THEY REALLY NEED TO
BE PAYING THAT 33.35.
I'M SORRY.
IF YOU ARE BUILDING A MASSIVE HOME, THEN YOU CAN AFFORD

MASSIVE, LIKE, FEES.
I DON'T HAVE ANY SYMPATHY FOR THAT.
IF YOU ARE IN TIER ONE AND TIER TWO, THOSE ARE THE PLACES
THAT I WANT TO BRING DOWN.
THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE.
WE NEED TO INCENTIVIZE SMALLER HOMES.
FOR ME, I MIGHT FLIP THAT WHOLE THING.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD DO THAT, BUT REALLY, WE WANT TO
INCENTIVIZE MORE SMALLER HOUSES.
ALSO, THE OTHER THING THAT COMES TO MIND IS AFFORDABLE
HOUSING SET-ASIDES.
AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE FEE INCREASES, WE ALSO REALLY WANT
TO LOOK AT PEOPLE WHO ARE BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
BY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I MEAN OWNER OCCUPIED.
IF THEY ARE OWNER OCCUPIED, I REALLY BELIEVE WE NEED TO
REDUCE OR ELIMINATE FUNDING OR FEES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO OWNER OCCUPY.
NOW, THERE STILL MIGHT BE A REDUCTION OR SOMETHING FOR
APARTMENT BUILDINGS, BUT REALLY -- AND BY AMI.
IF WE CAN'T REDUCE THEM WHOLLY, SOMETHING BY AMI.
BUT AGAIN, I'M TALKING ABOUT OWNERSHIP FOR RESIDENTIAL.
I DON'T REALLY KNOW -- I MEAN, I KNOW WE PROBABLY NEED TO DO
SOMETHING FOR COMMERCIAL, BUT HOME OWNERSHIP RESIDENTIAL, I
JUST HAD A REALLY GOOD CONVERSATION WITH HABITAT, AND THEY
ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO BUILD MORE HOUSING, AND THIS IS ONE

OF THE THINGS THEY SAID COULD TREMENDOUSLY HELP THEM.
A REDUCTION IN IMPACT FEES.
BECAUSE ALL THEY DO IS BUILD OWNER OCCUPIED, AND THAT TO ME
IS VERY IMPORTANT.
THANK YOU.
OTHERWISE, THIS IS VERY INTERESTING.
ALSO, YOU SKIPPED THROUGH QUITE A FEW, LIKE, YOU WERE JUST
SHOWING US, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE LAST ONE OF THE
VARIATIONS OF BETWEEN DIFFERENT CITIES, THIS ONE -- NO, ONE
MORE.
THEN GO BACK.
GO BACK ONE MORE.
THIS CONCERNS ME.
OUR PROPOSED ARE GOING TO BE LOWER THAN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
ALREADY IS.
AND I KNOW THAT -- BUT I UNDERSTAND -- SO MY GUESS IS WHAT
WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE BUILDING THIS STUFF
WITHIN THE CITY.
IS THAT THE REASON THAT WE'RE STICKING KIND OF LOWER HERE?
9:28:17AM >>JOE WILLIAMS:
THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SETTING THE
TIERS AND THE COST RECOVERY.
AS BUILDINGS SCALE, IT DOESN'T ALWAYS -- THE EFFORT FROM THE
DEPARTMENT DOESN'T ALWAYS SCALE QUITE AS FAST.
9:28:30AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY.
THAT'S FINE.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS.
BECAUSE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE.
I'M CURIOUS.
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY GENERALLY IS, BECAUSE IT'S OUR TRUE
NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR, I'M INTERESTED -- I DON'T KNOW, WAS
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IN ALL OF THESE COMPARISONS?
OKAY, IT WAS.
BUT THIS IS THE ONE THAT JUST MADE ME STOP FOR PAUSE.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS LIKE A RATIONALE BECAUSE WE
DON'T HAVE A LOT OF COMMERCIAL, AND WE DO NEED TO KEEP THE
COMMERCIAL THAT WE HAVE AND INCENTIVIZE MORE.
IS THAT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE'RE -- AND WHOEVER HAS
THEIR PHONE THAT IS MAKING THOSE JINGLES, IF YOU COULD TURN
THAT TO MUTE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
9:29:14AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
ABBYE FEELEY.
WHEN WE LOOKED AT THAT WITH JOE AND THE TEAM, I DON'T KNOW
AT THIS POINT IN THE STUDY IT WAS REALLY ABOUT COST
RECOVERY.
WHAT IS IT TAKING US TO DO THE WORK?
THEN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER LEGISLATION THAT JOE WAS
MENTIONING, PRIVATE PROVIDER HAS TO BE DONE IN CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF DAYS, AND YOU HAVE TO MEET THAT, OR YOU PAY BACK
FEES.
SO IT WAS LOOKING AT OPERATIONALLY THE REVIEW TIMES, THE
INTAKE, ALL OF THAT.

NOT NECESSARILY ON PAPER, HOW WILL THIS IMPACT THE
DEVELOPMENT.
SO EVERY POINT YOU'RE RAISING IS GREAT.
I'M TRACKING, BECAUSE ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALSO, LIKE WE
OFFER RIGHT NOW EXPEDITED PERMITTING.
WE OFFER NO CONNECTION FEE.
I ALWAYS GET CAPACITY FEE AND CONNECTION FEE MESSED UP.
BUT FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.
WE HAVE OTHER THINGS.
WE HAVE NOT BY STATUTE BEEN ABLE TO WAIVE IMPACT FEES.
9:30:12AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY.
THAT IS A STATUTE THING.
9:30:14AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
STATUTORY REQUIREMENT.
BUT MY BRAIN IS GOING AS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, HOW DO YOU
GET A LURA ON SOMETHING?
HOW DO YOU ENSURE AT C.O. THERE IS ACTUALLY AN AFFORDABLE
PERSON IN THERE WHEN THEY WALKED IN THE DOOR?
IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE BONUSES WE GIVE, TOO.
HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE SOMEBODY GOES AND SAYS, I'M BONUSING
FOR LEED, THEY GO OUT THERE, THE BUILDING NEVER WAS LEED
CERTIFIED BUT THEN THEY GOT ALL THE BONUS DENSITY.
SOME OF THIS I HAVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH.
I JOTTED DOWN.
9:30:40AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I APPRECIATE IT.
ALSO, THE SECONDARY THING, I WOULD LOVE FOR SOMEONE TO TALK

TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY.
LIKE, HOW ARE THEY COMING UP WITH THESE NUMBERS?
IT DOESN'T MEAN WE NEED TO DO THAT, THAT WE NEED TO GO TO
THESE NUMBERS BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE BEING LOWER FOR
COMMERCIAL REALLY DOES INCENTIVIZE COMMERCIAL TO STAY WITHIN
THE CITY LIMITS.
BUT HOW ARE THEY COMING UP WITH THOSE NUMBERS?
JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR NEIGHBOR.
9:31:03AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
YEAH.
JC CAN PROBABLY TALK, TOO.
HE SITS ON BUILDING OFFICIALS ACROSS THE STATE, BOAP, HOW
OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE LOOKING AT THAT.
9:31:17AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THOSE ARE MY FIRST IMPRESSIONS.
THIS IS GREAT SO FAR.
9:31:23AM >>BILL CARLSON:
FIRST POINT OF ORDER, MR. CHAIR.
ESPECIALLY ON WORKSHOP DAYS, COULD YOU PLEASE -- NOBODY HAS
DONE THIS YET, COULD YOU PLEASE ENFORCE THE RULE THAT WE
HAVE TO BE CALLED ON TO SPEAK AND WE DON'T INTERRUPT EACH
OTHER.
BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PROBABLY MORE BACK AND FORTH
LATER.
BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT IN AN ORGANIZED WAY.
JUST LIKE WE CAN'T HEAR, THE PUBLIC CAN'T HEAR IF WE'RE
TALKING OVER EACH OTHER.
JUST FOR THE PUBLIC, THIS IS THE FEES WE'RE PAYING, NOT

IMPACT FEES, RIGHT?
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IMPACT FEES.
9:31:54AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
CORRECT.
9:31:54AM >>BILL CARLSON:
THIS IS JUST APPLICATION.
OKAY.
JUST TO CLARIFY THAT.
THE LAW SAYS YOU CAN HAVE -- YOU SAID JUST TO REPEAT WHAT
YOU SAID, YOU CAN HAVE A CERTAIN FUND ON TOP OF IT, A
RESERVE FUND ON TOP, BUT WE CAN'T CHARGE -- IS THERE A
CERTAIN PERCENTAGE, BESIDES RESERVE FUND, A PERCENTAGE
MARK-UP THAT WE CAN CHARGE ON TOP OF WHAT THE ACTUAL COST
IS.
OR WE CHARGE THE ACTUAL COST PLUS WHATEVER THE RESERVE FUND
IS.
9:32:25AM >> WE CAN CHARGE THE ACTUAL COST OF THE DEPARTMENT PLUS IF
YOU HAVE THE ABILITY, IF YOU HAVE CUSHION FROM WHERE YOUR
CURRENT RESERVE IS TO WHERE YOUR RESERVE CAN BE JUSTIFIED,
YOU CAN SET THE FEES A LITTLE HIGHER TO FUND A RESERVE AND
FUND FUTURE CAPITAL REPLACEMENT NEEDS.
9:32:44AM >>BILL CARLSON:
MS. FEELEY MENTIONED AN EXPEDITED FEE.
IS THAT IN HERE?
DID I MISS THAT?
COULD YOU TALK TO US ABOUT THOSE FEES?
I FORGOT WHAT YOU CALLED A RUSHED FEE OR EXPEDITED FEE,
ADDITIONAL FEE.

9:32:57AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
ABBYE FEELEY.
THE LEGISLATION FROM THE STATE REQUIRES IF YOU'RE USING
PRIVATE PROVIDER THAT REVIEWS HAVE TO BE DONE WITHIN TEN
DAYS.
WHEN THE PRIVATE PROVIDER SUBMITS THAT, IT HAS TO BE DONE
WITHIN TEN DAYS.
IF IT'S NOT WITHIN TEN DAYS, YOU START PAYING BACK THE FEE
TO THE APPLICANT AT CERTAIN PERCENTAGES FOR THE AMOUNT OF
TIME IT TAKES LONGER.
GOING BACK TO THE FTEs AND HOW OUR FTEs HAVE INCREASED,
PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE THE STATE MANDATES TO COMPLETE
REVIEWS WITHIN CERTAIN TIMES BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO RETURN
FEE.
WE WANT TO KEEP THE DEPARTMENT STABLE.
9:33:37AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I KNOW YOUR OFFICE GETS A LOT OF COMPLAINTS
BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH GROWTH IN THE AREA.
YOU'VE COME BEFORE US SO MANY TIMES TO TALK ABOUT HOW YOU'RE
TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COST RECOVERY WITH THE PROCESS
YOU HAVE, AND THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY THERE.
IS THERE A HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT WE COULD OFFER IF
CUSTOMERS HAVE TO TRADE OFF BETWEEN SPEED AND COST?
SO SET ASIDE THE OUTSIDE SERVICES, IS THERE A WAY THAT IF
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING URGENTLY THAT THEY COULD PAY
MORE?

IS THERE AN EXPEDITED TEAM YOU COULD PUT ON THAT WE COULD
CHARGE AN EXTRA FEE FOR?
OR EXTRA PEOPLE YOU COULD HIRE THAT WE COULD DO COST
RECOVERY ON SO WE COULD PROVIDE THESE FASTER.
MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, IF WE PROVIDED MORE RESOURCES TO
PROVIDE A BETTER SERVICE OR FASTER SERVICE, WOULD THAT HELP
YOU?
AND THEN HOW WOULD WE COST RECOVER THAT?
9:34:34AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
SO, RIGHT NOW, AS JOE MENTIONED, SOMETIMES
THE PERMITTING EBBS AND FLOWS, RIGHT?
WE DO KEEP TWO TEAMS ON CONTRACT AND WE HAVE GONE TO USING
ONE OF THOSE TEAMS FOR OUR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS.
IF YOU ARE COMING IN TO GET A TENANT IMPROVEMENT, YOU WENT
ACROSS THE STREET TO THE SUNTRUST, YOU'LL PUT YOUR OFFICE IN
THERE NOW, THOSE, WE USE AN OUTSIDE TEAM TO DO THOSE NOW.
THOSE REVIEWS GET DONE IN THREE DAYS FOR THE BUILDING PART.
THEY STILL REQUIRE LIFE SAFETY REVIEW, WHICH IS THE FIRE
ELEMENT OF THIS, WHICH LIFE SAFETY DOES GET REVIEWED AS PART
OF THE PERMIT PROCESS, BUT THEY ARE PART OF TAMPA FIRE
RESCUE AND FIRE MARSHALS OFFICE.
9:35:14AM >>BILL CARLSON:
ARE WE RECOVERING ANY OF THAT COST IN HERE?
9:35:20AM >>JOE WILLIAMS:
WE DO HAVE FIRE IN CERTAIN -- COMMERCIAL --
9:35:24AM >>BILL CARLSON:
THE BUDGET FOR FIRE HAS BEEN UNDER WHAT IT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS.
IF THERE IS A WAY TO DO COST RECOVERY WHERE WE COULD HELP

EXPEDITE THAT.
I PASS ON THE COMPLAINTS TO MS. FEELEY, AND SHE ALWAYS DOES
A GREAT JOB WITH HER STAFF OF RESPONDING TO THEM.
A BUNCH OF THEM ARE AROUND THE FIRE REVIEW.
IF WE COULD MAKE SURE THAT THE TEAM AND FIRE IS COVERED BY
THESE COSTS --
9:35:50AM >>JC HUDGISON:
JC HUDGISON, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL.
THERE ARE TWO PIECES TO YOUR QUESTION THERE.
FOR THE EXPEDITE, YES.
IT'S IN THE SYSTEM TO BE DOUBLE THE FEE TO DO IT IN HALF THE
TIME.
HOWEVER, THE CONCERN THAT WAS JUST BROUGHT UP, BECAUSE WE
ARE THE ONE-STOP SHOP, I CAN EXPEDITE THE BUILDING SIDE BUT
THE OTHER PIECES, WHETHER IT'S FIRE OR OTHER PIECES,
STORMWATER, SOLID WASTE.
SO NOW IT GETS A LITTLE TRICKY BECAUSE WE COULD FINISH OUR
PART BUT DON'T TECHNICALLY GIVE YOU THE FULL REVIEW.
WE DON'T NECESSARILY PROMOTE IT AS MUCH AS WE SHOULD.
THERE ARE OPTIONS.
WE HAVE A LARGE SCALE PROJECT TEAM THAT DEALS WITH LARGER
PROJECTS AS WE GO THROUGH.
WE ALSO HAD TIERED PERMITS.
WE DIDN'T GET INTO THAT TOO MUCH.
THE BUILDING PERMIT, ALL INCLUSIVE, EVERYBODY LOOKS AT
EVERYTHING.

TIER BELOW, YOUR MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS.
SO THOSE DON'T TAKE AS LONG AND WE HAVE A PROJECT PROCESS
FOR THAT.
AND THEN TRADE PERMITS.
SOMEBODY COMING IN TO GET A HOT WATER HEATER, WE'VE
EXPEDITED THOSE AS FAST AS WE CAN.
THOSE ARE INSTANT ISSUANCE.
AS SOON AS THE CONTRACTOR COMES IN, LICENSED CONTRACTOR,
WANTS TO REPLACE A WATER HEATER AT SOMEBODY'S HOME, AS LONG
AS A LICENSED CONTRACTOR AND PAYS THE FEE, ISSUED.
AT THAT POINT IT IS ON THE INSPECTION.
SOME OF THE THINGS WE ALREADY SPED UP ABOUT AS FAST AS WE
CAN AND PRACTICAL AS WE CAN TO STILL MAKE SURE WE GET THE
REVIEWS.
9:37:06AM >>BILL CARLSON:
THE THING I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO DO IN
WORKING WITH THE CONSULTANTS, MY COLLEAGUE POINTED OUT THAT
OUR COSTS ARE LOWER THAN THE COUNTY AND OTHER CITIES, WHAT
YOU HAVE ON THIS CHART HERE, IT COULD BE THAT WE'RE JUST
MORE EFFICIENT AND THAT WE DON'T SPEND AS MUCH.
BUT THE OTHER THING IS THAT IF THERE ARE EXPEDITED SERVICES
OR WAYS TO IMPROVE CUSTOMER SERVICE, I WOULD ASK YOU ALL --
I KNOW YOU DO THIS ALREADY -- ASK YOU ALL TO TAKE ANOTHER
LOOK AT IT JUST TO SEE BECAUSE REAL ESTATE IS SO MUCH OF A
BIG PART OF OUR ECONOMIC ENGINE IN OUR AREA, HOW CAN WE MOVE
SOME OF THESE FASTER.

I WOULD LIKE TO GET EVERY DAY TEN COMPLIMENTS ON HOW AWESOME
THEY THINK YOU GUYS ARE.
WHEN YOU FIX THE PROBLEM, THEY THINK YOU ARE AWESOME.
IT'S AN ISSUE THAT'S BEEN WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
FOREVER.
IF WE COULD SOLVE THAT, BY RAISING THE RATES BY 20 CENTS AND
HAVE A TEAM THAT GETS THESE DONE FASTER, THAT WOULD REALLY
MAKE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY HAPPY.
I WONDER, MR. PERRY, COULD I CALL ON YOU REAL FAST?
IF WE DON'T RAISE THE RATES, CAN YOU TELL US WHO IS PAYING
FOR THIS?
WHERE THE MONEY IS COMING FROM TO COVER THE DEFICIT?
9:38:16AM >>MICHAEL PERRY:
MICHAEL PERRY, DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER.
ONCE THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FUND GOES NEGATIVE BALANCE,
PROBABLY HAVE TO COME FROM THE GENERAL FUND.
9:38:26AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC, TELL
WHERE -- WHO PAYS THAT?
9:38:31AM >>MICHAEL PERRY:
I'M SORRY, SIR.
9:38:32AM >>BILL CARLSON:
WHO PAYS THE GENERAL FUND?
9:38:35AM >>MICHAEL PERRY:
THE GENERAL FUND IS PRIMARILY PROPERTY
TAXES AND OTHER TAXES AND OTHER USER FEES.
9:38:40AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I THINK THE POINT IS THAT WHAT THE PUBLIC
WOULD LIKE IS FOR US TO BE FAIR.
IF SOMEBODY IS USING A SERVICE, WE CHARGE A FAIR AMOUNT FOR

THE SERVICE.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO MAKE A PROFIT.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CHARGE A FAIR AMOUNT FOR THE SERVICE.
WHAT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T WANT IS TO SUBSIDIZE SOMEBODY ELSE'S
SERVICES.
IF WE CAN HELP KEEP PROPERTY TAXES LOW, FOR EXAMPLE, BY
MAKING SURE WE'RE COVERING SOMEBODY ELSE'S COST, IF SOMEBODY
IS NOT USING A COST, THEY WOULD LIKE TO NOT PAY FOR IT, NOT
SUBSIDIZE SOMEBODY ELSE'S COST.
ANYWAY, THANK YOU.
9:39:10AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
9:39:11AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
SOMETHING CAUGHT MY EYE.
A LITTLE FIGURE THAT YOU HAD FOR AUTOMOBILE COSTS.
CAN YOU COME BACK WITH THAT FIGURE?
I KNOW IT IS A SMALL AMOUNT.
THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT QUESTION, IT IS A SMALL AMOUNT
WITHIN THE LARGER AMOUNT GOING IN OR PART OF.
MY ANSWER TO MYSELF, MY QUESTION TO MYSELF IS, WHICH I'M
POSING TO YOU NOW IS, IS THAT MONEY TAKEN AND PUT INTO A
SEPARATE ACCOUNT TO REPAIR -- TO REPLACE THE CAR?
IF IT IS A CAR CHARGING FOR, GOING --
9:39:48AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
AS JOE MENTIONED AND I'LL LET HIM JUMP, IN
THE ENHANCEMENT FUND THAT IS THE SURCHARGE ON THE PERMITS
PAYS FOR ALL THE TECHNOLOGY, CARS.

YOU'LL SEE IN THE YEARS WE BROUGHT BUDGETS TO YOU, AND THAT
SPEND DOWN OF THE ENHANCEMENT FUND, THAT DOES -- THAT IS THE
REPLACEMENT OF OUR CARS ON A REGULAR SCHEDULE.
WE ARE NOT UNDER FLEET.
WE ARE SEPARATE FROM THAT.
SO THE INSPECTORS, THAT ALL COMES OUT OF ENHANCEMENT FUND,
AND THERE IS A PLAN FOR REPLACEMENT.
9:40:17AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
DOES IT GO INTO A SEPARATE ACCOUNT FOR
TECHNOLOGY, WHATEVER THAT YOU ARE USING THAT YOU HAVE TO
REPLACE.
AT THE TIME YOU REPLACE, YOU ALREADY HAVE THE CASH GOING IN?
9:40:27AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
YES.
9:40:28AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
YOU HAVE THAT.
9:40:29AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
YES.
THAT IS HOW WE HAVE DONE IT.
WE HAVE REPLACED ALL OF OUR VEHICLES.
WE'VE REPLACED ALL OF OUR VEHICLES NOW, AND NOW WE'RE ON A
REGULAR SCHEDULE FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT AS
WELL AS ALL OF OUR COMPUTERS.
THAT'S ALL PAID FOR THAT SEPARATE FUND.
9:40:45AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NOW, THAT MEANS NOW FORWARD, OR HAD IT IN
THE PAST.
9:40:50AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
WE'VE HAD IT.
9:40:51AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO TO GENERAL FUND OR
ANY ACCOUNT TO BUY A CAR.

YOU BUY IT FROM THAT FUND.
9:40:57AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
THAT IS CORRECT.
THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO ADD TO THAT, WE'VE EVEN
DECREASED THAT COST BECAUSE WE'VE NOW GONE TO VIRTUAL
INSPECTION.
ON MANY OF THE SAME-DAY TRADE PERMITS, THE AC -- I'M SORRY,
ROOF, HOT WATER CHANGE-OUT, WE HAVE SOMEONE DEDICATED TO DO
VIRTUAL INSPECTIONS ON THEM EVERY 15 MINUTES TO HALF AN
HOUR, THEY PLUG OUT VIRTUAL INSPECTIONS ALL DAY.
THEY DON'T USE A CAR.
THEY DON'T GO OUT IN THE FIELD.
THEY ARE AT HANNA AND THEY DO ALL OF THAT VIRTUALLY.
WE'VE CONTINUED TO USE TECHNOLOGY TO TRY TO MAKE
IMPROVEMENTS AND COST SAVINGS IN THOSE AREAS.
9:41:29AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
ONE MORE QUESTION.
SO THEN IN LOGIC WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS CREATING SOMETHING
LIKE, WE HAVE A WATER, WASTEWATER, SOLID WASTE, AND PARKING.
YOU'RE PRODUCING YOUR MONEY TO CARRY --
9:41:41AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
CORRECT.
THAT ENHANCEMENT, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE THAT UP UNTIL JUST
A -- IN THE LAST TWO YEARS WHERE WE STARTED TO DIP AND HAD
TO THEN RELY ON THE GENERAL FUND BECAUSE, AND THIS YEAR, JC
ACTUALLY I THINK CUT CLOSE TO $2 MILLION FROM HIS BUDGET,
BECAUSE OF THE PERMIT ACTIVITY AND BECAUSE OF THE RESERVE WE
HAD FOR SO LONG.

WHEN JC CAME ON IN 2020 AND I CAME BACK TO THE CITY IN 2020,
THAT RESERVE WAS HIGH.
THAT'S WHERE WE GOT ON THE REGULAR SCHEDULE FOR VEHICLES.
WE GOT ON THE REGULAR SCHEDULE FOR COMPUTERS.
WE MADE THOSE CHANGES AND ENHANCEMENTS, GOT EVERYTHING AND
SPENT DOWN BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO CARRY SO MUCH FROM
THE STATE, WE HAVE TO KIND OF BE WITHIN THOSE GUIDELINES AS
WELL.
9:42:32AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THANK YOU.
I KNOW YOU HAVE A DIFFICULT POSITION, DIFFICULT JOB.
WHEN YOU LOSE SOMEBODY FROM THAT DIVISION, VERY DIFFICULT TO
REPLACE.
9:42:39AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
TALENT RECRUITMENT IS CHALLENGING, YES.
9:42:44AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU, MS. FEELEY.
QUESTION FOR YOU.
DON'T GO FAR.
THE ISSUE THAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON BROUGHT UP AND GETTING
SOME OF THE STUFF, THINGS WE HEAR.
YOU HAVE THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY
WITHIN YOUR CONTROL.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO SIGN AN INTERDEPARTMENT MOU BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENTS SO THEY CLEARLY UNDERSTAND, LIKE WITH THE FIRE
ISSUE, APPLICANT IS GOING THROUGH THE EXPEDITED PROCESS THAT
THAT WOULD BIND FIRE TO THAT AS WELL?
9:43:13AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
FROM WHAT I SEE, WE RUN INTO ROADBLOCKS

SOMETIMES.
I WOULD SAY UTILITIES, AND I CAN TELL YOU, JC, ERIC AND I
HAVE RECENTLY MET WITH BRAD, BRANDON, YUAN, CONTINUING TO
LOOK AT PROCESS IMPROVEMENT.
HOW DO WE ENSURE THINGS?
WE TALKED ABOUT INTEGRATING THE UTL BACK INTO THE BLD TO
MAKE THINGS MORE SEAMLESS.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GET A UTILITY COMMITMENT, THE UTL IS A
UTILITY COMMITMENT, BEFORE YOU GO IN TO GET YOUR PERMIT ON A
LOT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO WE CONTINUE TO LOOK AT PROCESS IMPROVEMENT.
I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT -- WE CAN TALK TO CHIEF TRIPP
AND WE COULD SEE, BECAUSE THAT FALLS UNDER THE FIRE
MARSHAL'S OFFICE.
9:43:59AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ALL THOSE LINES OF BUSINESS, IF YOU GUYS
HAD AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, SO YOU HAVE COMMON LANGUAGE
THAT YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN A SYSTEM IS MOVING THROUGH
THAT PROCESS, THAT EVERYBODY IS MOVING THROUGH THE SAME
PROCESS.
9:44:11AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I WOULD TELL YOU, OUR COMMON PROCESSES, ALL
ON THE SECOND FLOOR AT HANNA.
WHEN SOMETHING COMES IN, JC'S TEAM WALKS DOWN TO THE FIRE
TEAM.
WE WORK TOGETHER.
ST. JOE'S WAS JUST IN.

WE SAY, HEY, GUYS, WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER TO GET THIS STUFF
OUT THE DOOR.
WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE?
CAN WE MAKE -- YOU KNOW, IT IS A MINDSET BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE
ARE LIKE, WELL, I'M DOING IT THE WAY IT CAME IN THE SYSTEM.
IT'S LIKE, WELL, WE'VE GOT TO DO WHAT IS BEST FOR OUR CITY
AND WORK TOGETHER.
I THINK NORMALIZING THAT WE COULD STILL TALK ABOUT THAT, BUT
I DO THINK IT'S PART OF CAPACITY.
IT'S PART OF CAPACITY MATTER.
9:44:46AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH, BECAUSE ALL OF THE FEW TIMES -- IT'S
BEEN A HANG-UP SOMEWHERE ELSE.
IF WE WERE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING
THERE.
IF WE COULD FIGURE OUT A PROCESS THAT EVERYBODY IS SPEAKING
THE SAME LANGUAGE.
IF EVERYTHING IS, YOU KNOW, GOLD TAGGED OR SOMETHING, THEY
KNOW THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS A PRIORITY PROJECT THEY
HAVE TO MOVE THROUGH IT AND GET IT DONE, HAVE THAT EXPEDITED
SERVICE, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK'S POINTS ON THE AFFORDABLE, THANK YOU
FOR THROWING OUT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
THEY DO SUCH A GREAT JOB.
BEING ABLE TO FIT THE FEE STRUCTURE FOR AN ORGANIZATION LIKE
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AND ESPECIALLY THOSE THIRD PARTIES THAT

HAVE A PROCESS OF THE SURETY THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, ABOUT
POST-OCCUPANCY AND ALL THOSE.
I THINK THAT REALLY HELPS.
CLASSIFICATION AS A PROVIDER, I THINK THAT WOULD BE REALLY,
REALLY HELPFUL.
YEAH, NO, I APPRECIATE THE DIRECTION YOU GUYS ARE GOING WITH
THOSE TWO CAVEATS, IF WE COULD FIX THAT WITH A COMMON
PROCEDURE THAT CUTS ACROSS BUSINESS LINES WITHIN THE CITY
AND BEING ABLE TO INCENTIVIZE THE BOTTOM TIER VERSUS
INCENTIVIZING THE TOP TIER.
BOTH POINTS WELL TAKEN.
COUNCILMAN CARLSON, I SEE YOUR LIGHT IS BACK ON.
9:46:03AM >>BILL CARLSON:
COULD I ADD IN?
A MINUTE AGO WE TALKED ABOUT FIRE'S INVOLVEMENT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, IT'S NOT AN ENTERPRISE FUND, BUT IF YOU
LOOK AT IT LIKE A BUSINESS, YOU ALSO MENTIONED STORMWATER
AND SOME OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
MAYBE YOU ARE DOING THIS ALREADY, BUT WE SHOULD LOOK AT THIS
AS A LARGER SERVICE POOL.
ONE OF THE WAYS TO GET DEPARTMENT COOPERATION IS FINANCIAL
INCENTIVES.
IF, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'RE NOT DOING ANY COST RECOVERY AT FIRE
AND IF THEY COULD -- IF THERE'S, FOR EXAMPLE, I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE NUMBER IS, 200,000 OR 500,000 A YEAR IN COST
RECOVERY THAT WE COULD PUT INTO THIS RATE, THAT'S MONEY THEY

COULD SPEND ON NEW EQUIPMENT FOR FIREFIGHTERS.
SAME THING WITH STORMWATER.
IF THERE ARE SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND OF ADDITIONAL
MAINTENANCE THAT THEY COULD DO BECAUSE WE'RE DOING COST
RECOVERY ON THIS, THAT COULD BE HELPFUL.
THEN AN INCENTIVE BUILT IN FOR WHOEVER IS THE HEAD OF THE
DEPARTMENT.
BECAUSE THE MORE COST RECOVERY THEY CAN DO, THE MORE
SERVICES THEY CAN PROVIDE YOU.
HAVE TO HAVE CHECKS AND BALANCES.
IT WOULD ALLOW THEM MORE SERVICES SO THEY CAN IMPROVE THEIR
NUMBERS AND EFFICIENCY IN THEIR MAIN LINE OF BUSINESS.
9:47:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THIS MAY NOT BE SOMETHING FOR YOU ALL.
MAYBE FOR JC OR SOMEBODY ELSE.
THE DIY PROJECTS, AND YOU TALK ABOUT HOT WATER HEATERS.
SEEMS FUNNY TO ME THAT IN 2027 WE ARE EVEN TALKING ABOUT
PERMIT FEES FOR HOT WATER HEATERS SINCE NOBODY IS PULLING
PERMITS FOR HOT WATER REPLACEMENTS.
WE'RE GOING TO HOME DEPOT AND BUYING OUR OWN WATER HEATERS
AND PUTTING THEM IN.
WHO IS LOOKING AT THESE THINGS IN 2027, IS THIS SOMETHING
THAT WE REALLY SHOULD BE DOING?
9:47:51AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I WILL LET THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL OF
THE YEAR FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
9:48:00AM >>JC HUDGISON:
SO WE DEAL WITH THAT A LOT.

WE HAVE OUR OWNER PERMITS WHICH ALLOW THE OWNERS TO DO THAT
WORK.
TO YOUR POINT, OKAY, THAT OWNER COMES IN, DOES THAT WORK
THEMSELVES.
THEY SELL THAT PROPERTY IN FIVE YEARS.
THAT NEXT OWNER COMES IN THAT OWNS THAT PROPERTY.
WATER HEATER BURSTS.
INSURANCE CLAIMS.
CALL AND SAY, WHO PULLED THE PERMIT?
ANY WAY TO CLAIM AND GET THAT MONEY BACK?
FOR US, ANY MODIFICATION TO A STRUCTURE REQUIRES A PERMIT.
THERE ARE CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS UNDER CERTAIN SIZES, CERTAIN
FLATWORK IN YOUR YARD, THINGS LIKE THAT.
ANY MODIFICATION TO A STRUCTURE SHOULD HAVE A PERMIT.
WE DO TAKE OUT THE PLAN REVIEW SIDE.
FOR A HOT WATER HEATER, WE'RE NOT REVIEWING THE PLANS FOR
THAT.
INSTALL IT, STAFF COMES OUT, PLUMBING FINAL, GAS FINAL.
THAT'S IT.
AC CONDENSER CHANGE-OUT.
NO PLAN REVIEW, STRAIGHT TO INSPECTIONS.
STAFF JUST WANTS TO PUT THEIR EYES ON IT.
MAKE SURE IT IS DONE CORRECTLY.
TO YOUR POINT I UNDERSTAND.
BUT ALSO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE SAFETY OF THE CURRENT

OWNER THAT'S DOING THE WORK THAT MAY NOT KNOW HOW TO DO IT,
BUT FOR THE FUTURE OWNERS THAT WILL ALSO OCCUPY THAT
STRUCTURE AND MAKE SURE IT IS DONE CORRECTLY.
9:49:04AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I GET GAS.
I DO GET GAS BECAUSE OF THE LIABILITIES FOR GAS.
ELECTRICAL, SUCH A GREAT EXAMPLE OF A HOT WATER HEATER.
IT LITERALLY IS PUTTING THREADS ON THE THING -- NYLON
THREADS AND PLUGGING IT IN.
GO AHEAD, YEAH.
9:49:25AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I THINK YOU OVERESTIMATE.
I THINK OUR GENERATION MIGHT BE ONE OF THE LAST THAT KIND OF
DOES THAT STUFF THEMSELVES.
JUST GOING TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.
I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE NOW ARE PAYING TO GET IT DONE.
I AM SHOCKED AT THE AMOUNT OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE PAY FOR.
9:49:41AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'M PITCHING FOR THE FOLKS THAT GO TO HOME
DEPOT AND LOWE'S.
9:49:46AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I AGREE.
I'M SAYING, I AM SHOCKED AT THE THINGS PEOPLE WON'T DO
THEMSELVES.
9:49:50AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE ATTIC STAIRWELL.
THE LADDER BROKE AND NEED TO REPLACE THE STAIRS, DOES THAT
REQUIRE A PERMIT?
9:50:02AM >> NO.
THAT IS A REPAIR.

IDEALLY, YOU ARE REPAIRING THE LADDER.
9:50:06AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'M REPLACING IT WITH A NEW SET OF STAIRS.
9:50:09AM >> IF YOU ARE REPLACING WITH A NEW SET OF STAIRS BUILT INTO
THE SAME THING, NO, YOU WOULDN'T NEED A PERMIT.
THAT'S WHY I SAID, THERE ARE CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS FOR
ELECTRICAL SOCKET REPLACEMENT.
9:50:20AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT I'M DOING
AGAINST THE LAW AND WHAT I'M DOING LEGALLY.
9:50:24AM >>JC HUDGISON:
I CAN SEND YOU THE FULL LIST.
FOR ELECTRICAL SOCKET REPLACEMENT, ANY INDIVIDUAL
RECEPTACLE, YES, YOU CAN GO TO HOME DEPOT BECAUSE YOU'RE
RETYING THAT INTO THE EXISTING SYSTEM.
IF YOU ARE DOING WIRING BACK TO THE MAIN PANEL BOX, NOW YOU
NEED A PERMIT.
9:50:40AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I CAN CHANGE OUT A PLUG BUT CAN'T RUN THE
HOME WIRE.
9:50:44AM >>JC HUDGISON:
REPLACING CEILING FAN, REPLACING FAN, GOING
IN THE SAME PLACE, THOSE KIND OF THINGS YOU DON'T NEED A
PERMIT FOR.
THERE IS A LIST.
IDEALLY ONCE YOU START TO GET INTO THE BIGGER SYSTEMS --
9:50:55AM >> THE HOT WATER HEATER THROWS ME OFF.
IT IS A PLUG AND PLAY.
FAIRLY SIMPLE.
I'M DONE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCLOSE ANY STUFF YOU'VE DONE WITHOUT
PERMITS?
9:51:10AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
MY CURIOSITY, WHEN YOU'RE DOING THESE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOU'RE CHARGING FOR THE SIDEWALK.
HOW CAN IT BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHEN THEY HAVE TO PAY $290
A FOOT TO PUT THE SIDEWALK IN?
THEN THEY HAVE TO PAY THE HOUSE INSURANCE AND THE TAXES ON
THE HOUSE.
THERE IS NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
9:51:28AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THIS IS NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE --
9:51:30AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I KNOW.
THERE IS NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
TO WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
9:51:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BASEBALL.
9:51:37AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I UNDERSTAND.
[INAUDIBLE]
[ LAUGHTER ]
9:51:40AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.
WHY DON'T WE FINISH THE PRESENTATION.
9:51:44AM >>BILL CARLSON:
YOU MENTIONED A COUPLE OF CHAIN STORES.
THE CHAIN STORES EMPLOY LOCALS AND THAT'S GREAT AND USE
SUBCONTRACTORS BUT WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF GREAT INDEPENDENT
ENTREPRENEURS THAT WE SHOULD SUPPORT.
FAMOUS TATE IS ONE AND A BUNCH OF OTHERS.
FUN GOING TO A LOCAL STORE AND SEEING THE FLEXIBILITY THEY

HAVE IN DELIVERING THINGS AND GETTING THEM PUT IN.
9:52:03AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.
CONTINUE.
9:52:07AM >>MICHAEL PERRY:
MIKE PERRY.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR 2026, NO
GENERAL FUND MONEY WILL BE GIVEN TO THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICE
DIVISION.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE MAKE THAT VERY PLAIN AND CLEAR
TO EVERYBODY.
9:52:21AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WHAT ABOUT THE NEXT YEAR, '27?
9:52:23AM >>MICHAEL PERRY:
IT'S PROJECTED.
BUT AGAIN, WHAT IS HAPPENING, JC -- AND HE'S DONE A GOOD JOB
ON THE '27 BUDGET.
HE'S REDUCED HIS BUDGET.
REDUCED HEAD COUNT.
THE BUDGET IS FULLY LOADED BUT HE MANAGES DURING THE YEAR TO
KEEP HIS EXPENSES LOW.
SO IT DECREASES THE IMPACT ON THE FUND BALANCE.
9:52:43AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
9:52:45AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I'M GOING TO BE CLEAR.
I DON'T LIKE TO HEAR THAT HE'S REDUCING HIS HEAD COUNT
BECAUSE JUST ONE, BUT STILL, LIKE, THOSE ARE AREAS WHERE WE
STILL HAD SOME MONEY -- I KNOW WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THIS
IN OCTOBER.
THIS IS NOW ON MY LIST OF THINGS TO TALK ABOUT.

THIS IS A DEPARTMENT WHERE WE'RE CONSTANTLY HEARING YOU NEED
MORE PEOPLE.
EVEN IF IT'S JUST ONE HEAD COUNT, WE CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT.
I KNOW, I KNOW.
THIS IS NOT A DEPARTMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE REDUCING COSTS.
9:53:19AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I JUST WANT TO MENTION --
9:53:21AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ABBYE FEELEY.
9:53:22AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
SORRY, ABBYE FEELEY.
ONE OF OUR ASSISTANT BUILDING OFFICIALS RETIRE AFTER 43
YEARS.
HE WAS HANDLING TWO DUTIES.
HE WAS THE ASSISTANT BUILDING OFFICIAL AND HE WAS THE
FLOODPLAIN MANAGER.
WE TOOK THAT POSITION, BROKE IT INTO TWO.
NOW A DEDICATED FLOODPLAIN MANAGER.
DEDICATED ASSISTANT BUILDING -- SO WE OFFSET THESE BY ALSO
PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH WITH OUR
ACCREDITATION WHICH IS ALSO RUNNING WITH THIS AS WELL.
WE TRIED TO BE EXTREMELY MINDFUL OF THAT IN DELIVERING THE
SERVICE.
WE'VE GONE FROM TEAMS THAT WOULD LOOK AT COMMERCIAL
PROJECTS, RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS AND TENANT IMPROVEMENT.
WE'VE BROKEN THAT ALL UP NOW.
RESIDENTIAL TEAM, COMMERCIAL TEAM.
TOLD YOU ABOUT TENANT IMPROVEMENT.

JC CONTINUALLY LOOKS AT WHERE CAN WE BE FISCALLY
RESPONSIBLE, WHERE CAN WE MAKE THE PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS AND
GO FROM THERE AS WELL?
IT WAS ONE FTE.
9:54:21AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'VE GOT TO EXPEDITE THIS PROCESS BECAUSE
I HAVE TO GET HOME AND CHANGE OUT MY HOT WATER HEATER.
COULD YOU FINISH WITH THE PROCESS?
9:54:28AM >>JOE WILLIAMS:
YES, THANK YOU.
TO REITERATE, GREAT DISCUSSION.
WE'VE HAD GREAT DISCUSSIONS LIKE THIS WITH STAFF THROUGHOUT
THE PROCESS.
THEY REALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
WE FEEL REALLY CONFIDENT IN THE TIME ESTIMATES AND
EVERYTHING THAT'S GONE INTO DEVELOPING THE FEES BECAUSE THEY
ARE ALL REALLY ENGAGED AND REALLY KNOWLEDGEABLE.
IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE PRESENTATION.
PERFECT.
I'M GOING TO JUMP TO DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION REALLY, THE
HIGH-LEVEL INTRODUCTION HERE, THESE ARE TYPICALLY PROCESSES
HAPPENING BEFORE THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS.
THESE FEES HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR A LONG TIME.
LOOK AT MY QUICK CHEAT SHEET HERE TO GIVE YOU AN ESTIMATED
TIME FRAME.
2006.
ABOUT 20 YEARS AT THIS POINT.

AGAIN, THIS IS ERIC'S DEPARTMENT, 29 FTEs, ALMOST A $5
MILLION BUDGET.
HERE WE GO.
A FEW EXAMPLES.
YOU CAN GET A FEEL FOR THE TYPES OF THINGS THEY ARE DOING.
THE REPORT HAS THE FULL FEE LIST.
SITE PLAN DISTRICTS, DEs, DESIGN EXCEPTIONS, PROBABLY HEAR
ABOUT THOSE ALL THE TIME.
SO A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THEY DO.
THIS IS NOT A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND.
MORE OF A FUND WITHIN THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT.
SO THE APPROACH WE TOOK WAS NOT NECESSARILY FORECASTING
REVENUES FOR THE DEPARTMENT AS MUCH, BUT REALLY DIVING INTO
EVERY SINGLE FEE, EVERY SINGLE PERMIT OR SERVICE THAT THEY
ADMINISTER THAT HAS A FEE TIED TO IT AND REALLY FULLY
LOADING AND BUILDING UP THOSE COSTS WITH THE RIGHT OVERHEAD
THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR DEPARTMENT, THE SPECIFIC STAFF THAT
THEY HAVE EMPLOYED.
IF THEY USE ANY VEHICLES, NOT AS HEAVILY RELIANT ON
INSPECTION ACTIVITIES.
AGAIN, WIDE RANGE OF RESULTS 20 YEARS LATER.
WE'RE JUST SHOWING YOU ON THIS SLIDE, THE FIRST PHASE OF A
LOT OF THESE FEES.
AND A LOT OF THEM ARE REFLECTED AS AN EQUAL INCREASE OVER
THREE YEARS.

SO THE EXAMPLE FOR THE SITE PLAN DISTRICT, $2,600 NOW.
$3,600 ON THE FIRST PHASE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCHEDULE, IT WOULD BE PRETTY SIMILAR
INCREASES FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS AFTER THAT ON THAT
TYPE OF SERVICE.
WE DO HAVE A FEW EXAMPLES.
SO A VARIANCE, AGAIN, THIS IS BASED ON TIME THAT IT TAKES
STAFF AND THE TOTAL COST OF THE DEPARTMENT.
THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT PROCESSES IN OTHER PLACES.
THERE MAY BE DIFFERENT LOCAL ORDINANCES, THINGS THAT REQUIRE
MORE EFFORT, POTENTIALLY.
SO WE'RE STILL VERY -- VERY COMPETITIVE ON THE SCALE OF FEES
THAT WE HAVE FOR VARIANCE, AND A PD, WHICH IS THE LARGER
TYPE OF PROJECT.
AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE WE ARE INCREASING AND WE DO EXPECT TO
INCREASE OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS AS WELL, ABOVE THIS
POINT, BUT EVEN IF WE WERE AT SORT OF THAT 5,000, 5500
LEVEL, STILL WITHIN RANGE OF WHAT OTHERS ARE CHARGING RIGHT
NOW.
AGAIN, CONSTRUCTION SERVICES WAS MORE OF THE BIGGER INITIAL
PRESENTATION EFFORT BECAUSE THEY ARE A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND.
THERE'S MORE CONSIDERATION THERE ON HAVING RESERVES AND
HAVING FULL REVENUE SUFFICIENCY ESTABLISHED.
THESE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, WE PUT A LOT OF WORK AND THERE ARE
A LOT OF FEES THAT GO INTO THEM.

BUT FOR THIS PRESENTATION WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW OF THE
EXAMPLES AND TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE
DEPARTMENTS DO.
THIS IS DENNIS' DEPARTMENT.
THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
HIS FEES DATE BACK TO 2001 -- 2000.
2000.
EVEN A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
AGAIN, THESE ARE REALLY THOSE COUPLE OF AREAS THROUGHOUT THE
CITY THAT HAVE THE ADDITIONAL OVERLAY DISTRICTS, REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL REVIEWS TO MEET THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS IN
THOSE DISTRICTS THAT ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE TYPICAL
BUILDING CODE OR OTHER CODES THAT YOU HAVE.
HE HAS SEVEN FTEs, ABOUT A MILLION DOLLAR ANNUAL BUDGET.
AGAIN, THIS DATES ALL THE WAY BACK 26 YEARS AGO, SO WE HAVE
FEES THAT ARE FAIRLY OLD, NOT RECOVERING THE COST OF
PROVIDING SERVICE RIGHT NOW.
IF WE ARE DOING NEW CONSTRUCTION, FIRST PHASE IS GOING FROM
THAT $250 UP TO ABOUT A THOUSAND DOLLARS.
THESE ARE THE CALCULATED COSTS.
THESE ARE GENERAL FUND DIVISION, SO, AGAIN, THERE IS
LATITUDE ON WHERE YOU ULTIMATELY SET THE FEES.
IT'S JUST A TRADE-OFF BETWEEN FULL COST RECOVERY ON THE
APPLICANTS WHO ARE SUBMITTING AND HAVING STAFF TIME INVOLVED
IN THESE VERSUS USING OTHER FUNDING SOURCES TO OFFSET IT.

THIS ONE, WE TALKED WITH DENNIS ABOUT COMPARISONS.
THERE IS A LOT OF VARIATION THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND NOT
QUITE AS MANY OF THESE TO COMPARE TO.
SO WE DIDN'T PROVIDE COMPARISONS SPECIFICALLY ON THESE.
THESE ARE GOING TO BE BASED ON THE ACTUAL COSTS THAT WE'VE
IDENTIFIED WITH HIS DEPARTMENT.
THE CITY CLERK HAS A FEW FEES, PETITIONS FOR REVIEWS.
REALLY, ONCE WE GET INTO THIS POINT WHERE THE DEPARTMENTS
HAVE MADE DETERMINATIONS, GIVEN THEIR OPINIONS ON THINGS AND
THEN IT GETS CHALLENGED, BROUGHT BACK TO EITHER THE
DEPARTMENT OR THE COUNCIL.
BETWEEN LEGAL AND THE DIVISION HEADS, DEPARTMENT HEADS,
THERE IS A LOT OF TIME THAT GOES INTO ADDITIONAL RESEARCH,
PREPARING STAFF REPORTS, PREPARING DOCUMENTATION, HAVING
MEETINGS, ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE NECESSARY.
SOME OF THESE DO INCREASE.
THE COST INVOLVED IS SIGNIFICANT COMPARED TO THE CURRENT
FEES.
AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE THAT THESE ARE GENERAL GOVERNMENT
FEES.
THEY DO GENERATE GENERAL REVENUES THAT GO INTO THE BUDGET.
BUT THESE ARE THE COSTS OF WHAT KIND OF BEHIND THOSE EFFORTS
WHEN THESE DIFFERENT PETITIONS ARE BROUGHT FORWARD.
ONE IN PARTICULAR IS THE BARRIO LATINO COMMISSION.
IF THERE IS A DECISION MADE THERE AND IT GETS PETITIONED OR

APPEALED, CURRENTLY ONLY A $50 FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
REALLY, IT'S COSTING THE CITY BETWEEN LEGAL AND DEPARTMENT
HEADS, CLOSE TO $4,000 OF TIME GOING INTO THAT.
THAT IS A CONSIDERATION MOVING FORWARD.
MOBILITY RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO THIS ONE, AGAIN, THIS WAS REALLY
FOCUSED ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OF ADMINISTERING THESE
DIFFERENT FEES.
WE DID HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENT EARLY ON
ABOUT POTENTIALLY GETTING SIGNIFICANTLY MORE INVOLVED ON
SOME OF THESE FEE CALCULATIONS, LIKE IF YOU'RE CLOSING DOWN
A ROAD OR A SIDEWALK FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, ARE THERE
ADDITIONAL COSTS RELATED TO THE INCONVENIENCE OR THE USE OF
THOSE FACILITIES?
WE DIDN'T END UP GOING THERE IN THIS STUDY.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT BEYOND OUR SCOPE AND EXPERTISE FOR
DESIGNING THOSE TYPES OF FEES.
SO WE FOCUSED ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE RELATED COSTS.
PERSONNEL, BENEFITS, OVERHEAD OF RUNNING THE DEPARTMENT, ANY
USE OF VEHICLES THAT THEY HAVE.
AGAIN, IF THERE ARE LANE CLOSURES OR PUTTING A PERMANENT
STRUCTURE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, IF YOU ARE USING A SIDEWALK.
SO THESE ARE THE FEE CALCULATIONS, AGAIN, RANGE OF IMPACTS.
SOME APPEAR TO BE LARGER CHANGES, BUT JUST LOOKING AT THE
LIST, THERE'S STAFF TIME THAT'S INVOLVED AND STAFF COSTS
HAVE INCREASED.

BEST INFORMATION WE HAVE, THESE ARE FROM ABOUT 2006 WAS THE
LAST UPDATE ON THESE FEES, SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE FEE
STRUCTURE FOR MOBILITY.
IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME.
THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES TO THE PROCESSES, HOW THESE
ARE ADMINISTERED.
SO THAT'S THE PRESENTATION ON THE FEES.
ABBYE INTRODUCED EARLIER, I THINK SHE'LL COME UP AND SAY IT
AGAIN FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT, BUT THERE'S MORE MEETINGS TO
BE HAD, MORE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN POSTED AND AVAILABLE.
THIS IS OUR PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATION.
10:03:52AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
THANKS, JOE.
ABBYE FEELEY.
THIS IS A HARD CONVERSATION, RIGHT?
WE HAVEN'T UPDATED FEES IN A LONG TIME.
THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS, AS YOU KNOW, RETAINING GOOD
TALENT, GETTING PEOPLE IN, WE HAVE 3,000 OPEN PERMITS AT ALL
TIME IN JC'S SHOP WITH CLOSE TO 20 SOME THOUSAND PROCESSED A
YEAR.
YOU SEE THE WORK THAT ERIC'S TEAM DOES WITH BRINGING YOU --
THEY WILL BE HERE TONIGHT WITH THE REZONING REPORTS, THE
VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD, THE BARRIO LATINO COMMISSION, THE
ARC, THE HPC, THESE ARE ALL THE BOARDS THAT ARE RUNNING WITH
THE WORK COMING OUT OF CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AND THE
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION TEAM WHICH THEN FEEDS THE ECONOMY

OF THE CITY AS NEW DEVELOPMENT COMES ONLINE, NEW PEOPLE MOVE
INTO HOMES.
AS JOE SAID, WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY WAS THE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME OUT OF THE STUDY, WHAT IT COSTS TO
DO THE WORK.
IN ADDITION TO SOME LEVEL SETTING THAT WAS DONE BY STAFF,
ONE OF THE THINGS, ALL TRADE PERMITS STAY AT $155, EVEN
THOUGH IT SHOWED CERTAIN THINGS SHOULD GO UP.
VARIANCES, SOME ADJUSTMENTS WERE MADE.
WE FELT IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO SHOW YOU WHERE WE
ARE COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES AND WHAT THEY ARE CHARGING.
I KNOW A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WHEN THE COUNTY WENT UP TO
MAKE THEIR PD $10,000, PEOPLE WERE LIKE, OH, MY GOSH, THERE
WILL BE NO MORE DEVELOPMENT.
BUT REALLY, MAKING SURE THAT THE FEES ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING.
SO I THINK WE'RE NOT PROPOSING FULL COST RECOVERY TO YOU
TODAY.
WE'RE PROVIDING YOU WITH WHAT CAME OUT OF THE STUDY.
WE DID NOT BRING A FEE RESOLUTION TODAY.
WE WANT TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS ON THIS.
AND HOW THAT WILL GO.
AS I MENTIONED, WHEN WE STARTED, WE WILL HAVE A PUBLIC
MEETING AT HANNA OCTOBER 21st, I THINK IT'S 6 P.M.
ONE OF THEM IS 6 P.M. -- IT MAY BE 6:30.

IT'S ON THE FEE STUDY PAGE.
WE CONTINUE COMMUNICATION.
I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE TODAY WHO HAVE RECEIVED OUR
COMMUNICATION ON THAT.
WE DO HAVE THE WEBSITE THAT IS UP AND RUNNING, AND WHAT WE
WOULD LIKE TO DO IS SEE HOW WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU WITH A
FEE RESOLUTION NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER, LOOKING AT A MARCH
1st EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FEES THAT ARE DECIDED ON FOR THE
FIRST YEAR.
JUST TO RECAP A LITTLE BIT ABOUT JC'S FEES WOULD BE
FIVE-YEAR PROGRESSION, AND THAT FEE SCHEDULE WAS PROVIDED IN
THE BACKGROUND MATERIALS TODAY.
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THAT IS A
THREE-YEAR APPROXIMATELY 15 PERCENT A YEAR ON THAT THREE
YEAR FOR THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.
WITH THAT, WE ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS OR TAKE ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK, DIRECTION, HERE TODAY
WITH YOU.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION THIS MORNING.
10:06:46AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
10:06:48AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THANK YOU.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE PD?
10:06:57AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
IF I CAN JUMP IN BEFORE YOU ASK YOUR
QUESTION ON THAT, ONE THING I FOUND INTERESTING, PD FOR
GASWORX AND PD FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY ARE TREATED THE SAME IN

OUR SYSTEM.
THE AMOUNT OF WORK VARIES GREATLY WHEN THOSE COME IN.
10:07:11AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WELL, WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT THE COST
FOR A PD, I BELIEVE OUR CHAIR WOULD AGREE, SHOULD BE HIGH.
10:07:23AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE THE NOTE RIGHT HERE.
[ LAUGHTER ]
10:07:25AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
IT'S GOOD TO BE HIGHER BECAUSE WE REALLY WANT
TO DISINCENTIVIZE PDs.
NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT WE WILL ONCE WE HAVE OUR NEW LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE WHOLE GOAL IS DISINCENTIVIZE PDs SO
PEOPLE USE THE BASE ZONING BECAUSE THAT'S WHY WE'RE REDOING
OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THAT MIGHT NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WE CHANGE NOW AND MAKE
HIGHER, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING I REALLY WANT TO BE HIGH TO
DISINCENTIVIZE PDs ONCE WE PASS OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
NOW I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD REALLY MESS WITH IT TOO MUCH.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS GOING UP A THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
I THINK THAT IS LOW PERSONALLY.
AGAIN, FOR WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN THE CITY.
AFTER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE SHOULD PROBABLY KEEP IT
MORE STAYED.
MY BIG CONCERN, THOUGH, IF YOU CAN GO TO THE REVIEW COSTS,
YOU ALL KNEW THIS WAS COMING.
PETITION FOR REVIEW, WE NORMALLY GET -- THE FOLKS THAT ARE

PETITIONING FOR REVIEW TEND TO BE NEIGHBORS, TEND TO BE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT CANNOT AFFORD $4,000.
SO I KIND OF WANT TO LOOK AT -- I JUST DON'T SEE GOING FROM
$271 TO $4,000 AS BEING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE
REASONABLE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER LOOKS LIKE.
BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THAT PUBLIC MEETING AND WHEN YOU'RE
PUTTING STUFF OUT, THIS IS ONE OF THE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS I
WANT YOU TO ASK, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES IT'S PEOPLE COMING IN
TRYING TO -- THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD OR
THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S BEING DEVELOPED NEXT DOOR.
WE NEED TO MAKE THAT REASONABLE AND REACHABLE, EVEN IF
THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO EAT, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
10:09:18AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S INTERESTING.
THE TWO THINGS I WROTE DOWN WAS PD AND PETITION FOR REVIEW,
HISTORIC.
THOSE WERE THE TWO THINGS THAT I IDENTIFIED AS WELL.
I GET IT.
I'M NOT ON THE INCENTIVIZE, DISINCENTIVIZE.
THIS IS COST RECOVERY, FOR ACTUALLY COST TO THE CITY FOR
DOING THESE THINGS.
IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SUBSIDIZING, WE CAN CHOOSE WHAT WE'RE
SUBSIDIZING AND NOT SUBSIDIZING.
THE PETITION FOR REVIEW, BECAUSE OF GENERALLY THE FOLKS THAT

USE THAT PROCESS, IT SHOULDN'T BE SO COST PROHIBITIVE THAT
WOULD SO PENALIZE THE AVERAGE CITIZEN FOR POSITIVELY TRYING
TO IMPACT THEIR COMMUNITY.
ON THE PD THING, DITTO.
I LOVE THE EUCLIDEAN STUFF SHOULD BE EASY AND LOW COST.
PDs SHOULD BE MORE BURDENSOME AND DIFFICULT TO GET THROUGH
AND WE SHOULD RECOVER EVERY BIT OF THE COST PLUS BUILDING
INTO RESERVES ON THE PD SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
EVERYTHING ELSE, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE.
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
10:10:27AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I THINK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE WITH ALL OF
THESE, WE SHOULD, ESPECIALLY IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, SHOW
WHAT THE COST IS.
YOU SAID WE'RE NOT GOING FOR FULL COST RECOVERY.
EXCEPT FOR MAYBE THE FOLKS WHO ARE USING THIS, EVERYBODY
ELSE WOULD NOT LIKE TO SUBSIDIZE IT.
IF WE CAN SHOW WHAT THE ACTUAL COST IS, THAT WOULD BE
HELPFUL TO JUSTIFY WHY WE'RE DOING IT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT JUST
TRYING TO CHANGE RATES JUST TO TRY TO GET MORE MONEY.
WE'RE TRYING TO ACTUALLY COVER THE COST BECAUSE IT'S NOT
FAIR TO EVERYBODY ELSE TO SUBSIDIZE IT.
10:11:05AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IT'S DIFFICULT IN THE REVIEW BECAUSE OF
THE POMP AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF IT ALL, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE
INVOLVED IN THAT STUFF.
THAT'S A TOUGH ONE.

10:11:16AM >>BILL CARLSON:
ON THAT POINT ALSO, IS THERE A COST RECOVERY
FOR THE LEGAL FEES AT ALL ON THESE?
BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY ASKS FOR A REVIEW, THEN IT'S NOT JUST
THE CLERK'S OFFICE THAT LOOKS AT IT, LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS
LOOKING AT IT, TOO.
WHAT IS THE COST OF THAT?
THAT MUST BE REALLY HIGH.
10:11:39AM >> WE HAD THE CITY'S LEGAL TIME, CITY STAFF LEGAL TIME BUILT
INTO THOSE FEES.
THERE ARE ADDITIONAL FEES IF YOU HAVE TO PULL IN AN OUTSIDE
HEARING OFFICER TYPE OF SITUATION.
THERE IS A NOTE ON THE EXISTING CITY CLERK FEE SCHEDULE
ABOUT ADDITIONAL PER HOUR FOR THAT TYPE OF SERVICE.
BUT THE 4,000 INCLUDES CITY INTERNAL LEGAL, DIVISION,
DEPARTMENT HEADS.
10:12:07AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
10:12:09AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
VERY GOOD.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
HEARING NONE, I'LL ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK.
ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS?
IT'S ONLY ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
ITEM NUMBER 1.
10:12:33AM >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS EDWARD BRIGGS HERE ON BEHALF OF DOMAIN HOMES.
I WANT TO START BY SAYING WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THE CITY

COVERING THE REAL COST OF SERVICE.
NO ONE WANTS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES OR ZONING RUNNING FEES
THAT DON'T REFLECT WHAT IT ACTUALLY COSTS TO REVIEW OR
INSPECT A HOME AS WELL AS RETAINING AND HIRING QUALITY
STAFF.
THAT IS A FAIR GOAL.
IF SOME OF THESE COSTS GENERALLY HAVE NOT BEEN COLLECTED
PROPERLY IN THE PAST, WE UNDERSTAND THAT GAP NEEDS TO CLOSE
EVENTUALLY.
FIRST, THESE FEES I WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU DON'T GET
ABSORBED ANYWHERE BY US.
WE BUILD EXCLUSIVELY ON INFILL LOTS IN THE CITY, WHICH MEANS
ALMOST EVERY HOME WE BUILD ALREADY INCLUDES A TEARDOWN, AND
ALMOST EVERY LOT HAS MATURE TREES THAT TRIGGER THE CITY'S
TREE EVALUATION FEES.
ONCE THE FEES ARE FULLY PHASED IN, THAT'S CLOSE TO $2,000
MORE PER HOME IN CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FEES ALONE.
IF THAT LOT SITS IN HYDE PARK, SEMINOLE HEIGHTS, TAMPA
HEIGHTS, YBOR, HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW CAN RUN CLOSE TO
$5,000.
NONE OF THAT GETS ABSORBED BY US.
IT GOES STRAIGHT INTO THE PRICE OF THE NEXT HOME SOMEBODY IN
THE CITY IS BUYING.
THAT HOME IS ALREADY EXPENSIVE.
THE MEDIAN HOME SALE PRICE IN TAMPA RIGHT NOW IS OVER

$400,000.
EVERY DOLLAR WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT -- THIS MORNING
LANDS DIRECTLY ON TOP OF THAT NUMBER.
SECOND, THE SIZE OF SOME OF THOSE INCREASES WE SAW, THE PEER
CITY COMPARISON IN THE PRESENTATION AND ROUTINE BUILDING AND
ZONING FEES, TAMPA PROPOSED RATES ACTUALLY COME IN BELOW THE
AVERAGE OF THE PEER COMMUNITY SHOWN.
THAT'S A FAIR RESULT, AND WE'RE GLAD TO SEE THE CITY DID
THAT WORK.
BUT THE COMPARISON DIDN'T COVER EVERYTHING IN THIS STUDY.
THE FEES TO APPEAL TO THE BARRIO LATINO COMMISSION, DECISION
TO THE CITY CLERK IS GOING FROM $50 TO $4,000, AN INCREASE
OF NEARLY 8,000 PERCENT.
AND IT WASN'T PART OF TONIGHT'S BENCHMARK.
SEVERAL OTHER CITY CLERK -- FOLLOW THE SAME PATTERN,
INCREASES RANGING FROM 100% TO NEARLY 1400% IN A SINGLE STEP
WITH NO PHASE-IN AT ALL.
THAT IS NOT A FEE UPDATE ANYMORE.
THAT IS A PENALTY ON ANYONE WHO DARES TO CHALLENGE A
DECISION.
THOSE ARE THE FEES WE WOULD ASK COUNCIL TO LOOK AT
SPECIFICALLY SINCE THEY SIT OUTSIDE THE COMPARISON WE JUST
SAW THIS MORNING.
FINALLY, THE TIMELINE.
BASED ON THIS MORNING'S PRESENTATION, COUNCIL ISN'T

EXPECTED, AS WE KNOW, TO VOTE ON THIS RESOLUTION UNTIL LATE
FALL, WITH THE FEES THEMSELVES NOT TAKING EFFECT UNTIL IT
LOOKS LIKE NEXT SPRING.
THAT MEANS THERE IS REAL TIME BETWEEN NOW AND THEN TO GET
THIS RIGHT.
WE ASK THAT THE TIME BE USED SPECIFICALLY ON THE FEES TO
JUMP STRAIGHT TO THEIR FULL AMOUNT WITH NO PHASE-IN, THE
SAME WAY THE REST OF THE STUDY WAS PHASED IN GRADUALLY TO
AVOID RATE SHOCK.
WE'RE ASKING FOR A COUPLE OF THINGS.
USE THE MONTHS BETWEEN NOW AND THE COUNCIL VOTE TO LOOK AT
THE LARGEST INCREASES, ESPECIALLY THE ONES WITH NO PHASE-IN
AT ALL.
THE SAME GRADUAL TREATMENT THE REST OF THE STUDY RECEIVED
AND SEPARATE ALSO THE FEES THAT ARE LEGALLY REQUIRED UNDER
STATUTE 553 AND THOSE ARE SIMPLY NOW BEING A POLICY POSITION
SO COUNCIL CAN WEIGH EACH ONE OF ITS OWN TERMS RATHER THAN
APPROVING THIS AS A SINGLE PACKAGE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE TIME.
10:15:32AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU, MR. BRIGGS.
FYI, THROUGH MY AUTOMATIC PILOT MODE THIS MORNING, I DIDN'T
WAIT FOR THE END OF WORKSHOP TO CALL PUBLIC COMMENT.
DON'T GET USED TO THIS.
THIS IS ONE-OFF.
MS. POYNOR.

10:15:45AM >> STEPHANIE POYNOR.
YOU ARE WRONG FOR CHANGING IT BECAUSE EACH ONE OF THE ITEMS
THIS MORNING IS VERY IMPORTANT.
CAN I HAVE MY TIME SINCE YOU ARE TALKING OVER?
THANK YOU.
THIS IS ONLY FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, $3.1 MILLION LOSS
THAT YOU ARE PROJECTING FOR '26.
WHERE IS IT FOR THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS?
MR. PERRY JUST STOOD UP HERE AND SAID, NO, WE DIDN'T PUT ANY
MONEY FROM THE GENERAL FUND IN FROM CONSTRUCTION SERVICES,
BUT DID WE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT?
HERE IS THE THING, I'M GOING TO TELL YOU THIS.
SOMEBODY WAY THE HELL HIGH UP IN THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS
SAID REPEATEDLY THAT BOB BUCKHORN USED TO RUN AROUND TELLING
EVERYBODY HE WAS NEVER GOING TO RAISE ANY OF THESE FEES.
BOB BUCKHORN BRAGGED ABOUT IT.
NOW, OUR CURRENT MAYOR, I'VE NEVER HEARD THAT SHE SAID
ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT I AS A CITIZEN SHOULD NOT BE
PAYING FOR THE NEW DOMAIN HOME.
I AS A CITIZEN SHOULD NOT BE PAYING FOR WHATEVER
CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON AT GASWORX.
THAT SHOULD NOT BE COMING OUT OF MY TAX DOLLARS.
IT SHOULD NEVER BE THAT WAY.
I DON'T CARE IF WE MAKE ONE PENNY OFF OF ANY CONSTRUCTION

SERVICES OR LAND DEVELOPMENT, NOT ONE PENNY SHOULD WE EVEN
MAKE.
BUT WE SHOULD BE BREAKING EVEN.
I HAVE TO AGREE THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IS PROBABLY TOO
MUCH.
THE PETITION FOR REVIEW WHERE THEY TAKE IT TO A HEARING
MASTER FIRST IS STUPID.
IT IS A WASTE OF MONEY.
NOBODY SHOULD EVER DO IT BECAUSE IT STILL HAS TO COME TO
COUNCIL.
IT'S RIDICULOUS.
BUT I WILL SAY THAT THERE ARE APPLICANTS WHO ACTUALLY BRING
STUFF IN THAT THEY BOUGHT A HOUSE AND THE ADU WAS ALREADY
THERE AND THEY ARE DOING A PETITION FOR REVIEW TO GET
THEMSELVES BACK IN COMPLIANCE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIDICULOUS FOR THEM.
WHEN I'M LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE INTERESTING LITTLE POP-UPS
AND SOMEBODY WILL COME HERE AND CRY ABOUT IT.
AN IN-GROUND SWIMMING POOL, YOU ARE RAISING IT TO A THOUSAND
DOLLARS.
WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHEN I MOVED HERE IN 2015 WHEN I PUT IN
MY POOL, IT COST $50,000.
NOW IT COSTS $100,000 TO PUT IN A POOL.
1% OF WHAT IT COSTS TO PUT IN THAT SWIMMING POOL IS NOT
OUTRAGEOUS.

THE ROOF FEE IS GOING FROM 177 TO 230 DOLLARS.
THE PowerPoints ARE COMING UP HERE TOO FAST.
THAT IS A $12,000 PROJECT.
I JUST PRICED A NEW ROOF ON MY 13-YEAR-OLD HOUSE WHICH IS
RIDICULOUS.
CAN HAVE A ROOF ON YOUR HOUSE FOR 30 YEARS.
WE'RE BACK AT, IT'S NOT UNREASONABLE, BUT THESE PRICES, WE
SHOULD NOT BE PAYING, THE CITIZENS WHO ARE SITTING IN THIS
ROOM, SHOULD NOT BE FOLLOWING BOB BUCKHORN'S POLICY OF
FLOATING DEVELOPMENT FOR OUR CITY.
THANK YOU.
10:18:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I NEED TO KNOW WHERE I CAN GET A ROOF FOR
$12,000.
10:18:38AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH, ME, TOO.
10:18:40AM >> CALL ME.
10:18:43AM >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL.
STEVE MICHELINI.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME ISSUES HERE REGARDING COST VERSUS
BENCHMARKS.
TRYING TO RECOVER COSTS BUT NO BENCHMARKS IN THERE TO MEET
IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE PROCESS.
FREQUENTLY, YOU'RE IN THE PROCESS NOT FOR 30 DAYS, NOT FOR
60 DAYS, SOMETIMES 90 DAYS, SOMETIMES 120 DAYS.
SO IF YOU ARE HAVING TO PAY RESUBMISSION FEES WHICH WAS NOT
ADDRESSED IN THIS, THOSE SHOULD BE COMMENSURATE WITH THE

AMOUNT OF TIME IT IS TAKING TO GET YOUR PERMIT OUT.
I WAS MISTAKEN, BUT I THOUGHT JOE WILLIAMS SAID HE WAS IN
FOR FULL COST RECOVERY.
HE SAID THAT.
NOT ME.
I UNDERSTAND THE PHASING.
BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FEES AND IN SOME CASES, A THOUSAND
PERCENT OR MORE THAN THAT, THAT'S RIDICULOUS.
YOUR APPEAL FEE SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN WHAT THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION FEES.
COUNCILWOMAN, YOU ASKED WHAT THEY SHOULD BE.
THEY SHOULD BE THE SAME AS WHAT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE
IS.
THAT WILL GIVE YOU A BENCHMARK TO WORK FROM.
THE HEARING OFFICERS ARE PAID FOR BY THE APPLICANT, NOT A
EXPENSE NECESSARILY TO THE CITY.
YOU HAVE TO PUT THE MONEY IN IN ORDER TO HAVE AN APPEAL.
PDs, I THINK THEY SKIPPED OVER A PART.
LARGER PDs ARE A BASE FEE PLUS ACREAGE FEE THAT GOES ON
TOP OF THAT.
A SINGLE LOT IS NOT THE SAME FEE AS A LARGE THING LIKE
GASWORX.
THE VARIANCE, THE APPEALS, I ALREADY SAID THAT.
THE EUCLIDEAN ZONINGS AND SITE PLAN REVIEW, I THINK
GENERALLY THE FEES FOR THE PERMIT SIDE ARE NOT THAT BAD.

BUT THE PROCESSING FEES THAT THEY HAVE ADDED IN HERE ARE OUT
OF LINE.
THEY ARE JUST WAY OUT OF LINE.
YOU NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE SALARIES.
WHAT ARE THE SALARIES AND THE COST BENEFIT THAT'S BEING
APPLIED FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING?
THEIR NOTES AND THEIR E-MAIL SAYS HERE IT'S DROPPED.
THE DEMAND HAS DROPPED, BUT THEY ARE ADDING 15% AS A
CONTINGENCY JUST BECAUSE.
THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THIS.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS IN HERE IS, IT'S CALCULATED ON
CURRENT -- IT'S NOT GOING INTO THE CURRENT BUDGET.
THIS IS NOT IN THERE.
SO WHY IS THE URGENCY TO HAVE THIS ADOPTED BEFORE THE END OF
THE YEAR?
GIVE US SOME TIME TO LOOK AT THIS STUFF AND MEET.
I'M ASKING SPECIFICALLY FOR A SEPARATE TBBA MEETING WHERE
THEY CAN REVIEW THESE FEES WITH THE TBBA, THE ACTUAL
STAKEHOLDERS, AND NOT HAVE ONE MEETING ON OCTOBER 21st TO
REVIEW THIS AND BRING IT BACK TO YOU IN NOVEMBER, WHICH IS
JUST A FEW WEEKS AFTER THAT.
SO WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
I JUST THINK THAT THE INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND THOSE COSTS
SHOULD BE COMMENSURATE AND THE TIMELINE SHOULD BE SET.
IF YOU DON'T MAKE IT FOR TWO OR THREE SUBMISSIONS, THEN THE

REFUND SHOULD BE APPLIED THE SAME AS THEY ARE FOR --
PROVIDERS.
10:21:52AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU.
NEXT, PLEASE.
10:21:59AM >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.
MY NAME IS JESSICA COX.
I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WITH THE AMERICAN FIRE SPRINKLER
ASSOCIATION.
I REPRESENT THE LOCAL FIRE SPRINKLER CONTRACTORS.
FIRST, I WANT TO CREDIT TO THE CITY'S PERMITTING TEAM.
WE GENUINELY APPRECIATE THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
THEY DO A GREAT JOB.
WE TALK TO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS THE
STANDARD.
SO WE DO APPRECIATE THE JOB THAT THE TEAM DOES HERE
PROCESSING PERMITS.
WE DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH THE INCREASE IN FEES THAT WE
WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.
WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT INCREASES HAVE NOT HAPPENED IN A WHILE
SO WE DO UNDERSTAND SOME INCREASES BUT WE FEEL LIKE THEY ARE
A LITTLE BIT AGGRESSIVE.
A COUPLE OF THE ONES THAT WE'RE SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT ARE
THE UNDERGROUND AND FIRE MAIN SPIKES.
THOSE ARE GOING UP PRETTY EXTENSIVELY WHERE STORAGE TANK
FEES ARE DECREASING.

SO WE'RE NOT SEEING AND SOME OF THE FIRE ALARM FEES ARE ALSO
DECREASING.
ONE OF OUR BIG THINGS IS THE FAST-TRACK PERMITTING.
WE DID PUT THIS, AND GET THIS IN PLACE A FEW YEARS AGO TO
HELP ENSURE THAT OUR LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS ARE FIXED WHEN
THERE'S JUST A SMALL REPAIR THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE, THESE
FEES ARE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASING.
ONE OF THE THINGS, WITH SOME OF THE PROPERTY MANAGERS AND
PROPERTY OWNERS, IMMEDIATELY FIXING THESE DEFICIENCIES, WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE IF THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PAINTED SPRINKLER
HEADS OR A HANGAR THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED, THAT THEY ARE
TAKING THE TIME TO GET THE PERMIT AND MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT,
MAKING SURE THAT OUR SYSTEMS ARE READY WHEN NEEDED.
ONE OTHER POINT TO THIS IS WE'VE RECENTLY SEEN LOWERING OF
LIFE SAFETY STANDARDS COMING FROM TALLAHASSEE SPECIFICALLY.
THE PERMITTING FEES AND COSTS HAVE BECOME ASTRONOMICAL.
SOME OF THE BUILDING OWNERS LOOK FOR WORKAROUNDS.
WE'VE SEEN THIS PLAY OUT IN TALLAHASSEE WITH SCHOOL CHOICE
EXPANSION.
WE'RE CHANGING OCCUPANCY AND SMALL PRIVATE SCHOOLS ARE
ACTIVELY PUSHING TO LOWER OR BYPASSING FIRE SPRINKLER
REQUIREMENTS ENTIRELY BECAUSE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS ARE TOO
HIGH.
SO WE JUST WANT TO BRING THIS TO YOUR ATTENTION.
WANT TO SAY, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE PERMITTING PROCESS

THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA DOES, BUT WE ARE AGAINST THE EXTREME
HIKES AND ASK THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER TO SLOWLY INCREASE
THESE FEES.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
10:24:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.
10:24:43AM >> HELLO, COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS ALEX GULUZIAN.
I AM ONE OF THE OWNERS OF MGA HOMES.
WE'RE TRULY A MOM-AND-POP SHOP.
IT'S ME AND MY DAD ONLY.
WE POUR OUR HEART AND SOULS INTO EVERY SINGLE HOUSE THAT WE
BUILD.
THESE FEES WOULD HURT US A LOT AND ULTIMATELY WE WOULD HAVE
TO PASS THEM ON TO OUR CLIENTS.
I'M NOT HERE TO SAY WE DON'T NEED TO INCREASE THE FEES OR
ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I WOULD JUST SAY WE SHOULD GIVE THIS A LOT OF TIME AND
CONSIDERATION.
WE'RE TALKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS HERE.
SO I HAD A FEW POINTS I WANTED TO POINT OUT ABOUT THE
REPORT, JUST SOME THINGS FOR YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER.
AS WE ALL KNOW, THESE ARE SOME PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES.
ONE THING THAT CONCERNED ME WAS THE DATA ONLY WENT BACK TO
2025.

I FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT ENOUGH STATISTICS TO GET AN ACCURATE
READING.
THE MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS RELY ON BUDGETS AND ESTIMATED TIME,
RATHER THAN FULLY DISCLOSED ACTUALS.
HAVING A VERY HARD TIME TRACING WHERE A LOT OF THE 2025
NUMBERS ARE COMING AND GOING FROM.
I SPOTTED ONE CALCULATION ISSUE.
IT'S NOT A SLEIGHT ON THE CONSULTANTS OR ANYTHING.
IT'S A POINT OF LET'S REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO THIS.
REVENUE SEEMS TO BE THE MAIN DRIVER FOR SETTING RATES.
AGAIN, THIS IS A GOVERNMENT OPERATION.
I'M ALSO IN THE CAMP LIKE ZERO DOLLARS IN AND OUT SHOULD BE
THE GOAL.
TRUE UP AT ZERO.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE CONSULTANTS TO PRICE
IN THE AVAILABLE EFFICIENCIES AND AVOIDED COST
OPPORTUNITIES.
I THINK THOSE SHOULD BE PRICED IN.
I KNOW WE HAVE SOME TECHNOLOGY, LIKE ACCELA, BUT THERE ARE
OTHER THINGS OUT THERE.
HONOLULU, THE ENTIRE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SEATTLE JUST TRIED
IT, THEY ARE ALL DOING A TECH OR A.I. REVIEW OF AT LEAST
SIMPLE THINGS.
CALIFORNIA IS DOING ALL RESIDENTIAL COMPLETELY WITH A.I.
HONOLULU IS DOING SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE BENEFITED ME,

ACTUALLY.
IT'S A PRELIMINARY CHECK.
KIND OF SAVES ALL THE TIME OF THE INITIAL PLAN REVIEW WHEN
YOU UPLOAD.
IT WILL TELL YOU WHAT IS MISSING SO I DON'T HAVE TO WAIT,
WHATEVER.
THOSE ARE MY SIX THINGS I WANTED TO POINT OUT.
JUST MY ONE EXPERIENCE, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS ALWAYS
BEEN GOOD AND FAIR, BUT THEY ARE SO UNDERSTAFFED, AND THING
THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE CAN HELP THEM CHEAPER THAN JUST
AUTOMATICALLY BOOSTING THESE FEES BY 41% A YEAR.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
10:27:34AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU.
THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
10:27:38AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
AS FAR AS SOME OF THE THINGS, IS THERE A
SPECIFIC E-MAIL FOR THIS?
AND IF THERE IS, IF YOU COULD TELL US WHAT IT IS AND MAKE
SURE THAT IT'S ON THE WEBSITE FOR THIS.
10:27:53AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
IT IS.
THAT'S ALL BEEN CORRECTED, I BELIEVE.
IT IS DGM FEE STUDY@TAMPAGOV.NET.
D AS IN DOG.
G AS IN GEORGE.
M AS IN MOM.

F-E-E-S-T-U-D-Y@TAMPAGOV.NET.
10:28:16AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
A LOT OF FOLKS WHO COMMENTED TODAY SHOULD
MAKE SURE THEY GET THOSE.
I SAW YOU WRITING NOTES.
TELL OTHER PEOPLE, E-MAIL, BECAUSE THEY REALLY WILL READ
THOSE AND PUT THOSE IN.
AFTER OCTOBER 21st, WHENEVER YOU ARE COMING BACK TO US, I
THINK YOU SHOULD BRING US BACK THIS NEW INFORMATION AND
EVERYTHING YOU LEARN FROM THE E-MAILS, FROM THE MEETING.
I THINK WE NEED ANOTHER CONVERSATION BEFORE A VOTE.
THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO ASK FOR.
DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE A WORKSHOP MANNER.
IT CAN BE A LITTLE QUICK.
MAYBE A STAFF REPORT.
MAYBE ON THE DAY HAVE FOUR STAFF REPORTS INSTEAD OF FIVE,
SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT WAY WE HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME.
I JUST DON'T SEE US GOING FROM THIS TO ADOPTION THAT
QUICKLY.
THAT WILL BE MY ASK.
10:29:05AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
NOT A PROBLEM.
10:29:06AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
10:29:07AM >>BILL CARLSON:
MAYBE THIS IS FOR THE CONSULTANT, BUT IT
WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE LAST TIME THESE
FEES WERE INCREASED AND LOOK AT WHAT THE SUBSIDY WAS EACH

YEAR BY THE GENERAL FUND.
IT'S PROBABLY A VERY LARGE NUMBER, BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL
TO SHOW WHAT THE REST OF THE PUBLIC, HOW MUCH THE REST OF
THE PUBLIC SUBSIDIZED IT.
I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBERS.
LET'S SAY $10 MILLION SINCE 2001.
THAT'S A LOT OF THE MONEY THAT THE REST OF US SUBSIDIZED
WHEN WE DIDN'T NEED THE SERVICES.
I THINK IT WOULD HELP TO TALK ABOUT IT.
THANK YOU.
10:29:46AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MS. FEELEY, ALSO IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC
DISCLOSURES, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS TALKED ABOUT A.I., IT WOULD
BE HELPFUL TO TAKE A MINUTE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING
WITH A.I.
10:30:00AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
SURE, AND I CAN ASK JC IF HE WANTS TO COME
UP.
WE ACTUALLY JUST APPLIED FOR A HUD GRANT.
HUD HAD A GRANT OUT TO HELP AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTIVITY
THROUGH THE UTILIZATION OF A.I. WITHIN THE PERMITTING
SYSTEM.
UNFORTUNATELY, WE DID NOT RECEIVE THE GRANT.
I THINK IT WENT TO -- TWO OR THREE MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY.
BUT PRIOR TO US APPLYING FOR THAT GRANT, WE WERE ALREADY IN
PROCESS.

WE HAD DONE AN RFI, REQUEST FOR INFORMATION, ON COMPANIES
THAT WERE PROVIDING A.I.
WHILE THERE IS PRESS ABOUT CITIES USING A.I. FOR FULL PLAN
REVIEW, WE ARE REALLY NOT AWARE OF THAT HAPPENING.
WANT TO BE STRAIGHT UP ABOUT THAT.
WE DO TRACK.
WE'RE ALWAYS TRACKING.
LOS ANGELES WAS TALKING ABOUT IT.
OTHER CITIES WERE TALKING ABOUT IT.
WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT IT IS PREDOMINANTLY HAPPENING AT
THAT INTAKE PHASE.
PUTTING STUFF IN, SEEING IF THEY ARE MEETING SUFFICIENCY.
DO THEY HAVE ENERGY CALCS?
DO THEY HAVE OTHER THINGS?
DO THEY HAVE THE FLORIDA PRODUCT APPROVAL THAT NEEDS TO BE
IN THE PERMIT?
AND BEING ABLE TO SPIT THAT OUT PRETTY QUICKLY TO LET PEOPLE
KNOW YOU'RE MISSING THESE THINGS JUST AT THE INTAKE PORTION.
SO WE ARE WORKING ON THAT.
WE DO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE HORIZON WITH ACCELA THAT I WOULD
LIKE JC TO SPEND A COUPLE OF MINUTES TALKING ABOUT WITH YOU
SO YOU KNOW WHERE WE ARE WORKING TO INTEGRATE THAT IN TO
MAKE IT MORE SEAMLESS FOR SERVICE DELIVERY.
10:31:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I THINK WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS ON AN INTAKE
PHASE.

NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN WHEN WE SEEM TO HAVE A PERMITTING
ISSUE, IT IS OMISSIONS IN THAT FIRST APPLICATION, AND THAT
DELAY IN THE FIRST 30 DAYS THAT CAUSED THE PROBLEM.
HOPEFULLY THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING
PROACTIVELY TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE.
10:31:47AM >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I THINK HISTORICALLY, JUST TO ADD THAT A
LITTLE BIT, HISTORICALLY, WE'VE BEEN THE CHECKS AND BALANCES
WHERE PEOPLE WILL PUT IN WHAT THEY THINK IS A PERMIT
SUBMISSION.
MISSING 12 THINGS.
WE GO BACK.
THEN THEY COME IN WITH THOSE 12 THINGS AND NOW THEY HAVE 20
COMMENTS AND THEY WANT TO KNOW, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS
THE FIRST TIME.
WELL, YOU DIDN'T HAVE A SUFFICIENT PACKAGE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS, WE HAVE PUT IN
A SUFFICIENCY CHECKLIST THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO SEE
USING HUMAN SCALE.
HERE'S WHAT YOU NEED TO COME IN THE DOOR WITH TO BE
SUFFICIENT FOR A FULL REVIEW UNDER YOUR FIRST REVIEW.
WE ALSO HAVE OBLIGATIONS TO REVIEW THAT WITHIN A CERTAIN
TIME AND GET THAT BACK TO THEM AS WELL.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO JC.
WE ARE FULLY ENGAGED IN A.I. AND HOW IT CAN HELP US BETTER
DELIVER SERVICES TO THE CITIZENS AND CLIENTS OF TAMPA.

10:32:45AM >>JC HUDGISON:
CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL.
WE HAVE A PILOT CURRENTLY WORKING WITH ACCELA.
A.I. PLAIN CHECK.
LITERALLY DIGITIZING THAT SUFFICIENCY CHECKLIST THAT
DIRECTOR FEELEY BROUGHT UP.
THEREFORE TO YOUR POINT, YES, THERE IS A QUEUE.
EVEN IF THEY SUBMIT IT, WE HAVE UP TO FIVE DAYS TO LOOK AT
IT.
WE LOOK AT IT IN THREE DAYS OR LESS.
STILL, TO YOUR POINT THAT IS THE DELAY.
PERSON HAS TO PHYSICALLY LOOK AT IT AND GO THROUGH IT.
WE'RE LOOKING TO HAVE THAT BE DONE THROUGH THE A.I.
SOME OF THE A.I. THAT WE'VE SEEN THE MODELS, THEY CAN DO A
YES-NO ANSWER.
IDEALLY TO YOUR POINT, IF IT HAS ENERGY CODE DOCUMENTS, DO
YOU HAVE YOUR SITE PLAN OVER A CERTAIN SQUARE FOOTAGE, THE
SYSTEM CAN LOGICALLY FIGURE THAT OUT.
SO WE'RE WORKING WITH ACCELA TO HOPE TO HAVE THAT AS EARLY
NEXT YEAR.
WE'RE IN A PILOT WITH SEVEN OTHER JURISDICTIONS WITH ACCELA
AND THEIR DIGITAL PLAN ROOM TO BE ABLE TO UPLOAD THE PLAN
ROOM DOCUMENTS, THEN BE ABLE TO SCAN IT TO CONFIRM IF IT IS
SUFFICIENT TO MOVE INTO PLAN REVIEW.
THE SECOND PART IS THE TOUGHER PART.
JUST THE PLANS.

THERE'S NOT ONE SET OF PLANS.
YOU GO FROM A HOSPITAL.
GO TO A STRIP CENTER.
GO TO APARTMENT COMPLEX.
SO THEY ARE ALL KIND OF DIFFERENT.
THE A.I. SYSTEMS ARE STILL TRYING TO LEARN HOW TO PHYSICALLY
-- WE HAVE LANGUAGE MODELS WHICH ARE GREAT.
THE WORDS GREAT.
BUT THE PHYSICAL THINGS AND BEING ABLE TO DO THE IMAGERY IS
WHERE THE BLOCK IS CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW.
A LOT OF CITIES ARE TESTING IT, BUT THEY ARE DOING IT KIND
OF BEHIND THE SCENES BECAUSE THEY ARE USING A.I. TO TEST IT
AND THEN CHECKING.
MOST OF THE COMPANIES WE TALK TO SAY IT WILL TAKE AT LEAST
18 TO 24 MONTHS TO BE COMFORTABLE ENOUGH WITH THE RESULTS TO
SAY, HEY, A.I. CAN DO IT ON ITS OWN.
RIGHT NOW, WE'RE STILL USING WHAT MOST OF THEM ARE CALLING
HUMAN-IN-THE-LOOP A.I.
THEY'LL MAKE THE REVIEW.
THEN YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE A PHYSICAL PERSON LOOK AT IT, GO
THROUGH THE CHECKLIST.
THE A.I. WILL SAY, HEY, WE'RE FAIRLY COMFORTABLE THIS IS A
CODE VIOLATION.
SOME OF THEM WILL SAY IT MAY BE A JUDGMENT CALL OR THIS ONE
DOESN'T MEET THE CODE.

ONCE AGAIN, THE STAFF THEN, BUT THAT WOULD HELP IF YOU'RE
GOING THROUGH 300 SHEETS FOR PLANNING REVIEW AND THEN HAVE
THE A.I. TO AT LEAST DO THE INITIAL SCAN OVER FOR YOU AND
THEN GO BACK IN AND CONFIRM OR DENY THE RESULTS.
WE'RE WORKING WITH ACCELA TO INTEGRATE BOTH OF THOSE THROUGH
OUR PLANNING ROOM.
HOPE TO HAVE THAT BY NEXT SUMMER, NEXT FALL, BUT AT LEAST
THE INTAKE PART WE HOPE TO HAVE EARLY NEXT YEAR.
10:35:10AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
10:35:11AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE WHO SPOKE.
I BELIEVE WHAT YOU SAID.
HOWEVER, WHEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION, IT'S GOT TO BE
BASED ON THE FACTS THAT ARE REAL.
I'M NOT SAYING WHAT YOU SAID WAS UNREAL, BUT IF YOU HAVE A
BUSINESS AND YOU'RE CREATING PROPERTY THAT YOU ARE BUILDING
IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OR IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, IF YOU GO
DOWN ADAMO DRIVE OR 22nd STREET OR YOU GO DOWN 7th
AVENUE ALL THE WAY TO HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, DOES IT COST YOU
MORE OR LESS TO GET A PERMIT?
THAT'S MY QUESTION TO MYSELF.
FROM WHAT I SAW HERE TODAY, IT COSTS YOU MORE IN
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY THAN IT DID IN TAMPA.
SO YOU ARE THE SAME INDIVIDUALS BUILDING -- I'M NOT HERE TO

CHASTISE ANYONE.
BUT YOU'RE BUILDING THE SAME HOUSES FOR THE SAME COST, BUT
IT COSTS YOU MORE TO GET A PERMIT THERE THAN IT DOES HERE.
AM I RIGHT OR WRONG?
I DON'T KNOW FROM WHAT I SAW.
ARE WE RIGHT OR ARE WE WRONG?
MEETING EXPECTATIONS TO GIVE YOU THE SERVICE THAT YOU DEMAND
THAT YOU WANT?
NOT ONLY ARE WE IN A PINCH, GUARANTEE YOU THAT PASCO COUNTY,
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS THE SAME PROBLEM WE HAVE WITH
STAFFING.
THEY ARE VERY VALUABLE EMPLOYEES JUST LIKE YOUR EMPLOYEES
ARE.
WHEN YOU HAVE A GREAT ELECTRICIAN WORKING FOR YOU OR GREAT
INDIVIDUAL WHO DOES THE STUCCO WORK, AND THEY ARE GONE, THEY
ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO REPLACE BECAUSE ALL OF THEM ARE
WORKING.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM WE HAVE TODAY.
AND THAT DIVISION, IF SOMEBODY LEAVES HERE, THEY GOT TO
BORROW IT, STEAL SOMEBODY, HATE TO SAY THAT WORD, FROM SOME
OTHER DIVISION WHO IS ALREADY TRAINED BECAUSE THEY DON'T
HAVE TIME TO TRAIN THEM.
THEY HAVE ZERO EXPERIENCE.
SO THEY HAVE TO GO OUT AND I THINK THE LAST TWO WE GOT WERE
FROM PASCO COUNTY, IF I REMEMBER.

I'M NOT SURE OF THAT BECAUSE I SEE SOME PEOPLE THAT WERE NEW
HERE WORKING IN PLANNING AND ZONING.
SO I'M MAKING AN ASSUMPTION ON MY PART.
BUT DOES IT COST MORE OR LESS TO BUILD A HOUSE AND GET YOUR
PLANS BUILT AND CERTIFIED AND GO AND INSPECT THEM DURING THE
PROCESS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OR TAMPA?
THAT'S THE MAIN QUESTION WE HAVE HERE BECAUSE THE SALARIES
AND THE COSTS ARE THE SAME.
THAT'S ALL, MR. CHAIRMAN.
10:37:18AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU.
IF NO OTHER DISCUSSION, I THINK YOU'VE CAPTURED ENOUGH
INFORMATION FROM THIS COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD.
WE'LL PUT THIS ONE TO BED FOR NOW.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU GUYS FOR SHOWING UP.
FOR ITEMS 2 AND 3, I SUSPECT THAT WE CAN OPEN THEM UP
TOGETHER BECAUSE I HAVE PROPOSALS INCORPORATED IN.
WE CAN DO 2 AND 3 TOGETHER.
I HAVE SAM PRINTING, AS WE SPEAK, THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
HERE THEY ARE.
THIS IS SOMETHING I DID.
MR. SHELBY WILL START -- KICK US OFF WITH A BRIEF
INTRODUCTION OF THE TIMELINE, WHERE WE STARTED, WHERE WE ARE
AT.

MR. SHELBY, START WITH YOUR NAME, PLEASE.
10:38:25AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.
MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY.
THE ACOUSTICS ARE MUCH BETTER HERE.
10:38:48AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
PUSH THE DOCUMENT DOWN.
PHYSICALLY PUSH IT DOWN.
ACOUSTICS, PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THEY ARE TALKING OUT THERE.
WE CAN HEAR EVERYTHING.
EVEN WHISPERS UP HERE.
10:39:10AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THIS DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE, ACTUALLY FROM
WHERE I SIT, I'M ABLE TO HEAR THE SPEAKERS MUCH BETTER AS
WELL.
HERE WE ARE ON SEPTEMBER 24th FOR THE INITIAL REVIEW OF
THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER.
AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS, I HAVE A PROPOSED MOTION THAT I'M
GOING TO ASK SOMEBODY TO MAKE TO BRING THIS BACK BECAUSE IF
YOU SEE THE NEXT TIME, ACCORDING TO THIS TIMELINE IS NEXT
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1st, CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE A FINAL
REVIEW OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
CHARTER.
YOU WILL THEN APPROVE THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT YOU CHOOSE
TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AND AT THAT TIME, YOU WILL
DIRECT THE CRC LEGAL COUNSEL, WHO YOU HAVE RETAINED FOR THIS
PURPOSE, TO DRAFT THE ORDINANCE SETTING THE BALLOT QUESTIONS
AND SUMMARY LANGUAGE.

AND AT THAT TIME, YOU WILL SET THE FIRST READING FOR THE
ORDINANCE ON NOVEMBER 5 OF 2026.
AT WHICH TIME ON NOVEMBER 5, IT COMES BACK FOR FIRST READING
AND THEN THE SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE IS
ON NOVEMBER 19.
AS YOU COULD SEE, WE'RE MOVING RATHER QUICKLY HERE BECAUSE
THE ORDINANCE IS THEN FORWARDED TO THE MAYOR FOR HER
SIGNATURE, AND WE HAVE A PLACEHOLDER DATE OF EITHER DECEMBER
3rd OR 17th, DEPENDENT ON THE DATE OF A POTENTIAL
MAYORAL VETO TO ALLOW FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDINANCE
BY CITY COUNCIL, WHICH THEN REQUIRES A TWO-THIRDS VOTE IF
COUNCIL CHOOSES TO OVERRIDE.
THE DROP-DEAD DATE THAT WE ALL HAVE TO REMAIN MINDFUL OF IS
JANUARY 4 OF 2027, BECAUSE THAT, ACCORDING TO THE SUPERVISOR
OF ELECTIONS, IS THE FINAL DEADLINE OF SUBMISSION OF THE
BALLOT LANGUAGE FOR THE MARCH 2, 2027, MUNICIPAL ELECTION.
10:41:11AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S FOR THEM TO PUT IT INTO SPANISH AS
WELL.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
10:41:14AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CAN YOU LEAVE THAT UP?
THE LAST PAGE.
SO MY QUESTION IS, DOES THE MAYOR HAVE A DEADLINE FOR WHICH
SHE CAN VETO?
10:41:24AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES.
I BELIEVE IT IS 15 DAYS.

10:41:26AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY.
MAKING SURE.
THANK YOU.
10:41:29AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE GOOD EXPERIENCE WITH
THAT ONE.
10:41:33AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I LIKE TO BE REMINDED.
10:41:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. SHELBY ON THIS
PROCESS?
PROCESS QUESTIONS.
THAT -- COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
10:41:43AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I THINK THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT QUESTION.
BECAUSE THE LAST TIME OR ONE OF THE TIMES WE TALKED ABOUT
THIS --
10:41:49AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
IT WAS TIGHT.
10:41:50AM >>BILL CARLSON:
-- THE ADMINISTRATION SLOW WALKED IT AND AT
THE END BLAMED US FOR DECIDING AT THE LAST MINUTE WHEN
ACTUALLY THEY DELAYED IT FOR MONTHS.
10:42:00AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
10:42:04AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I'LL WAIT UNTIL WE GET TO THAT PART.
SORRY.
10:42:07AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BEFORE YOU, THIS DOCUMENT IS THE
STRIKE-THROUGH ITEMS THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION HAD
RECOMMENDED.
THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THAT IS NEWLY PRINTED AND
OFF THE PRESS.

YOU HAVE ANOTHER DOCUMENT THAT IS ON MY LETTERHEAD WAS THE
LIST OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE SUBMITTED TO THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMISSION FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION.
AND THEN WE HAVE A PLAIN BLACK-AND-WHITE PAGE, THE FIRST ONE
IS INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THAT IS A DOCUMENT THAT I CREATED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR
THE ITEMS THAT I FELT LIKE WERE WORTHY OF DISCUSSION TODAY,
NOT TO SAY THAT I KNOW SOME OF THESE OTHER ITEMS MAY BE
IMPORTANT FOR OTHER FOLKS.
BUT THESE ARE THE ONES I FELT WERE STRUCTURALLY WORTHY OF
OUR CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION TODAY.
AND THAT ONE WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SALARY ISSUE AS
WELL.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
10:43:01AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
HOW ARE WE ORGANIZING THIS?
HOW ARE WE GOING TO GO ABOUT THIS?
ARE WE GOING TO GO BASED ON THE STRIKE-THROUGH?
10:43:09AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WHY DON'T WE DO THREE MINUTES OF
DISCUSSION FROM EACH COUNCILPERSON ABOUT WHERE THEIR HEAD IS
AT.
THIS IS A WORKSHOP.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO HAVE -- JUST GENERAL
DISCUSSION FROM THE BEGINNING?
THAT'S FINE.
WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME.

I WANT TO GET OUT OF HERE BY 1:00.
WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME.
10:43:28AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY.
JUST A REMINDER, COUNCIL, THAT WHEN YOU CRAFTED THIS
RESOLUTION, YOU ALLOWED THIS PROCESS TODAY TO BE EXACTLY
WHAT THE CHAIRMAN SAYS.
THAT'S WHY NEXT WEEK, THERE WILL BE NO OFFICIAL ACTION
NECESSARILY TODAY, MAYBE SOME DIRECTION, BUT THERE WILL BE
NO -- BASICALLY WHAT WILL COME BACK WITH IS ACTION ITEMS FOR
YOU TO PRESENT TO THE LEGAL COUNSEL IF YOU CHOOSE TO MOVE
FORWARD.
10:43:59AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GIVE US THE FRAMEWORK.
WHY DON'T WE DO THIS?
CHARLENE, SET THE TIMER FOR FIVE, PLEASE.
I SEE COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
DO YOU WANT TO KICK US OFF?
GO AHEAD.
10:44:10AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I'M LOOKING AT THE AMENDED SECTIONS, THE PART
FROM -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A WAY TO PUT THIS ON THE
SCREEN FOR FOLKS TO READ ALONG.
MR. SHELBY, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO BE OUR VANNA WHITE?
10:44:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HE DOES NOT HAVE THE HANDS FOR IT.
10:44:29AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I WOULD BRING MORE THAN ONE.
BRING ALL OF THESE THINGS.
THE QUESTIONS I'LL LET OTHER PEOPLE DEAL WITH.

ALAN'S THING IN THIS.
CAN YOU PAUSE MY TIME UNTIL HE GETS UP THERE?
THANK YOU.
10:44:49AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BRING A LEGISLATIVE AIDE INTO THIS?
CAN WE GET A VOLUNTEER LEGISLATIVE AIDE.
SAM, IF YOU CAN'T GET ANYBODY ELSE TO DO IT, SAM, COULD YOU
COME OUT HERE AND HELP US, BE OUR VANNA WHITE?
10:45:01AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT.
MAYBE WE CAN BORROW THE CLERK'S COPIES.
PERFECT.
THE MOST DANGEROUS THING SAM THOMAS HAS DONE IS GOING TO
COSTCO OR WHATEVER HE DOES AND GETS THE BIG BAGS OF CANDY.
SAM THOMAS' BEST OR WORST THINGS HE'S DONE, I'M A THOUSAND
PERCENT WITH YOU.
GO BACK.
YEAH, THERE YOU GO.
10:46:21AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
LISA IS A MUCH BETTER VANNA WHITE.
10:46:23AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES, YOU HAVE THE HANDS FOR IT.
LISA, CAN YOU GO TO THE SECOND PAGE, PAGE 2?
AND YOU CAN START MY TIME AGAIN.
I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I DON'T KNOW THAT THE REZONING PROCESS
OF A ZONING HEARING OFFICER HAS ANY SUPPORT WITH THIS
COUNCIL.
I WOULD BE SHOCKED.

I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK IT IS A BAD IDEA IN THE LONG RUN.
I JUST DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE QUITE READY FOR IT.
ALSO, I BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE HANDLED DURING THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES.
WE'RE HAVING SOME CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS THERE.
THAT'S JUST MY TWO CENTS.
IF YOU COULD GO TO PAGE 5 -- ANYBODY HAVE AN INTEREST IN
THIS?
10:47:12AM >> [INAUDIBLE]
10:47:12AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY.
WELL, THERE YOU GO.
PROBLEM SOLVED.
10:47:15AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
[INAUDIBLE]
10:47:17AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH.
PAGE 5 OF 8, THE PROGRESS OF CITY PROJECTS.
THIS IS FASCINATING.
THIS CLEARLY -- I DON'T THINK THEY UNDERSTAND THE COST OF
PROJECTS BECAUSE ANY FUNDED PROJECT IN EXCESS OF $100,000,
THAT WOULD TAKE US MULTIPLE COUNCIL MEETINGS.
AND I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A NEEDED THING.
WE GET UPDATES EVERY SIX MONTHS ON MAJOR PROJECTS THROUGH
THE CITY.
I'M ASKING, FOR ME, JUST LOOKING AT THIS INITIALLY, I JUST
DON'T --
10:47:58AM >> [INAUDIBLE]

10:47:59AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I'M FINE OPENING IT NOW.
IF YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON IT NOW SO WE CAN GET IT DONE.
WE MIGHT AS WELL.
10:48:06AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF YOU CAN PAUSE THE COUNCILWOMAN'S TIME.
I DO WANT TO MAKE A GENERAL COMMENT AS AN OVERVIEW.
THE CHARTER IS LIKENED TO THE CONSTITUTION.
10:48:14AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH.
10:48:15AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MIND YOU, THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS FOR
COUNCIL TO COMMUNICATE, AS YOU KNOW.
THE CHARTER ALLOWS YOU TO PASS RESOLUTIONS AND THE CHARTER
ALSO GIVES YOU THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO ENACT LAWS BY
PASSING ORDINANCES.
THERE ARE WAYS TO ADDRESS, OBVIOUSLY, IT'S VERY EASY TO
RESCIND A RESOLUTION OR CHANGE A RESOLUTION OR AMEND A
RESOLUTION, AND IT IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT, ALTHOUGH NOT
IMPOSSIBLE, TO DO THE SAME FOR AN ORDINANCE, AND THAT
REQUIRES NOTICING A PUBLIC HEARING.
WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS THAT WHEN SOMETHING IS IN THE
CHARTER AND THE VOTERS APPROVE IT, THE LAW REQUIRES THAT IF
ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT FROM THAT POINT FORWARD HAS TO BE
PRESENTED BACK TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION THROUGH THE
PROCESS.
10:49:07AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
[INAUDIBLE]
10:49:08AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I GUESS FOR ME, INSTEAD OF -- YOU CAN TALK
DURING YOUR TIME, BUT DO WE HAVE LIKE A SHOW OF HANDS IF WE

THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA?
[CONVERSATION OFF MICROPHONES]
10:49:25AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
THIS IS SOMETHING I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT.
WHAT I HAD GIVEN TO MY APPOINTEE TO DISCUSS DURING THE CRC.
10:49:36AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
AND THEN I'M GOING TO ALAN'S, JUST A BLACK
AND WHITE THAT SAYS INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL.
SO I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY WITH THIS, ESPECIALLY THE FACT
THAT WE SHOULD NOT HAVE THE MAYOR, THE COUNCIL, THE CITY
ATTORNEY.
THIS INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL IDEA IS GREAT, BUT IT
SHOULD NOT BE TOUCHED.
IT SHOULD BE WILDLY INDEPENDENT.
IT SHOULD HAVE KNOWN OF US SHOULD HAVE FINGERS ON IT, EXCEPT
FOR THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION CAN BE ADDRESSED BY ORDINANCE.
THE ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PUTS TOGETHER, I THINK
THIS IS A GREAT IDEA.
I KNOW OTHER PEOPLE WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, SO I'LL LET THEM.
GOING TO NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS COUNCIL -- I'M SORRY, NUMBER
FOUR, WHICH IS SALARY.
WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE CHAIR'S DESIRE TO SETTLE THIS ONCE
AND FOR ALL FOR HERE, I DO BELIEVE THAT WE COULD ALSO DO
THIS THROUGH ORDINANCE.
IT DEPENDS TODAY IF WE DECIDE TO DO THAT.
AGAIN, I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES.
MY CONCERN IS I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS WOULD PASS VERSUS IF WE

JUST DO IT OURSELVES, AND DO THIS TODAY.
THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN.
SO THOSE ARE THE FIRST THINGS I WANT TO SAY.
[OFF MICROPHONES]
10:51:13AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MY INTENT ON THAT WAS JUST TO HAVE THIS
QUESTION ASKED AND ANSWERED SO NO FUTURE COUNCILS HAVE TO BE
PUT IN THIS POSITION.
MR. SHELBY.
10:51:24AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'VE JUST BEEN REQUESTED, IT IS VERY
DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY FOR THE PURPOSES WHO ARE DOING THIS BY
AUDIO AND NOT BY THE SCREEN, IF YOU COULD READ WHAT IT IS
YOU ARE REFERRING TO SPECIFICALLY SO THAT YOU ALL HAVE IT IN
FRONT OF YOU, THE PUBLIC NECESSARILY MIGHT NOT.
YES, THAT'S TRUE.
THAT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT TO READ.
IT'S YOUR CALL.
THE THING IS, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, MAYBE BE MORE
SPECIFIC.
10:51:50AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THANK YOU.
10:51:50AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ANYTHING ELSE?
COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG WANTED TO SPEAK NEXT.
AND THEN LUIS VIERA.
10:52:01AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
THE PROGRESS OF THE CITY PROJECTS, SO HOW THAT
CAME ABOUT, REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE AT A CRA MEETING AND I
THINK IT WAS YOU, COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK, WHO HAD MADE A MOTION

TO HAVE LIKE THIS PROGRESS TRACKER OF THE CRA PROJECTS.
MANY TIMES, I GET A LOT OF QUESTIONS FROM MY CONSTITUENTS.
THEY ARE LIKE, HEY, WHAT HAPPENED TO THIS?
I THOUGHT THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HAPPENING THIS YEAR, THAT
YEAR.
FOR EXAMPLE, WITH PALMETTO BEACH, WITH THE SEAWALL.
I'VE HAD SOME CONSTITUENTS ASK WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT?
THEN WE GO AND ASK AND SEE WHERE IT IS.
THEN IT'S LIKE, OH, WELL, THIS IS KIND OF WHERE IT IS.
BUT IT WAS MORE SO JUST TO HAVE A MORE, LIKE ACCOUNTABILITY
AND TRANSPARENCY WHEN IT COMES TO PROJECTS.
OF COURSE, THE CITY -- THE PROJECT LOAD IS DIFFERENT THAN
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE CRA.
BUT JUST SOME KIND OF ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES.
WE CAN SAY THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE PROJECT.
HERE IS WHERE WE ARE WITH THE PROJECT.
SO IT MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THAT IS NECESSARILY IN THE
CHARTER IF THAT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNCIL'S PLEASURE.
BUT JUST SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GO BACK TO AND LOOK AT.
AND THERE'S SOME ACCOUNTABILITY WHEN IT COMES TO PROJECTS
THAT ARE HAPPENING.
WELL, WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT?
FINALLY, IT'S NOT UNTIL SOMEONE ASKS THAT WE REALIZE, OH,
WE'RE WAITING FOR THE STATE OR, YOU KNOW.
YOU WOULDN'T KNOW IT UNLESS YOU ASK.

SO THAT WAS KIND OF WHERE THIS CAME FROM WAS JUST TRYING TO
HAVE SOME TYPE OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY WHEN IT
COMES TO THE PROJECTS THAT WERE DOING IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SO THAT WAS KIND OF WHERE THAT CAME FROM.
10:53:45AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. SHELBY.
10:53:45AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF COUNCIL DOES NOT WANT ME TO CHIME IN ON
INFORMATIONAL THINGS, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PERHAPS
CAME UP THIS YEAR WHEN YOU REVIEWED THE BUDGET, PARTICULARLY
A PARK IN SOUTH TAMPA THAT PEOPLE HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THAT
JUST APPEARED AT WHAT EXPENSE.
YOUR CIP THAT YOU PASSED, THE RESOLUTION EVERY YEAR IS A
PLANNING DOCUMENT.
AND IN AN IDEAL WORLD, YOU PLAN THINGS FIVE YEARS OUT AND IF
ALL GOES WELL, EVERYTHING MOVES UP EVERY YEAR AND THEN YOU
ADD NEW PROJECTS TO THE END OF THE FIVE YEARS.
NOW, WHAT'S HAPPENED OR WHAT CAN HAPPEN IS BECAUSE OF
CHANGING ECONOMICS OR CHANGING PRIORITIES OR CHANGING
POLICIES OF WHOEVER THE ADMINISTRATOR IS, THE CIP CAN
CHANGE.
SOMETIMES, PERHAPS WITH A NEW ADMINISTRATION, NEXT YEAR'S
CIP MAY BE DRAMATICALLY PERHAPS DIFFERENT.
HOWEVER YOU SET IT UP, THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS TO BE ABLE TO
MORE ACCURATELY TRACK THE PROJECTS WITHIN THE C.I.P. SO YOU
CAN FIND OUT WHAT HAPPENED TO SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY NOT
HAVE BEEN AWARE OF THAT WHEN YOU PASSED THE C.I.P. CHANGED

THE PROCESS.
10:55:02AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
WHAT MR. SHELBY SAID.
10:55:05AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MY INPUT ON THAT IS, I UNDERSTAND THE
INTENT.
I DON'T NECESSARILY BELIEVE IT IS A CHARTER ISSUE.
UNLESS THERE'S SOMEBODY THAT REALLY FEELS STRONGLY ABOUT
THIS, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE IN THE CHARTER.
I THINK WE COULD HANDLE THAT VIA A RESOLUTION.
DID YOU WANT TO TALK ON THAT ONE?
10:55:21AM >>LUIS VIERA:
IF I MAY.
IS THIS GENERAL SPEAKING TIME OR JUST ON THIS TOPIC ON
SPENDING?
10:55:25AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WERE YOU DONE?
IS THAT ALL YOU WANTED TO SAY?
AGAIN, THIS IS A WORKSHOP.
WE CAN BE MORE INFORMAL.
10:55:34AM >>LUIS VIERA:
OBVIOUSLY, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, I STRONGLY
SUPPORT THAT.
I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.
I SEE MY APPOINTEE, MR. COHN, WHO IS HERE.
GOOD TO SEE ALAN.
I THINK THIS IS A GREAT, GREAT, GREAT IDEA BECAUSE THEN YOU
CAN GET A MORE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS ON ALLEGATIONS OF ETHICAL
VIOLATIONS, CORRUPTION, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND I THINK THERE WILL BE VAST SUPPORT IN THE PUBLIC ON THIS

ISSUE.
I SALUTE THAT.
I THINK THAT'S WONDERFUL.
10:56:04AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHICH VERSION, THOUGH?
10:56:06AM >>LUIS VIERA:
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT.
YEAH, I KNOW.
I KNOW.
I KNOW.
YOU'RE RIGHT, COUNCILWOMAN, THAT OUR FINGERPRINTS MUST BE ON
IT AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.
YEAH, BECAUSE WE DON'T -- YEAH, WE DON'T WANT ANY PUPPET
STRINGS TO BE ALLEGED OR TO BE INTERPRETED IN ANY WAY.
SO THAT WILL CERTAINLY -- BY THE WAY, I DON'T THINK I'M
GOING TO BE HERE TO VOTE ON THIS.
I'M JUST TALKING IN THE WIND HERE, RIGHT?
BUT FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH.
WITH REGARDS TO THE --
10:56:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU'LL BE HERE TO VOTE ON IT.
10:56:37AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO.
NOVEMBER 15.
10:56:39AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
CERTAINLY GOING TO BE HERE ON OCTOBER --
10:56:43AM >>LUIS VIERA:
OH, YEAH.
BUT THEN WITH REGARD TO THE SPENDING ISSUE, I KNOW WHY THIS
IS PUT IN.
THIS SAYS CAPITAL PROJECTS, BUT THERE COULD BE OTHER BUDGET

ALLOCATIONS.
I THINK ABOUT THE SPECIAL NEEDS INTERNSHIP PROGRAM THAT IF I
DIDN'T OBSESSIVELY STAY ON THAT, IT WOULD HAVE NEVER
HAPPENED.
I THINK I HAD TO RUN THROUGH THREE YEARS OF THAT BEFORE
FULLY OPERATIONAL.
THE RETURNING CITIZENS PROGRAM.
THE OFFICE OF RETURNING CITIZENS, WHICH IS NOW GETTING UP.
SO THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU PASS AS A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT
IT'S INCUMBENT ON YOU TO PUSH THEM AND KEEP THEM ON THE
AGENDA AND FRONT OF MIND.
THAT BEING SAID, THERE IS ALSO A GREAT PUBLIC INTEREST IN
MAKING SURE THAT THESE ISSUES ARE BY VIRTUE OF PROCEDURE
BROUGHT UP BEFORE COUNCIL, WHETHER IT'S A CAPITAL ALLOTMENT,
WHETHER IT'S A PROGRAM AND SO FORTH.
HOW YOU WRITE THAT IN EXACTLY, THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE
DETAILS.
BUT I AM OPEN TO SOMETHING IN THE CHARTER THAT DOES SPECIFY
THAT JUST FOR THE RECORD.
I AM OPEN TO SOMETHING.
AGAIN, THE DEVIL OR WHATEVER WOULD BE IN THE DETAILS.
I'M CERTAINLY OPEN BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN WITH MY OWN
PROGRAMS THAT I'VE TRIED TO PUSH.
OBVIOUSLY, YOU HAVE STATION 24, WHICH IS A LARGER EXAMPLE
WHEN WE GOT DESIGN FUNDING IN '23 AND TAKEN THREE YEARS TO

DO THE GROUND BREAKING.
BUT THAT IS A BIGGER THING.
I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT INASMUCH AS THE SMALLER PROGRAMS.
SO THAT'S IT.
THANK YOU.
10:58:06AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
10:58:09AM >>BILL CARLSON:
JUST ON THESE TWO ISSUES, TO THE LAST ONE,
WE HAD THE SITUATION STATION 24, WAS IT 15 MILLION WE
ALLOCATED AND FOUND OUT THE NEXT YEAR THEY JUST DIDN'T SPEND
IT AND SPENT IT ON SOMETHING ELSE AND DIDN'T TELL US WHEN WE
MOVED IT THAT WE MOVED IT TO SOMETHING ELSE.
WE ALSO HAVE THE EXAMPLE OF TAMPA UNION STATION, WHICH WAS
ACTUALLY THE CRA PROJECT, BUT THEY DECIDED JUST NOT TO DO IT
BECAUSE THE CITY OWNS IT.
IT'S BEEN FUNDED FOR SIX OR SEVEN YEARS AND IT TOOK MOST OF
THAT TIME FOR THEM TO EVEN START.
SAME THING WITH JACKSON HOUSE.
IT WAS A CRA PROJECT.
THEY JUST DECIDED NOT TO TELL THE JACKSON HOUSE THAT WE HAD
ALLOCATED THE MONEY, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A PRESS
CONFERENCE ABOUT IT THAT WE WEREN'T INVITED TO.
I THINK THE PROBLEM IS NOT GIVING UPDATES, BECAUSE WE CAN
ASK FOR UPDATES.
ALL THAT IS DOING IS KIND OF EMBARRASSING THEM.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY.

WE CAN ALLOCATE THE MONEY BUT CAN'T FORCE THE ADMINISTRATION
TO DO ANYTHING.
IF WE HAVE PROJECTS THAT WE WANT TO GO FORWARD, THAT THE
PUBLIC WANTS, THE PUBLIC CAN COME HERE ALL THE TIME.
WE CAN APPROVE WHATEVER WE WANT.
WE CAN EVEN APPROVE BUDGETS BUT THEY WON'T DO IT.
IF IT IS AN ADMINISTRATION THAT'S NOT COLLABORATIVE, THEY
JUST WON'T DO IT.
IN THIS CASE, THIS ADMINISTRATION JUST DIDN'T TELL US THEY
DIDN'T DO IT AND REFUSE TO EVEN TALK ABOUT IT.
IT IS A HORRIBLE SITUATION.
THE OTHER THING WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, I CAN GO THROUGH
THIS MORE LATER, BUT WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE EXAMPLES
WHERE THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS USED CITY STAFF, LEGAL STAFF,
COMMUNICATION STAFF, POLITICAL STAFF AGAINST CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS TO DO INVESTIGATION OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I HAD AN EDITOR TELL ME THAT A PERSON FROM STAFF GAVE -- OR
OFFERED AN OPPOSITION RESEARCH FOLDER ON ME.
ALLEGATIONS BY STAFF THAT THEY SAW ONE OF THE MAYOR'S STAFF
GOING AROUND TO STAFF MEMBERS DURING THE LAST ELECTION
RAISING MONEY DURING THE DAY, RAISING MONEY FOR MY OPPONENT
AND RALLYING PEOPLE TO VOLUNTEER.
I FILED MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS WITH SOME WITH HR, SOME WITH THE
CHIEF OF STAFF, SOME WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND SOME WITH
THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND NO RECOURSE WHATSOEVER.

IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW BAD THESE FOLKS ACT, THEY DO THINGS
THAT ARE DEFINITELY UNETHICAL AND SOME OF THEM MAY BE
ILLEGAL, BUT THERE'S NO MECHANISM TO STOP THEM FROM DOING
IT.
WHEN THEY COME AFTER CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR POLITICAL
PURPOSES AND ATTACK, AND THEN THEY'LL SAY, OH, WELL THERE IS
NO EVIDENCE.
REVIEWED AND NO EVIDENCE.
ABSOLUTELY EVIDENCE.
HARD EVIDENCE.
THE PROBLEM IS NOT THAT THERE IS A LACK OF EVIDENCE.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE'S NO MECHANISM TO PUNISH THEM FOR
DOING IT.
SO WE NEED AN INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THERE'S ALSO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN
DISCLOSED.
WE HAVE A FORMER MAYOR WHO IS LOBBYING THIS MAYOR.
I'VE TALKED TO AT LEAST TWO OR THREE OF HIS CLIENTS WHO HAVE
TOLD ME TO MY FACE THAT HE'S LOBBYING AND THE MAYOR HAS NO
RECORD OF IT.
THE MEDIA WRITES THAT HE JUST IS NOT A LOBBYIST BECAUSE HE
HASN'T REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST.
WELL, THAT'S UNETHICAL.
WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THESE THINGS?
SOMEBODY CAN LOBBY THE MAYOR AND ADMINISTRATION SET A

MEETING ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENTS AND JUST NOT DISCLOSE IT
AND SAY THEY ARE NOT A LOBBYIST?
IN AT LEAST ONE CASE, THE MAYOR DIDN'T HAVE IT ON HER
CALENDAR AND THE REPORTER HAD TO DIG TO FIND OUT WHO WAS
THERE.
THERE'S ALL KINDS OF UNETHICAL THINGS HAPPENING IN THIS
ADMINISTRATION AND THE LAST ADMINISTRATION.
AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A THIRD PARTY THAT CAN INVESTIGATE IT.
THE MAYOR HAS CONTROL OVER THE COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT, THE
POLITICAL DEPARTMENT AND THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND HR TO COME
AFTER US.
AND WE HAVE NO RECOURSE WHATSOEVER TO STOP THEM FROM DOING
THOSE UNETHICAL THINGS, BUT ALSO TO STOP THEM FROM THE
UNETHICAL THINGS THAT THEY ARE DOING ON THEIR OWN.
THANK YOU.
11:01:54AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG.
11:01:57AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
I WAS TRYING TO FIND THE PAGE.
TO YOUR FIRST COMMENT ABOUT TALKING ABOUT PROJECTS AND THE
MONEY THAT IS ALLOCATED, I THINK THERE WAS A SUGGESTION MADE
-- I CANNOT FIND WHAT PAGE -- TO HAVE WHATEVER MONEY IS
ALLOCATED TO A PROJECT, THAT YOU HAVE TO SPEND IT WITHIN
THAT FISCAL YEAR ON THE PROJECT.
11:02:18AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
[INAUDIBLE]
11:02:21AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
OKAY.
THAT'S THE ONE.

THE CLENDENIN QUESTIONS.
WHICH NUMBER WAS THAT?
I THINK I CIRCLED IT.
NUMBER 22?
11:02:31AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
THAT ONE AND THEN --
11:02:34AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
YEAH, 22.
BE REQUIRED TO -- SAME FISCAL YEAR WHICH THE BUDGET IS
APPROVED.
I THINK THAT IS -- EVEN IF, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO LIKE THE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND THE TRANSPARENCY, IF WE ALLOCATE
SOMETHING AND WE FIND OUT, OH, WE HAVEN'T DONE IT YET, NOW
WE'VE ALLOCATED THIS MONEY TWO, THREE, FOUR YEARS AND HASN'T
BEEN SPENT YET ON A CERTAIN PROJECT.
AGAIN, IT MAY NOT BE SOMETHING -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S
SOMETHING THAT GOES IN THE CHARTER, BUT SOME KIND OF --
SOMETHING THAT GIVES IT SOME TEETH TO SAY THESE ARE THE
PROJECTS THAT WE WANT TO SEE.
WE'VE ALLOCATED THIS MONEY FOR IT TO BE DONE.
IT NEEDS TO BE SPENT WITHIN THIS TIME FRAME AND NEEDS TO GET
DONE.
SO WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE IS OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, AND
WHETHER IT'S IN THE CHARTER OR NOT, BUT SOMETHING SO WE'RE
NOT -- I HEARD PLENTY OF TIMES, EVEN BEFORE I WAS ON THE
COUNCIL, LIKE THESE PROJECTS TAKE FOREVER AND TAKE FOREVER
TO HAPPEN.

WHAT DO WE DO?
WHAT CAN WE DO SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T
CONTINUE TO HAPPEN DOWN THE ROAD?
11:03:36AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE SAW THAT IN REAL-TIME THIS YEAR WITH
PAVING.
ALLOCATED ALL THE MONEY FOR PAVING.
I'VE ACTUALLY HANDWRITTEN A NOTE ON THERE.
ON THAT PAGE, GOT 22, SHOULD BE HELD BY AN ORDINANCE.
I THINK THAT 15 WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THAT WITH AN
ORDINANCE.
THOSE ARE THE TWO THAT WERE HOT-BUTTON ITEMS FOR ME.
11:03:55AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHAT ABOUT 16?
16 IS A HOT BUTTON.
LISA, YOU HAVE THAT PAGE, IF YOU COULD PUT THAT UP?
SORRY, YOU DO.
YOU ARE LIKE WAY AHEAD OF ME.
I'M SORRY.
I APOLOGIZE.
11:04:10AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE A CHARTER
AMENDMENT.
11:04:12AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I KNOW.
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DID ASK THEM TO DISCUSS,
AND THAT'S THE BIGGEST ONE REALLY THAT WAS UNTOUCHED.
11:04:22AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CHARTER AMENDMENT
FOR SURE.

11:04:25AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I DO BELIEVE WE SHOULD DISCUSS THAT TODAY AS
-- I DON'T KNOW.
I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO GO IN SOME TYPE OF ORDER.
11:04:32AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE'RE KIND OF FLESHING IT OUT, THROWING IT
OUT.
THIS IS A BROAD NET AND THEN START FOCUSING AS COUNCIL
MEMBERS HAVE THE CONVERSATION.
I SEE COUNCILMAN MIRANDA'S LIGHT IS ON.
11:04:43AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ADMINISTRATION, NO MATTER WHO IS THERE
OR WHO IS ON THE COUNCIL, AND YOU LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENS,
SOMETIMES IT HAPPENS BECAUSE THERE'S NO OTHER WAY OF DOING
IT, PIPES PROGRAM.
THE PIPES PROGRAM WAS YEARS AGO.
WE'RE SPENDING 35 TO $40 MILLION AND JUST REPAIRING PIPES
EVERY YEAR.
FINALLY, WE DECIDED SOMETIME BACK IF WE HAVE A PIPES
PROGRAM, CHANGE ALL THE PIPES ON THE GROUND, WATER AND
WASTEWATER AT ABOUT $2.9 BILLION COST.
WE STARTED COLLECTING THE MONEY AT $2 A MONTH FOR WATER AND
WASTEWATER.
NOW IT'S UP TO 8 OR 9 DOLLARS A MONTH BECAUSE OF COSTS.
WE WERE DOING A MILE WAS COSTING US A MILLION AND A HALF
DOLLARS A MILE.
ALL OF A SUDDEN WENT TO FOUR AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS A

MILE BECAUSE THE COSTS OUTSIDE, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
WE HAD TO STOP IT.
WHO DO YOU BLAME?
THE COUNCIL, THE MAYOR?
WHO?
IT WASN'T US.
WAS IT THEM?
I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS.
SO WHO WAS IT?
THE CONTRACTOR?
IT STOPPED AND NOW THEY ARE STARTING IT ON ANOTHER AREA FROM
WHAT I TALKED TO BRAD ON IT THE OTHER DAY.
WE'RE DOING IT LIMITED.
WE'VE DONE ABOUT 78 OR 80 MILES OF THAT AND 200 MILES OF ONE
OR THE OTHER.
I FORGET WHICH.
WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS.
BUT THIS PROGRESS, YOU DON'T HAVE A CITY THAT HAS NO
BUILDINGS OR NO NOTHING.
YOU HAVE A CITY THAT'S ALREADY GOING AND DOING WELL AND YOU
HAVE TO REPLACE WHAT YOU HAVE AT THE SAME TIME YOU HAVE ALL
THE THINGS GOING ON AROUND YOU.
IT IS NOT EASY.
WE DO NOT CONTROL COSTS.
THE COST IS WHAT WE HAVE IN LABOR, AND WE CAN DO SOMETHING.

WE STARTED DOING SOME ON OUR OWN.
YOU LOOK AT DIFFERENT COSTS, WHAT DOES IT COST TO START
SOMETHING NEW?
NOT HERE TO BLAME THE ADMINISTRATION OR BLAME THE COUNCIL,
BUT WE CAN PASS ALL WE WANT.
IF THE COST GOES UP, WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BLAME?
THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS HERE ON PAPER THAT I READ.
YEAH, WHO IS GOING TO -- EVERYBODY -- AND I'M NOT AGAINST
WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER ABOUT THE GENTLEMAN OR THE LADY,
WHOEVER WILL BE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, WHO IS GOING TO LOOK
AT HIM OR HER?
IS THAT WHERE WE'RE STARTING?
YOU HAVE TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN YOURSELF BEFORE YOU HAVE
CONFIDENCE IN SOMEBODY ELSE.
IF I GOT TO TELL THE MAYOR TO GO TO HELL, I DON'T GIVE A
DAMN WHO THE MAYOR IS.
I'LL GO SEE HIM AND TELL HIM.
11:07:12AM >> OR HER.
11:07:13AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I NEVER CRITICIZE ANY MAYOR WHEN I'M ON
THE DAIS BECAUSE I'M CRITICIZING MY CITY.
THAT'S HOW I OPERATE.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.
11:07:21AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU.
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
11:07:22AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA'S POINT IS

GOOD ABOUT WHO IS GOING TO REVIEW THE IG.
I THINK THAT THE OVERRIDING ISSUE, THOUGH, IS IN THE FIRST
THREE POINTS ON THIS CLENDENIN SHEET, WE'RE CALLING IT, BUT
IT IS WHO HAS CONTROL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE A CITY ATTORNEY WHO SEEMS VERY EVEN WITH
ALL OF US, BUT WE'VE HAD CITY ATTORNEYS WHO DON'T ACT IN THE
BEST INTEREST OF CITY COUNCIL.
11:07:54AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ACTUALLY THE ONE WITH THE LETTERHEAD.
11:07:57AM >>BILL CARLSON:
IF WE HAVE CONTROL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, IF
WE HAD THE RIGHT TO FIRE THE CITY ATTORNEY AND I THINK WE
SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIRE THE MAYOR'S SENIOR STAFF,
SHOULD HAVE FIRED THE COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR AND POLITICAL
DIRECTOR ALREADY YEARS AGO.
THERE'S JUST BEEN TOO MUCH POLITICAL CHAOS IN THE CITY.
THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD NOT BE PAYING FOR IT.
PEOPLE ON THE OUTSIDE WANT TO DO IT, THAT'S FINE, BUT NOT
PEOPLE BEING PAID.
EXAMPLE IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, 2018 AND WE FOUND
THIS OUT BY ACCIDENT IN LIKE 2020.
2018, CITY ATTORNEY MICROPHONE TWO PARAGRAPH MEMO SAYING
IT'S OPINION THAT CITY COUNCIL NO LONGER NEEDS TO REVIEW OR
APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS.
COMPLETELY WRONG.
IT WAS COMPLETELY AGAINST THE CHARTER.
WE FOUND OUT BY ACCIDENT AND WE HAD TO FIGHT THE CITY

ATTORNEY AT THE TIME, GREAT PERSON, BUT WE HAD TO FIGHT TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY FOLLOWED THE CHARTER.
THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS NO RIGHT BY CHARTER TO CHANGE THE
CHARTER, AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
THE CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED HUNDREDS OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS
WITHOUT CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL, AND THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE
HAPPENED.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE, THE SAME CITY ATTORNEY THERE IN 2008 AND
ALSO IN 2019 PRESUMABLY IS THE ONE WHO DIDN'T PUT THE
CHARTER AMENDMENTS ON THE BALLOT.
THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION APPROVED THEM.
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THEM BEFORE MY TIME, AND THE CITY
ATTORNEY DIDN'T PUT THEM ON THE BALLOT.
IS ANYBODY INVESTIGATING WHY THAT HAPPENED?
IS THAT BECAUSE THE MAYOR AT THE TIME ORDERED IT NOT TO
HAPPEN?
OR DID SOMEBODY JUST MAKE A MISTAKE?
HOW CAN A CITY ATTORNEY MAKE A MISTAKE LIKE THAT?
THEN MORE EGREGIOUS ONES, WHERE 2020, 2021, CITY ATTORNEY
PROVEN IN THE MEDIA FROM PUBLIC RECORDS, CITY ATTORNEY SPENT
HOURS AND HOURS WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE SUING OR THREATENING TO
SUE AT LEAST THREE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
IF A MAYOR IS USING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS A WEAPON
AGAINST CITY COUNCIL OR DOING THINGS NOT ETHICAL OR ILLEGAL,
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIRE THEM.

CITY ATTORNEY LIKE WE HAVE NOW WHO IS LISTENING TO BOTH
SIDES, THEN WE MIGHT NOT NEED AN IG.
11:10:12AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.
MR. SHELBY, AS WE FURTHER IN THIS CONVERSATION, IF YOU COULD
START TAKING NOTES.
11:10:19AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I AM VERY POOR AT THAT.
11:10:22AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I EXPECT TO YOU IMPROVE YOUR SKILL LEVEL.
11:10:26AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'LL DO THE BEST, BUT MY SUGGESTION IS --
11:10:30AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE'LL TELL YOU WHAT YOU NEED TO JOT DOWN.
11:10:34AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
BY THE WAY, THERE IS REALLY NO REASON WHY
YOU CAN'T DO IT BY MOTION AND VOTE.
11:10:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I UNDERSTAND THAT.
STICK WITH ME.
IF YOU COULD CAPTURE -- IF SOMEONE POINTS OUT SOMETHING VERY
SPECIFIC THAT NEEDS TO BE CAPTURED -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO
TALK ABOUT THIS.
11:10:55AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I HAVE TO THINK AND WRITE AT THE SAME TIME.
11:10:58AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IF YOU WOULD CAPTURE, IF I HAVE TO POINT
TO YOU AND SAY PLEASE CAPTURE THAT.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
11:11:04AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MS. SCHARF IS TRULY THE BEST NOTE TAKER EVER.
11:11:09AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IF YOU WANT TO THROW YOUR AIDE UNDER THE
BUS AND ASK HER TO COME OUT HERE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
11:11:14AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
AS OPPOSED TO ME.
11:11:16AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MS. SCHARF IF YOU WANT TO COME OUT HERE OR

KEEP THE NOTES YOURSELF IN THE OFFICE, WHATEVER WORKS.
WOULD YOU LIKE HER OUT HERE?
MS. SCHARF, IT'S YOUR CHOICE.
IF YOU COULD TAKE NOTES.
I WANT YOU TO START WITH THIS ONE.
WE ARE NOT DOING SECTION 2.15.
THAT BEING THE REZONING PROCESS.
WE'VE DECIDED NO ON THAT.
NO ACTION ON THAT.
IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, PLEASE, WHICH IS THREE OF
8, THE ONE THING I FORGOT TO MENTION WAS THE APPOINTMENT ON
SECTION 6.03.
THEY BASICALLY TOOK OUT THE NOMINATION AND WENT BACK TO
CONFIRMATION.
THAT'S A NO-GO FOR ME.
11:12:01AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I BELIEVE ALSO REFERENCE IN THE REPORT THAT
THAT ACTUALLY WENT TO THE VOTERS THAT CHANGE.
11:12:05AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
IT DID.
11:12:06AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
AND WAS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
11:12:08AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
IT WAS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
11:12:10AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WHAT THE CRC IS RECOMMENDING IS UNDO WHAT
THE VOTERS PREVIOUSLY VOTED ON.
11:12:16AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I'M SAYING NO TO
IT.
ALSO, ONE OF THE REASONS, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, WE

CURRENTLY HAVE AN INTERIM CHIEF OF POLICE, AND THAT'S
ILLEGAL.
11:12:26AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
REAL QUICK.
SAM, WOULD YOU PLEASE MAKE A COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS WE'RE
LOOKING AT?
THE ONE THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ONE, THE ONE ON MY
LETTERHEAD, AND THEN THE SUGGESTIONS I PRINTED OUT SO WE CAN
GIVE THAT TO KELLY SO AS SHE'S MAKING NOTES, SHE HAS AN
ACTUAL COPY IN FRONT OF HER.
IF YOU NEED A HARD COPY, COME GRAB MINE AND COPY IT ON THE
MACHINE.
SAM, IF YOU COULD DO THAT, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.
11:12:54AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I WANT TO BRING THAT ONE UP FOR A QUICK VOTE
TO SEE IF ANYBODY THINKS WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE MAYOR
APPOINTING.
11:13:01AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THE VOTERS ALREADY VOTED ON IT.
11:13:04AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
DOES ANYBODY THINK THAT IS A GOOD IDEA TO GO
BACK TO THE MAYOR APPOINTS?
SHOW OF HANDS.
11:13:10AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
11:13:11AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I WANT TO ADD, THE CITY COUNCIL, I FORGOT
THE YEAR, 2020 OR SOMETHING, WE PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT AND
THE VOTERS VOTED ON IT.
AND NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO CHANGE IT BACK.
THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED.

11:13:27AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MS. SCHARF, 6.03 APPOINTMENT, WE'RE NOT
APPROVING THAT.
11:13:35AM >>BILL CARLSON:
TO THE POINT ABOUT THE POLICE CHIEF ALSO,
THAT WAS PUT IN THERE ALSO INTENTIONALLY BECAUSE THE LAST
ADMINISTRATION, I THINK THIS ADMINISTRATION, TOO, I CAN'T
REMEMBER EXACTLY, HAD PEOPLE AS INTERIM FOREVER.
I THINK ONE OF THEM WAS THE CFO DURING THE LAST
ADMINISTRATION.
WAS A GREAT PERSON BUT SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPOINTED.
I TALKED TO CHIEF OWENS AND BENNETT ABOUT MAKING THE INTERIM
CHIEF PERMANENT.
HE'S GOT TO KNOW THAT WHOEVER WINS MAY PICK SOMEBODY ELSE,
BUT FOR THE SAKE OF THE COMMUNITY, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD
HAVE AN INTERIM POLICE CHIEF ANYWAY.
I THINK WHOEVER IS POLICE CHIEF SHOULD BE POLICE CHIEF.
THEY NEED THE AUTHORITY BECAUSE PUBLIC SAFETY IS TOO
IMPORTANT.
11:14:22AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
AGREED.
THAT'S WHAT I SAID.
I THINK INTERIM CHIEF OWEN IS DOING A PHENOMENAL JOB.
I REALLY LOVE HIM.
I THINK HE SHOULD HAVE THE TITLE.
IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN IN THIS CITY, WE NEED TO HAVE
SOMEONE WHOSE JOB IT IS THAT CAN'T BE SWITCHED IMMEDIATELY.
PEOPLE NEED THE CONFIDENCE IN THE CHIEF.

AND HIM BEING NAMED INTERIM JUST SAYS THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE
CONFIDENCE.
I HAVE THE CONFIDENCE IN HIM AND I THINK ALL OF US DO.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULDN'T JUST APPROVE HIM.
I 100% AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.
SO FAR, WE HAVE SAID NO TO SECTION 2.15 AND SECTION 6.03.
WE'RE STILL DEBATING 7.12.
DO WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THESE AND JUST APPROVE, GO BY
SECTION?
AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK TO OTHERS.
11:15:11AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ARE WE DONE WITH GENERAL DISCUSSION?
NOBODY WANTS GENERAL DISCUSSION, THAT'S FINE.
THAT CAN BE OUR NEXT DIRECTION.
11:15:19AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
SECTION 2.03, THE ONLY QUICK --
11:15:25AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
TO REQUIRE THE ATTENDANCE OF THE
MEMBERS, MEANING THAT MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL HAVE, WHAT,
CERTAIN DAYS THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO MISS ON MEETINGS?
WHAT IS THAT EXACTLY?
IT SAYS COMPEL AND SWITCH TO REQUIRE THE ATTENDANCE OF THE
MEMBERS.
AND TO ENFORCE THE SAME BY FINE OR PENALTY IF THEY SO ELECT.
11:15:49AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WHAT IS THE LEGAL DEFINITION BETWEEN
COMPEL AND REQUIRE?
WHY WAS THAT -- ANY OF THE MEMBERS FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW
COMMISSION REMEMBER WHAT THAT DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT?

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPEL AND REQUIRE?
11:16:04AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CAN YOU PLEASE PUT THAT BACK UP?
11:16:06AM >>LUIS VIERA:
IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, YOU SAID IF WE COULD
RECOGNIZE THE MEMBERS, I THINK THREE THAT ARE HERE.
11:16:15AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT WOULD BE LOVELY.
11:16:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I SEE TWO.
11:16:17AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I SEE THREE, FOUR.
BECAUSE WE HAVE THE INTERIM.
COME ON UP.
11:16:24AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU GUYS WANT TO SIT CLOSE TO US SO WE CAN
CALL YOU UP IF WE HAVE TO.
11:16:34AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
COME UP AND INTRODUCE YOURSELVES FOR A THANK
YOU.
11:16:36AM >> ALAN COHN, VICE-CHAIR OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
I CAME HERE TODAY BECAUSE, NUMBER ONE, I WANTED TO THANK ALL
OF YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A MARK ON THE CITY THAT
WE ALL LOVE SO MUCH.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO, UNLESS YOU HAVE
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
11:16:56AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH, NO SPEECHES.
INTRODUCTION IS FINE.
11:17:00AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THANK YOU.
11:17:01AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BOBBY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO INTRODUCE
YOURSELF?
11:17:07AM >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL.

BOBBY CREIGHTON, CHARTER REVIEW ADVISORY COMMISSION MEMBER.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO EXPRESS MY DEEPEST GRATITUDE FOR THE
HONOR TO BE ABLE TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION.
IT WAS THE PRIVILEGE OF A LIFETIME IN MY CIVIC INVOLVEMENT
TO DATE.
I GUESS I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WITH THE CAVEAT WE DID DELIBERATE A LOT OF THIS AS A GROUP.
I WOULD NOT WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ANYONE WHO ISN'T
PRESENT TODAY.
11:17:34AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE UNDERSTAND.
WE DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND.
11:17:35AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
HE WAS MY APPOINTEE.
11:17:39AM >> DID AN INCREDIBLE JOB.
HE WAS LOOKING AT THE CITY CHARTER --
11:17:43AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
NO SPEECHES.
11:17:45AM >> -- GOING BACK TO --
11:17:47AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
NO SPEECHES.
[ LAUGHTER ]
GO AHEAD.
11:17:49AM >> GOOD MORNING.
ALISON HEWITT, ALTERNATE.
IT WAS EXCEPTIONALLY ENERGETIC DISCUSSIONS.
WHEN YOU THINK YOU START A MEETING AT 6 THAT WILL GO UNTIL
9, THAT YOU THINK YOU WILL END EARLY, BUT WE NEVER END
EARLY.

11:18:06AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU ARE ALREADY POLITICIANS.
YOU GET A MICROPHONE AND YOU HAVE TO GIVE A SPEECH.
11:18:12AM >> ALWAYS.
YOU KNOW ME AT THE PODIUM, GOT TO MAKE MY STATEMENT.
WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE ALTERNATE POSITION.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO LEARN ABOUT THE CHARTER, AND WE
ARE HERE FOR QUESTIONS BECAUSE ALL OF US HERE DEFINITELY
PARTICIPATED.
WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE NOT
HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE WORKING, BUT THANK YOU TO THEM AS
WELL.
11:18:32AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
JUST SO YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ASKED ME IF THEY
SHOULD BE HERE, I SAID YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO BE.
THIS IS NOT AN INDICTMENT OF WHY OTHER PEOPLE ARE NOT HERE.
ACTUALLY ASKED AND SAID NO.
11:18:52AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPEL AND
REQUIRE?
WHAT WAS THE DISCUSSION THERE?
11:19:00AM >> I'LL TAKE A STAB AT IT.
FROM MY RECOLLECTION, FEEL FREE TO HELP OUT IF YOU HAVE
DETAILS, IT WAS THOUGHT THAT THE WORD COMPEL IMPLIED SOME
DEGREE OF FORCE SUCH THAT I SUPPOSE THERE WAS LIKE A LEGAL
STANDARD THERE FOR THE WORD COMPEL.
HAS A LITTLE MORE WEIGHT THAN REQUIRE DID.
THAT'S MY PERSONAL RECOLLECTION.

11:19:30AM >> YES, WE HAD SEVERAL LAWYERS ON THE COMMISSION WHO FELT
THAT WAS TOO IMPACTFUL WHEN YOU COULD ACHIEVE THE SAME
RESULTS WITH REQUIRE.
11:19:42AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY.
THIS SECTION IN THE CHARTER CREATES THE ABILITY TO DO THAT,
BUT I WILL SHARE WITH YOU THAT THERE IS NO MECHANISM IN
EXISTENCE NOW THAT HAS ENFORCING FINE OR PENALTY.
IT SAYS IF THEY SO ELECT.
TO THIS POINT, THERE IS NO REMEDY THAT'S BEEN CREATED BY
COUNCIL.
11:20:03AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
11:20:05AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NOTHING TO PREVENT US.
SAYS COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY ADOPT BY SUCH BYLAWS, REGULATIONS
AND RULES OF PROCEDURE, IF WE FOUND THERE IS A PROGRAM, WE
COULD FIX IT WITH RULES OF PROCEDURE.
11:20:14AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY.
11:20:17AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'M NOT HEARING ANY OBJECTION.
WE ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 2.03 FROM THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMISSION.
WITHOUT OBJECTION.
OKAY.
11:20:26AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
STAFF IS AT THE END.
11:20:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT IS A YES.
ACCEPTING LANGUAGE 2.03 FROM CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
SECTION 2.04, STAFF ALLOCATED WITHIN --

11:20:41AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
ALLOCATE --
11:20:42AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I AGREE.
ANY OBJECTION TO THE LANGUAGE?
HEARING NO OBJECTION.
WE ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION IN
2.04.
2.08.
THIS IS ABOUT THE READINGS.
MR. SHELBY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CHIME IN ON THIS ONE?
11:21:03AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I HAVE NO COMMENT ON THIS.
MIND YOU, THIS IS PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF GENERAL
LAW, WHICH IS OPEN-ENDED BUT IN CHAPTER 166, WHICH MAY
CHANGE.
BUT I HAVE NOT REVIEWED THIS FOR LEGALITY.
YOU HAVE AN EXCELLENT ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMISSION.
SO I HAVE NO COMMENT.
11:21:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HEARING NO OBJECTION, ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE
IN 2.08.
ANY OBJECTION?
HEARING NONE.
WE'LL ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE IN 2.08.
11:21:39AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
READING REGARDING, WHEN TWO -- THE
AMENDMENT WOULD BE, PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF GENERAL
LAW WHEN TWO READINGS ARE REQUIRED, ORDINANCES SHALL BE READ

ONLY BY TITLE ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS AND IT GOES ON FROM
THERE.
IT'S REGARDING THE PASSAGE OF ORDINANCES.
11:21:55AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CTTV, AS MUCH AS EVERYBODY LOVES LOOKING
AT MY FACE ON TV, IF YOU GUYS COULD LEAVE THE DOCUMENTS UP
ON THE PUBLIC MONITOR FOR PEOPLE TO REVIEW WHILE WE'RE
HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.
YOU JUST HAVE TO IMAGINE WHAT WE LOOK LIKE.
ALREADY ELIMINATED 2.15.
THAT WAS THE REZONING PROCESS.
REZONING HEARING.
11:22:17AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
11:22:18AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
AFFIRMATIVE.
SO WE'VE GOT TERM 6.02.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
11:22:25AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MY GUESS IS THAT THIS -- THEY DID MENTION
SOMEWHERE IN THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, I BELIEVE
SOMEONE SAID THERE WERE QUITE A FEW THINGS THAT DIDN'T MAKE
IT IN.
COUNCILMAN CARLSON ALLUDED TO IT EARLIER.
I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS INADVERTENTLY LEFT IN.
I'M ALMOST POSITIVE WE TOOK OUT ANYTHING THAT HAD TO DO WITH
1979.
AND ALL OF THESE DATES.

I THINK THIS WAS MISSED.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THIS.
11:22:52AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I AGREE.
I SAY WE ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE WITHOUT OBJECTION FOR 6.02.
11:22:56AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHAT THIS IS TERMS.
THIS IS THE TERMS OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND IT TALKS ABOUT
THE 1979 MUNICIPAL ELECTION.
SO IT'S A LITTLE OLD.
11:23:09AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IT'S STALE.
I DON'T HEAR ANY OBJECTIONS.
ACCEPT LANGUAGE 6.02 BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
ONE MORE TIME, AGREED BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO NOT ACCEPT THE
LANGUAGE IN 6.03 UNDER APPOINTMENT.
I HEAR NO OBJECTIONS.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
THAT IS GONE.
STRUCK THROUGH A RESIDENT OF THE CITY AND IS.
11:23:34AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA?
MEANING WHO, AN ELECTED, SOMEONE RUNNING FOR THESE POSITIONS
DOES NOT HAVE TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA?
AM I READING IT WRONG OR WHAT?
THIS IS 6.05.
IT SAYS THAT THE OFFICER --
11:23:52AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MR. CREIGHTON, YOU RAISED YOUR HAND.

11:23:58AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
OR THEY CAN WIN AND THEN MOVE IN?
11:24:01AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE
CLERK, WHEN YOU SAY BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT, THAT'S REALLY --
IT'S NOT ON A MOTION AND VOTE AT THIS POINT.
YOU'RE LISTENING TO THEM AT THIS TIME.
THIS IS PRELIMINARY.
11:24:10AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES.
11:24:12AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THANK YOU.
11:24:13AM >> 6.05.
11:24:14AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THE OATH.
11:24:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
STRUCK THROUGH A RESIDENT OF THE CITY AND
IS.
11:24:19AM >> SO THERE WAS APPARENTLY A TRANSMISSION ERROR IN SOME OF
THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS THAT WERE APPROVED IN THE LAST ROUND.
I FORGET THE EXACT DETAILS.
11:24:32AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE UNDERSTAND THAT PART.
THIS ACTUALLY ACCEPTS THE OTHER LANGUAGE THAT HAD BEEN
APPROVED AND WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TRANSMITTED?
11:24:38AM >> RIGHT.
SO THIS LANGUAGE DOESN'T CHANGE WHETHER OR NOT AN OFFICER
HAS TO BE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY.
IT DEALS WHETHER OR NOT, WHEN THEY SWEAR THEIR OATH THAT
THEY ARE, WHICH IS A LITTLE CONFUSING.
11:24:53AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
YOU HAVE TO LIVE HERE IN A CERTAIN
PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE YOU QUALIFY AND ALL THAT.

11:25:01AM >> WHAT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST, MAYBE WE COULD SEGREGATE THE
ISSUES THAT WE WERE INFORMED ABOUT BY OUR ATTORNEY IN TERMS
OF JUST THE CLEANUP OF ISSUES FROM THE LAST CHARTER REVIEW
AND WHETHER IT WAS DATES OR WHAT WAS LEFT IN THE --
11:25:20AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE UNDERSTAND.
MR. SHELBY.
11:25:21AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
JUST TO CLEAR UP ANY CONFUSION, BECAUSE
THERE HAS BEEN TALK ABOUT CORRECTING ERRORS THAT MIGHT HAVE
BEEN.
DID THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ACTUALLY WORK THROUGH
THOSE TO BE AWARE OF THEM?
WAS MADE AWARE OF THEM?
AND IS INCLUDED NOW IN THIS PROCESS OF ITS RECOMMENDATIONS?
I JUST NEED TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY ATTORNEY
HAS PREPARED A MEMO WITH REGARD TO ITEMS, AND I JUST WANT TO
KNOW IF, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, THEY WERE BROUGHT TO YOUR
ATTENTION AS A BOARD AND YOU INCORPORATED THAT IN YOUR
RECOMMENDATIONS.
11:26:01AM >> WE DID.
AND JUST TO PROVIDE CLARITY, THE CHARTER DOESN'T REQUIRE
CERTAIN OFFICERS TO BE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE CHIEF OF POLICE OR THE CFO.
IF YOU READ THE LANGUAGE IN THE OATH, EACH OFFICER OF THE
CITY BEFORE ENTERING UPON DISCHARGE, ET CETERA, SHALL SWEAR

THAT THE OFFICER IS A RESIDENT OF THE CITY CONFLICTS WITH
LANGUAGE ELSEWHERE IN THE CHARTER.
11:26:24AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU'RE RIGHT.
AS I READ THROUGH THE PARAGRAPH, I AGREE.
I THINK WE SHOULD ACCEPT THIS LANGUAGE.
YES.
11:26:28AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THANK YOU.
11:26:31AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
BECAUSE WE NO LONGER REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT HEADS.
RIGHT, CORRECT.
11:26:38AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE REQUIREMENTS.
11:26:39AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
AND ALSO ENTITLED TO HOLD.
THEY ALREADY HAVE THAT.
[OFF MICROPHONE]
11:26:51AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
11:26:54AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I WAS TRYING TO FIND THE EXACT LANGUAGE.
I VOTED AGAINST TAKING AWAY THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT.
I KNOW THE MAJORITY OF YOU ALL VOTED FOR IT.
BUT WHEN IT WENT TO THE BALLOT LANGUAGE, THE WAY IT WAS
TRANSLATED, THE EFFECT OF IT IS THAT IT ASKS THE PUBLIC, DO
YOU THINK THAT CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR SHOULD BE REQUIRED
TO BE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY?
AND IT WAS COMPLETELY MISLEADING.
I NOTICED THAT BY THE TIME IT WAS TOO LATE.
I WENT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME AND SAID THIS IS

BIAS.
IT SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED.
THE ONLY REMEDY I HAD WAS TO FILE AN INDIVIDUAL LAWSUIT TO
STOP IT, WHICH I DIDN'T WANT TO DO.
BUT THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF HOW MISLEADING LANGUAGE WAS
INTERPRETED BY WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL SAID.
HAD THE CORRECT LANGUAGE BEEN THERE THAT THE MAYOR'S DIRECT
REPORTS THIS TAKES AWAY THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE MAYOR'S
DIRECT REPORTS HAVE TO LIVE IN THE CITY IT MIGHT NOT HAVE
PASSED.
BUT IT PASSED BECAUSE THE QUICK READING OF IT IS THAT IT
REQUIRED CITY COUNCIL TO --
11:27:52AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE UNDERSTAND.
THAT QUESTION HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
11:27:54AM >>BILL CARLSON:
NOT REALLY, BECAUSE THE PUBLIC RESPONDED TO
A MISLEADING --
11:28:00AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH, THAT WOULD STILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL
ACTION BEYOND WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
11:28:05AM >>BILL CARLSON:
IT WOULD BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL TO GO IN AND FIND OUT WHY THAT HAPPENED.
NO, SERIOUSLY.
BECAUSE IT WAS MISLEADING AND DONE -- YOU KNOW, AT THE SAME
TIME, THERE IS A TERM WHEN I WAS ON THE CHARTER REVIEW
COMMISSION, I TRIED TO GET TERM LIMITS FOR CITY COUNCIL AND
THE MAYOR.

WE WERE NOT, THE MAYOR AT THE TIME FOUGHT US ON TERM LIMITS
FOR THE MAYOR UNDER CITY COUNCIL WHEN I FIRST GOT IN, WE DID
PUT A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE NOT MORE THAN, I THINK,
FOUR TERMS OF CITY COUNCIL.
THIS MAYOR'S PAC RAN ADS SAYING IT WAS A DEVIOUS PLOT BY
CITY COUNCIL TO EXTEND THEIR TERMS BY ANOTHER 20 YEARS.
THERE'S ALL THIS MISLEADING CHAOTIC STUFF GOING ON OUT
THERE.
SOMEHOW WE HAVE TO CLEAN THIS UP.
11:28:54AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
11:28:56AM >>BILL CARLSON:
WE'RE AT THE END OF THIS TERM AND THIS WAS
PASSED UNDER FALSE PRETENSES AND SHOULD BE REVOKED AND PUT
BACK ON THE BALLOT.
11:29:03AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.
THE NEXT SALARIES, PUT A PIN IN THIS.
THIS WILL BE PART OF THE OTHER DISCUSSION.
11:29:08AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WHAT HAPPENED WITH OATH?
WHAT HAPPENED TO 6.05?
11:29:11AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE OF 6.05.
11:29:14AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
[OFF MICROPHONE]
11:29:18AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
SO I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON.
THIS ISN'T SOMETHING I WANTED, AND IT WENT THROUGH, AND I'M
NOT THRILLED BY IT.
11:29:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HERE IS THE PROBLEM, THOUGH, COUNCIL --
11:29:30AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

11:29:32AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IT'S ALREADY DONE.
11:29:33AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
PLEASE DON'T INTERRUPT.
SORRY, BUT PLEASE DON'T INTERRUPT.
I'M JUST SAYING IF YOU ALL WANT IT TO GO THROUGH, THAT'S
FINE.
BUT I DON'T.
I'M SAYING NO.
11:29:41AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HERE IS THE PROBLEM, THEN YOU HAVE AN
INCONSISTENCY.
11:29:44AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES.
I THINK WE SHOULD FIX IT LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON SAID.
AGAIN, IF WE DON'T HAVE A MAJORITY THAT WANT TO FIX IT, THEN
THAT'S FINE.
11:29:54AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT IS THE FIX?
11:29:57AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THE FIX IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ACTUAL
LANGUAGE DOESN'T SAY CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR AND ONLY SPEAKS
TO DIRECTORS, WHICH THAT WAS NOT THE LANGUAGE THAT MADE IT
ON THE BALLOT.
COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON IS CORRECT.
11:30:16AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
[INAUDIBLE]
11:30:18AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
OFFICER HAD BEEN ELECTED OR APPOINTED.
WE ARE ELECTED.
11:30:21AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
DOES THIS NEED GREATER SCRUTINY AND MAYBE
HAVE TO BRING IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WHO WORKED ON
THIS.

11:30:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES.
LET'S DO THAT.
I KNOW THEY ARE LISTENING.
CITY ATTORNEY STEADY, IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMISSION PROPOSED LANGUAGE 6.05 FOR CONSISTENCY
WITH THE CHARTER AND WHAT WAS VOTED ON BY THE CITIZENS OF
THE CITY OF TAMPA AND HOW WE CAN FIX THAT FOR CONSISTENCY.
PUTTING A PIN IN 6.06.
11:30:53AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MAY I ASK, MR. CHAIRMAN?
11:30:55AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I WAS GOING TO SAY 6.05, WE SHOULDN'T JUST
HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY.
WE SHOULD HAVE THE CRC ATTORNEY LOOK AT THAT AS WELL.
11:31:03AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO BE NEXT WEEK
THEN ON THAT.
HE'S NOT PRESENT AND HE WASN'T INVITED -- ACTUALLY --
11:31:15AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THEN NEVER MIND.
11:31:19AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IRRESPECTIVE OF THAT, AT THIS POINT IN TIME
PER YOUR AGREEMENT WITH MR. TINKLER, KENNETH TINKLER OF
CARLSON FIELDS, HE NOW BECOMES YOUR ATTORNEY FOR THIS
PURPOSE.
HE DID ASK IF COUNCIL WANTS HIM TO BE PRESENT.
THE DECISION WAS MADE, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION.
NEXT WEEK HE CAN BE INVITED TO BE HERE.
11:31:46AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU ALL KNOW THAT MR. TINKLER, THE
ATTORNEY THAT WE CONTRACTED WITH FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW

COMMISSION, HE IS STILL ON RETAINER.
HE'S FINISHED THE WORK WITH THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
WHEN WE DECIDE WHAT IS GOING TO MAKE IT TO THE BALLOT OR NOT
MAKE IT TO THE BALLOT, HE'S GOING TO REVIEW THAT PRODUCT FOR
US.
BUT THAT'S ADDITIONAL WORK.
11:32:07AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
HE'S GOING TO CREATE THE PRODUCT BECAUSE
HE'S GOING TO DO IT -- HE'S GOING TO CRAFT THE LANGUAGE AND
PUT IT IN THE FORM OF AN ORDINANCE FOR YOUR REVIEW.
11:32:14AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
11:32:16AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PUT A PIN IN 6.06.
LET'S JUST HAVE THE DISCUSSION.
I THINK THAT WE CAN DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID.
IF YOU COULD PULL UP NUMBER 4 ON COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN --
11:32:30AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THE INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL ONE.
11:32:32AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH.
IT'S LIKE THE SECOND-TO-LAST PAGE.
NUMBER 4, CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION.
THANK YOU.
SO I REALLY BELIEVED THAT WE CAN DO THIS BY ORDINANCE.
THERE WAS NOT AN APPETITE FOR THIS AT THE BEGINNING OF OUR
TERM, BUT I BELIEVE NOW AT THE END OF OUR TERM, WHEN THE
MAJORITY OF US, OR AT LEAST -- NOT THE MAJORITY, BUT THREE
OF US ARE GOING TO BE LEAVING, I THINK THAT NOW IS THE TIME

TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION.
I AGREE WITH THIS PARTICULAR MODEL OF 50% OF THE MAYOR'S
BASE SALARY AND THAT WAS FOUGHT FOR BY COUNCIL MEMBER
CARLSON.
11:33:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S WHERE IT CAME FROM.
11:33:17AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH.
I THINK THIS IS PERFECTLY FINE.
I THINK WE JUST DO AN ORDINANCE AND GET IT DONE.
11:33:22AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I MEAN --
11:33:25AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
BECAUSE IF YOU PUT COMPENSATION IN THE
CHARTER, I THINK THAT'S TOO TIGHT.
11:33:31AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
REMEMBER, IT'S ONLY A FORMULA.
11:33:32AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I UNDERSTAND.
A, I BELIEVE -- I THINK IT WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME PASSING.
B, I REALLY DO THINK THAT IT'S JUST NOT -- I THINK THIS IS
AN ORDINANCE ISSUE.
I DO NOT THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT SALARIES IN
OUR CHARTER.
11:33:51AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
DO WE ACTUALLY ELIMINATE 6.06 THEN?
11:33:56AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO.
6.06 SAYS THE SALARIES OF OFFICERS OF THE CITY MAY BE
INCREASED OR DECREASED AT ANY TIME BY THE CONCURRENCE OF THE
MAYOR.
AND MAJORITY OF NO FEWER THAN FOUR VOTES.
THIS IS FOR STAFF.

THIS IS SALARIES FOR STAFF.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SALARIES FOR US, I THINK THE
ORDINANCE WOULD DO JUST FINE.
I THINK WE COULD ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO COME UP
WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS JUST THIS.
AND LET'S JUST GET IT DONE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE OPPOSITION TO IT AT THIS POINT?
I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER VIERA, YOU HAD A LOT OF OPPOSITION
EARLIER.
BUT NOW THAT YOU'RE LEAVING OFFICE AND THIS OBVIOUSLY NOT BE
FOR US.
THIS WOULD NOT START UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL.
11:34:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GO AHEAD, MR. SHELBY.
11:34:39AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I JUST WANT TO KNOW, PRESENTLY, YOUR SALARY
SET BY RESOLUTION, THIS LOOKS LIKE -- IT SAYS IT LOOKS LIKE
ADDS OR ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL.
BUT YOUR SALARIES, AS YOU HAVE ADJUSTED THEM WAS DONE BY
RESOLUTION.
11:34:55AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
IF WE WANTED TO DO THIS BY, I THINK ORDINANCE WOULD BE
BETTER.
THAT WOULD LEAVE THE -- THE GRAVITAS WOULD BE THERE AND IT
WOULD ELIMINATE THE STUFF, BACK AND FORTH YOU HAVE ON THIS.
COUNCILMAN VIERA AND THEN COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
11:35:12AM >>LUIS VIERA:
HOW MUCH DOES THE MAYOR PRESENTLY MAKE?

11:35:15AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ABOUT 200,000.
IT'S LIKE 189, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
11:35:20AM >>LUIS VIERA:
LOOK, I COULD SUPPORT A SALARY RANGE IN THAT
REGARD.
MY BIG CHALLENGE WAS VOTING FOR SOMETHING AND DOING IT AFTER
AN ELECTION.
IT WAS MORE OF A PROCEDURAL ISSUE.
I DID THINK COUNCIL SALARY NEEDED TO BE RAISED.
THAT WAS MORE OF A PROCEDURAL ISSUE.
SOMETHING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD I COULD SUPPORT.
I DON'T WANT TO MARRY MYSELF TO THIS.
11:35:42AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
-- NEXT OCTOBER, BEGINNING OF NEXT FISCAL
YEAR, A YEAR FROM NOW.
11:35:47AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NOT ONLY THAT, THE MOST IMPORTANT REASON
WE'RE HAVING THE DISCUSSION, SOMEHOW WHEN THIS WAS DONE
AFTER THE ELECTION, WHEN COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON FOCUSED ON
THIS, SOMEHOW IT ENDS IN MAY.
IT GOES BACK TO 53,000.
SO WE HAVE TO SOLVE THIS.
WE CANNOT KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD ANY FURTHER.
11:36:12AM >>LUIS VIERA:
I WOULD SUPPORT EVEN SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT
I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH FOR A POSITION LIKE THIS TO TAKE
IT OUT OF THE HANDS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH A SET SALARY AND
FORMULA SO THAT IT'S NOT POLITICIZED.
THAT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE FOR ME.

THAT'S THE BIGGEST THING.
11:36:29AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. SHELBY AND COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
11:36:32AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY.
IT OCCURRED TO ME I THINK WHAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO HAVE IN
FRONT OF YOU IS THE RESOLUTION THAT NOW CONTROLS BECAUSE I
BELIEVE THE WAY IT'S STATED IS YOUR SALARIES DO INCREASE.
SO THE MAYOR'S SALARY TODAY WAS NOT --
11:36:50AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
JUST FOR THE COLA, JUST FOR THE
COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE.
11:36:55AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO, I TIED IT TO ATU.
11:37:00AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ATU COLA.
11:37:01AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
BUT, AGAIN, IT ENDS IN MAY.
11:37:05AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S KIND OF MOOT.
BECAUSE IT ENDS IN MAY.
11:37:10AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
CAN I ONLY SAY THIS, THAT I BELIEVE, I
KNOW I DIDN'T AND I'M SURE THE OTHER SIX MEMBERS DIDN'T
EITHER, NONE OF US WENT FOR OFFICE THINKING OF THE SALARY.
YOU RAN FOR OFFICE TO MAKE THE CITY BETTER THAN WHEN YOU HAD
IT THE DAY BEFORE YOU GOT ELECTED.
THAT'S WHAT IT IS ALL ABOUT.
NOW WE'RE HERE DISCUSSING SALARY.
THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO SAY.
11:37:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
11:37:41AM >>BILL CARLSON:
WHETHER BY ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION OR CHARTER,
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A FORMULA SO FUTURE CITY COUNCILS

DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON IT AGAIN.
I FEEL -- LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK SAID -- THIS WILL
AFFECT THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL, NOT US.
I'M TERMED OUT.
IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ME AT ALL.
BY THE WAY, THE PACs THAT RAN NEGATIVE ADS AGAINST ME LAST
TIME, SAYING I RAISED MY SALARY.
I GOT ELECTED BY 60%.
IT DOESN'T MATTER ANYWAY.
I BELIEVE IN GOOD GOVERNMENT.
IF WE WERE EARNING 52,000 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEFORE,
THAT'S NOT ENOUGH FOR SOMEBODY TO SURVIVE.
IT'S LIKE 60% AMI OR 80% AMI.
OUR LEGISLATIVE AIDES ARE PAID MORE THAN THAT.
I WANT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO BE HONEST PEOPLE WHO CAN
DEDICATE THEIR FULL TIME AND TO GET THE KIND OF PEOPLE WE
NEED, WE SHOULD BE PAYING MORE THAN A HUNDRED THOUSAND.
WHEN I WAS IN COLLEGE.
100,000 WAS A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE
EARNING LIKE 20,000 WHEN THEY GRADUATED.
KIDS GRADUATING COLLEGE ARE EARNING 100,000 PLUS BECAUSE OF
INFLATION.
WE NEED HONEST PEOPLE.
WE NEED PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO PAY FOR TICKETS TO GO TO
EVENTS.

WHEN I GO TO AN EVENT, I REIMBURSE FOLKS FOR IT SO THAT I
DON'T EVEN HAVE TO COUNT IT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT A GIFT, IF I'M
PAYING THEM FOR IT.
WE NEED PEOPLE TO MAKE ENOUGH MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
11:39:12AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG.
11:39:15AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
TO COUNCILMAN VIERA'S POINT, HAVING SOMETHING
SET IN STONE SO IT DOESN'T BECOME POLITICIZED I THINK IS
IMPORTANT.
OFTENTIMES PEOPLE ASK ME, WHAT ELSE DO YOU DO?
I DON'T HAVE TIME TO DO ANYTHING ELSE.
YOU DON'T HAVE ANOTHER JOB?
NO, THIS IS IT.
THIS IS MY EXPERIENCE, BUT I THINK HAVING SOMETHING SO THAT
-- IT'S LIKE THE CONVERSATION THAT YOU KNOW IS IMPORTANT BUT
YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO HAVE.
SO IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO, YOU KNOW,
EVEN PEOPLE KNOW LIKE, MAN, IT WOULD BE NICE, BUT THEY DON'T
WANT TO SAY THAT OUT LOUD.
THEY DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT.
WHETHER BY ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION SO WE DON'T HAVE TO
CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND DOESN'T BECOME
SOMETHING WHERE SOMEBODY IS PUTTING OUT AN AD, OH, THEY ARE
GOING TO RAISE THEIR SALARIES.
JUST LEAVE IT SET IN STONE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO KEEP GOING
BACK TO IT.

11:40:07AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU KNOW WHAT I WANT TO SET IN STONE, THE
ASSERTION HAS BEEN REPEATED SO MANY TIMES ABOUT
PART-TIME/FULL-TIME.
THIS IS NOT A PART-TIME JOB.
BY THE WAY, THE DEFINITION -- THE MAYOR'S POSITION IS NOT A
PART-TIME JOB.
DOESN'T DIFFERENTIATE ITSELF IN THE CHARTER.
WE ARE WORKING -- COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG, YOU WERE HERE WHEN I
GOT HERE YESTERDAY AND YOU WERE HERE WHEN I LEFT YESTERDAY.
WE KNOW HOW THIS GOES.
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
11:40:36AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I'M GLAD THAT YOU BROUGHT THAT UP.
REGARDING THE MAYOR, I ONCE CAUGHT A GLIMPSE OF HER
CALENDAR, I DON'T KNOW HOW SHE DOES IT.
IT'S FROM MORNING TO NIGHT.
THAT'S ONE THING.
MY WIFE CAN ATTEST OF THAT COMMENT OF A PART-TIME JOB.
I THINK I SIT ON SEVEN OR EIGHT BOARDS AND TRIED TO GET ON
ANOTHER BOARD, BUT --
11:41:00AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I'VE GOT A BOARD FOR YOU.
11:41:01AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WOULD YOU LIKE ONE OF MY BOARDS?
[ LAUGHTER ]
11:41:05AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I ASKED AND I CAN'T.
I'M SORRY MY WIFE ISN'T HERE.
SHE DOESN'T COME TO THE MEETINGS.

BUT I GET CALLS AT 8 IN THE MORNING ON A SUNDAY.
WHEN THEY HAVE YOUR PERSONAL CELL PHONE, IT'S DIFFERENT.
YOU'RE ON CALL.
WE GET COMPLAINTS, WE GET REQUESTS.
I'M GLAD BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT I SIGNED UP FOR AND I'M HERE TO
SERVE THE COMMUNITY, BUT IT'S NOT PART-TIME.
AND THEN THE EVENTS THAT WE GO TO AND THE COMMUNITY EVENTS
AND NEIGHBORHOOD EVENTS, THE ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, IT GOES
ON AND ON.
IT IS A FULL-TIME.
YOU CAN MAKE IT PART-TIME BUT NONE OF US MAKE IT PART-TIME
BECAUSE I SEE HOW HARD EVERYONE WORKS HERE.
I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.
THAT'S IT.
THANKS.
11:41:41AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
11:41:42AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
WELL, I GUESS I HAVE TO CONFESS, I HAVE
THREE FULL-TIME JOBS THEN.
CITY HALL, THE RACETRACK AND RESTAURANT WHEN I USED TO BE
PART OWNER OF CAFE PEPE.
NEVER TIRED ME OUT.
I'M 86 AND STILL DO WHAT THE HELL I WANT.
11:41:59AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BUT YOU QUIT THE OTHER TWO JOBS?
11:42:01AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NO, I DID NOT.
11:42:03AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU RETIRED.

11:42:04AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NO, I DID NOT.
11:42:05AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THEY FIRED YOU.
11:42:06AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NO, THEY DID NOT.
[ LAUGHTER ]
YOU'RE GETTING CLOSE.
YOU'RE GETTING CLOSE.
I WORK ONE DAY A WEEK STARTING IN NOVEMBER TO MAY.
ONLY BECAUSE I SPEAK ANOTHER LANGUAGE.
11:42:19AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I SAW COUNCILMAN CARLSON FIRST AND THEN
BACK TO YOU.
11:42:23AM >>BILL CARLSON:
THE ONLY THING -- I WOULD RATHER LEAVE THE
FULL-TIME/PART-TIME THING OUT.
IF IT'S IN THERE, IT NEEDS TO BE NOT EXCLUSIVE.
11:42:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH.
THE MOST INACCURATE ASSERTION REPEATED OFTEN ENOUGH ASSUMES
TRUTH.
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS THIS.
PEOPLE KEEP REPEATING, OH, PART -- NO, IT'S NOT.
DOESN'T SAY IT IS A PART-TIME JOB.
IT'S JUST A JOB.
IT IS JUST A JOB.
NO MORE THAN WHEN YOU GET HIRED WITH ANY OTHER TYPE OF
LEADERSHIP TYPE.
IF YOU ARE A CEO OR WHATEVER YOU ARE, DIRECTOR OF A COMPANY,
IT'S A JOB.

IT DOESN'T TELL YOU IT IS A FULL-TIME JOB OR PART-TIME JOB.
YOU DON'T PUNCH INTO A CLOCK.
COUNCILMAN CARLSON, FINISH YOUR WORK AND THEN COUNCILWOMAN
HURTAK AND THEN COUNCILMAN VIERA.
11:43:09AM >>BILL CARLSON:
I COULD GIVE YOU LOTS OF EXAMPLES.
I THINK THE BEST, MOST ETHICAL GOVERNMENTS PAY THEIR PEOPLE
WELL, SO THERE'S NO INCENTIVE TO TAKE FREEBIES AND CHEAT.
EVEN IF WE CHANGE IT TO $100,000, ANY OF THE SEVEN OF US CAN
EARN EASILY DOUBLE THAT IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
IT'S NOT THAT ANYBODY IS TRYING TO MAKE MONEY OFF OF IT OR
UPGRADE THEIR JOB, ANY OF US COULD EARN MORE THAN THAT.
11:43:39AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK, AND THEN COUNCILMAN
VIERA.
11:43:43AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ASK STAFF TO
COME BACK WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT USES NUMBER FOUR AS ITS
BASE OF THE DOCUMENT THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW.
IT'S CALLED CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF TO COME BACK ON OCTOBER 15.
11:44:01AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
HOLD ON JUST A MINUTE.
11:44:05AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'LL GET STAFF A COPY.
11:44:06AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
ACTUALLY, THIS IS NOT STAFF.
THIS IS NOT THE CITY.
WHEN YOU SAY STAFF, YOU MEAN --
11:44:12AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE'RE DOING AN ORDINANCE.
11:44:14AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
DOING A SPECIFIC ORDINANCE FOR THIS.

11:44:17AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES.
11:44:18AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NOT AN ORDINANCE --
11:44:19AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE'RE NOT DOING THE CHARTER.
WE'RE DOING THIS OURSELVES AS AN ORDINANCE WHICH IS WHY I
WANT CITY LEGAL STAFF TO COME BACK ON OCTOBER 15 IDEALLY, IF
THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME, THAT PROBABLY ISN'T ENOUGH TIME.
LET'S DO NOVEMBER 5.
I WOULD LIKE CITY STAFF TO COME BACK ON NOVEMBER 5 WITH THIS
ORDINANCE, PROPOSED ORDINANCE, THAT FOLLOWS NUMBER 4, AND
I'M GOING TO THROW CHAIR UNDER THE BUS AND HAVE, SINCE THIS
WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU WROTE DOWN, I'LL HAVE CITY STAFF WORK
WITH YOU ON GETTING THIS DONE.
IS THAT FAIR?
11:44:52AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES.
11:44:53AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT'S MY MOTION.
11:44:57AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
COUNCILMAN VIERA.
11:44:59AM >>LUIS VIERA:
YEAH, NO.
FOLKS WERE TALKING ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES AND EVERYBODY IS
DIFFERENT.
FOR ME I'VE BEEN IN OFFICE ABOUT TEN YEARS AND DONE ABOUT A
HUNDRED TOWN HALLS.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S PEOPLE FOR THEM STUFF LIKE THAT AND
GOING INTO THE COMMUNITY IS VERY, VERY STRESSFUL.
FOR ME THAT'S NOT WORK, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

LIKE, I DO MY LEGAL PRACTICE.
I'M A MEDIATOR.
I HANDLE CASES IN EVERYTHING.
I HAD TO GO TO MISSOURI FOR A CLIENT A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
I'M A VERY INVOLVED AND ACTIVE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
EVERYBODY IS DIFFERENT.
THERE IS A REASON WHY YOU HAVE A LOT OF LAWYERS IN PUBLIC
OFFICE IS BECAUSE, AND THAT'S A BENEFIT OF THE PRACTICE, IS
THAT OUR PRACTICE CAN BE AMENABLE TO BEING IN OFFICE AND
THEN MANAGING YOUR CASELOAD.
BUT EVERYBODY IS DIFFERENT.
WHAT THIS ALLOWS PEOPLE, IF I MAY, MR. SHELBY, WHAT THIS
ALLOWS PEOPLE TO DO IS TO -- I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.
11:45:59AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
[INAUDIBLE]
11:46:00AM >>LUIS VIERA:
YEAH, YEAH.
THIS ALLOWS SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT IN A VOCATION OR A CAREER OR
THEY CAN'T MANAGE THEIR CASELOAD, CAN'T MANAGE THEIR WORK
THE WAY OTHER PROFESSIONS CAN AND EARN A GOOD SALARY.
THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT THIS.
I THINK THIS IS GOOD.
THANK YOU.
11:46:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE HAVE LEGAL STAFF IN THE ROOM.
COME ON UP.
11:46:22AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
JUSTIN VASKE, LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SALARIES.

BACK IN 2024, IN SEPTEMBER, WE PASSED A SALARY RESOLUTION
FOR CITY COUNCIL.
ONE OF THE THINGS I HEARD WAS THAT THERE'S LIKE AN END DATE
TO IT OF MAY OF NEXT YEAR.
IN THIS PARTICULAR RESOLUTION, WHICH MARTY HAS A COPY AND I
HAVE A COPY FOR CITY COUNCIL, THERE'S NO END DATE TO IT.
11:46:47AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GOOD.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
I APPRECIATE THAT.
11:46:50AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
BY THE WAY, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE HAVE TO
GET YOU A COPY OF WHAT THEY ARE MAKING REFERENCE TO THAT'S
ON THE SCREEN.
11:46:57AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'LL MAKE SURE SAM SENDS YOU A COPY.
11:46:59AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
ALSO, IT'S BEING REQUESTED TO BE DONE BY
ORDINANCE.
IS THE FIRST MEETING IN NOVEMBER SUFFICIENT TIME TO BE ABLE
TO COME BACK TO ALLOW FOR IT TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS?
11:47:09AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
WELL, THE DEADLINE FOR THE 15th AGENDA IS
NEXT WEEK.
IT'S A LITTLE TIGHT.
11:47:15AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NOVEMBER 2nd, IF YOU WANT IT TO BE LONGER
THAN NOVEMBER 2nd?
11:47:21AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
NOVEMBER 5 WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.
11:47:24AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MY MOTION WAS NOVEMBER 5.
THANK YOU, MR. VASKE, I APOLOGIZE.

THAT IS WHAT I WAS TOLD.
OBVIOUSLY, SOMETHING GOT LOST IN TRANSLATION.
THANK YOU FOR THE CORRECTION.
11:47:36AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
NO WORRIES.
11:47:37AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND A SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
11:47:43AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
JUST TO CLARIFY, THE SALARY DOES NOT
REVERT BACK TO THE 50 SOMETHING THOUSAND THAT WAS PRIOR TO
THIS, CORRECT?
11:47:50AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
LEGAL DEPARTMENT, NO, IT DOES NOT.
11:47:52AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
OPPOSED?
11:47:57AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
NAY.
11:47:58AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NAY.
11:48:00AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
IF IT WOULD HAVE -- [INAUDIBLE]
11:48:04AM >>THE CLERK:
THE MOTION PASSES WITH MANISCALCO AND MIRANDA
VOTING NO.
11:48:07AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU.
THAT BEING SAID, I THINK 6.06 WE SHOULD ACCEPT THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMISSION LANGUAGE.
11:48:15AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES.
11:48:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.

IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO ACCEPT THE CHARTER REVIEW
COMMISSION LANGUAGE IN 6.06?
WE'RE MOVING ON TO 7.05, MILLAGE.
11:48:25AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
IS MR. VASKE STILL IN HERE?
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THIS FOR MR. VASKE, 7.05 WITH THE
MILLAGE.
MY CONCERN WITH THIS, AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S ON THE SCREEN, IS
THAT THE STATE LAW NUMBER IS PUT IN THERE.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE STATE LAW CHANGES ALL THE
TIME.
WOULD IT BE BETTER TO JUST LEAVE THE WORD STATE LAW?
I KNOW IT SAYS AS MAY BE AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME, BUT THAT
MAKES ME UNCOMFORTABLE.
11:48:54AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
IT'S BEEN THAT STATUTE FOR PROBABLY 30
YEARS.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO LEAVE IT ALONE.
OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN CLEAN IT UP AT SOME POINT IN ANOTHER --
11:49:09AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CAN WE JUST PUT THE WORDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH
STATE LAW AND JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT?
I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT?
WOULD YOU BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT?
11:49:19AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MAY I ASK A QUESTION OF MR. VASKE?
11:49:21AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T WANT TO KEEP
IT.

11:49:25AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
I WOULD PREFER TO KEEP THE FLORIDA STATUTE
200-POINT -- [INAUDIBLE]
11:49:29AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YOU THINK THIS IS FINE.
11:49:32AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY.
WHAT DOES 200.065 RELATE TO?
11:49:37AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
RELATES TO OUR BUDGET PROCESS AND EVERYTHING
ELSE.
11:49:40AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WHAT ABOUT AS TO THE TRIM NOTICE?
11:49:43AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
I THINK IT MIGHT BE IN THERE AS WELL.
11:49:45AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WHAT ABOUT DR 420 THAT HAS TO GO TO THE
STATE?
11:49:49AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
I DON'T THINK IT SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES --
11:49:51AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NOT REFERENCED BY 200.065, I'M CONCERNED.
WELL, NO, IT IS NOT A POLICY, FRANKLY.
THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT A LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION?
11:50:03AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
THAT'S SOMETHING I'D HAVE TO LOOK INTO.
11:50:06AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT'S TRUE.
THAT IS A DISCUSSION.
11:50:08AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOU AND I HAVE HAD THAT CONVERSATION.
11:50:10AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES, WE HAVE.
THAT'S WHY I'M CONCERNED IF 200.065 DOES NOT MENTION THE
TRUTH IN MILLAGE, THEN IT MIGHT BE PROBLEM.
IT MIGHT BE BETTER THAN IF IT DOES HAVE TO COMPLY WITH STATE
LAW AND A MUNICIPALITY HAS TO NOTIFY THE STATE PER THE TRIM
NOTICE REQUIREMENT OF WHAT THE MAXIMUM MILLAGE RATE WOULD

BE, PERHAPS THAT IS A LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION.
TALK ABOUT THAT AT A FUTURE DATE.
11:50:33AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
I RECOMMEND THAT I GET A MINUTE TO ACTUALLY REVIEW THE
STATUTE BECAUSE I'M GETTING CAUGHT OFF GUARD.
11:50:40AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO, NO PROBLEM.
I WAS RANDOMLY ASKING.
11:50:43AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
LET'S STOP THERE FOR A ONE SECOND.
BECAUSE I THINK WHAT HE JUST BROUGHT UP IS SOMETHING --
WHILE WE'RE IN THIS PROCESS, LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS.
AS YOU'RE REVIEWING THIS MAYBE YOU COULD THROW THIS INTO
REVIEW.
BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN STATE LAW OF WHEN WE HAVE TO NOTIFY
THE STATE OF MILLAGE, IT DOES NOT COINCIDE WITH WHEN WE
PASSED OUR MILLAGE FOR LEGISLATIVE.
DO WE HAVE A CONFLICT AND DOES THAT HAVE TO BE RESOLVED?
11:51:12AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
I WOULD REALLY HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT.
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE SUBMIT.
IS IT JUST A PROPOSED?
I DON'T KNOW.
11:51:18AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OR BOUND.
SINCE YOU WERE DOING THAT, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO THROW THAT
OUT THERE, SO WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE REVIEW, IF YOU COULD
LOOK AT THAT IN YOUR REVIEW, IF SO, SO IF WE HAD TO MAKE
SOME MODIFICATION TO BE IN COMPLIANCE, I THINK THIS WOULD BE

AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO LOOK AT IT.
11:51:30AM >>JUSTIN VASKE:
OKAY.
11:51:31AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
11:51:36AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE ALREADY PASSED THAT MOTION.
I WOULD PREFER TO TAKE THE NUMBER OUT.
THAT AGAIN IS JUST ME, JUST BECAUSE.
THAT'S GOING TO BE MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE TAKE THE
ACTUAL STATUTE OUT BECAUSE NOWHERE ELSE DO WE REALLY USE THE
STATUTES, AND I'M JUST UNCOMFORTABLE AND WORRIED BECAUSE
WE'RE TAKING STUFF OUT THAT TALKS ABOUT 1979.
ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST ME.
IF NOBODY ELSE AGREES, THAT'S FINE.
I'LL SUPPORT IT.
11:52:06AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BECAUSE OF LEGAL'S RECOMMENDATION TO LEAVE
IT IN, I THINK I WOULD GIVE THEM THE DEFERENCE.
11:52:11AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THAT.
11:52:13AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'LL HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT, TOO.
BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE WHAT 200.065 SAYS.
11:52:20AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
RIGHT NOW, MOTION TO ACCEPT LANGUAGE OF
7.05 FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
ANY OBJECTION?
HEARING NO OBJECTION, BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT, YES.
WE ACCEPT THAT.
NOW WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE 7.12.

AGAIN, I THINK THIS SHOULD BE AN ORDINANCE.
11:52:37AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
I'M FINE WITH THAT.
WHEN I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE DOCUMENT, SO THE CITY OF
JACKSONVILLE DOES HAVE AN ORDINANCE FOR SIMILAR LANGUAGE.
AS LONG AS THERE'S JUST SOME KIND OF ACCOUNTABILITY, BECAUSE
I THINK OF MYSELF OR US, WHEN YOU GET A DOLLAR, IT'S IN YOUR
POCKET FOR, WHAT, MAYBE A COUPLE OF HOURS, FEW DAYS.
IF SOMEBODY GAVE ME $15 MILLION, I WANT TO SPEND IT.
I WANT TO BE SURE LIKE IF WE ALLOCATE MONEY FOR SOMETHING
FOR A PROJECT THAT WE'RE SPENDING IT, THAT WE'RE BEING
ACCOUNTABLE TO THE COMMUNITY WITH THE PROJECTS, LETTING THEM
KNOW THIS IS WHERE WE ARE, THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING.
HOWEVER THAT IS DRAFTED, WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE LOOKS LIKE, I
WANT THERE TO BE THAT ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY.
11:53:20AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO WRITE THE ORDINANCE
AND BRING IT TO US THEN?
WORK WITH CITY STAFF ON IT?
11:53:26AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
SURE.
11:53:27AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
UNLESS THERE'S ANY ENERGY AROUND THIS,
THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE IN 7.12 AND
INSTEAD COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG IS GOING TO WRITE A PROPOSED
ORDINANCE AND SUBMIT IT TO AT A DATE TO BE DETERMINED.
11:53:39AM >>NAYA YOUNG:
YEAH, DATE TO BE DETERMINED.
WE KIND OF HAVE SOMETHING OUTLINED HERE FROM THE OTHER
DOCUMENT SO WE CAN USE THAT.

11:53:47AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
VERY GOOD.
COUNCILMAN VIERA.
11:53:48AM >>LUIS VIERA:
I AGAIN FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW, WANT TO SALUTE
THEM FOR 7.12 BECAUSE THIS, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY NOT
NECESSARILY GET IN THERE BY ORDINANCE, IT WILL.
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
THANK YOU ALL FOR THIS BECAUSE THIS DOES TACKLE A VERY
IMPORTANT ISSUE.
AGAIN, WHEN YOU PASS SOMETHING AS A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT IS A
UNIQUE PROJECT TO SOMETHING YOU HAD ENVISIONED YOU HAVE TO
STAY ON.
OTHERWISE IT COULD EVAPORATE.
THIS IS GOOD.
THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR THAT WITH THE CHARTER REVIEW AND
COUNCIL.
11:54:16AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
9.02, PERSONNEL.
THIS SEEMS LIKE A NO-BRAINER.
CAN WE ACCEPT THAT LANGUAGE?
WE'LL ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE FOR THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION
FOR 9.02.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, HEARING NO OBJECTION, IT'S UNANIMOUS.
10.06.
11:54:35AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I THOUGHT THAT WAS TWO YEARS.
11:54:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH, IT'S ONE.
11:54:41AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE THE STATE OF FLORIDA JUST

SAID NO CITY ELECTED OFFICIAL CAN'T BE -- I THINK IT'S SIX
YEARS NOW.
IT'S NOW SIX YEARS.
AND THAT IS A STATE LAW.
11:54:53AM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
[INAUDIBLE]
11:54:54AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THIS IS KIND OF NULL AND VOID BECAUSE THE
STATE --
11:54:57AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
DELETE THAT SECTION COMPLETELY OR GIVE
THAT TO TINKLER TO HAVE HIM REVIEW THAT?
11:55:02AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING TO COMING
UP SOON HAVE A REVIEW OF YOUR CITY'S ETHICS CODE BECAUSE
CITY ETHICS CODE NOW DEALS WITH THAT.
IT MAY HAVE TO BE THE CITY'S ETHICS CODE MAY HAVE TO BE
AMENDED IF IT'S COUNCIL'S PLEASURE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH
STATE LAW.
11:55:17AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CAN WE ASSIGN THIS TO MR. TINKLER?
11:55:20AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES.
11:55:20AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ACTUALLY, I THINK WE CAN SIMPLY SOLVE IT BY
SAYING UNTIL ONE YEAR AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERM TO
WHICH THEY ARE ELECTED OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW.
11:55:31AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT'S IN CONFLICT, WHICH CONTROLS?
11:55:35AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BECAUSE THAT IS AN OR.
11:55:37AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS --
11:55:38AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
LET'S GIVE THIS TO TINKLER.
11:55:40AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'LL HAVE TO WORK --

11:55:42AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY, FINE.
SEND IT TO HIM.
11:55:44AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
10.06 WE'LL SEND THIS BACK TO MR. TINKLER
FOR CONFORMANCE WITH STATE LAW AND CURRENT POLICY.
11:55:51AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
AND ALSO PERHAPS CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY'S
ETHICS CODE.
11:55:54AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ASSOCIATED POLICY.
10.07, INITIATED REFERENDUMS.
11:56:00AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT WITH REGARD TO THAT?
11:56:07AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE NO THOUGHTS ON THIS.
11:56:11AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ME EITHER.
11:56:12AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WHAT NUMBER IS THAT, SIR?
11:56:14AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
10.07, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM.
WHAT WAS THE THOUGHTS ON THAT, ANYBODY FROM CHARTER REVIEW
COMMISSION?
YOU ALL HAVE NO THOUGHTS EITHER.
IT'S 10.07, WHICH IS THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM SECTION.
AND YOU GUYS ADDED A BUNCH OF LANGUAGE.
THE BULK OF THE LANGUAGE WAS, INSERTION OF ZONING,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THEN THE PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED
FOR CITIZENS INITIATIVES AND REFERENDUMS WILL BE PROVIDED BY
ORDINANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH, QUOTES THE STATUTE.
11:56:53AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
GOES BEYOND THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN.
IT PUTS RESTRICTIONS ON THE ABILITY.
11:56:58AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO, I DON'T WANT TO PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THE

ABILITY.
11:57:02AM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
BECAUSE YOU'RE INSERTING, I DON'T BELIEVE
IT'S STATE LAW THAT SAYS ONCE PASSED MAY BE AMENDED MORE
FREQUENTLY -- THE TIME FRAME 90 DAYS AFTER A GENERAL
ELECTION.
11:57:12AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
DO YOU REMEMBER THE CONVERSATION
SURROUNDING THIS?
11:57:16AM >> ALAN COHN, CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
I THINK THAT CAME FROM MR. TINKLER.
HE WOULD HAVE THE DETAILS.
11:57:22AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
LET'S SEND THIS BACK TO TINKLER FOR REVIEW
AND EXPLANATION.
10.07, BACK TO TINKLER FOR REVIEW AND EXPLANATION.
YES, SIR.
11:57:33AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I THINK I KNOW THE FELLOW WHO STARTED
THIS BACK IN 1972, BUT I'M NOT SURE.
BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CITY, TALKING ABOUT 10% OF THE
PEOPLE WHO IT SAYS HERE WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO VOTE.
IN OTHER WORDS -- YEAH, REGISTERED VOTERS.
IF YOU RUN, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THERE, QUALIFIED TO VOTE, IF
YOU RUN IN A DISTRICT, DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT
OF THOSE THAT RUN CITYWIDE OR NOT?
11:58:01AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THIS IS JUST CITIZEN INITIATIVE AND
REFERENDUM.
11:58:05AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
PARDON ME?

11:58:06AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THIS IS JUST FOR CITIZEN INITIATIVES AND
REFERENDUM.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
11:58:10AM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
WELL, IT SHOULD BE THEN IF IT'S THE SAME
THING, BASICALLY.
I'LL YIELD.
11:58:23AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
10.10, CHARTER REVIEW, WHY GO TO 12 YEARS
INSTEAD OF 8?
11:58:30AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT WAS THE QUESTION WE JUST ASKED AND
ANSWERED, RIGHT?
11:58:34AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO.
BECAUSE THIS ISSUE, THE COUNTY DOES IT EVERY FIVE YEARS.
AND THE REASON THAT WE WENT TO EIGHT --
11:58:43AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
IT JUST WENT TO EIGHT.
11:58:46AM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH, JUST WENT TO EIGHT -- I MEAN, WENT TO
EIGHT IN 2023 WHEN EVERYBODY VOTED ON IT.
I REALLY THINK THIS IS AN ASKED AND ANSWERED QUESTION.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE IT UNTIL AT LEAST ANOTHER
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.
I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH -- THE ONLY THING I DON'T HAVE A
PROBLEM WITH IS CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, INCLUDING DEDICATED
CITY STAFF FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT TO ALLOW FOR
COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE CHARTER.

I BELIEVE THAT CAN BE PART OF THE ORDINANCE.
11:59:22AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES, I AGREE.
COUNCILMAN VIERA.
11:59:24AM >>LUIS VIERA:
THANK YOU, SIR.
I TEND TO AGREE ON THE 12 YEARS.
BUT IF THE MEMBERS ARE HERE HAD OPINIONS ON THAT, IF I MAY.
11:59:34AM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IT WAS JUST VOTED ON.
11:59:36AM >>LUIS VIERA:
I KNOW.
THAT'S WHY I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE WE JUST CHANGED IT.
MAYBE THEY WEREN'T THE CHAMPIONS OF THAT.
I DON'T KNOW.
AGAIN, I WOULD AGREE, BY THE WAY.
11:59:50AM >> ALISON HEWITT.
A LOT OF THAT CONVERSATION CAME FROM AS FAST AS DEVELOPMENT
IN TAMPA IS CHANGING, THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
LOOK AT WHAT IS GOVERNING TAMPA AS YOU GUYS ARE VASTLY
TRYING TO HAVE TO REVIEW ORDINANCES AND RULES AS IT RELATES
TO DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGING IN THE CITY.
12:00:16PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THIS ACTUALLY SLOWS IT DOWN.
12:00:17PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH, THIS SLOWS DOWN THE PROCESS.
12:00:20PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IF THEY ADOPT THE CHANGE.
12:00:21PM >> YES.
BUT IT WOULD GIVE YOU TIME TO SEE IF THINGS ARE WORKING
RATHER THAN YOU HAVING TO CHANGE WHILE YOU ARE TRYING TO
MONITOR AND NOT ALL OF YOU, BUT COUNCIL IN GENERAL, MONITOR

--
12:00:34PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
SINCE THE VOTERS JUST VOTED ON THIS, I
DON'T HAVE AN APPETITE FOR THIS.
ANYBODY THAT HAS AN APPETITE?
12:00:41PM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
WHEN THIS FIRST CAME UP WHEN THE CHARTER
REVIEW COMMISSION WAS ESTABLISHED UNDER COUNCILWOMAN CAPIN
IN THAT ERA, WE HADN'T HAD A LOOK AT THE CHARTER SINCE 1975
OR '74.
IF YOU LOOK AT STAYING WITH THE EIGHT YEARS, LOOK HOW MUCH
THE CITY HAS CHANGED IN EIGHT YEARS AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED.
THE PANDEMIC IN BETWEEN AND EVERYTHING.
I THINK 12 YEARS IS TOO LONG AND LEAVE IT AT 8 YEARS.
PEOPLE JUST VOTED FOR THIS.
12:01:07PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ANY APPETITE?
I SAY WE REJECT THE LANGUAGE CHANGES IN 10.10.
10.10 IS REJECTED.
ARTICLE 11, 11.3.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, LET'S ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE IN 11.03.
NOW THE BIG ONE.
LET ME PUT IT RIGHT ON THE TABLE.
I WANT TO REJECT THE LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THE CHARTER REVIEW
COMMISSION BECAUSE IT'S NOT STRONG ENOUGH.
12:01:38PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I WANT TO TAKE YOUR LANGUAGE.
LISA, IT IS THE FIRST PAGE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ONE.
AND THEN IT IS THE FIRST, THE SECOND AND THIRD.

LET'S JUST LEAVE IT ON.
IF YOU CAN ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT AND THEN THAT WAY WE CAN
LEAVE IT ON FOR THE PUBLIC TO LOOK AT WHILE WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT IT.
ON EACH PAGE.
BUT I STRONGLY BELIEVE -- SO FOR ME, SOMEONE MENTIONED
EARLIER WHO INSPECTS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
THERE IS A RETENTION COMMITTEE, AND THAT COMMITTEE, THAT IS
THEIR JOB.
I'M FINE.
I BELIEVE THAT THE INSPECTOR GENERAL WILL BE JUDGED BY THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THIS BOARD.
BUT I WANT TO TAKE THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL PEOPLE OFF,
WHICH I THINK YOURS DOES.
THE ONLY THING I DON'T SEE ON HERE IS THAT YOUR APPOINTMENT,
DO YOU NOT HAVE -- YOU DON'T HAVE AN APPOINTMENT PROCESS.
12:02:55PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH, WE DO.
12:02:56PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
F.
SORRY, I DIDN'T SEE THE THING DOWN AT THE VERY BOTTOM.
12:03:06PM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
WHO PUTS THE COMMITTEE TOGETHER?
12:03:08PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S WHAT WE --
12:03:09PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YOU WANT TO DO THAT THROUGH ORDINANCE.
MY ONLY PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT I LIKE THE FACT THAT IN
THE CHARTERS THAT THEY ARE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHO IT SHOULD
BE AND MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY.

12:03:23PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THE PROBLEM, YOU LOOK AT THAT AND THINK
ABOUT THE CURRENT POLITICAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
12:03:27PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YOU'RE RIGHT.
12:03:30PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BY THE WAY, WE DO AN ORDINANCE OF THE
SELECTION COMMITTEE AND THAT STILL COMES BACK TO COUNCIL FOR
AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF FIVE.
12:03:41PM >> [INAUDIBLE]
12:03:42PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
12:03:48PM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I SUPPORT THIS INSPECTOR GENERAL
POSITION BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR OWN ETHICS COMMISSION LOCALLY.
WE HAVE A STATE ETHICS COMMISSION, BUT BEYOND THAT,
SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD BE TRULY INDEPENDENT.
AND LIKE YOU SAID, COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK, LEAVE THE MAYOR
AND CITY COUNCIL COMPLETELY OUT OF THE PROCESS SO IT'S NOT
TAINTED IN ANY WAY.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE SELECTION COMMITTEE, THEY CHOOSE THAT
PERSON.
IT'S UNBIASED OR AS UNBIASED AS YOU CAN BE AND TAKE IT FROM
THERE.
I APPRECIATE THIS.
THANK YOU.
12:04:25PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT CONCERNS ME, THOUGH.
AND THIS GOES BACK TO OUR SAME PROBLEM THAT WE'RE HAVING
WITH OUR CRA RIGHT NOW, IS THAT OUR CRA STILL HAS TO ABIDE

BY THE HR -- OH, NO, THESE PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE -- NO, BUT
ACTUALLY THEY WOULD BE.
BECAUSE WOULDN'T WE BE MOVING THE AUDITOR DEPARTMENT UNDER
THIS?
12:04:45PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IT'S NOT ADDRESSED.
12:04:46PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I BELIEVE THAT THE ENTIRE AUDITING DEPARTMENT
SHOULD BE MOVED UNDER THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.
MIAMI BEACH DOES THAT, AND IT'S A REALLY PHENOMENAL --
12:04:58PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I DID NOT ANTICIPATE THAT.
12:04:59PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN, MR. CHAIRMAN.
12:05:03PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
LET'S SEE.
HOLD ON.
I HAVE IT SOMEWHERE.
I THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE THIS, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT MAYBE
-- LET MR. TINKLER SPEAK ON IT.
ALSO, MAYBE, HOW DO WE GET SOMEONE TO COME AND TALK TO EACH
OF US ABOUT THIS?
12:05:33PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GO AHEAD, MR. SHELBY.
12:05:35PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MY SUGGESTION AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS IF
YOU LIKE THE CONCEPT, DIRECT HIM TO COME BACK WITH LANGUAGE
THAT MEETS THE CHARTER THAT STANDS THE TEST OF TIME.
IT ALLOWS YOU THROUGH ORDINANCE TO BE ABLE TO CREATE THE WAY
YOU WANT.
BECAUSE WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, IF I CAN, JUST AS THIS MAY
CAUSE YOU AND THE ADMINISTRATION TO RETHINK THE ROLE OF THE

INTERNAL AUDITOR AND TO WHOM IT REPORTS, IT WILL ALSO CAUSE
TO YOU NEED TO RETHINK THE ETHICS COMMISSION, WHICH NOW
WORKS THROUGH THE ETHICS OFFICE, WHICH IS NOW RUN THROUGH
THE HR DEPARTMENT.
12:06:09PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
I THINK THIS IS GOING TO CREATE A DOMINO EFFECT.
12:06:12PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
EXACTLY.
I MAKE A MOTION TO SEND THIS NUMBER ONE INDEPENDENT
INSPECTOR GENERAL TO MR. TINKLER FOR REVIEW, SPECIFICALLY
LOOKING AT THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH'S INSPECTOR GENERAL, AND
HOW THEY PUT THE AUDITING DEPARTMENT UNDER THAT.
BUT ALSO LOOKING AT -- AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE HIM TO WEIGH IN
ON IT.
12:06:42PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION AND I HAVE A SECOND.
I SEE LIGHTS.
CARLSON AND VIERA.
HAVEN'T HEARD FROM COUNCILMAN CARLSON IN A WHILE.
12:06:48PM >>BILL CARLSON:
I JUST WANTED TO ADD, IF HR, THE ETHICS
COMMISSION AND THE AUDITOR AND THE CITY ATTORNEY ALL REPORT
TO THE MAYOR, THEN THEY ALL CAN BE WEAPONIZED AS THEY HAVE
BEEN AGAINST CITY COUNCIL.
SO WE HAVE TO CHANGE THAT.
THEY SHOULD REPRESENT THE CITY NOT THE MAYOR.
THE MAYOR NEEDS TO HAVE CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATION, BUT WHEN
HR REFUSES TO DO AN INVESTIGATION, WHEN SOMETHING IS

HAPPENING AGAINST CITY COUNCIL, OUR CITY COUNCIL IS MADE
AWARE OF SOMETHING THAT THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IS DOING, THEN
THAT'S WRONG.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOME CONTROLS.
I'LL COME BACK TO THAT IN A MINUTE.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO PUT THE ETHICS COMMISSION
UNDERNEATH THIS.
AND THE AUDITOR AS WELL.
12:07:36PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE'LL ASK MR. TINKLER TO LOOK AT THAT.
COUNCILMAN VIERA AND THEN WE NEED TO MOVE ON BECAUSE WE HAVE
SEVERAL MEDIA ISSUES BEFORE WE BREAK AT ONE.
12:07:46PM >>LUIS VIERA:
UNDER SUBSECTION C, TAKING OUT THE MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL, CORRECT?
12:07:50PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO.
WE'RE NOT USING THIS LANGUAGE AT ALL.
THIS LANGUAGE AND ASKING MR. TINKLER TO WRITE BETTER
LANGUAGE.
12:07:59PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE'RE NOT ACCEPTING THIS LANGUAGE.
12:08:01PM >>LUIS VIERA:
GOOD.
WHAT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST IS IF WE DO INCLUDE MEMBERSHIP
IN YOUR BAR ASSOCIATIONS ALONG WITH GEORGE EDGECOMB, WE
INCLUDE MI GENTE WITH THE TAMPA HISPANIC BAR.
12:08:15PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN ORDINANCE.
12:08:17PM >>LUIS VIERA:
I GUESS I WON'T BE HERE, BUT REMEMBER MI GENTE
AND THE HISPANIC BAR.

12:08:21PM >> JUST FOR THE NOTES, SO YOU'RE GOING TO REJECT THE
PROVIDED LANGUAGE AND THEN YOU'RE SENDING MR. TINKLER YOUR
SUGGESTIONS.
12:08:29PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES.
WITH LOOKING INTO THE AUDIT ISSUE.
AND THE ETHICS COMMISSION.
AUDIT AND ETHICS.
12:08:40PM >> INTERNAL AUDIT AND ETHICS AND LOOK AT THE MIAMI BEACH
MODEL.
12:08:44PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES.
YOU KNOW THE MAYOR OF MIAMI BEACH, RIGHT?
12:08:48PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I DO.
12:08:49PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS AND LOOKING AT
MIAMI BEACH, I KNEW YOU DID.
I THOUGHT MAYBE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO REACH OUT TO THE MAYOR
AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT HOW THEY HANDLE HR.
12:08:58PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
IF THEY ARE AT THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF
CITIES CONFERENCE TOMORROW, I WILL SEE THEM TOMORROW.
12:09:03PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
MY CONCERN IS THE SAME CONCERN WITH THE CRA IS THAT BECAUSE
IT'S -- BECAUSE THE STAFF WHO WORKED FOR THE CITY FULL-TIME
STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE HR RULES, THEY ARE STILL REQUIRED
TO HAVE SOMEONE THEY REPORT TO.
THAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE HAVING WITH OUR CRA RIGHT NOW.
AND SO HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE TRULY

INDEPENDENT OF HR AND OF ALL OF THAT?
THAT'S MY -- CONCERN THAT COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON BROUGHT UP
TIME AND TIME AGAIN.
HAVE TO FIX THAT WITH THE CRA.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE SOLVE IT WITH THIS.
12:09:40PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. CARLSON.
12:09:41PM >>BILL CARLSON:
I WANT TO ADD TO THAT FOR ANYBODY LISTENING.
IT'S NOT THAT WE THINK THE CRA STAFF SHOULDN'T FOLLOW HR
RULES, THEY ABSOLUTELY SHOULD.
BUT BY THE AGREEMENT THAT THE CRA HAS WITH THE CITY, THE
CITY STAFF AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE SHOULD NOT BE RUNNING THE
CRA, BUT THEY ARE, BECAUSE THERE IS A NOT SO SUBTLE THREAT
THAT YOU DO WHAT I SAY OR I'LL FIRE YOU.
ONLY THE CRA BOARD SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIRE THEM.
BUT THEY CAN'T MOVE FORWARD AND DO WHAT THE CRA BOARD WANTS
BECAUSE THE MAYOR'S OFFICE HAS THEIR THUMB ON THEM.
AND THAT'S THE INFLUENCE OF HR.
AND I THINK THE HR DEPARTMENT IS WAY TO POLITICIZED AS WELL.
12:10:20PM >> AGREED.
12:10:21PM >>BILL CARLSON:
ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS I FILED A FEW YEARS
AGO, I COPIED THE CITY ATTORNEY AND HR DEPARTMENT.
GUESS WHO RESPONDED TO ME?
THE CHIEF OF STAFF.
PART OF THE COMPLAINT WAS ABOUT THE CHIEF OF STAFF.
HOW IS IT SUDDENLY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE KNOWS EVERYTHING GOING

ON WITHIN THE CITY ON THESE ACTIVITIES?
IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN LIKE THAT.
WHEN WE OR AN EMPLOYEE HAS A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE MAYOR OR
HER STAFF, IT SHOULD BE HANDLED PRIVATELY AND NOT TAKEN UP
THE FLAGPOLE LIKE THAT.
12:10:54PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
LET'S KILL THIS CONVERSATION HERE.
I'M TRYING TO GET US OUT OF HERE IN 45 MINUTES.
12:11:00PM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I UNDERSTAND.
I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO ACCUSATIONS.
MAYBE WE'LL HAVE AN INVESTIGATION OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID,
SIR.
FIND OUT WHO IS TELLING ME THE TRUTH.
12:11:09PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MAY HAVE AN IG HERE SHORTLY.
THIS IS A LITTLE BIT YOUR ISSUE.
I HAVE A PROPOSAL ON THE MAYORAL TERM LIMITS IN MY PACKET.
12:11:20PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT'S NUMBER TWO.
YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT --
12:11:26PM >> ARE WE DONE WITH INDEPENDENT --
12:11:28PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
JUST MAKE SURE -- ARE WE GOOD?
UNANIMOUS CONSENT ON INSPECTOR GENERAL?
ARE WE GOOD WITH UNANIMOUS CONSENT ON THE INSPECTOR GENERAL?
ALL IN FAVOR?
12:11:43PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
AYE.
12:11:43PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE HAVEN'T DONE IT YET.
12:11:44PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I DID.

I SAID TO SEND IT TO MR. TINKLER.
I MADE A MOTION.
12:11:49PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
OPPOSED?
AYES HAVE IT.
THANK YOU.
12:11:55PM >> NOW WE'RE GOING TO MAYORAL TERM LIMITS.
12:11:57PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES, YES, YES, YES.
I KIND OF ADOPTED THIS OUT OF SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT
WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST.
12:12:05PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES, AGREED.
THOUSAND PERCENT.
12:12:10PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON.
12:12:12PM >>BILL CARLSON:
BEFORE SOMEBODY WRITES A FRONT-PAGE STORY
ABOUT THIS, THIS ELECTION -- THE VOTE FOR THIS WOULD BE AT
THE SAME TIME AS THE MAYOR'S VOTE AND SO WOULD NOT APPLY TO
WHOEVER IS ELECTED THE NEXT TIME.
12:12:24PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
12:12:25PM >>BILL CARLSON:
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS PUNITIVE TOWARD
ANYBODY RUNNING RIGHT NOW.
12:12:28PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
12:12:33PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
AGREED.
SEND IT TO TINKLER.

12:12:35PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
ANY OBJECTION TO SENDING THIS TO MR.
TINKLER FOR LANGUAGE?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, UNANIMOUS CONSENT, ITEM NUMBER 2 WE'LL
SEND TO TINKLER.
THIS IS A GOOD ONE.
ITEM NUMBER 3.
MR. SHELBY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SET THIS ONE UP?
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS.
12:13:00PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MR. CHAIRMAN, I PREFER THE WAY YOU'RE
HANDLING IT.
12:13:03PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
VERY GOOD.
12:13:03PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF THERE'S SOMETHING I NEED TO CHIME IN ON.
12:13:06PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.
I WANT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO PUT IN ITEM NUMBER 16, THAT
THE QUESTION THAT'S ON THE LETTERHEAD, IT'S ON THE SECOND
PAGE.
SHOULD TAMPA CITY COUNCIL BE ABLE TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO
THE CITY BUDGET DURING THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, I THINK
THESE TWO THINGS MIGHT COME TOGETHER, OVERRIDING OF
EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND INITIATING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY
BUDGET.
I THINK BOTH OF THESE THINGS ARE SUPER IMPORTANT TO BRING
SOME LEVITY BACK OR MORE BALANCE BACK.
I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO OVERRIDE EXECUTIVE ORDERS,
BUT I ALSO THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO INITIATE BUDGET

AMENDMENTS.
12:13:46PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. SHELBY, COULD YOU PLEASE FOR THE
PUBLIC, COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENS AND WHAT
COUNCIL'S REMEDY IS IF THE MAYOR SIGNS AN EXECUTIVE ORDER
THAT CONFLICTS WITH SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS
DONE.
12:14:04PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YOU HAVE A CHARTER CRISIS.
THAT GOES TO THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'VE PREPARED, AND YOU
SENT TO THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION DATED JANUARY.
22 QUESTIONS THAT YOU ASKED.
AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO NOW, I BELIEVE.
COUNCILWOMAN, NUMBER 16.
I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, IF I CAN, THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE
ISSUES AND WOULD BE DEALT WITH IN TWO SEPARATE SECTIONS OF
THE BUDGET.
ONE OF THEM OF THE CHARTER BECAUSE ONE OF THEM RELATES TO
BUDGET AND FINANCES.
THE OTHER ONES RELATES TO THE DUTIES --
12:14:41PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I APOLOGIZE.
I WILL RESCIND THAT.
I WANTED TO MAKE THE COMMENT.
I THINK NUMBER THREE OVERALL I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH.
12:14:47PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN, MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CHAIRMAN,
EXCUSE ME, BUT THE THING IS, I THINK WE'VE DISTRIBUTED THAT.
YOU'VE DISTRIBUTED THIS AGAIN TO COUNCIL.

12:14:55PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
12:14:56PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
YOU TO DISCUSS ANYTHING IN HERE SUCH AS YOU HAVE.
12:15:00PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE'RE WORKING THROUGH IT.
12:15:02PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT'S GOOD.
12:15:03PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT'S WHY I RESCINDED MY COMMENT FOR NOW.
12:15:05PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THE ISSUE IS WHEN YOU LOOK BACK
SPECIFICALLY TO THE SITUATION OF, LET'S SAY, TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THE POLICE REVIEW BOARD, WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL INITIATED THE CONCEPT OF CREATING A POLICE
REVIEW BOARD.
AND IT WAS MOVING FORWARD IN THAT DIRECTION, AND THE MAYOR
AT THE TIME SAID THAT -- WAS OPPOSED TO IT AND I BELIEVE WAS
QUOTED IN THE PAPER WILL NOT CREATE A KANGAROO COURT.
WHAT HAPPENED AT THAT TIME, AS THE CITY COUNCIL WAS MOVING
FORWARD, THE MAYOR ISSUED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER DEALING WITH
THE SUBJECT AND THEN INFORMED COUNCIL THAT HAD LOST
AUTHORITY OVER THE SUBJECT AND IT WAS NOW CONTROLLED BY AN
EXECUTIVE ORDER.
AND THAT CREATED A MAJOR ISSUE AMONGST CITY COUNCIL AND THE
QUESTION IS, WHAT CONTROLS?
IS IT AN EXECUTIVE ORDER?
AND CAN THE ISSUANCE OF AN EXECUTIVE ORDER PREEMPT YOUR
LEGISLATIVE ABILITY TO CREATE AND PASS A LAW?
OR, ON THE OTHER HAND, IF IT IS YOUR AUTHORITY AS ALL

LEGISLATIVE MATTERS ARE VESTED IN THE CITY COUNCIL, IF YOU
PASS A LAW THAT THEN CONFLICTS WITH A MAYORAL EXECUTIVE
ORDER, THEN WHICH CONTROLS?
WHICH HAS PRECEDENT.
AND THIS GOES TO WHAT COUNCIL HAS BEEN DISCUSSING FOR A LONG
TIME.
THERE IS NO MECHANISM IN THE CHARTER TO BE ABLE TO RESOLVE
THAT.
AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST IS THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY
IS REQUESTED TO OPINE AND RELIES ON ONE LINE IN THE CHARTER
THAT SAYS THE CITY ATTORNEY IS THE LEGAL OFFICER WHO SPEAKS
FOR THE CITY, AND THAT HAS BEEN RELIED UPON HISTORICALLY AS
SAYING WHATEVER THE CITY ATTORNEY OPINES IS WHAT GOES, AND
THAT'S HOW WE RESOLVE IT. THE QUESTION HAS REPEATEDLY COME
UP, WHEN THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ADMINISTRATION AND
THE MAYOR ENACTING POLICY, WHAT IS CITY COUNCIL'S REMEDY
UNDER ITS ROLE TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT IF THERE IS A
CONFLICT.
12:17:22PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
12:17:24PM >>BILL CARLSON:
YEAH, THE FIRST THING I OBJECT TO IS THE
TERM STRONG MAYOR.
12:17:28PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
DID I USE THE TERM?
12:17:30PM >>BILL CARLSON:
NO, NO.
IT'S HERE IN THIS WRITING.
TECHNICALLY, IT'S CORRECT, EXCEPT SOME MAYORS, ESPECIALLY

THE LAST TWO, LOOK AT THAT AS BEING KIND OF LIKE
DICTATORSHIPS.
THAT'S NOT THE INTENTION OF THAT.
THE TERM STRONG MAYOR IS NOT IN THE CHARTER ANYWHERE.
IF WE'RE GOING TO REFER TO IT, WE SHOULD CALL IT EXECUTIVE
MAYOR BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT STRONG MAYOR MEANS.
ALL IT MEANS IS THE MAYOR DOESN'T SIT ON CITY COUNCIL.
MAYOR RUNS THE ORGANIZATION.
I WOULD BE OKAY LIMITING THIS TO CONFLICTS AS DEFINED IN THE
CHARTER.
AND ALSO THE FINANCIAL CONFLICTS.
BUT THREE CONFLICTS WE RUN INTO, ONE WAS NAMING OF
BUILDINGS.
A COUPLE OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SEVEN YEARS AGO PROPOSED
NAMING BUILDINGS AND THE MAYOR PUT TOGETHER A COMMITTEE,
CAME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND THEN PASSED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER.
AND WE SAID YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
AND THEN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EVEN SAID, OH, NO, THE
MAYOR HAS THE RIGHT TO NAME BUILDINGS.
AT LEAST I ARGUED, NO, YOU DON'T.
THE MAYOR MAY BE IN CHARGE OF MANAGING LEASES AND OTHER
THINGS, BUT THE MAYOR CAN'T SIGN A LEASE WITHOUT OUR
APPROVAL.
CAN'T PAINT A BUILDING WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL.

AND CAN'T DO A NUMBER OF THINGS WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL.
JUST BECAUSE THE MAYOR IN THEORY OVERSEES REAL ESTATE AND
MANAGES, DOESN'T MEAN THE MAYOR CAN NAME SOMETHING.
SO WE SIGNED AN ORDINANCE TO CODIFY THE EXECUTIVE ORDER.
TURNS OUT THE CITY ATTORNEY CHANGED IT EVEN DURING THAT
TIME, WHICH SHOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.
IT BANNED BUILDINGS FROM BEING NAMED AFTER PEOPLE WHO
COMMITTED CIVIL RIGHTS ABUSES, WHICH THIS ADMINISTRATION
THEN WENT AHEAD AND DID.
2018 I MENTIONED THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME WROTE A TWO
PARAGRAPH MEMO SAYING THAT CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE DOESN'T HAVE TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS WHICH
WAS COMPLETELY FALSE, AGAINST THE CHARTER.
AND ON THE ONE THAT MR. SHELBY MENTIONED, I WASN'T HERE AT
THE TIME, BUT THE RESOLUTION, THE CONFLICT IS THAT THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HIRED A FORMER FLORIDA BAR PRESIDENT,
GWYNNE YOUNG, WHO CAME IN AND WEIGHED IN ON IT.
BUT THAT WAS NOT A PURE PROCESS, ALTHOUGH SHE IS A FANTASTIC
PERSON, VERY HONORABLE PERSON.
THE MAYOR'S OFFICE STILL HAD CONTROL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
AND THAT PROCESS, SO IT WASN'T AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW.
THE POINT IS THAT IF THERE IS A CONFLICT IN THE CHARTER, WE
DEFINITELY SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO OVERRUN IT.
IF IT IS A CONFLICT IN THE MONEY, WE SHOULD HAVE -- BUT PART
OF THE PROBLEM WE HAVE, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE

CITY -- CAN I FINISH MARTY?
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
-- BECAUSE, TECHNICALLY, BY THE CHARTER, THE CITY ATTORNEY
REPORTS TO US AND THE MAYOR.
BUT IN PRACTICE, THE CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS TO THE MAYOR.
AND ANY ATTORNEY WILL TELL YOU THAT THEIR OPINIONS WILL
DEPEND ON WHO THEY REPORT TO.
AND SO BECAUSE THE CITY ATTORNEY DOES NOT DIRECTLY REPORT TO
US AND BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE FIRING AUTHORITY, THERE HAVE
BEEN MANY MISINTERPRETATIONS OF THE CHARTER IN FAVOR OF THE
MAYOR AGAINST THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS BEFORE WE RUN OUT OF TIME
WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT HAVING THE ABILITY TO FIRE THE ...
12:20:55PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I WANT TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE TIME FOR
THAT VERY REASON.
12:20:58PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I SAY THAT WE MOVE FORWARD AND SEND THIS TO
MR. TINKLER.
MY ONLY OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO SAY, WHICH, OF COURSE,
I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN, CHEMO BRAIN JUST --
12:21:14PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
DELETE THE FIRST LINE, TAMPA HAS A STRONG
MAYOR -- IT'S FLUFF.
12:21:18PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH, THIS IS FLUFF.
I'M JUST SAYING, THIS IS WHAT SHOULD GO.
MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE SEND THIS TO MR. TINKLER.
TO LOOK AT AND ADD.

OH, MAN.
OH WELL.
OKAY.
THAT'S MY MOTION.
12:21:36PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION, SECOND FROM COUNCILWOMAN
YOUNG.
IS THERE ANY OBJECTION?
HEARING NO OBJECTION, WE'LL SEND THAT TO TINKLER FOR REVIEW.
12:21:53PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE ALREADY DID CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION.
WE'RE DONE.
12:21:57PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE'RE DONE WITH THAT PART.
STILL OTHER ISSUES ON THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO
DISCUSS.
COUNCILMAN CARLSON.
12:22:09PM >>BILL CARLSON:
SAVE TIME, CAN WE CHERRY PICK?
I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE ASK MR. TINKLER TO COME BACK WITH A
MODIFICATION OF THE CHARTER TO GIVE CITY COUNCIL THE RIGHT
WITH SUPERMAJORITY VOTE TO FIRE EITHER THE CITY ATTORNEY
AND/OR THE MAYOR'S DIRECT REPORT.
12:22:28PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NUMBER 7.
OH, NO.
I'M SORRY.
12:22:33PM >> CAN THEY PUT THE QUESTIONS UP, PLEASE?
12:22:38PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CAN CCTV PUT THEM UP, PLEASE?
12:22:41PM >>BILL CARLSON:
THAT IS KIND OF A SUMMARY OF SEVERAL OF

THESE.
THE REMEDY --
12:22:45PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S NUMBER 12.
12:22:46PM >>BILL CARLSON:
THE REMEDY TO THE CONFLICTS.
12:22:48PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
FLIP IT OVER.
IT'S NUMBER 12.
12:22:50PM >>BILL CARLSON:
-- AND THE IDEA THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY
REPRESENTS AND BY CHARTER REPRESENTS US AND THE MAYOR, BUT
HAS BEEN USED AS A WEAPON AGAINST CITY COUNCIL IS THAT WE
SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO FIRE THE CITY ATTORNEY BY
SUPERMAJORITY.
THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE CITY ATTORNEY IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND
BECAUSE BY CHARTER, THEY ARE OUR ATTORNEY.
WE HAVE OUR OWN ATTORNEY, BUT THE CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS TO
-- OR REPRESENTS THE MAYOR, THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THE
DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
NOT JUST THE MAYOR.
BUT IN PRACTICE, THE PERSON IS ONLY REPRESENTING THE MAYOR.
IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIRE THE PERSON BY SUPERMAJORITY,
THEN THEY ARE GOING TO LISTEN TO US.
12:23:31PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CORRECT.
I AGREE.
12:23:33PM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I DISAGREE AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY.
NO EMPLOYEE CAN HAVE TWO BOSSES.
IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIRE PEOPLE, WHO IN THE

HELL WANTS TO BE CITY ATTORNEY?
WHO WANTS TO BE A DEPARTMENT HEAD?
I DON'T UNDERSTAND, IF WE WANT A SEPARATE GOVERNMENT, LET'S
FORM ONE.
LET'S FORM ONE WHERE THE MAYOR SITS WITH US.
YOU CAN'T HAVE ONE PARTY AND THE OTHER PARTY LOOKING BOTH
WAYS.
IT'S ABOUT THE PUBLIC AND NOT ABOUT ME AND WHAT I WANT.
IT'S ABOUT WHAT GOOD ARE WE DOING FOR THE CITIZENS THAT WE
SERVE, WHETHER THEY ARE RIGHT OR WRONG, THAT'S UP TO THE
COURTS.
TAKE IT TO COURT.
BUT I AM NOT ONE THAT'S GOING TO GIVE THE CITY AWAY BY
DIVIDING THIS GOVERNMENT.
I JUST WON'T DO IT.
THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT TO SAY.
12:24:19PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO, DID YOU WANT TO SAY
ANYTHING?
COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG, DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS ONE?
12:24:24PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I MOTION THAT WE SEND THIS TO TINKLER.
12:24:27PM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
SECOND.
12:24:27PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION AND I HAVE A SECOND FROM
COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
12:24:30PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I'M SORRY, SEND QUESTION NUMBER 12 TO TINKLER
TO BRING US LANGUAGE.

12:24:39PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK,
A SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE?
OPPOSED?
12:24:49PM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NO.
12:24:51PM >>THE CLERK:
MOTION CARRIED WITH MIRANDA VOTING NO AND VIERA
BEING ABSENT AT VOTE.
12:24:58PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
12:25:00PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
IF HE HAS MORE.
12:25:01PM >>BILL CARLSON:
I WANT TO ADD TO THAT AND CLARIFY FOR THE
PUBLIC.
THE CITY ATTORNEY REPRESENTS THE CITY BUT ALSO THROUGH THAT
REPRESENTS ALL THESE DIFFERENT ENTITIES.
IF A CITY ATTORNEY HAS A CONFLICT, THEY ULTIMATELY REPRESENT
THE CITY.
ANYWAY --
12:25:19PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
UNDERSTAND.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
12:25:21PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ITEM NUMBER 7, AND I WOULD LIKE -- SHOULD THE
CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY BE ALLOWED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF
AND OUTSIDE ATTORNEY SUBJECT TO BUDGET APPROVAL OF CITY
COUNCIL, SO I THINK IT SHOULDN'T JUST BE CITY COUNCIL
ATTORNEY.
IT'S SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL BE ALLOWED TO HIRE --
12:25:40PM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
[INAUDIBLE]

12:25:41PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
INSTEAD OF JUST CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY, IF I
TAKE THE ATTORNEY OUT, AND JUST SAY SHOULD CITY COUNCIL BE
ALLOWED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF.
12:25:48PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT ONLY WORKS IF WE DO SOMETHING WITH
16.
12:25:52PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
AND ALSO --
12:25:53PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES, BUT THAT'S, AGAIN, SO THAT WAS MY
SECONDARY ONE THAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT THEM TOGETHER.
SO I THINK IT SHOULD BE, SO THE CITY COUNCIL -- THE CITY
COUNCIL SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF SUBJECT
TO BUDGET APPROVAL OR TO THE BUDGET, PERIOD.
12:26:10PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF I CAN.
12:26:11PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
HOLD ON.
MR. SHELBY.
12:26:13PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YEAH, PLEASE LET ME FINISH.
SHOULD THE CITY COUNCIL BE ALLOWED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF
SUBJECT -- AND JUST PERIOD.
NO SUBJECT TO ANYTHING.
JUST SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HIRE.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF AS
NECESSARY.
THAT'S GOING TO BE MY THING FOR TINKLER.
GOING ALONG WITH NUMBER 16, WHICH IS ON THE OTHER SIDE,
SHOULD TAMPA CITY COUNCIL BE ABLE TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO

THE CITY BUDGET DURING THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO BOTH OF THOSE THINGS.
SO I WOULD LIKE MR. TINKLER TO COME TOGETHER AND BRING
LANGUAGE TO THAT EFFECT.
12:26:43PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. SHELBY.
12:26:46PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
TWO SEPARATE ISSUES, TWO SEPARATE SECTIONS
OF THE CHARTER.
12:26:49PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BUT ONE HAS TO HAPPEN BEFORE THE OTHER ONE
CAN HAPPEN.
12:26:53PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WELL, LET ME READ TO YOU, THERE IS A
SECTION RELATED TO HIRING OTHER STAFF IN YOUR CHARTER.
WHAT YOU HAVE -- YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GIVE DIRECTION.
THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS, OTHER STAFF, THE CITY MAY CREATE, THE
CITY COUNCIL, AND THIS IS IN SECTION 2.04 STAFF.
D.
OTHER STAFF, COLON, THE CITY COUNCIL MAY CREATE AND FILL
OTHER STAFF POSITIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING IN THE
PERFORMANCE OF ITS LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION SEMICOLON, HOWEVER,
COMMA, SUCH OTHER STAFF POSITIONS MUST FIRST BE APPROVED BY
AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF NO FEWER THAN FIVE MEMBERS OF THE
CITY COUNCIL, SEMICOLON.
FUNDS FOR SUCH POSITIONS MUST BE FOUND IN THE CITY COUNCIL
BUDGET AND ANY ADDITIONAL COSTS THEREOF MUST FIRST BE
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR.
12:27:40PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY, WELL, THEN, I APOLOGIZE THAT I THOUGHT

-- I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT MADE IT THROUGH ON THE LAST ONE.
12:27:47PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT'S BEEN IN THERE FOR AS LONG AS --
12:27:51PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THE ISSUE WITH THE MAYOR.
12:27:52PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE THE MAYOR
PART OUT.
12:27:54PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
BUT YOU'D HAVE TO GET --
12:27:58PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THEN WE HAVE TO GO.
12:27:59PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHAT SECTION WAS THAT?
12:28:04PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THIS IS 2.04 STAFF, SUB D, OTHER STAFF.
12:28:11PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
GOT IT.
THANKS.
WHAT ABOUT 16?
12:28:13PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
16, GOING TO TALK ABOUT --
12:28:16PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MID CYCLE BUDGET AMENDMENTS.
12:28:18PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YES.
HERE IT GOES.
LET ME FIND IT.
BUDGET CHANGES, 70.7 BUDGET CHANGES.
THE CITY COUNCIL UPON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAYOR SHALL
HAVE THE POWER FROM TIME TO TIME DURING THE FISCAL YEAR
AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET THEREFORE BY
RESOLUTION TO REAPPROPRIATE TO ANY MUNICIPAL PURPOSE ANY
FUNDS NOT NEEDED FOR THE PURPOSE ORIGINALLY APPROPRIATED OR
TO APPROPRIATE ANY UNAPPROPRIATED CASH SURPLUS TO ANY
MUNICIPAL PURPOSE.

THIS HAS BEEN AROUND IT LOOKS LIKE SINCE THE 1970s.
12:28:55PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S THE PRACTICE WE USE.
BUDGET AMENDMENTS ARE RECOMMENDED BY THE MAYOR AND THEN THEY
INITIATE IT.
THAT'S THE PROCESS USED.
WE CAN'T INITIATE ONE.
12:29:04PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NOT AS THAT SECTION AS PRESENTLY WRITTEN.
12:29:07PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO CHANGE.
12:29:09PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
HOW IS IT YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE?
OR WHAT DIRECTION DO YOU WANT TO GIVE MR. TINKLER WITH
REGARD TO THAT SECTION?
12:29:16PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
JUST SAYING WE WANT TO CHANGE IT SO THAT CITY
COUNCIL CAN INITIATE AMENDMENTS.
THAT'S JUST LET HIM.
12:29:22PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YOUR DIRECTION WOULD BE ASK MR. TINKLER TO
EVALUATE SECTION 7.07 OF THE CITY OF TAMPA CHARTER TO
MODIFY, TO ALLOW TAMPA CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE OR SUGGEST
MIDTERM CYCLE BUDGET AMENDMENTS.
12:29:39PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WITHOUT -- LET ME JUST.
12:29:41PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WITHOUT MAYORAL APPROVAL.
INITIAL MAYORAL APPROVAL.
12:29:44PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
WITHOUT INITIAL --
12:29:47PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WITHOUT INITIAL RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
MAYOR.
12:29:51PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
HERE IS A QUESTION FOR COUNCIL.

12:29:54PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
STILL COULD RUN A VETO.
12:29:55PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
IF YOU QUITE REMEMBER, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER
IT IS COMING IN NEW CHAPTER 27 CHANGES, BUT THE CONCEPT OF A
CYCLE, THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO CYCLES A YEAR THAT YOU COULD
PROVIDE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 27, DO YOU RECALL THAT?
THAT DID NOT ALWAYS EXIST.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED DURING THE PERIOD OF -- I GUESS AFTER I
WAS HERE, BECAUSE I SAW IT HAPPEN, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE MAKING SOMETIMES AT EACH
INDIVIDUAL MEETING CHANGES TO CHAPTER 27.
AND IT BECAME VERY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THAT DEPARTMENT TO BE ABLE
TO KEEP UP WITH THE CHANGES THAT CITY COUNCIL WAS
REQUESTING.
THEREFORE, IT WAS PROPOSED TO CITY COUNCIL TO QUANTIFY IT OR
LIMIT IT TO, LET'S SAY, THE TIMES OF THE YEAR OR PERHAPS BY
A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE, IN THIS CASE, SO YOU DON'T HAVE --
BECAUSE THERE IS A WHOLE PROCESS THAT TAKES PLACE WITH
REGARD TO FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS AND --
12:30:54PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MR. SHELBY, I THINK THAT IS A PERFECTLY FINE
THING, BUT IF THAT APPLIES TO CITY COUNCIL, IT SHOULD ALSO
APPLY TO THE MAYOR.
12:31:02PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I'M NOT TAKING A POSITION.
I'M JUST SHARING WITH YOU THAT I WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO GIVE
DIRECTION TO MR. TINKLER.
SO YOU WANT TO JUST MAKE IT SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE

RECOMMENDED BY THE MAYOR.
12:31:13PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
CORRECT.
ONCE AGAIN, SECTION 7.07, IS THAT WHAT YOU READ?
7.07, DIRECT MR. TINKLER TO EVALUATE THAT, TO MODIFY THE
LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ALLOW TAMPA CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE MIDYEAR
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATIONS AND -- PERIOD.
12:31:38PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I HAVE A MOTION BY CHAIR CLENDENIN.
I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
12:31:42PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
QUESTION.
IS THAT BY SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE OR BY --
12:31:48PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WELL, THEN, BECAUSE THE MAYOR COULD MAKE A
VETO AND IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO US WITH AN OVERRIDE
WITH A SUPERMAJORITY.
12:31:57PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE IN THERE.
12:31:59PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES.
12:31:59PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR?
AYE.
ANY OPPOSED?
12:32:05PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
OKAY.
I SEE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS.
I'M GOING TO TAKE AN IOU ON THE DEBT.
I THINK WE COULD DO THAT VIA ORDINANCE.
NUMBER 15.
I BELIEVE THAT WHEN WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT WHEN WE ARE

SUBMITTED WITH A PROPOSAL, IT SHOULD BE VERY CLEAR -- I
MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THEY HAVE IT IN A CATCHALL.
THIS COULD BE PAID FOR BY BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
WE SEE IN THE PAST, HANNA, FAIR OAKS, A LOT OF THESE
PROJECTS, IT'S NOT SPECIFIC.
I THINK IF A PROJECT IS GOING TO BE PAID BY DEBT, FROM THE
MOMENT THAT IT IS BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF CITY COUNCIL,
THERE SHOULD BE A LINE IN THAT PROPOSAL THAT THIS PROJECT IS
GOING TO BE PAID FOR BY THIS TYPE OF DEBT.
AND THE TYPE OF DEBT THAT IT IS GOING TO BE PAID FOR.
IF YOU VOTE ON THE AFFIRMATIVE ON THAT, YOU ARE -- THAT WE
ARE VERY CLEARLY, THAT -- EVERY SINGLE PROPOSAL IS BROUGHT
FORTH, THAT IT'S NOT BURIED INTO A PARAGRAPH THAT HAS TO BE
A STAND-ALONE PARAGRAPH, HIGHLIGHTING HOW THAT IS GOING TO
BE PAID FOR SO THAT -- AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH EVERY SINGLE
COST THAT WE VOTE ON.
IF DEBT IS PART OF IT, IT HAS TO BE HIGHLIGHTED IN A VERY
SPECIFIC AND STANDARDIZED WAY.
I'M GOING TO WORK -- THIS IS JUST FOR INFORMATION.
I'LL TAKE THIS AS AN IOU TO WORK ON THIS TO HAVE A MOTION
FOR A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING TO SUBMIT TO LEGAL TO BRING
BACK TO US.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO TAKE THAT AS AN ORDINANCE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE IN THE CHARTER BECAUSE IT'S
ONE OF THOSE ITEMS, I THINK WE CAN DEAL WITH THIS VIA

ORDINANCE AND NOT VIA CHARTER.
WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG'S ISSUE.
DEAL WITH THAT VIA ORDINANCE.
22.
12:33:55PM >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
[INAUDIBLE]
12:33:56PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YEAH.
WHAT ELSE?
ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S OUTSTANDING THAT YOU THINK WE NEED TO
DEAL WITH WITH THESE ISSUES?
I THINK WE COVERED ALL THE HIGHLIGHTS.
12:34:04PM >>BILL CARLSON:
MARTY, DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO
APPROVE THE ONES THAT WE DID BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT?
12:34:09PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
YEAH, I THINK --
12:34:11PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
NO, I THINK WE'LL BRING THOSE BACK TO THE
NEXT ONE.
12:34:14PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MS. SCHARF LOOKS LIKE SHE HAS QUESTIONS.
CAN YOU COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE?
STATE YOUR NAME.
12:34:20PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MS. SCHARF, FOR THE RECORD, I DID NOT
VOLUNTEER YOU TO DO THIS.
YOUR BOSS DID.
12:34:26PM >> KELLY SCHARF, LEGISLATIVE AIDE.
JUST PLEASE CONFIRM WHAT YOU WANTED ON SECTION 2.04 AS IT
RELATES TO QUESTION NUMBER 7.
12:34:37PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ACTUALLY, I NEED TO CHANGE THAT.

I RESCIND QUESTION NUMBER 7 AND INSTEAD WHAT IT REALLY IS,
IS QUESTION 14 ON THE OTHER SIDE.
IT SHOULD, SHOULD CITY COUNCIL BE ALLOWED TO HIRE ADDITIONAL
STAFF.
IT IS SECTION 2.04, SUBSECTION D.
12:35:01PM >> YOU'RE ASKING -- YOU WANT MR. TINKLER TO LOOK AT IT?
12:35:05PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE WANT MR. TINKLER TO ADD LANGUAGE TO --
12:35:14PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT'S ALL ABOUT BUDGET AMENDMENTS.
12:35:19PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WE ALSO WANT HIM TO REMOVE THAT THE MAYOR HAS
TO APPROVE THAT.
12:35:26PM >> RESTATE FROM THE BEGINNING, PLEASE.
12:35:27PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
ITEM 14, SHOULD CITY COUNCIL BE ALLOWED TO
AMEND THE BUDGET TO HIRE ADDITIONAL STAFF TO CARRY OUT THEIR
LEGISLATIVE DUTIES, WHICH IS UNDER 2.04 SUBSECTION D, BUT
TAKING OUT THE FACT THAT THE MAYOR HAS TO APPROVE SUCH
BUDGET CHANGES.
12:35:42PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THAT PASSED BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
12:35:44PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THAT WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
I WOULD LIKE TO RESTATE THAT MOTION.
ACTUALLY, I NEED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO NOT BE NUMBER 7, BUT
TO BE NUMBER 14.
12:35:58PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS A
WORKSHOP.
12:36:01PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY.
NEVER --

12:36:03PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE ARE CRAFTING THE INFORMATION THAT IS
GOING TO COME BACK TO US AT THE NEXT MEETING FOR ACTUAL
DEFINITIVE VOTES.
THIS IS JUST GETTING -- DIRECTING TINKLER FOR THE WORK
PRODUCT.
SO WE'LL STILL HAVE ANOTHER BITE AT THE APPLE.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE?
ANYTHING WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED TODAY THAT PEOPLE FEEL
COMPELLED TO TALK ABOUT?
I THINK WE ACCOMPLISHED AN AWFUL LOT.
IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS
ANY OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE JUST DISCUSSED IN THIS ITEM AND
THAT IS REFERENCE TO CHANGES TO THE CHARTER.
2 AND 3.
CHANGES TO THE CHARTER AND PROPOSED BUDGET ORDINANCES WE
DISCUSSED.
ALL THE ITEMS WE'VE DISCUSSED, INCLUDING PROPOSED ORDINANCE
CHANGES.
12:36:49PM >> GOOD AFTERNOON.
STEPHANIE POYNOR.
I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE NOT DISCONTINUING THE SALARY INCREASE IN
MAY.
I 100%, IT TOOK FOUR VOTES BEFORE WE GOT TO LET'S RAISE YOUR
SALARIES.
IT TOOK THREE TIMES SHOOTING IT DOWN, SO IT WAS RIDICULOUS.

AND I DON'T WANT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS GOING BACK TO THE
URBAN LEAGUE AND THREATENING THEM IN ORDER TO GET INTO
EVENTS.
SO I THINK YOU GUYS SHOULD MAKE A LIVING WAGE DOING THE JOB
SO THAT CLOWNS DON'T ACT LIKE THAT IN PUBLIC AND EMBARRASS
THE ENTIRE CITY.
I PROBABLY KNOW BETTER THAN ANYONE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA WHO
HAS NEVER RECEIVED A PAYCHECK FROM THE CITY OF TAMPA, HOW
HARD YOUR JOB IS AND HOW LITTLE YOU MAKE PER HOUR DOING IT.
AND AT NO POINT IN TIME SHOULD IT BE ANYTHING.
I WOULD 100% SUPPORT IT BEING TETHERED TO THE MAYOR'S
SALARY.
WHATEVER HER SALARY IT, WHATEVER HIS SALARY IT, WHOEVER SITS
OVER THERE AT TBOB, IT SHOULD BE ABSOLUTELY TIED TO THAT.
AND WE SHOULD BE PAYING OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS A LIVING
SALARY BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO PAY TO GO INTO THINGS.
DO YOU HAVE TO PAY TO PARK.
IF YOU COULD PAY A PARK ACROSS THE STREET, IT'S 30 BUCKS FOR
THE DAY OR WHATEVER.
I'M PROUD OF YOU GUYS.
IT MAKES MY HEART GROW TWO SIZES TODAY THAT WE WON'T HAVE TO
BE THREATENING THE URBAN LEAGUE ANYMORE.
THANK YOU.
.
12:38:29PM >> ALAN COHN, VICE-CHAIR OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION.

I WANTED TO THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN FOR ALLOWING US TO
PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS.
FROM THE BEGINNING, I HAD HOPED THAT WE WOULD DO SOMETHING
THAT WOULD HELP THE CITY MEET THE MOMENT THAT WE LIVE IN.
OBVIOUSLY, THERE WAS A LOT OF PUSH AND PULL IN TERMS OF OUR
DELIBERATIONS.
AND THAT IS OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT.
IN THE END, WE PASSED WHAT WE COULD DO BY CONSENSUS.
AND I AM INCREDIBLY PROUD OF WHAT WE DID IN TERMS OF THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL.
WE HEARD THE FRUSTRATIONS FROM THIS CHAMBER FROM TIME TO
TIME.
WE HAVE HEARD THE PUBLIC'S FRUSTRATIONS WITH GOVERNMENT IN
GENERAL.
PEOPLE ARE INCREASINGLY CYNICAL ABOUT GOVERNMENT.
BY HAVING AN INSPECTOR GENERAL, WE ARE ADDING AN INDEPENDENT
MECHANISM TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF WRONGDOING OR
CORRUPTION WHENEVER THEY TAKE PLACE.
WE WERE VERY DELIBERATE WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON THIS NOT TO
FILL IN EVERY BLANK, BECAUSE WE WANTED THE CITY COUNCIL TO
CREATE THIS INSPECTOR GENERAL IN THE WAY THAT BEST SERVES
THE CITY.
SO WE DID THAT DELIBERATELY.
IT WAS ABOUT CREATING A SYSTEM THAT HAS TRANSPARENCY.
COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG AND COUNCILMAN VIERA, SPOKE ELOQUENTLY

ABOUT THE FRUSTRATION THAT YOU ALL HAVE AND THE PUBLIC HAS
HAD THAT YOU SET ASIDE MONEY FOR PROJECTS IN THE CITY AND
SOME PROJECTS GET BUILT VERY QUICKLY.
OTHERS DO NOT.
AND THE PUBLIC IS QUITE OFTEN LEFT WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED
TO THAT ISSUE THAT WE KNEW WE GOT MONEY FOR.
AND IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO ON AN
INDIVIDUAL BASIS COME BACK AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN TO FIND
OUT WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THEIR PROJECT.
I'M GLAD IT'S GOING TO BE DONE BY ORDINANCE OR HOWEVER IT IS
ACCOMPLISHED BECAUSE PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT
WHEN THEY COME HERE AND THEY LOBBY MEMBERS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL AND MONEY IS SET ASIDE FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE
IMPORTANT TO THEIR COMMUNITY, THAT IT IS DONE.
AND IF IT'S NOT DONE, THAT THERE IS AN EXPLANATION FOR IT.
AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE HONOR OF TAKING PART IN THIS
PROCESS, AND I'M HOPING THIS IS NOT THE END OF MY PUBLIC
SERVICE, BUT JUST THE BEGINNING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
12:40:57PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NEXT SPEAKER.
START WITH YOUR NAME AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
12:41:05PM >> BRITTNEY LLWEWLYN.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL.
BEFORE I BEGIN, I WANT TO THANK EACH OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE

TO OUR CITY.
I'M A TAMPA NATIVE, FORMER CITY OF TAMPA EMPLOYEE AND A
RESIDENT WHO HAS FOLLOWED THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION'S
WORK CLOSELY OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
MUCH OF MY INVOLVEMENT IN THAT PROCESS HAS FOCUSED ON THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL.
IN MY JULY PUBLIC COMMENT, I EMPHASIZED TO THE COMMISSION
THAT THE DECISIONS THEY MADE AND THOSE THEY LEFT FOR THE
FUTURE WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER AN IG COULD FULFILL ITS
INTENDED PURPOSE.
TODAY THAT RESPONSIBILITY COMES BEFORE YOU.
AN IG CAN EXIST ON PAPER AND STILL LACK THE INDEPENDENCE,
AUTHORITY, STAFF, OR RESOURCES NECESSARY TO PROVIDE
MEANINGFUL OVERSIGHT.
LAST WEEK, I E-MAILED EACH OF YOU ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
OUTLINING FOUR STRUCTURAL SAFEGUARDS THAT I BELIEVE ARE
IMPORTANT TO CREATING AN EFFECTIVE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR
GENERAL.
THOSE SAFEGUARDS INCLUDED OPERATIONAL INDEPENDENCE,
MEANINGFUL INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY, DEDICATED FULL-TIME
STAFFING, AND STABLE FUNDING.
INDEPENDENCE MATTERS BECAUSE AN IG MAY HAVE TO INVESTIGATE
THE GOVERNMENT IT OVERSEES.
AUTHORITY MATTERS BECAUSE AN IG NEEDS ACCESS TO THE
INFORMATION NECESSARY TO DO ITS JOB.

STAFFING MATTERS BECAUSE THE CITY AS LARGE AS TAMPA REQUIRES
DEDICATED OVERSIGHT.
FUNDING MATTERS BECAUSE AN OVERSIGHT OFFICE CANNOT TRULY BE
INDEPENDENT WITHOUT STABLE RESOURCES.
NONE OF THIS ASSUMES WRONGDOING.
EFFECTIVE OVERSIGHT SHOULD IDENTIFY INEFFICIENCIES,
WEAKNESSES, AND SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS BEFORE THEY BECOME LARGER
AND MORE EXPENSIVE FOR TAXPAYERS.
MY OWN EXPERIENCE WORKING FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA IS WHAT
ORIGINALLY LED ME TO START PAYING ATTENTION TO THESE
SYSTEMS.
BUT WHAT I AM ASKING TO YOU CONSIDER TODAY IS MUCH LARGER
THAN ANY INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCE.
IF TAMPA IS GOING TO ESTABLISH AN IG, THE QUESTION SHOULD
NOT SIMPLY BE WHETHER WE CREATE THE OFFICE.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE WHETHER WE CREATE AN OFFICE CAPABLE
OF DOING THE JOB WE ARE ASKING TO DO.
AS YOU REVIEW THE RECOMMENDATIONS, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT
YOU PRESERVE THE STRUCTURAL SAFEGUARDS NECESSARY TO MAKE
THAT POSSIBLE AND GIVE TAMPA VOTERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO
DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT THOSE PROTECTIONS EMBEDDED IN THEIR
CITY CHARTER.
THANK YOU.
12:43:56PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
THANK YOU.
12:43:57PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
NEXT.

12:44:01PM >> ALISON HEWITT.
JUST A BRIEF SUGGESTION.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP ON EVERY ISSUE WAS BY
THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION IS WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO
ADDRESS RIGHT NOW?
WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION?
SO I SAY THAT TO SAY IN YOUR INSTITUTIONAL DOCUMENTS, I
SUGGEST AS THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL COME UP WITH
REPRESENTATIVES THAT THEY TRY TO SELECT SOMEONE WHO IS
PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT'S HAPPENING, ACTIVE IN THIS PROCESS
BECAUSE WE HAD TO HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE COME IN TO BE ABLE TO
EXPLAIN IT, BECAUSE THE PEOPLE YOU DID SELECT DID TAKE THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY AND SAID WHAT ARE WE ADDRESSING NOW.
AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL IF A LOT MORE OF THE BOARD
ACTUALLY WATCHED THE MEETINGS, PARTICIPATED IN MEETINGS TO
BE ABLE TO BRING SOME OF THE THINGS YOU ALL HAVE BROUGHT UP
IN YOUR CONVERSATIONS.
I JUST ASK YOU CONSIDER AS YOU ARE WRITING INSTITUTIONAL
DOCUMENTS AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE NEXT BOARD WHO
MAKES THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THAT THEY CONSIDER APPOINTING
PEOPLE WHO HAVE SHOWN THAT THEY ARE FOLLOWING WHAT THE CITY
COUNCIL IS GOING THROUGH AND ADDRESSING.
THANK YOU.
12:45:14PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU, MS. HEWITT.
NEXT.

12:45:19PM >> GOOD AFTERNOON.
BOBBY CREIGHTON.
JUST WANTED TO STEP UP AND ONCE AGAIN EXPRESS MY DEEPEST
GRATITUDE.
AGAIN, IT WAS THE PRIVILEGE OF A LIFETIME TO BE ABLE TO
SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION.
MORE THAN ANYTHING, IT WAS JUST SO MUCH FUN.
I LEARNED MORE ABOUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND HOW IT WORKS AND
OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAN I EVER THOUGHT I WOULD HAVE.
I'M NOT GREAT AT MAKING SPEECHES.
I ALWAYS SHOWED UP WITH A LAPTOP, BINDER AND NOTEBOOK TO
FEEL PREPARED.
SO I FEEL A LITTLE UNDRESSED HERE, WITH A LITTLE SHEET OF
PAPER.
ONE THING TO ALSO CONSIDER, THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT IG
MODELS AND CHARTERS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN FLORIDA.
TO MS. LLWEWLYN'S POINT, I THINK SHE MADE A GREAT POINT THAT
FUNDING IS ALSO A CONTINGENCY OF INDEPENDENCE.
SOME CHARTERS OR IN SOME ORDINANCES WHERE IGs EXIST IN
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, THERE IS A FUNDING MINIMUM.
THERE'S DIFFERENT FORMULAS FOR HOW TO FUND IT.
AND THAT CAN GET PRETTY INTRICATE AND PRETTY IN THE WEEDS
FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE.
I THINK THIS IS DEFINITELY ONE REALLY WORTH FLESHING OUT
WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD ALLOTTED IN THE CHARTER.

I THINK IT'S SIX MONTHS OR SO YOU HAVE TO FORMULATE THE
ORDINANCE LANGUAGE TO REALLY DIVE IN AND FIGURE OUT WHAT
WOULD WORK BEST FOR OUR CITY.
LIKE I SAID, THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENT MODELS.
THERE IS A LONG DISCUSSION TO BE HAD ABOUT THAT.
ONCE AGAIN, JUST WANTED TO COME UP AND EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE
AND THANK YOU.
12:46:47PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THANK YOU, BOBBY.
12:46:50PM >> SURGRET DOSS.
A COUPLE OF THINGS.
I BELIEVE IN A FAIR DAY'S PAY FOR FAIR DAY'S WORK AS WELL.
YOU ALL DEFINITELY WORK MORE THAN THE 50,000.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU ALL CREATE A CLEAR DEFINITION FOR
TERMS LIKE THEY DO AT THE BEGINNING OF STATE STATUTE.
DEFINE THE TERMS.
OFFICER NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY DEFINED FOR THE VOTERS.
I ACTUALLY AM A WALKING BILLBOARD FOR THE NEED FOR AN IG.
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO INVESTIGATE WASTE, FRAUD, ABUSE OF POWER,
MISUSE OF OFFICE OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
A LOT OF THE PEOPLE HAVE LOST THEIR FAITH IN GOVERNMENT.
HELL, I HAVE.
I BELIEVE IN THE SYSTEM BECAUSE I'M A VETERAN.
BUT IT'S THE STEWARDS THAT HAVE DRAWN MY ATTENTION.
THE STEWARDS THAT WE PUT IN POWER ARE NOT DOING WHAT SO MANY
OF US HAVE ASKED THEM TO DO.

BUT MY PROBLEM WITH THE WAY THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AND YOURS
WAS SET UP IS THAT HE COULDN'T INITIATE CERTAIN ACTIONS.
HAVING THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, HAVING A WATCHDOG WITHOUT
TEETH IS KIND OF LIKE HAVING A PET.
THIS PERSON CAN'T BE BEHOLDEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO
GRADE HIM OR HER AS THEY TRY TO DO THEIR JOB IN LOOKING OUT
FOR THE PEOPLE.
LAST WEEK, I EVEN REMEMBER -- ACTUALLY, THIS GUY HAS TO PAY
OR HE'S RESTRICTED EVEN WHEN IT COMES TO REQUESTING PUBLIC
RECORDS.
THAT MEANS HE AIN'T NO DIFFERENT THAN ME.
GAVE ME A BILL FOR $10,000 WHEN I MADE A REQUEST FOR PUBLIC
RECORDS.
YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME THAT OUR INSPECTOR GENERAL WOULD
HAVE TO PAY THE SAME THING OR GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS
THAT ANY OTHER CITIZEN WOULD GO THROUGH TO GET PUBLIC
RECORDS.
ANOTHER THING THAT THIS CITY NEEDS TO DO, EVERY TIME
SOMEBODY MAKES A CHAPTER 119 REQUEST, THAT INFORMATION
SHOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
MY CHAPTER 119 REQUEST CAME ON THE HEELS OF ME AT THE END OF
A LEGAL SITUATION, CRIMINAL CASE, WHERE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN
TURNED OVER TO ME DURING MY BRADY DISCOVERY, DURING JUST
REGULAR DISCOVERY.
I FOUND OUT ABOUT IT LATER ON.

THE CITY SAID, WELL, WE HAD IT.
WE HAD IT WHEN YOU WERE BEING PROSECUTED BUT DIDN'T TURN IT
OVER.
BUT IF YOU WANT IT, WE WANT $10,000 FOR IT AND 7,000 E-MAILS
IN AND OF ITSELF INSANE.
THE COMMISSION, I THINK IT WAS 6-3 VOTE THAT YOU ALL SAID TO
PUT THIS THING ON THE BALLOT.
LET'S PUT IT ON THE BALLOT.
LET THE PEOPLE CHOOSE.
AND TO THE PEOPLE OF TAMPA, SHOW YOUR ASSES UP.
I KNOW, MOST PEOPLE PROBABLY DOING THAT J THING WORKING.
I DON'T LIKE TO USE THAT WORD TOO MUCH.
THEY ARE PROBABLY AT WORK.
WE NEED TO BE MORE PARTICIPATORY, ESPECIALLY YOUNG PEOPLE.
WE GOT TO GET OUT HERE AND PARTICIPATE IN THE POLITICS THAT
AFFECT YOUR LIVES ON A DAILY BASIS.
AS ALWAYS IN PARTING, TOMORROW, I'LL BE AT THE GREATEST
INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING IN THE CITY OF TAMPA SAYING
HELLO TO THE CLASS OF 1996 TEAM AND THE WINNINGEST BLACK
COACH IN THE HISTORY OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, NELSON.
SHOUT-OUT TO THE GREATEST INSTITUTION OF HIGHER LEARNING IN
THE CITY OF TAMPA, THE UNIVERSITY OF THOMAS JEFFERSON HIGH
SCHOOL.
12:49:53PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. DOSS, MR. SHELBY HAS A COPY.
12:50:00PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MAY I?

12:50:03PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
GO AHEAD.
12:50:04PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHEN IT COMES TO THAT PARTICULAR INSPECTOR
GENERAL, I WOULD LIKE THAT MR. TINKLER RECEIVE BOTH A COPY
OF MS. LLWEWLYN AND MR. CREIGHTON'S E-MAILS ON THIS MATTER
BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAD REALLY GOOD POINTS.
12:50:18PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WITHOUT OBJECTION.
WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER.
MICHAEL RANDOLPH.
12:50:28PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
FOLLOW-UP ON THAT.
I DON'T RECALL SEEING THEM.
12:50:37PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MS. SCHARF, COULD YOU PRINT OUT MS. LLWEWLYN
AND MR. CREIGHTON'S E-MAILS IN FULL AND BRING THEM HERE TO
PUT THEM IN THE RECORD.
12:50:45PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
ELECTRONICALLY, TOO.
12:50:46PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
AND FOR THEM, YOU SHOULD HAVE THEM BECAUSE
THEY WENT TO CITY COUNCIL AS A WHOLE.
12:50:53PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
MR. RANDOLPH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
I APOLOGIZE FOR ALMOST MISSING YOU AFTER BEING REMINDED AT
LEAST THREE TIMES.
12:51:00PM >> THANK YOU, CAN YOU HEAR ME?
12:51:02PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WE CAN HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR.
12:51:04PM >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
TAMPA IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING --
12:51:06PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
START WITH YOUR NAME.
GOT TO HAVE YOUR NAME.

12:51:10PM >> I'M SORRY.
MICHAEL RANDOLPH.
TAMPA IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING AND MOST DYNAMIC CITIES
IN FLORIDA.
YET FOR YEARS OUR CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN COMPENSATED -- LEVEL
OF RESPONSIBILITY TO THE JOB.
TODAY CITY COUNCIL AMENDMENTS OVERSEE MULTIBILLION DOLLAR
BUDGET -- TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, PUBLIC SAFETY, NEIGHBORHOOD
DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH.
THE WORKLOAD HAS BECOME FULL-TIME IN A PRACTICAL SENSE, EVEN
THOUGH THE PAY DOES NOT REFLECT THIS.
THE CAPACITY OF GOVERNMENT GROWS WITH IT.
CITY COUNCIL IS EXPECTED TO RESPOND TO CONSTITUENTS,
NAVIGATE STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATION AND LONG-TERM
DECISIONS THAT AFFECT GENERATIONS.
HISTORICALLY, TAMPA'S SALARIES HAVE LAGGED BEHIND OTHER
MAJOR CITIES, MAKING IT HARDER TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN
HIGH-QUALITY INDIVIDUALS.
WHEN CONVERSATION IS SO LOW, ONLY PEOPLE WITH INDEPENDENT
INCOME -- CAN AFFORD TO SERVE.
THIS AMENDMENT'S DIVERSITY REDUCES ACCESSIBILITY -- TRULY
WANTS TO SERVE COMMUNITY.
FAIR COMPENSATION ALSO STRENGTHENS ETHICAL GOVERNANCE.
WHEN CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T HAVE TO RELY ON OUTSIDE
EMPLOYMENT, THEY CAN DEDICATE THEIR FULL-TIME ATTENTION TO

CITY NEEDS WITH NO POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
WELL-PAID CITY COUNCIL IS BETTER POSITIONED TO MAKE
INDEPENDENT DECISIONS.
THE COST OF INCREASING SALARY IS SMALL COMPARED TO THE
IMPACT THE CITY HAS TO MAKE FOR THE FUTURE WITH
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT, PUBLIC SAFETY, THE CITY NEEDS
THIS.
RAISING CITY COUNCIL SALARIES IS A STRATEGIC INVESTMENT IN
PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND REPRESENTS TRUE LEADERSHIP.
FINALLY, I WANT TO THANK THE CITY CLERKS AND THE STAFF FOR
GETTING ME ON TODAY.
I HAD SOME PROBLEMS.
I ALSO RECOMMEND THEY GET A SALARY INCREASE AS WELL.
THANK YOU.
[ LAUGHTER ]
12:53:32PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I BELIEVE OUR CITY CLERK JUST SECONDED
THAT MOTION.
THANK YOU, MR. RANDOLPH.
ALWAYS APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.
THAT CONCLUDES OUR REGULAR SCHEDULED BUSINESS.
MR. SHELBY.
12:53:48PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I BELIEVE I WOULD APPRECIATE TWO MOTIONS.
12:53:51PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I'M WORKING ON THIS.
THIS WOULD BE NEW BUSINESS.
12:53:58PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
NO.

THIS IS PART OF THE SAME ITEM.
ALSO, BEFORE YOU EVEN GET TO THE REQUEST FOR NEXT WEEK, IS
TO ACTUALLY -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DID IT PIECE MEAL, BUT TO
I GUESS BE ABLE TO ENCAPSULATE THE FACT THAT CITY COUNCIL
ACCEPTS ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT IT HAS MADE TODAY TO
BE ABLE TO PASS IT ON TO THE ATTORNEY.
12:54:25PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT ALL THE
RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY TO PASS ALONG IT MR. TINKLER.
12:54:32PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.
OPPOSED?
12:54:39PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
CHAIR.
12:54:39PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
I MOVE A TIME CERTAIN OF 1:30 P.M. NEXT
WEEK, OCTOBER 1st FOR FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF COUNCIL
OF CHARTER AMENDMENTS TO BE PRESENTED TO VOTERS AND THEN
CORRECT THE CRC LEGAL COUNSEL AT THAT TIME TO BRING BACK AN
ORDINANCE FOR THE FIRST READING THAT PLACES THE CHARTER
QUESTIONS ON THE BALLOT FOR MARCH 2, 2027 BALLOT.
12:54:56PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
WHY 1:30?
12:54:59PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
MARTIN SHELBY.
THERE ARE NO REVIEW HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR NEXT WEEK, BUT
THERE MAY BE DISCUSSIONS.
THIS IS MY NEXT QUESTION TO YOU.
IS IT COUNCIL'S REQUEST TO HAVE MR. TINKLER HERE AT THAT
TIME?

12:55:14PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
YES.
12:55:16PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
YES.
OH, THAT'S WHY THE TIME CERTAIN.
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR?
AYE.
ANY OPPOSED?
12:55:23PM >>MARTIN SHELBY:
CAN YOU ALSO MAKE THAT A MOTION PLEASE TO
INVITE MR. TINKLER TO BE HERE.
12:55:28PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
SAM, IF YOU ARE LISTENING.
PLEASE MAKE SURE WE INVITE MR. TINKLER, COMMAND HIS
PERFORMANCE NEXT OCTOBER 1st, 1:30 P.M.
DON'T NEED A MOTION FOR THAT.
SINCE I'VE GOT THE MICROPHONE -- I'M SORRY -- I'VE HAD SOME
COORDINATION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION STAFF.
AND THEY ARE BACKED UP IN CASES.
AND THEY NEED AN EXTRA EVENING HEARING IN DECEMBER.
IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE BECAUSE OF HAVING FEWER EVENING
HEARINGS IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAYS SO
WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKUP.
I COORDINATED WITH THEM AND THE CLERKS, I'M GOING TO MAKE A
MOTION THAT WE ADD AN ADDITIONAL EVENING MEETING ON
DECEMBER 3rd AT 5:01 P.M. AT 315 EAST KENNEDY BOULEVARD
WITH NO MORE THAN SIX CASES.
THEY COULD BE REZONINGS, AB, OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

AMENDMENTS.
12:56:24PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
MY RECOMMENDATION IS ONLY IF WE LIMIT STAFF
REPORTS TO FOUR FOR THE DAY MEETING.
12:56:31PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
WHAT DO WE HAVE ON THERE NOW?
12:56:34PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NOTHING ON THERE NOW.
12:56:35PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
LET'S LIMIT STAFF REPORTS TO TWO.
12:56:37PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
OKAY, LIMIT STAFF REPORTS TO TWO FOR THE
DECEMBER 3rd.
MS. YOUNG OR COUNCILWOMAN YOUNG, WHEN I JOINED COUNCIL, IT
WAS RIGHT AFTER 2020.
WE WERE SO BACKED UP, WE HAD TO ADD A SECOND MEETING EVERY
MONTH.
SO WE DID A FULL REGULAR MEETING.
AND THIS WAS LIKE BRAND-NEW FOR ME.
I WAS NEW TO COUNCIL, AND SO IT WAS AWFUL.
WE HAD A FULL YEAR.
IT WAS UNBELIEVABLE.
ANYWAY -- YEAH.
I HAVE A MOTION FROM CHAIR CLENDENIN AND A SECOND FROM
COUNCIL MEMBER MANISCALCO TO ADD A DECEMBER 3rd EVENING
MEETING, BUT ALSO LIMITING STAFF REPORTS TO TWO.
ALL IN FAVOR?
AYE.
AT THE DAY MEETING.
ANY OPPOSED?

12:57:33PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
VERY GOOD.
IT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS?
COUNCILMAN CARLSON?
COUNCILMAN VIERA?
12:57:41PM >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
NO, NO.
RUIN YOUR RECORD.
12:57:45PM >>NAYA YOUNG:
SOCIAL ACTION IN ARTS FUNDING APPLICATIONS
LAST DAY SEPTEMBER 30.
FOR FIRE PREVENTION WEEK, YOU HAVE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 25 TO
REGISTER ONLINE AT TAMPA.GOV/FIRE TO GET YOUR FREE SMOKE
ALARM.
AND THEN ALSO JUST WANT TO THANK ADAM PURCELL WITH THE
MOBILITY DEPARTMENT.
WE WERE AT THE TAMPA HEIGHTS CIVIC ASSOCIATION MEETING LAST
NIGHT, WHICH WENT VERY, VERY WELL.
I JUST WANT TO THANK HIM BUT ALSO THE MOBILITY DEPARTMENT,
EVERYTHING THEY ARE DOING WITH REGARDS TO TRANSPORTATION IN
THE CITY OF TAMPA.
12:58:17PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
THEY ARE ROCKING, AND THEY ARE GOING TO
GET US A STREETCAR HERE.
COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK.
12:58:24PM >>LYNN HURTAK:
NO.
12:58:24PM >>ALAN CLENDENIN:
VERY GOOD.
MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE FROM COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO.
SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.
OPPOSED?
AYES HAVE IT.
WE MADE IT BY 1 P.M.
[ SOUNDING GAVEL ]

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.
ANY PERSON WHO NEEDS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THE
PROCEEDINGS MAY NEED TO HIRE A COURT REPORTER.