(RECESS). >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU HAVE YOUR MIKE ON? I'M SORRY. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY THREE DOWNSTAIRS, AND I HAVE 19 REGISTERED TO SPEAK VIRTUALLY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE STARTED OFF WITH MR. MANASSE AND TOOK TIME OFF BECAUSEF THE TIME FRAME. HOW DO THEY FEEL ABOUT GOING TO THE STAFF REPORTS NOW AND LET THEM GET BACK TO WORK VERSUS DOING ITEM NUMBER 56? WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: [OFF MICROPHONE] >>ORLANDO GUDES: CONSENSUS? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES, SECOND. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. MANISCALCO WITH A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO GO FORWARD WITH STAFF REPORTS. MR. MIRANDA SECONDED IT. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? >>THE CLERK: MR. CHAIRMAN, WE NEED TO DO ROLL CALL. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ROL CALL. >>BILL CARLSON: HERE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: HERE. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: HERE. >>JOSEPH CITRO: HEAVIER VIER HERE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HERE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: HERE. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT, CHIEF. DO YOU WANT TO GO WITH 57 OR WAIT? >>JOHN BENNETT: CHIEF OF STAFF. FIRST, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK THROUGH THE STAFF REPORTS. HOMEFULLY WE WILLE NIMBLE ENOUGH TO GET EVERYBODY BACK ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 57, WE ARE OFFERING TO POSTPONE. THAT WAS JUST AN UPDATE FROM DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. SO WE SAW THE AGENDA AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE WAITING, SO WE ARE GOING TO PASS ON 57. THE RESTS OF THEM ARE REALLY COUNCIL'S PLEASURE AS FAR AS THE MEMORANDUMS GO. I AM NOT CONVERSANT ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE BEGINNING OF APPROVING THE AGENDA, WHICH STAFF MEMBERS YOU WERE WILLING TO RELEASE. THE FIRST ONE WAS 58 WITH A MEMO FROM DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR BARED. SO THAT FIRST, MR. BAIRD. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I BELIEVE THAT WE RELEASED HIM? >>MARTIN SHELBY: IS THERE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT? >> SO MOVED. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE 58? >>MARTIN SHELBY: MOVE THE RESOLUTION. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MOTIONY MANISCALCO TO MOVE THE RESOLUTION, MR. DINGFELDER SECONDED IT. ANY DISCUSSION ON IT? ROLL CALL FOR THE RESOLUTION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>BILL CARLSON: YES. >>JOSEPH CITRO: YES. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: YES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES. >>THE CLERK: MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ITEM 59. >>JOHN BENNETT: AGAIN, A MEMO FROM ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CARL BRODY. I'M NOT SURE OF COUNCIL'S PLSUREN TH. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. IT WAS MR. DINGFELDER'S MOTION. >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I SPOKE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING YOU SAID THAT YOU WOULD JUST ACCEPT THE REPORT, BUT I CAN MAKE SURE MR. BRODY IS AVAILABLE. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: HE'S THERE WAITING FOR IT. >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I CAN'T SEE THAT FAR. THANK YOU. >>CARL BRODY: GOOD AFTERNOON. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE ARE WAITING ON YOU WHENEVER YOU ARE READY. >>CARL BRODY: OH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. >> OKAY, GOOD. SORRY. SORRY. IN RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FROM COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER -- I'M SORRY, CARL BRODY FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. MS. SIMMS AND I ALSO FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT DID A REVIEW OF CASE LAW STATUTORY PROVISIONS THAT WOULD COME INTO PLAY, IF W WANTED TO INCORPORATE A LOCAL BUSINESS PREFERENCE. WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE A PRETTY STRONG LOCAL BUSINESS PREFERENCE IN PLACE THERE ARE OUR 36.5 BUSINESS ENTERPRISE ORDINANCE. WHAT THAT ORDINANCE DOES IS IT PROVIDES A SHELTERED MARKET FOR LOCAL SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE BASED IN THE CITY OF TAMPA AND SHELTERED MARKET ALLOWS ONLY THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES TO BE ABLE TO BID FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS THAT ARE OF A CERTAIN VALUE. THE LARGER PROJECTS THAT THE SMALL BUSINESSES MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO HANDLE COMPLETELY, WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE A 5% PREFERENCE FOR THE LARGER BIDDERS WHO USE OUR SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES OR FIVE EXTRA POINTS IN THEIR BID. SO THERE ARE DIRECT DIRECT BENEFITS TO OUR SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES. THE KEY DISTINCTION TO BE MADE FOR A LOCAL PREFERENCE IS THAT A LOCAL PREFERENCE APPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS, APPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS WITH HIRING PREFERENCE, APPLIES TO INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS WHO TREAT THEM DIFFERENTLY, AND WHAT WE FOUND WAS THE SUPREME COURT -- IT BASICALLY PLACES A STRICT SCRUTINY STANDARD ON ANY LOCAL GOVERNMENT THAT'S ATTEMPTING TO CREATE A LOCAL PREFERENCE THAT'S GOING TO BENEFIT LOCAL CITIZENS OVER OUT-OF-STATE CITIZENS AND DO THAT UNDER PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITY CLAUSE, AND THE CONSTITUTION DOES PROVIDE THAT ALL CITIZENS OF DIFFERENT STATES SHOULD RECEIVE PROTECTIONS OF BEING UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND NOT BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST BECAUSE THEY ARE COMING FROM A DIFFERENT STATE. SO THE COURT, AN OLDER CASE BUT IT'S BEEN UPHELD SUBSEQUENTLY BY D THAT THE SCRUTINY STANDARD APPLIES, AND THE HIRING PREFERENCES, SO THAT WE HAVE A NARROWLY TAILORED ORDINANCE THAT ACHIEVES AN IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT INTEREST. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE LEGAL STANDARD BEHIND THIS. SO WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS. THERE'S A REPORTING PROVISION THAT WE LOOKED AT, TT IS POSSIBLE, BUT THERE ARE SOME DOWNSIDES TO IT IN TERMS OF HOW IT WOULD AFFECT COMMERCE IN THE CITY. SPECIFICALLY, REQUIREMENT IS THAT ANY OF THE CONTRACTORS AND/OR SUBS TRACK THE ZIP CODES, THE CITIZENS, OF THEIR EMPLOYEES. THAT CREATES SOME DIFFERENT CONCERNS REGARDING FIRST FOR% STAFF BECAUSE WE HAVE TO TRACK AND DETERMINE THE COMPLIANCE BY THE DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS AND SUBS WITH THE ORDINANCE OR PROGRAM, WHICHEVER WAY WE WENT WITH IT, BUT ALSO IT KIND OF LIMITS OUR POOL OF ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES THAT THE BUSINESSES HERE IN THE AREA COULD USE, INSTEAD OF BEING ABLE TO HAVE A BROADER CONSIDERATION OF EMPLOYEES, IT WOULD BE LIMITED. WOULSO HAVE REDUCED COMPETITION OVERALL BECAUSE OF THE LIMITED LABOR POOL AVAILABLE, AND WE WOULD ALSO -- IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ANY OF OUR BUSINESSES USING DAY LABORERS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE BECAUSE JUST THE NATURE OF WORKING WITH DAY LABORERS AND GETTING THEIR ADDRESSES. WE ALSO LOOKED AT SPECIFICALLY DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS. WE DIDN'T FIND ANY CASE LAW SPECIFICALLY ON THAT, BUT WE ARE VERY CONCERNED THAT IT'S HARD TO EXPLAIN A BASIS OR PROVIDE A GOOD BASIS FOR WHY WE WOULD TREAT TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE WHO BASICALLY LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM EACH OTHER FROM ONE BEING A HIGHER PREFERENCE AND THE OTHER NOT. THAT'S AN EQUAL PROTECTION CONCERN AND ALSO A DUE PROCESS CONCERN THAT WE JUST REALLY WAND ABOUT, IF THAT WAS THE TYPE OF PROGRAM THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT MOVING FORWARD ON. AND THEN AS NOTED RECENTLY A NEW PROVISION THAT DOES NOT ALLOW LOCAL HIRING PREFERENCES IF THE STATE ITSELF IS FUNDING ANY PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. SO THAT IS ALSO A CONCERN. THE MAIN ISSUES I WANTED TO DISCUSS WITH YOU IN THE MEMO -- AND I WILL ASK MRS. HAMILTON IF SHE HAS ANYTHING. >> HAMILTON: I THINK YOU BASICALLY CERED IT. I THINK WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS BEFORE, BUT THOSE ARE THE PRIME FACTORS. IN REGARD TO PRIVILEGES AND I AM MUNICIPALITIES, WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO DO SOME SORT OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS TO REACH ANY KIND OF -- TO PROVIDE FOR LOCAL PREFERENCE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: GENTLEMEN, QUESTIONS ANYONE? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MR. CHAIRMAN, AS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION. YES, I READ THE MEMO WHEN YOU GUYS PROVIDED IT A FEW DAYS AGO. I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK IT WAS VERY COMPREHENSIVE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS. SO, ANYWAY, WE'LL CARRY ON FROM THERE. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: MY FIRM IN THE PAST HAS APPLIED FOR GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS OUT OF THE MARKET OUT OF STATE, DOES BUSINESSES IN CALIFORNIA. WE DON'TO ANY IN TAMPA, FOR ANYBODY WATCHING. BUT THE PROBLEM WITH LOCAL PREFERENCE IS THAT OTHER GOVERNMENTS RETALIATE, AND IF OUR COMPANIES WANT TO BE THE BEST THAT THEY CAN BE, THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO SELL OUT SIDE THIS MARKET. THEY NEED TO SELL PASCO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL AROUND THE WORLD, AND PROVIDING PROTECTION FOR -- PROVIDING LOCAL PROTECTION DOESN'T WORK. INDIA HAD A PROTECTED ECONOMY FOR 20, 30 YEARS, AND WHEN IT FINALLY OPENED UP IT'S BEEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST ECONOMIC BOOMS IN THE WORLD'SISTORY BY OPENING IT UP TO COMPETITORS. AND I THINK WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR LOCAL COMPANIES BY ENABLING THEM TO NOT GET HURT BY WORKING OUTSIDE OF TAMPA. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. >>CARL BRODY: THANK YOU. >>JOHN BENNETT: THAT BRINGS US UP TO I BELIEVE ITEM 60. AGAIN I BELIEVE THAT WAS A RECEIVE AND FILE. I WANT TO VERIFY WITH COUNCIL. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MOVED BY MR. MANISCALCO. SECOND BY MR. VIERA. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. ITEM 61. >>JOHN BENNETT: SAME SCENARIO WITH DIRECTOR TO BE ON STANDBY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. IS HE THERE? THERE HE IS. >>VIK BHIDE: I'M HERE TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTION RELATED TO ITEM 61. THIS IS RELATED TO A MOTION MADE EARLIER THIS YEAR BY COUNCILMAN -- CHAIRMAN GUDES AND COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO REGARDING THE STATUS OF THE BERMUDA BOULEVARD SEAWALL PROJECT. A STAFF REPORT WAS SUBMITTED, AND I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: VIK, I HAPPENED TO BE ON THE CLEAN-UP WITH THE FOLKS OUT IN PALMETTO BEACH, ASKED TO COME DOW TO VIEW THE ACTUAL SEAWALL, ME NOT KNOWING MUCH ABOUT THE SEAWALL. THEY GAVE ME A HISTORY LESS ON OF THE SEAWALL AND SHOWED ME THE DETERIORATION OF THAT SEAWALL. I READ THE MEMO. AND EVERYONE WAS PUTTING IN THEIR BUDGETS AND PUTTING THINGS IN REFERENCE TO THE ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY EVERYBODY WAS SO GOOD ON THESE ITEMS WITH MONEY THEY DIDN'T HAVE. SO MY QUESTION, MONEY THEY DIDN'T HAVE, B WE ARE PUTTING IT INTO A PROGRAM, SO MY QUESTION NOW IS, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE MONEY IS GOING TO COME FOR TRANSPORTATION. BUT THEY ARE RIGHT. THAT THING IS GOING TO CAVE IN. PATCHWORK ON THE STREET THERE, AND I'M AFRAID WE GET A BIG STORM OR SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM DOWN THERE. I SAW THE MEMO BUT IT WASN'T DETAILED, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO NOT WORRYING ABOUT ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION? >>VIK BHIDE: AND THAT'S A VERY VALIQUESON CHAIRMAN. I WISH I HAD A BETTER ANSWER THAN WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT FUNDING OPTIONS AND WILL WORK WITH OUR RESILIENCE OFFICER AS THE MEMO MENTIONED. WE'LL CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR GRANTS. I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU AND COUNCIL THAT -- GRANTS IN JAH GENERAL, COMING FROM THE RECENT WEEK, WORKING ON IT BUT RIGHT NOW THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S HOLDING US BACK, AND THAT IS FUNDING. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I APPRECIATE I. THAT'S WHY I THREW IT OUT THERE BECAUSE PEOPLE IN PALMETTO BEACH ARE CALLING AND ASKING SO WE HAVE TO GIVE THEM SOME TYPE OF DIALOGUE, AND WE CAN'T KEEP SAYING ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION. WE HAVE TO QUICK TALKING ABOUT THAT BECUSE THAT'S NOT ON THE TABLE ANYMORE. LIKE YOU SAID, THE GRANTS THAT WE ARE AFTER RIGHT NOW, X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS COMING FOR SOMETHING ELSE, AND WE LET THOSE FOLKS KNOW THIS IS WHAT WE PLAN TO DO AND THIS IS HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO IT. BECAUSE I WENT DOWN THERE. GENTLEMEN, I URGE YOU TO COME DOWN. I CAN TELL YOU, IT'S GOT SOME MAJOR PROBLEMS. ONE DAY, WE'LL HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM. MR. CITRO. >>JOSEPH CITRO: THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HARD WORK, VIK. HAVE WE LOOKED AT ALTERNATIVES? AND YOU RAISED A POINT OF RESILIENCY. WITH SEA LEVEL RISE, AND OTHER EFFECTS THAT WE ARE HAVING FROM CLIMATE CHANGE, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE LOOKING AND SAYING THE SEAWALLS ARE NO LONGER A GREAT WAY OF KEEPING BACK STORM SURGE. AND WE HAVE BEEN GOING MORE TOWARD RUBBLE, AND/OR MANGROVES. IS THAT COMPLETELY OFF THE TABLE? >>VIK BHIDE: ANOTHER GREAT POINT COUNCILMAN. IT IS NOT OFF THE TABLE. IN FACT, THE FIRST ITERATION OF THE PLANNING FOR THIS PROJECT INCLUDED CONSIDERATION OF ADDING ARRIVE RAP, THAT IS LARGE CONCRETE MATERIAL, AND OTHER EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. WE HAVE SINCE MOVED AWAY FROM AT CONCEPT WHICH WAS FIRST DEVELOPED AROUND 2012 FOR MULTITUDE OF REASONS BUT PRIMARILY THAT THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN DISRUPTIVE, AND WE NEEDED A PERMANENT EASEMENT OVER WATER TO COMPLETE THAT PROJECT. SINCE THEN, WE HAVE USED NEW MEANS AND METHODS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED WHERE RIFRAP AND CONTROL WERE NEEDED. WE HAVE WATER ACCESS AND PART OF THE DESIGN PROCESS, WEILL CONSIDER ADDING SOME SORT OF VEGETATION AS WELL. OUR CHALLENGES STILL REMAIN. >>JOSEPH CITRO: I THANK YOU FOR THAT. BUT AGAIN WE GET BACK DO OUR EFFORTS FOR RESILIENCY, AND I I WOULD JUST HOPE WE EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. DINGFELDER, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: IT'S KIND OF SCARY WHEN SOME OF THESE ITEMS GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO 2003 WHEN I FIRST CAME ON COUNCIL BECAUSE I REMEMBER THIS DISCUSSION REALLY HASN'T CHANGED VERY MUCH. WHICH IS PRETTY SAD WITH REGARD TO WHAT MR. CHAIRMAN SAYS. AND I DO GO DOWN THAT A AREA PERIODICALLY AND IT'S GETTING WORSE AND WORSE. WHAT I AM WORRIED ABOUT IN READING THE MEMO, YOU ALSO MADE REFERENCE TO THE VARIOUS PRIVATE EASEMENTS. I THINK THERE'S ABOUT A DOZEN OR SO. AND YOU INDICATED THAT HISTORICALLY WE HADN'T RECEIVED A WHOLE LOT OF COOPERATION FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. BUT I GUESS WHAT I AM CURIOUS ABOUT IS WHAT DOES IT GO, PRIVATE PROPERTY ON THE LAND WARD SIDE AND THEN WE HAVE AN EASEMENT ON THE SIDEWALK THERE, AND THEN THEIR PROPERTY PICKS UP AGAIN? I HAVE NEVER SEEN A PROPERTY MAP OF THIS AREA, BUT TELL ME HOW THAT WORKS. >>VIK BHIDE: I WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT WITH DETAILS, BUT WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THAT OPTION ANYMORE. SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT WAS MORE DESTRUCTIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS NEIGHBORS. SO WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT PERMITTING EASEMENTS. THAT WAS OUR INITIAL APPROACH IN 2011, 2012, AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OF REASONS. ONE WAS THE COST OF THOSE EASEMENTS WERE RELATIVELY HIGH TO WHERE IT WOULD NOT HAVE MADE FINANCIAL SENSE THEN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT APPROACH, BUT NOW WE HAVE BETTER INFORMATION AND BETTER METHODS TO PREVENT OR MITIGATE FOR ANY KIND OF SURGE. >> I REMEMBER RESEARCHING TITLE, AND ONE OF THE ISSUES SPECIFIC TO THIS AREA THAT'S VERY, VERY STRANGE IS THAT THE ACTUAL PORTIONS OF MACKAY BAY THAT ABUT BERMUDA BOULEVARD THERE ARE PLATTED LOTS, AND THERE WAS A COURT CASE SOMETIME AGO WHERE THERE WAS LITIGATION ABOUT AS YOU KNOW, MOST CASES WHERE YOU HAVE WATER, A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, THE CITY OR THE STATE THAT OWNS OR CONTROLS THAT, BUT BECAUSE OF SOME UNIQUE FACTORS IN THAT CASE, BUT THOSE PLATTED LOTS ARE ACTUALLY OWNED BY INDIVIDUAL LAND OWNERS WHO BOUGHT THEM. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAD ON THE WATER SIDE IN DEALING WITH EASEMENT ISSUES, I BELIEVE. THAT'S BEEN OUR CHALLENGE SINCE 2003. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MORRIS, THANKS FOR YOUR CLARIFICATION ON THAT. THE THING THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME IS YOU STILL HAVE YOUR HAIR AFTER 2003 AND SOME OF US DON'T. >>MORRIS MASSEY: I AM PRETTY GRAY HAIRED SO I APPRECIATE THAT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYTHING ELSE ON 61, GENTLEMEN? VIK, THANK YOU AS USUAL. WE APPRECIATE ALL YOUR HELP. 62. >>JOHN BENNETT: ONE POSTSCRIPT ON 61,F Y DON'T MIND REAL QUICK, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT PRECIPITATED THE MAYOR AND SUPPORT OF THE CITY FOR ME TO GO TO THE NETHERLANDS AND LOOK AT THESE SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCY OPTIONS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF SHORELINES. AND I LOOKED AT A LOT OF THE COUNTRYSIDE, THE BEACH FRONTS, THE CITY FRONTS, THE CITY ESCAPE, CONVERSION OF STORMWATER TO DUPLICATE USE, ALL THOSE THINGS AND TO VIK'S POINT, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS FIRST FROM A SAFETY POINT OF VIEW AND THEN ACCESSIBILITY AND COMMUNITY RESILIENCY POINT OF VIEW, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE BROUGHT WITHIN. ONE. REASONS WHIT REMER WAS HIRED WAS HE HAD A REALLY CLEAR UNDERSTANDING HOW TO GET OTHER MONEY INTO THE COMMUNITY TO DO SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. SO LOOKING FORWARD TO MORE OF THOSE THINGS. AND I WILL MAKE SURE THAT THIS BECOMES A HYPER FOCUS FOR THE COMMUNIY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. IT'S GETTING VERY, VERY BAD. I DIDN'T REALIZE UNTIL THEY SHOWED ME. >>JOHN BENNETT: FOR 20 YEARS I HAVE RUN THAT ROUTE WITH TRT. IT WAS OUR PATH OUT OF THE ACADEMY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST FOLLOWING ON THAT. WE TALKED SEVERAL TIMES ABOUT THE SEA LEVEL RISE PROBLEM, MOST OF SOUTH TAMPA IS GOING TO BE UNDERWATER IN SOME PERIOD OF TIME I.DIDN'T SEE A SPECIFIC TOONS THAT QUESTION IN THE RESILIENCY PLAN THE MAYOR PUT OUT THE OTHER DAY. IS THERE A SEPARATE PLAN THAT'S GOING TO COME OUT TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS WHAT YOU TO DO WITH SWALL A WHAT TO DO WITH AREAS LIKE SOUTH TAMPA THAT DON'T HAVE SEAWALLS? >>JOHN BENNETT: SURE. AND I THINK, COUNCILMAN, THE FOCUS ON THAT WAS WHEN THE 58 ITEMS WERE PUT INTO THAT, PART OF THAT WAS ONE THAT WE BUILT THE PLAN UNDER THE CAROLE POST AREA ACTUALLY BUILT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH A DIRECTOR TO MOVE IN THOSE DIRECTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE AREAS ARE TAKEN CARE OF AND WE ARE LOOKING AT SEA LEVEL RISE. THAT'S DEFINITELY ON THE AGENDA. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYTHING ELSE, GELEME >>BILL CARLSON: I'M JUST CURIOUS, SOMETHING THAT WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT ON COUNCIL ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, AND I AM GLAD YOU ALL HIRED WHIT AND HE'S LOOKING AT IT AND I KNOW OTHER DEPARTMENTS ARE. BUT WE HAVE LOTS OF RESIDENTS THAT ARE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT IT SO WHEN MIGHT WE HAVE AN ANSWER ON THAT? >>JOHN BENNETT: IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION I WILL BE HAPPY TO BRING SOMETHING BACK TO COUNCIL. IF YOU WANT A SPECIFIC MOTION ON THAT ISSUE -- >>BILL CARLSON: TO DO WITH SEA LEVEL RISE RELATED TO OUR COASTLINE. >>JOHN BENNETT: OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW IT'S A COMPLEX ISSUE. IT'S PART OF A LONG RANGE PLAN PROCESS. I AM JUST GLAD THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION, THIS COUNCIL HAS TAKEN THE LEAD ON THAT. BUT I GUESS WHAT I AM ASKING TO BE MORE SPECIFIC NO RESPONSE, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACCEPT A MOTION FOR TO BRING BACK A REPORT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: IF YOU WANT TO DO IT HOW LONG? YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JEAN DUNCAN: CHIEF, I JUST WANTED TO OFFER THE STAFF, RANDY RI STUDY THAT WE RECEIVED LEVEL GRANTS FUNDING FOR, AND WE WOULD BE GLAD TO CHECK ON THE SCHEDULE FOR THAT EFFORTS AND REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL THE STATUS OF HOW THAT'S GOING, AND THEN WHEN WE WOULD ULTIMATELY HAVE MORE OF A FINISHED PRODUCT OR A DRAFT PRODUCT TO SHARE WITH THE COUNCIL. SO WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO BRING THAT INFORMATION BACK AND GIVE YOU A STATUS OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT SEA LEVEL RISE STUDY. >> DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION? >>JOHN BENNETT: NO, WE CANO IT WITHOUT A MOTION. I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF YOU NEEDED A SPECIFIC RESPONSE. AND THAT'S WHAT I MEANT. THANK YOU TO MS. DUNCAN FOR THAT FOLLOW-UP. BUT THAT'S WHAT I MEANT BY THE PLANNING WHICH IS LED BY RANDY GOERS. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST SO WE CAN ANSWER TO THE PUBLIC WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO PROPERTY VALUES, SHOULD I BUY A HOUSE THIS NEAR BAYSHORE, IS IT GOING TO BE FLOODED ORPHAN NOT? >>MARK BENTLEY: ABSOLUTELY. IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR WHERE WE ARE, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO GET THAT WITHOUT A MOTION. MOON TO ASK STAFF, SHOULD IA SAY MS. DUNCAN OR RANDY? >> RANDY GOERS, PLANNING DEPARTMENT. >>BILL CARLSON: TORE ASK STAFF TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND REPORT ON WHEN -- THE STATUS OF THE SEA LEVEL RISE PLAN, AND WHEN THE PROPOSAL -- WHEN THE PROPOSALS MIGHT BE DELIVERED. >>MARTIN SHELBY: QUESTION, PLEASE. MARTIN SHEY. I'M SORRY. QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE MOTION, IS THERE A REQUEST FOR A WRITTEN REPORT OR IS AN APPEARANCE GOING TO BE NECESSARY? >>BILL CARLSON: APPEARANCE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: HOW MUCH TIME IS NECESSARY FOR THAT? MAYBE MRS. DUNCAN WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE SOME GUIDANCE AS TO HOW LONG THIS WOULD BE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MRS. DUNCAN? >>JEAN DUNCAN: A STAFF REPORT IN THAT USUAL PERIOD OF TIME, AND IN THE MEANTIME WE CAN ALSO REFERENCE ANY UPDATES THAT THEY E CURRENTLY. SO A SHORTER PRESENTATION IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING -- >>BILL CARLSON: DO YOU WANT A DATE? IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE PRETTY BUSY UNTIL SEPTEMBER. SHOULD I SAY SEPTEMBER 2nd? IS THAT TOO FAR OUT? >>MARK BENTLEY: I THINK. >>MARK BENTLEY: I THINK THAT >>JOHN BENNETT: I THINK THAT WOULD WORK WELL. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. >>BILL CARLSON: SEPTEMBER 23rd WORKSHOP? >>ORLANDO GUDES: DOES THAT WORK, MADAM CLERK? >>THE CLERK: ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A TIME CERTAIN DATE? AT 11 A.M.? >>BILL CARLSON: DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT? OKAY. >> SECOND. >>ORLANDO GUDES: SEPTEMBER 23rd, 11 A.M., AT A WORKSHOP? MR. CARLSON? >>BILL CARLSON: GREAT. >>ORNDO R SECONDED THE MOTION. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU TO CHIEF BENNETT AND MS. DUNCAN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, JEAN. ITEM 62. >> JOHN BENNETT CHIEF OF STAFF COMING BACK ON ITEM 62. JUST TO KEEP THINGS FLOWING, I DID SEE THE MEMORANDUM FROM COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER'S OFFICE. MYSELF, OBVIOUSLY OUR AUDIT DIRECTOR CHRISTINE GLOVER AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY GINA GRIMES IS ON STANDBY TO SUPPORT ANYTHING EITHER WITHIN THAT MEMO OR BEYOND THAT MEMO ON THIS ITEM. SO WE'LL STAND BY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I JUST HAD A QUESTION. I THINK KIND OF CRAFT IT DOWN WITH COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: WITH THE ADMINISTRATION TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE. I THINK THE LATEST DRAFT IS FEBRUARY CHRISTINE? >>ORLANDO GUDES: MRS. GLOVER? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: AND THEN MOVE FORWARD SETTING THAT FOR FIRST READING TWO WEEKS FROM NOW? AND THEN WE CAN REVISIT MY COLLEAGUES SUGGESTIONS AND ANY OTHER COUNCIL'S SUGGESTIONS. >>CHRISTINE GLOVER: INTERNAL AUDIT DIRECTOR. YES SIR. THE LATEST DRAFT WAS FEBRUARY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: SO WE ARE SAYING YOU WANT TO GO THE LAST HALF OF FEBRUARY AND PUT IT OFF FOR FIRST READING. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: TWO WEEKS FROM NOW. >>ORLANDO GUDES: TWO WEEKS FROM NOW. MRS. GLOVER, I WANT YOU TO COVER SOME NUTS AND BOLTS. IT'S BEEN A LONG WHILE NOW. YOU HAVE HAD SEVERAL CONTINUANCES I DO WANT TO PUT IT TO BED TODAY. SO IF WE CAN KIND OF GOING OVER THE LOGISTICS. >>CHRISTINE GLOVER: YES, SIR. THANK YOU. I'M PREPARED TO DO -- WE HAD A WOSHOPN JANUARY 28th. A BRIEF SUMMARY OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE WORKSHOP. ONE OF THE THINGS WE WENT OVER IS WE DO HAVE A HIGHLY CREDENTIALED STAFF WITH CERTIFICATIONS, AND THEY HAVE STANDARDS THEY HAVE TO MEET AND COMPLY WITH IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THEIR CERTIFICATIONS IN THE INTERNAL AUDIT FEEL. WE ALSO COMPLY WITH GOVERNMENT AUDIT STANDARDS, AND WE ARE REQUIRED TO DO THAT AND PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR ALL THE PROCESSES, FROM POLITICAL -- ET CETERA.FREE IT'S CALLED THE YELLOW BOOK. WE ALSO GET A PEER REVIEW FROM A TEAM ACROSS THE COUNTRY EVERY THREE YEARS WHO CONFIRM THAT WE ARE IN COMPLIACE WITH THE GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS. WE ARE DUE FOR A PEER REVIEW IN 2020 FOR THE PREVIOUS THREE-YEAR PERIOD BUT OF COURSE WAS DELAYED DUE TO THE PANDEMIC. I HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATION LAST WEEK WITH SOMEONE THAT WE WOULD HAVE THAT PEER REVIEW THIS YEAR. SO ONE OF THE THINGS I COVERED WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR AUDIT DEPARTMENT ACROSS THE COUNTRY, A LOT OF PEOPLE COPYING OUR PROCESS, CERTAINLY IN THE TAMPA BAY AREA, PASCO COUNTY, CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG, SO WHEN THEY COME AND DOO DO THE PEER REVIEW THEY LIKE OUR APPROACH, DOING SOME THINGS THAT COPYING. IF WE HAVE A PEER REVIEW AND ARE FOUND NOT TO BE IN COMPLAINS, IT'S GOING TO LOOK PRETTY BAD FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA SO WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WE STAY WITHIN THAT RANGE. NOW, OUR UNIVERSE WHICH IS A COD POSSIBLY AUDIT IN THEAT WE CITY, AND THAT'S PART OF THE WORKSHOP. I GAVE YOU ALL A COPY OF THAT LIST. IT'S OVER 160 ITEMS. WHEN WE ARE FULLY STAFFED, WE CAN DO 15 TO 20 AUDITS IN A YEAR. AND SO AT THAT POINT RATE IT WOULD TAKE US NINE YEARS TO AUDIT EVERYTHING IN THE CITY. NOW, TO TAKE A RISK BASED APPROACH, THE WAY WE DO THAT, AND IT'S A PROCESS WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF RIGHT NOW. I START OUT BY MEETING WITH ALL OF THE KEY MANAGEMENT, PERSONS AT THE CITY, DIRECTORS AND ABOVE, ONE ON ONE. AND WHEN I MEET WITH THEM, I GO WITH THEIR PORTION OF THE AUDIT UNIVERSE, EVERYTHING THAT I CAN AUDIT WITHIN THEIR AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY. WE DISCUSS IT. WE MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO IT. IF WE NEED TO, THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST AUDITS IF THEY LIKE. AND MANY TIMES WE DO GET REQUESTS FOR AUDIT. I REMEMBER A FEW YEARS BACK, MAYBE FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO, I WENT OUT AND I CAME BACK AFTER I DID ALL MY MEETINGS. I HAD REQUESTS FOR 26 UNITS. REMEMBER I SAID I COULD ONLY DO 15 OR 20. SOE DO GET REQUESTS FROM MANAGEMENT. AT THAT POINT AFTER I HAVE ALL THOSE MEETINGS, WE HAVE A TOOL THAT WE USE. WE CALL IT A RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL. WE TAKE EVERY ITEM, MY STAFF AND I, TAKE EVERY TIME ON THAT AUDIT UNIVERSE AND WE RATE IT. AND WE RATE IT 1 THROUGH 4, AND THE FACTOR, EACH FACTOR ON THERE, AND THE WAY THE TOOL IS SET UP, THE GREATER THE SCORE, THE GREATER THE RISK IS FOR THE CITY. SO WE DEVELOP AN AUDIT PLAN FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEA AER WE COMPLETE THAT RISK ASSESSMENT AND THOSE MANAGEMENT MEETINGS, AND IT'S BASED ON MANAGEMENT REQUESTS, THE RISK ASSESSMENT, THE RESULTS THAT ARE RISK ASSESSMENT, AND MAKING SURE WE HAVE COVERAGE ACROSS THE CITY. AND ONE OF THE WAYS TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE COVERAGE ACROSS THE CITY, A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT IS THE FIRST COUPLE OF YEARS I WAS HERE WITH THE CITY WE DIDN'T DO ANY AWED TIPPING IN PARKS AND REC OR THE CONVENTION CENTER. WE HAVE KIND OF GET AROUND TO EVERYTHING PERIODICALLY. ONCE THAT PLAN IS DEVELOPED, A PROPOSED AUDIT PLAN FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR, I SUBMIT THAT TO THE MAYOR FOR APPROVAL. AND IN ALL THE YEARS I HAVE BEEN DOING THAT, EIGHT YEARS, HERE WITH THE CITY, ONE TIME THE MAYOR ADDED SOMETHING, BUT THE MAYOR NEVER TOOK ANYTHING AWAY. AND THAT'S AN OPPORTUNITY. SO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO IS FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET COUNCIL IN THAT PROCESS. BUT THIS YEAR I BACKED UP 30 DAYS. NORMALLY, I GET A PROPOSED PLAN TO THE MAYOR BY AUGUST. I AM GOING TO GIVE TO THE HER BY IAVE GOT ONE MORE MEETING TO HAVE, TEN AND THAT'S NEXT WEEK AND MY STAFF AND I ARE GOING TO START DOING THE RISK ASSESSMENT NEXT WEEK AS WELL. SO I PLAN TO GET SOMETHING TO THE MAYOR, PROPOSED PLAN, IF WE CAN GET COUNCIL IN ON THAT. AND THAT'S AN OVERVIEW OF HOW WE DEVELOP THE AUDIT PLAN. BUT EACH YEAR. AND SO TO F I CAN ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS I WILL BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANYTHING I CAN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: CHIEF, YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING BEFORE I . >> I WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH CHRISTINE'S OFFICE WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THE VALUE OF WHAT SHE DOES AND ONE OF THE FIRST REQUESTS I BROUGHT TO THE ADMINISTRATION WAS TO INCREASE HER STAFF TO CONTINUE TO DO THE AUDIT UNIVERSE SHE TALKED ABOUT, AND IT WHATS APPROVED BY COUNCIL, INCREASE HER OFFICE BY 20%. BUT I WILL ALSO SAY THAT WE ARE GIVING A VERY HOLISTIC LOOK TO HER OFFICE BECAUSE DESPITE ALL THE GOOD LEADERSHIP AND WORK WE TEND TO BE LOSING FOLKS THAT CHRISTINE IS TRAINING TO THIS HIGH LEVEL AND GETTING CERTIFIED TO OTHER OUTSIDE ENTITIES THAT ARE EITHER IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR LARGER GOVERNMENT SECTORS. SO WE HAVE GOT OUR WORK TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SUSTAINABILITY IN HER OFFICE AS WELL. JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS. >> >>CHRISTINE GLOVER: AND CHIEF BENNETT IS CORRECT, MAYOR CASTOR TAKING OFFICE, I LOST A POSITION IN THE BUDGET CUTTING PROCESS. SO IN ACTUALITY IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN ME 12 YEARS AT THAT STAFF SIZE. AND SO ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THEY DID WHEN THEY CAME BACK WAS GIVE ME THAT HEAD COUNTS BACK. BUT HE'S CORRECT. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, THEY ARE STEALING OUR PEOPLE LEFT AND RIGHT. AND IT SHOWS THAT WE HAVE GOOD QUALITY AND WELL TRAINED PEOPLE, AND THESE FOLKS' POCKETS ARE DEEPER THAN OURS. BUT WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD STAFF HERE, SHORT NOW BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE HAD SOMEBODY LEAVE THE LAST TWO MONTHS, ONE EACH MONTH. BUT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF REPLACING THOSE INDIVIDUALS, BUT IT TAK TIME TO GET THEM TRAINED UP. BUT ALSO IN THE INTERIM, WE HAD AN AUDIT FIRM THAT WE WORKED WITH WHEN WE WERE SHORT STAFFED, AND THEY ARE GOING TO DO SOME AUDITS FOR US OVER THE SUMMER. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY, YOU MIGHT WANT TO COME UP HERE AS WELL, SIR, TO MAKE SURE THAT IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE -- AND MR. DINGFELDER HAS BEEN TALKING GOING BAN BACK AND FORTH AND WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO PUT THIS TO BED MAKING SURE THAT COUNCIL'S PURVIEW TO AUDITS AND HOW WE ARE GOING TO MAINTAIN THAT AND MAKE SURE THIS ORDINANCE DOESN'T TAP AWAY ANY POWER FROM THE COUNCIL, IN THAT THE ORDINANCE WAS PUT IN, SO COUNCIL COULD ASK FOR AN AUDIT. SO IF YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THAT, HOW THAT PROCESS IS GOING TO WORK, AND I KNOW MR. DINGFELDER HAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. SO IF THAT'S ADDRESSED AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT WHEN IT COMES BACK IN TWO WEEKS. MR. SHELBY, HAVE YOU SEEN -- >>MARTIN SHELBY: I DON HAVE THE TWO SIDE BY SIDE AND I ADOPT HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME. BUT WITH REGARD TO DOES THIS IMPLEMENT IF CHARTER PROVISION, AND THE ANSWER IS YES. BY THE WAY, THE CHARTER, USE THE TERM COUNCIL MAY REQUEST. AND THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS, I BELIEVE, FITS INTO YOUR THE PRESENT WORK PLAN, AND THE ABILITS, A SHORT WINDOW, WILL COUNCIL BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL -- COME BACK TO THE AUDITOR AFTER GETTING THE WORK PLAN BEFORE IT IS FINALIZED? DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE ACTUAL PROCESS OF WHAT CAN MOVE FORWARD? I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >>CHRISTINE GLOVER: THE DRAFT ALREADY TALKING THROUGH THAT--- PROCESS THAT GOES TO THE MAYOR FOR APPROVAL. SHE SIGNS OFF ON IT UNDER THE CURRENTS PROCESS. THEN THAT'S THE APPROVED PLAN AND WE PUBLISH THAT, A WE WILL WORKING ON IN THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR. THE WAY THE DRAFT IS WRITTEN AFTER THE MAYOR -- AND MADE ANY ADJUSTMENT, ANYTHING SHE MIGHT WANT TO MAKE SOME ADDITIONS OR WHATEVER, IT WOULD THEN COME TO COUNCIL SIXTY DAYS BEFORE THE FISCAL YEAR, AND IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME COUNCIL WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE REQUESTS TO THE AUDIT PROPOSAL PLAN. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I GUESS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WOULD BE RAISED WOULD BE, I GUESS THERE ARE OPTIONS IF IT DOES NOT FIT INTO YOU'RE TIME FRAME RELATIVE TO THE NUMBER OF TASKS YOU HAVE AND THE PERSONNEL THAT YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVES TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH. I BELIEVE THAT'S PART OF THE PROCESS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: AND IT WILL GO TO -- >>CHRISTINE GLOVER: IF THE REQUEST CAME IN, FOR SOME REASON WE COULDN'T DO IT, WE WOULD OFFER ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE LIKE A NONAUDIT SERVICE WHICH IS AERY NARROW SCOPE PRODUCT VERSUS A FULL-BLOWN AUDIT F.TO FOR SOME REASON WE COULDN'T DO IT, TO COME BACK AND OFFER AN ALTERNATIVE. THAT'S THE WAY IT'S SET UP IN THE STANDARD. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND MY UNDERSTANDING IN LISTENING, WITH REGARD TO THE TIMING OF IT? L, YOUR ABILITIES TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS LET'S SAY NOW, ARE YOU BY DEVELOPING AN ENACTING THIS ORDINANCE NOW, OBVIOUSLY IF ERE ARE ISSUES THAT CAN COME UP, IT'S COUNCIL'S PLEASURE. IF EVERYTHING IS FINE THE WAY IT IS. AND IF THERE ARE ISSUES THEN COUNCIL CAN ADDRESS IT DOWN THE ROAD. BUT CERTAINLY WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS SOMETHING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION SUPPORTS, AND THE AUDITOR KNOWS THE FUNCTION OF HER DEPARTMENT, AND CERTAINLY BY YOUR PUTTING IT IN PLACE NOW, YOU WON'T LOSE THIS YEAR'S PROCESS IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE UNDER THE ORDINANCE. THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE THERE WAS AN ISSUE OF NEEDING TO MOVE FORWE THIS YEAR, THE WORK PLAN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MS. GRIMES. >>GINA GRIMES: I WAS JUST GOING TO ANSWER ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT MS. GLOVER ANSWERED. SO I AM AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS RELATIVE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANY QUESTIONS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS? MR. CARLSON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: QUESTION FOR MR. SHELBY OR MRS. ZELMAN. AS I REMEMBER IT CITY COUNCIL BY CHARTER IS GIVEN THE RIGHT TO INVESTIGATE, I THINK IS THE WORD. AS I WOULD GUESS, AUDITS WITH THE SUBSET OF INVESTIGATIVE POWERS. MY QUESTION IS, DOES THIS ORDINANCE IN ANY WAY TAKE AWAY FROM CITY COUNCIL'S INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY BY CHARTER? OR IS IT JUST SETTING UP A PROCESS FOR THE AUDIT? >>ANDREA ZELMAN: ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. GO AHEAD, GINA. >>GINA GRIMES: I WAS GOING TO SAY YOU ARE ASSUMING HONEST ASSESSMENT OF THIS COUNCIL'S INVESTIGATIVE AUTHORITY. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE AT ALL. THE INTERNAL AUDITS THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ARE INTERNAL AUDITS THAT ARE ADDRESSED IN THE CHARTER. AND AS YOU HEARD FROM MRS. GLOVER UNDER STRICT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY UNDER THE CHARTER TO USE INVESTIGATIVE POWERS IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY. I THINK THEY ARE TWO COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUES. THEY DON'T AFFECT EACH OTHER AT ALL. >>ANDREA ZELMAN: AND I WAS GOING TO SAY, WE DID DISCUSS BOTH DURING THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION PROCESS, BUT THERE ARE SEPARATE PARTS OF THE CHARTER. WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY IS SIMPLY A RESPONSE TO ONE OF THE CHARTER CHANGES THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION OR VOTERS IN THE CITY MAY WISH, ALLOWING THE CITY COUNCIL BY SUPER MAJORITY TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL AUDITS, IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD BE DOING, BUT THE DISCUSSION WE HAD AT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION ABOUT THE INVESTIGATIVE POWERS AS GINA POINTED OUT, THAT'S IN A SEPARATE PART OF THE CHARTER AND THAT RELATES TO BEING ABLE TO CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS IN THE COURSE OF YOUR LEGISLATIVE DUTIES. >>BILL CARLSON: GREAT. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYONE ELSE? AS WE TRY TO PUT THIS TO BED. ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO COME BACK IN TWO WEEKS FOR FIRST READING. BY MR. DINGFELDER. >> I SECOND. >>THE CLERK: JUST KNOW THAT YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO TWO WEEKS BECAUSE OF NOTICE FOR THE NEXT REGULAR SESSION WILL BE JULY 15. >>MARTIN SHELBY: EXCUSE ME. >>ORLANDO GUDES: YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MADAM CLERK, THIS IS ON FOR FIRST READING? WOULD YOU NEED NOTICE FOR THAT? >> OH, NO, YOU ARE CORRECT. IT'S THE FIRST READING. . >>MARTIN SHELBY: SO THE MOTION WOULD BE TO PLACE IT ON THE AGENDA FOR FIRST READING CONSIDERATION. ON THE 17th OF JUNE? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: CORRECT. THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> I SECOND. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: AND IF THE CLERK DOESN'T HAVE THE DRAFT, CHRISTINE, YOU WILL PROVIDE THE CLERK THE COPY OF THE DRAFT? THANK YOU. >>MARTIN SHELBY: ACTUALLY, IT WOULD BE A CLEAN COPY. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: ALL RIGHT. >>ANDREA ZELMAN: WE WILL MAKE SURE WE ENTER A CLEAN COPY INTO SIRE. >> YES. WE PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED IT BUT WILL PROVIDE A CLEAN COPY. IT'S REFERRED TO AS MARKED VERSION 4. THAT'S THE COPY THAT'S IN THERE. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: SO MOVED. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE BRING IT IN FOR A LANDING FOR JUNE 17, FIRST READING. MR. DINGFELDER'S MOTION. MR. MANISCALCO SECONDS IT. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIED. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: IF I COULD JUST FOLLOW THAT UP WITH THE SUBSEQUENT MOTION THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT IN MY MEMO. I'LL PUT THAT ON. WE CAN GIVE THIS TIME TO SETTLE IN. I CAN PUT IT ON FOR, LET'S SAY, JANUARY 22 WORKSHOP AT 9:00 IN THE MORNING? WE'LL JUST SAY TO ADDRESS THE AUDITOR ORDINANCE GENERALLY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MOTION BY MR. DINGFELDER. SECOND BY MR. MANISCALCO. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CRIED >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >>MARTIN SHELBY: JANUARY 27, 9:00 A.M., 2022. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: YES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ITEM 63. >>DENNIS ROGERO: CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, SIR. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME AGAIN TO TALK ABOUT THE FISCAL YEAR 21 MIDYEAR. SCEN AGAIN, MS. LUCAS?ARE MY CAN YOU SEE IT WELL? >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE SEE IT. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YOU DO? >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, SIR. >>DENNIS ROGERO: OUTSTANDING. THANK YOU. YOU SEE THE AGENDA IN FRONT OF YOU. WE'LL DISCUSS THE STATUS AND SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 21. BOTH AS THEY RELATE TO THE PANDEMIC CRISIS AND OUR DECISIONS THAT KEPT US ON A SOUND FOOTING SO WE CAN MEET ANY FINANCIAL CHALLENGES AHEAD. EXCUSE ME. WE'LL DISCUSS THE SIGNIFICANT PANDEMIC FUNDING RECEIVED UNDER THE CARES ACT, AND THE FUNDING WE ARE RECEIVING UNDER THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN OR ARFA. AS YOU KNOW WE WILL BE BACK TO BRIEF COUNCIL IN MORE DETAIL REGARDING OUR BUDGET IN JULY. ITEMS.RANTS AND BONDS RELATED AND OF COURSE WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL HAS. SO MOVING RIGHT INTO THE FINANCIAL STATUS. AS WE TYPICALLY DO, WE'LL START WITH A BRIEF REFRESHER OF THE TOTAL BUDGET ADOPTED THIS YEAR. JUST OVER ONE AND ONE QUARTER BILLION DOLLARS WITH THE TWO LARGEST COMPONENTS BEING THE ONES WE TALK ABOUT MOST, THE GENERAL FUND AND THE ENTERPRISE FUND, WHICH TOGETHER MAKE UP OVER THREE QUARTERS OF THE TOTAL DGET. HERE ARE THE EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES FOR EACH OF THOSE FUNDS, WITH PUBLIC SAFETY, PARKS AND RECREATION, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND SUPPORT OPERATIONS MAKING UP THE BULK OF THE GENERAL FUND. AND THEN OVER ON THE RIGHT, YOU HAVE THE WATER, WASTEWATER, SOLID WASTE, UTILITY DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDNG PARKING. HERE WE SHOW AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED BEFORE THE IMPACT OF THE TRANSFERS TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PROPERTY TAX REVENUE. HERE ON THE RIGHT, $29 MILLION. AND HOW THE COST OF POLICE AND FIRE ON THE LEFT BY THEMSELVES ECLIPSE WHAT WE RECEIVE IN PROPERTY TAXES. YOU HEARD COUNCILMAN VIERA SPEAK TO THIS A LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT WELL OVER HALF OF THE GENERAL FUND. WE SHOW THIS SLIDE ALSO BECAUSE IT SEEMS WHEN MOST PEOPLE THINK OF CITY REVENUE THEY THINK OF PROPERTY TAX. BUT PROPERTY TAXES ARE ONLY ABOUT A FIFTH OF THE TOTAL BUDGET AND ONLY ABOUT HALF HALF OF THE GENERAL FUND. WE ALSO LIKE TO EMPHASIZE THIS BECAUSE THE GENERAL FUND AS NOW IS THE MONEY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL HAVE THE MOST FLEXIBILITY AND SPENDING. BUT IT'S ALSO THE ONE WITH SO MANY COMPETING AND DIFFERENT DEMANDS BECAUSE OF IT. SPEAKING OF THE GENERAL FUND, THE GOOD NEWS, COUNCIL, IS WE THINK WE'LL END UP IN A SLIGHTLY STRONGER FUND BALANCE POSITION THAN WHEN WE ADOPTED THE BUDGET. YOU SEE HERE ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT. THAT'S OUR PROJECTIO IT WAS OUR BUDGET. JUST OVER 109 MILLION. HOW DID WE DO THAT? YOU WILL RECALL GOING INTO THIS YEAR WE KNEW WE WOULD BE ON OUR BACK FOOT. WE HAD ABOUT SIX MONTHS INTO THE PANDEMIC AND A LOT OF UNKNOWNS. SO ON THE TOP RIGHT YOU SEE WE FORTIFIED THE FUND BALANCE TO A HIGH LEVEL BY DELAYING EXPENSES, ALMOST $9 MILLION IN EXPENSES, UNTIL WE HAD A BETTER LAY OF THE LAND, AND SAW THE IMPACT ON OUR REVENUES AND OUR EXPENDITURES. AND YOU SEE THE RESULT HERE IN OUR FUND BALANCE HISTORY. WE ARE STILL MAINTAINING, OR WE PROJECT WE WILL MAINTAIN A VERY STRONG FUND BALANCE WELL OVER OUR 20% PILES, IN FACT OVER $15 MILLION OVER. BUT A FAR CRY OF WHERE WE STARTED WHEN WE FORTIFIED THAT FUND BALANCE. OUR REVISED PROJECTION IS SOMEWHAT IN LINE WITH THE PERSONALS WE HAD IN THE RECENT PAST. HERE IS THE LARGESTINGLE SOURCE OF CITY REVENUE. IT WILL ACTUALLY BE A BIT MORE THAN BUDGETED THIS YEAR, ADVERSE IMPACTS HAVEN'T MATERIALIZED OR HAVEN'T BEEN AS BAD AS FEARED. THIS IS VERY GOOD NEWS FOR US RIGHT NOW, AND THE 8th YEAR NO ROW OF INCREASES, AND OF COURSE FURTHER TO COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER'S EARLIER COMMENT YOU SEE IN GREEN. GREEN MEANS IT'S WAY BETTER THAN WE ANTICIPATE. ONE CAVEAT, THOUGH, AS WE DISCUSSED BEFORE IMPACTS THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPTS TYPICALLY LAG DUE TO VALUATIONS AND COLLECTIONS SO WE WILL BE WATCHING CLOSELY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S CERTIFIED EVALUATION AT THE END OF THIS MONTH. SOMEWHERE ON THE FRANCHISE FEE, YOU SEE JUST ABOUT ITS LOWEST IN EIGHT YEARS. THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT REVENUE TO PROJECT BASED ON ANY NUMBER OF FACTORS. THE LATE CHARGES, FUEL CHARGES CHARGE ADJUSTMENTS, THE INCREASED USE IN SOCIETY AS ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCES. WE ARE ON TARGET BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, WE LOST A FEW MILLION OVER THE YEARS. OUR HALF CENT SALES TAX IS A PLEASANT SURPRISE, LOOKING ABOUT 5% BETTER, OVER A MILLION DOLLARS, AND THAT'S ABOUT 2019 LEVELS. AND THESE TWO REVENUE SOURCES ON THE LEFT, THE FIRST FISCAL YEAR 18 LEVEL WITH AN INCREASE OF NEARLY $2 MILLION MORE. AND THE SECOND IN COMMUNICATION SERVICES TAX, STAYING NEAR THE LOWEST IN OVER A DECADE. YOU HEARD COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO SPEAK TO IT EARLIER AND HE SEWED, QUIETED RIGHT, IT'S BEEN A VERY DIFFICULT REVENUE FOR YEARS. YOU HEARD ME SAY IT BEFORE, BUT TO PUT IN THE CONTEXT, IT'S NEARLY $20 MILLION ANNUALLY TEN YEARS AGO. OVER TIME, BETTER. MOVING TO ONE OF THE CITY'S BIGGEST EXPENDITURES, BECAUSE NOTHING GETS DONE WITHOUT PEOPLE. ON THE GOO NEW SIDE, OUR PERSONNEL COSTS HERE ARE NEARLY $2 MILLION LESS DUE TO COVID RELATED COSTS BEING BORNE BY THE CARES ACT, AND HELPED US MOVE SOME OF THE BURDEN TO FUNDING INSTEAD OF OUR GENERAL FUND. SPEAKING OF PERSONNEL, AND THE CITY'S COMPLEMENT OF EMPLOYEES, OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS THE CITY'S RATIO OF EMPLOYEES FOR THE CITIZENS WE SERVE HAS CONTINUED TO DECREASE. YOU SEE HERE FOR 19-20, WE ARE THE GREEN BAR. WE WERE THE LOWEST RATIO AMONG OUR PEERS IN 2019 AND 2020. AFTER A GRADUAL DECLINE IN TERMS OF THE RATIO. I DON'T HAVE THE 20-21 INFORMATION BUT OF COURSE THAT'S VERY POSITIVE, AND AGAIN FURTHER PROOF THAT WE STAYED RIGHT SIZE AND SOME AREAS MAYBE A BIT UNDERRESOURCED DURING THE RECOVERY FROM THE GREAT RECESSION. AND AGAIN, PART OF THE CONTINUING CONSERVATIVE FISCAL MANAGEMENT THAT REALLY HAS BEE T. BACK TO EXPENDITURES. WE CONTINUE TO HAVE SOME OF THE BEST FUNDED PENSION PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTRY. YOU SEE HERE THE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION PROGRAM IS RIGHT ON BUDGET. WITH AN INCREASE DUE TO HIGHER SALARIES AND SOME ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS, IN EXCESS OF 95%, AN ABSOLUTELY OUTSTANDING FUNDED RATIO. THE GENERAL EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT SBLE REGARDING YEAR TO YEAR CONTRIBUTIONS, AND IS STILL FUNDED IN YEAR 90%. AGAIN OUTSTANDING. JUST TO SUMMARIZE BOTH OF OUR PENSION PROGRAMS REMAIN VERY ROBUST DUE TO THE CITY AND FOR THE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION FUND, THE EMPLOYEES, TOO, CONTRIBUTING WHAT'S NEEDED THROUGH GOOD TIMES AND BAD EVERY YEAR. AND I WOULD LIKE TO COMPLIMENT THE CONTINUING EXCELLENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT BY BOTH BOARDS. -- PENSION BOARDS. MOVING TO OUR ENTERPRISE FUND, YOU SEE THE PARKING DEPARTMENT COULD BE IN BETTER SHAPE. BUT WE ARE STILL ANTICIPATING AN INCREASE IN THEIR FUND BALANCE, NOT AS MUCH AS WE HAD ANTICIPATED WHEN WE ADOPTED THE BUDGET. BUT STILL ON THE PLUS SIDE. DESPITE REVENUE DOWN NEARLY 10% DUE PRIMARILY TO THE PANDEMIC. THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT, WE ANTICIPATE IS GOING TO TAKE IT EVEN A BIT HARDER THAN WE ANTICIPATED. YOU WILL RECALL THAT THE BUDGET WAS ALREADY REDUCED. BAD O WHAT WE SAW DURING THE HEIGHT OF LAST SUMMER INCLUDING COMMERCIAL REVENUE, ACTUALLY GOING TO LOSE MORE MONEY THAN WE ANTICIPATED. THE WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT WILL FINISH AHEAD, SLIGHTLY AHEAD WHEREOF WE ANTICIPATED. THE LOSSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PANDEMIC HAVE NOT BEEN AS BAD AS PROJECTED SO FAR. AND THE WATER DEPARTMENT WILL FINISH AHEAD AS WELL, PRIMARILY DUE TO A JUMP IN WATER SALES AND E IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT CHARGE. YOU HEARD ME SPEAK LAST WEEK WHAT WE FEEL IS THE NECESSITY OF MAINTAINING A STRONG FUND BALANCE HERE AND WE ARE ON COURSE TO DO JUST THAT. TURNING NOW TO THE PANDEMIC FUNDING STATUS WE RECEIVED, AND OUR ANTICIPATED TO RECEIVE IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. WE'LL START WITH THE CARES ACT. YOU RECALL THE FIRST INFUSION OF FUNDING HAD THAT MAIN, AND WE RECEIVED AND SPENT30 MILLION OF IT, AND TO SEE THE ITEMS LISTED HERE. THE LARGEST ITEM OF COURSE BEING PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, EMPLOYEE PERSONNEL EXPENSES. NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT ON DISINFECTING, SUPPLIES, SOCIAL DISTANCING, ET CETERA. AND THEN THE OTHER AREA, COSTS ALLOWED BY THE CARES ACT. NEXT UP, APPROXIMATELY $80 MILLION WE'LL RECEIVE OVER THE COURSE OF TWO ANNUAL PAYMENTS. AGAIN, WE ARE COMING TO COUNCIL IN JULY FOR A DETAILED BRIEFING, BUT FOR NOW, WE AND EVERYONE ELSE RECENTLY RECEIVED GUIDANCE FROM THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT REGARDING THE METHODOLOGY. THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF FUNDING AND BASED ON OUR CARES ACT, THE GUIDELINES WILL PROBABLY CHANGE SOME AS WE GO FORWARD. THE EMPHASIS NOW AS IT WAS THEN WAS GETTING THE MONEY OUT THE DOOR, NOT SO MUCH ON THE GUIDANCE. ON THE PLUS SIDE, IT SEEMS IT WILL BE MORE FLEXIBLE THAN CARES FUNDING,ROBAY THE LARGEST EXAMPLE, CARES MONEY WAS SPECIFICALLY NOT ALLOWABLE FOR REVENUE RECOVERY, WHILE IT ALLOWS FOR IT. THAT'S NO SMALL CONSIDERATION. YOU SEE HERE LIST OF AUTHORIZED USES INCLUDING PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSE. AS A REMINDER WE CONTINUE TO HAVE EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PANDEMIC. IT'S NOT OVER. THE REVENUE LOSS I ALREADY MENTIONED. INFRASTRUCTURE. AND OF COURSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS ALSO WORKING ON FUNDING A SEPATE NATIONWIDE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM. AND THE HOUSEHOLD SMALL BUSINESSES AND NON-PROFITS. A WORD OR TWO ABOUT OUR GRANTS PROGRAM AND BOND. FIRST UP, GRANTS. COUNCIL, YOU MAY RECALL THAT LAST YEAR WE DEVELOPED A MORE COHESIVE GRANT PLANNING AND SUBMISSION PROGRAM, TO TRY TO ENSURE EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE AND WE ARE MOVING WITH ONE VOICE. LAST YEAR, WE WERE AWARDED NEARLY $30 MILLION IN GRANT FUNDS, AND I HAVE ALWAYS HEARD THAT IF YOU A TAIN YOUR GOALS YOU HAVEN'T SET IT HIGH ENOUGH. SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE WE HAVE AGAIN SET OVER $70 MILLION OF POTENTIAL GRANT FUND BEING. AND WHAT WOULD A BUDGET PRESENTATION BE WITHOUT EMPHASIZING OUR VERY STRONG CREDIT RATING? WE DO THIS NOT ONLY TO EMPHASIZE THE CITY'S STRENGTH IN THE MIDST OF THESE PANDEMIC CHALLENGES, BUT TO REMIND OURSELVES IN SOME AREAS, THERE IS STILL ROOM TO IMPROVE. ALL OF THAT AYOU Y KNOW ARE HIGH RATE OR BETTER. AT THE VERY TOP YOU SEE THE ISSUER CREDIT RATING. THAT'S BASICALLY A MEASURE OF THE CITY AS A WHOLE, IT'S OVERALL FINANCIAL HEPP HEALTH. YOU CAN SEE ON THE FAR RIGHT@STS THE BEST RATING. THE OTHER TWO AGENCIES, MOODY'S AND FITCH HAS GIVEN US THE SECOND HIGHEST. SO SOMETHING TO SHOOT FOR AND WE'LL GET THERE. OF COURSE AS YOU KNOW WE ARE VERY PROUD, THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM HAS THE BEST CREDIT RATING ACROSS THE BOARD. HERE IS THE REMAINING TALEN CAR ASSOCIATED WITH FISCAL YEAR 22. THE CITIZENS BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE, EARLY JULY, WILL COME TO YOU JULY 15th REGARDING A MORE DETAILED BREAKDOWN AND EXPLANATION OF THE FUNDING. THE MAYOR'S PRESENTATION EARLY ON, AND OF COURSE THE SEPTEMBER PUBLIC HEARINGS. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME, AND THANK YOU FOR THE BRIEFINGS WE HAVE HAD OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE NOW. IF I CAN'T, WE'LL CIRCLE BACK. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I SAW MR. VIERA FIRST. MR. MANISCALCO SECOND. MR. CARLSON. AND I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS OF MY OWN. >>LUIS VIERA: THANK YOU, MR. ROGERO, AS ALWAYS FOR THAT, AS ALWAYS VERY INFORMATIVE REPORT. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. YOU KNOW, THE DEFICITS THAT WE ARE OPERATING UNDER, THINGS ARE GOOD RIGHT NOW THANKS TO FEDERAL LEADERSHIP THAT LAST YEAR WAS BIPARTISAN. THIS YEAR WAS MORE PARTISAN. BUT UNDER CARES ACT AND NOW THE AMERICAN RELIEF ACT, CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES ARE GETTING THE FUNDING THAT THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET PAST THIS TERRIBLE CRISIS THAT WE HAVE BEEN UNDER, THANKS TO GREAT LEADERSHIP, WE ARE SEEING WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE END OF IT, WHICH IS VERY, VERY GOOD. WE ARE GETTING CLOSER AND CLOSER AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE ALL WANT TO CELEBRATE AS AMERICANS AND I THINK THAT'S A WONDERFUL THING. BUT WE HAVE SO MANY DEFICITS. WE ALWAYS, CHAIRMAN GUDES WAS TALKING ABOUT ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION, AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DON'T HEAR ABOUT ARE THE DEFICITS THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE TAKING CARE OF JUST WITH EQUITY SO THAT PENNY SALES TAX, I THINK THE NUMBERS WITH AFT, JUST TO MEET THE NEEDS IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, REPAY I THINK $16 MILLION A YEAR AND OUR BUDGET IS ABOUT $5 MILLION. WE HAVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA BUDGET IF MY MEMORY IS CORRECT ABOUT $850,000 FOR SIDEWALKS. THAT AFT PENNY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN US FOUR OR FIVE TIMES THAT AMOUNT. SO WE KNOW WHAT WE HAVE TO DO, NOT ONLY WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER THIS MORNING BUT ALSO WITH THAT ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION PENNY SALES TAX, WHICH IS JUST SO VERY PIVOTAL, SO VERY PIVOTAL FOR US. ANOTHER THING TO KEEP ON THE HORIZON IS IF ANY OF YOU ALL OWN A HOLME HOME AND YOU ARE GETTING LETTERS FROM REALTORS OF A HOME THAT WAS WORTH X AMOUNT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO IS NOW WORTH PROBABLY X AMOUNT PLUS 40%. YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF HOW MUCH LONGER WILL THIS GO FOR? ARE WE DEALING WITH ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE WE SAW IN 07 AND 08 WHEN THE CITY OF TAMPA REALLY FACED ONE OF ITS WORST FINANCIAL CRISES THAT WE HAVE HAD IN SUCH A VERY, VERY LONG TIME? WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT, BECAUSE I FOR ONE AM ALWAYS VERY SKEPTICAL OF THAT. WHEN I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO THE MAYOR'S PRESENTATION ON THE BUDGET, I HAVE ALREADY STATED MY STRONG PREFERENCE, MR. ROGERO AND I HAD SOME FNK TALKS ABOUT THAT IS CORRECT WHEN IT COMES TO SOME OF THE NEEDS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY, I THINK, I MENTIONED IT THIS MORNING, TAMPA FIRE RESCUE, SOMETHING THAT'S SO CRITICAL CAL I.WANT THAT YEAR TO BE THE YEAR OF PUBLIC SAFETY IN THIS BUDGET. COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL HAS MADE ITS PREFERENCE KNOWN FOR SEE IF WE CAN USE THOSE FEDERAL FUNDS IN PART FOR SOME OF OUR PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS, AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT EQUITY AND COMMUNITY, I REMIND FOLKS THAT SOME OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT FIRE STATION 13 SERVE VERSUS CHI, 60%. SO THAT'S A BIG ISSUE. BUT THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, SIR. MR. MANISCALCO, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES, SIR. I SAW STRUCTURE IN ONE OF THE SLIDES AND IT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID AND I SAID IT THIS MORNING, BUT MR. ROGERO SAID IT, YOU KNOW, THE BULK OF OUR REVENUE SUBPOENAING FROM PROPERTY TAXES. SO ONE OF THE MOST COMMON THINGS I HEAR IS I PAY MY TAXES, WHY CAN'T MY ROAD GET PAVED? CAN WE DEDICATE SOME OF THAT FUNDING T A LEAST PAVING SOME OF OUR WORST ROADS? AND EVEN WITH SIDEWALKS. THERE'S NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR SIDEWALKS FOR YEARS, SPECIFICALLY WEST TAMPA, AND AGAIN ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION IS DEAD TO ME. I DON'T COUNT ON IT. BUT WE WERE RELYING ON THAT MONEY TO CATCH UP ON THOSE PROJECTS I DON'T WANT TO CALL AT WINDFALL BUT THIS $ 0 MILLION THAT'S COMING WILL ALLOW US SOME FLEXIBILITY, I WOULD ASSUME. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THIS BUDGET JUST BASIC STREET PAVING AND WHAT WE CAN DO, AND SIDEWALK PROJECTS, AND THAT'S IT. AND YOU WILL SEE THAT. AT LEAST SOME PEOPLE WILL BE HAPPY WITH THAT. BUT THEIR TAX MONEY IS -- THE RETURN IS SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN SEE, YOU KNOW. SO THAT WOULD BE IT ON TOP OF THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PARKS IN MY DISTRICT. I ALREADY SPOKE TO MR. ROGERO ABOUT THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN -- I DON'T 2021 SAY IGNORED BUT SET ASIDE, SET ON THE BACK BURNER. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO STRIKE WHILE THE IRON IS HOT. ION'TRUST THIS HOUSING MARKET. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE ARE GOING TO BA GO BACK TO A GREAT RECESSION SITUATION. I TALK TO REALTORS DAILY AND THE STORIES THAT THEY TELL ME, I JUST SIT BACK AND I'M CONFUSED, AND I LAUGH BECAUSE LOOK AT THAT HOUSE. LOOK AT THAT HOUSE. $400,000. IT APPRAISED AT $400,000. THE BANKS, THE MARRIAGES APPROVES $400,000 AND THE BUYERS ARE PAYING $50,000 OVER BECAUSE PEOPLE EVER FIGHTING OVER THAT PROJECT, OROUSE THAT HOME. AND I ASK MYSELF, IF THE MARKET DROPPED JUST A LITTLE BIT, AND THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE STARTING UNDERWATER WITH MONEY OUT OF POCKET UNDERWATER. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. BUT YET PEOPLE ARE BUYING, AND VENTURES LENDING THE MONEY AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND. WE DIDN'T LEARN OUR LESSON THE FIRST TIME. THAT'S IT. I'LL STOP THERE. I APPRECIATE IT. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU. IT'S AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION, AND JUST FOLLOWING UP WITH WHAT MY COLLEAGUE JUST SAID, IN THE PAST, PAST ADMINISTRATION VERSUS GONE TO CITY COUNCILND ASKED WHAT IS YOUR PET PROJECT THAT WE CAN FUND? AND WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT SO FAR IN THIS ADMINISTRATION, WHICH I APPRECIATE. THE PUBLIC DOESN'T WANT VANITY PROJECTS. THEY DON'T WANT PET PROJECTS. THEY WANT BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE ADDRESSED. AND WHEN MR. ROGERO APPROACHED ME A YEAR AGO FOR THE BUDGET, I SAID, I THINK WE NEED TO SAVE MONEY INTO THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE, BECAUSE EVERYBODY WAS PUTTING IN SOME KIND OF RECESSION, WE DIDN'T EXPECT COVID-19 TO HIT. BECAUSE THAT WAS TWO YEARS AGO, WASN'T IT? BUT THANK GOODNESS WE STARTED TO PUT SOME OF THE MONEY BACTHAT THE LAST ADMINISTRATION SPENT OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. BUT GOING FORWARD, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES. WE HAVE FLORIDA, TAMPA ARE NOT A COUNTRY WE CAN'T CLOSE OUR BORDERS, WE HAVE PEOPLE FROM OTHER STATES THAT ARE MOVING HERE BY THE THOUSANDS. THE OLD NUMBER WAS A THOUSAND PEOPLE A DAY MOVING TO FLORIDA AND NOW IT'S GOT TO BE MORE THAN THAT BECAUSE THEY ARE MOVING EVERYWHERE, AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE ISN'T BUILT TO HOLD THE PEOPLE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW AND THE COMPLAINTS WE ARE GET BEING THAT. WHAT I SAID TO MR. ROGERO THE OTHER D IS WHAT MR. MANISCALCO SAID, WE NEED TO FOCUS ON ROADS, PEOPLE ARE VERY ANGRY ABOUT POTHOLES, THEY THINK THAT ONLY THEIR STREETS HAVE POTHOLES IN THEM. I SAY, NO, IT'S THROUGHOUT THE ATTENTION PAID ON IT, MAYBE EVERYBODY WAS WAITING FOR ALL FOR TRANSPORTATION. BUT NOW PEOPLE HAVE CARS THAT ARE FALLING APART BECAUSE THEIR ROADS ARE SO BAD. AND THEY ARE REALLY, REALLY BAD. IN SOME WAYS, MAYBE THEY ARE LIKE SPEED BUMPS THAT THEY SLOW PEOPLE DOWN IN NEIGHBORHOOD WITH KIDS, SPEEDING IS ALSO A PROBM, AUT YOU THE PUDDLES ARE JUST HORRIBLE. SIDEWALKS WE HAVE TALKED AT% LENGTH ABOUT. WE HAVE GOT TO FIX THOSE, PARKS PEOPLE ARE SPENDING MORE AND MORE TIME IN THE PARKS. WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON IT. THE OTHER THING I WOULD ADD IN WHICH I DIDN'T MENTION WAS MR. ROGERO'S CODE ENFORCEMENT. CODE ENFORCEMENT WORKING ON PARKING ISSUES, ALL KINDS OF THINGS. PEOPLE ARE JUST REALLY ANGRY THAT NOBODY FROM THE CITY SHOWS UP, AND IT'S BECAUSE WE ARE UNDERRESOURCED TO GO OUT AND TRY TO FIX ISSUES PEOPLE DUMPING GASH BADGE ON THEIR FRONT YARD OR SOUND PROBLEMS AND OTHER ISSUES. THREE QUICK QUESTIONS. CAN YOU PULL UP YOUR SLIDES AGAIN REAL FAST? I THINK IT'S SLIDE NUMBER 1. >>DENNIS ROGERO: AND CAN YOU STILL SEE MY SCREEN? >>BILL CARLSON: YES. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING? >>DENNIS ROGERO: CERTAINLY. >>BILL CARLSON: SORRY, I DIDN'T 2021 INTERRUPT YOU WHILE YOU WERE GOING THROUGH. THE SECOND SLIDE. >>DENNIS ROGERO: I APPRECIATE THAT. THE AGENDA? >>BILL CARLSON: ONE MORE. YES, SO DEBT SERVICE 2.9%. HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO OTHER CITIES OUR SIZE? IS THAT A HIGH NUMBER, LOW NUMBER, AVERAGE NUMBER? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, SIR. LET ME DO SOME RESEARCH AND CIRCLE BACK TO YOU. IN THE PAST WHEN WE LOOKED AT IT, IT'S BEEN TO MY RECOLLECTION MID RANGE, MID RANGE. >>BILL CARLSON: I KNOW YOU SAID YOU AND YOUR -- SORRY. I KNOW YOU AND YOUR PREDECESSOR PAID A LOT OF ATTENTION TO FUND RESERVES WHICH I APPRECIATE. BUT I AM JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE DEBT SERVICE, THAT AVERAGE. AND THEN CAN YOU SKIP AHEAD A FEW SLIDES? YOU HAD A COUPLE SLIDES ON PERSONNEL COSTS. ONE OF MY FRUSTRATIONS WITH SOME OF THESE SLIDES IN THE PAST IS THEY DON'T GO BACK FAR ENOUGH AND SOME OF THEM LIKE THE FUND BALANCE DON'T SHOW WHAT THE FUND BALANCE USED TO BE BEFORE IT GOT RAIDED. BUT ON PERSONNEL COSTS, I THINK THERE WAS A TIME -- >>DENNIS ROGERO: THERE WE GO. >>BILL CARLSON: THIS IS OVERALL PERSONNEL COSTS. IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THIS LE, 2014, 2021, IT LOOKS LIKE THE CITY ESPECIALLY THE WAY THIS CURVE IS, WHICH IS JUST THE WAY IT WAS SET UP IN EXCEL OR WHATEVER, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE CITY IS JUST SPENDING A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY ON STAFF AND STAFFING UP. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THAT NUMBER WAS PRE-2008. >> THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER THE IORIO ADMINISTRATION WHEN THE GREAT RECESSION HIT. DO YOU HAVE -- 2006 OR 2007 WHAT THE STAFF EXPENSE WAS, JUST SO WE CAN SHOW THE PUBLIC THE CONTEXT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: NO, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION. I COULDN'T EVEN HAZARD A GUESS BUT WE'LL FIN IT VERY EASILY AND GET TO THE YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: THE SAME THING WITH THE NEXT SLIDE WHICH SHOWS I THINK PER CAPITA, THAT KIND OF RATIO. JUST SO WE CAN SHOW IF CONTEXT. AND WHAT I THINK THE POINT I AM TRYING TO MAKE IS WHAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING IS THAT THE CITY HAS BEEN UNDERSTAFFED BECAUSE OF THE GREAT RECESSION AND OTHER THINGS, THE CITY HAS BEEN UNDERSTAFFED AND BEING ABLE TO SOLVE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS, AND NOW THE ADMINISTRATION IS SPENDING ON STAFF, BUT WE NEED TO SHOW THAT THAT RESPONSE TO WHAT THE PUBLIC NEEDS BUT ALSO THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BK BA UP TO MAYBE THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE WE HAD BEFORE 2008. AND THE LAST THING, A BIG QUESTION I GET FROM MY DISTRICT IS PEOPLE COMPLAIN ABOUT PROPERTY TAX INCREASES AND WHAT THEY ARE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY VALUE WENT UP WHICH IS A GOOD BUT THEN THEIR TAXES GO UP AND SAVE OUR HOMES,. BUT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, WHY DON'T YOU GUYS ROLL BACK? I KNOW THERE'S A LOADED WHEN QUESTION BUT IF WE ROLLED BACK TO LAST YEAR'S REVENUES, WHAT KIND OF IMPACT -- I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH EQUIP TO ANSWER QUICKLY, BUT WHAT KIND OF OVERALL IMPACT WOULD THAT HAVE ON THE BUDGET CONSIDERING EVERYTHING WE ARE TRYING TO DO? >>DENNIS ROGERO: AGAIN I COULDN'T HAZARD A GUESS RIGHT NOW BUT WE COULD RESEARCH IT WITH VERY LITTLE TROUBLE AND GET BACK TO YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>JOSEPH CITRO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. GENTLEMEN, WHEN I SAY THESE THINGS I DON'T MEAN TO OFFEND ANYBODY BUT WE HAVE TO FACE REALITY. ATF IS BEHIND US. FLORIDA SUPREME COURT STRUCK IT DOWN. FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY CAME UP WITH. CIT IS ABOUT TO BE BEHIND US. I THINK IT'S ADVANTAGEOUS FOR US TO WORK WITH OUR FRIENDS OVER AT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND GET A NEWER VERSION OF ATF ON THE BALLOT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND FEIGNED A DIFFERENT FORM OF REVENUE THAT THIS SHORTFALL IS GOING TO CAUSE US FOR THE C.I.T. IF WE WANT TO PLAY, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY. AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS IF WE WANT THE SERVICES THAT THIS CITY IS USEDO, IT'S STILL GOING TO COST US MONEY. I HOPE AGAIN THAT WE CAN WORK WITH OUR FRIENDS AT COUNTY COMMISSION SO THAT WE CAN FIND A WAY FOR THESE SHORTFALLS THAT IMMINENT WITHIN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. DENNIS, AGAIN, I THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. AND THIS MORNING, AS I SAID, PUBLIC SAFETY SHOULD BE FIRST AND FOREMOST IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. DINGFELDER, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. DENNIS, THAT ONE SLIDE ALWAYS BOTHERS ME A LITTLE BIT, THE ONE THAT SHOWS HOW OUR NUMBERS OF EMPLOYEES HAVE DROPPED, AND IT'S ALWAYS GOOD FOR US TO TRY AND BE PRUDENT AND, YOU KNOW, STRETCH OUR DOLLARS AS FAR AS POSSIBLE. BUT THE FLIP SLIDE IS, RIGHT AT TH BEGNING OF MAYOR CASTOR'S ADMINISTRATION, SHE AND I STOOD DOWN IN HER OFFICE AND KIND OF BRAGGED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE WERE GOING TO PAY OUR EMPLOYEES THE MINIMUM OF $15 AN HOUR TO DO THE WORK OF THE CITY, WHICH IS HARD FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE ON $15 AN HOUR, BUT SOME OF OUR EMPLOYEES AT THAT TIME, I THINK, WERE 11 OR $12 AN HOUR SO ABOUT 100 EMPLOYEES I THINK GOT BUMPED UP TO $15 AN HOUR AND THAT WAS A GOOD DAY. MY CONCERN IS, WE CA LOSE EMPLOYEES, BUT WE ARE NOT GOING TO LOSE THE SERVICES THAT ARE REQUIRED. SO INSTEAD WHAT WE DO IS WE CONTRACT OUT SOME OF THOSE LOWER-END SERVICE JOBS TO PRIVATE PROVIDERS, AND THEY END UP PAYING PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, 8, 9, $10 AN HOUR. AND AS A COMMUNITY, I AM NOT REALLY SURE WHAT WE ACCOMPLISH IN DOING THAT. AND THIS IS SOMETHING I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. SPECIFICALLY, ON ITEM 41 OF TODAY'S AGENDA, I ACTUALLY MAKES REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT A PARTICULAR VENDOR WAS LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BUMP IN THEIR CONTRACT SO THEY COULD RAISE WHAT THEY PAY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE I THINK THEIR FLAGMEN OUT ON THE STREET DOING TRAFFIC CONTROL. AND THEY WERE GOING TO RAISE THEM BECAUSE THE MINIMUM RAGE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA WENT UP FROM $8.56 AN HOUR TO 8.65 AN HOUR. SO THEN WE WERE FOLLOWING SUIT AND BUMPING UP THAT CONTRACT. FORTUNATELY, THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA HAVE SAID WE ARE GOING TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE BUT IT'S ONLY GOING TO BUMP UP A DOLLAR EACH YEAR OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. SO SEPTEMBER GOES TO 10, THEN 11, THEN 12, ET CETERA. ANYWAY, KIND OF A LONG-WINDED WAY TO GETTING AROUND TO SAYING WE NEED TO BE REALLY CAREFUL THAT WE DON'T PAT OURSELVES ON THE BACK TOO MUCH ABOUT KEEPING THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT WE HAVE DOWN, BUT THEN CONTRACTING OUT AND UNDERPAYING THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THE CITY'S WORK. SO THAT'SOMETHING I KNOW THAT I -- AND I HOPE THE REST OF CITY COUNCIL WILL KEEP A SHARP EYE OUT ON IN THE FUTURE. I KNOW MANY TIMES WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW EXACTLY HOW MUCH OUR CONTRACTORS ARE PAID, THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND I AM NOT REALLY SURE HOW WE GET TO THAT SORT OF INFORMATION. BUT I THINK WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE ALL OF OUR CONTRACTORS TO FOLLOW SUIT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE CITY IS PAYING, AND AT LEAST PAY A MINIMUM OF $15 AN HOUR, KEEP THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS HIGHER. OTHERWISE, AS THE CHAIRMAN POINTED OUT, PEOPLE END UP OUT ON THE STREET BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD A PLACE TO LIVE AT 7 OR $8 AN HOUR. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S MY SOAPBOX. THANK YOU, DENNIS. >> [OFF MICROPHONE] >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. ROGERO, I NEED YOU OH TO HOLD BACK FOR A MINUTE. I HAVE THESE THINGS I AM GOING TO GO AT YOU WITH. WE TALKED, AND MY NUMBER ONE CONCERN IS HOUSING. I KNOW PUBLIC SAFETY IS A BIG ISSUE WITH FIRE. EVERYONE HAS HAD THEIR CONTRACTS THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS DONE. I THINK THAT -- I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY PARTICULAR BIG RAISES OR BONUSES DUE, BUT PUBLIC SAFETY THIS COMING YEAR, A CONTRACT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. SO WE NEED FIRE STATIONS. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. HOPE WE CAN GET THAT IN. BUT FOR ME RIGHT NOW, AND FOR M DISTRICT, AND ACTUALLY FOR THE CITY, ESPECIALLY THE MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES WITHIN ALL FOUR DISTRICTS, HOUSING IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE THEY TALK ABOUT EVERY DAY. IT IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE. HOUSING. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT -- OUTSOURCING, TO OUTSOURCE HOUSING TO GET THOSE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN INTO THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT, THEN THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. WE HAVE TO GET PEOPLE INHERE, BECAUSE THAT IS THE NEED. NUMBER ONE. AND ALSO LOOKING AT DOLLARS TO GO IN THAT AREA SO THEY CAN HELP THOSE WHO ARE IN THAT THRESHOLD THAT CAN'T DO THE NEXT STEP TO GET INTO HOUSING. THAT HAS TO BE NUMBER ONE. PUBLIC SAFETY IS OUR OVERALL GOAL. I DO UNDERSTAND THAT. DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANYTHING FROM PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE I BUT OTHER THAN THAT, HOUSING HAS TO BE THERE. WHEN I LOOK AT THE HOMELESS PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND IN YBOR WITH THE WHOLE SITUATION OVER THERE, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT SOME OF THE OTHER COMMUNITIES, AGAIN, IT JUST YESTERDAY, OF THAT YOUNG MOTHER, KIDS, AND TIMES ARE GETTING MUCH TOUGHER RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT. THAT'S MY BIG TICKET ITEM FOR ALLLY ALL THREE DISTRICTS. MR. CARLSON'S DISTRICT, THERE ARE SOME MARGINALIZED DISTRICTS DOWN IN PORT TAMPA, I HEAR YOU, THAT NEED HELP AS WELL. THESE MY THING. I WAS AT A MEETING, SPECIAL GUEST AT A MEETING A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. AND POLITICIANS THAT SIT ON THE BOARDS IN OTHER COUNTIES AND OTHER STATES. AND THEY ASKED A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I HAD NO ANSWER TO. BUT I AM GOING TO ASK YOU TODAY. I MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER TODAY BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY BANKS DOES THE CITY USE AND HOW MUCH OUR SHARE OF MONEY IN THOSE BANKS AND THOSE FUNDS? EACH ONE OF THOSE BANKS THAT WE ARE UTILIZING HAVE COMMUNITY MONEY THEY GIVE OUT, WHAT PROJECTS THEY HAVE GIVEN OUT OVER THE YEARS, WHERE, AND THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT HAS BEEN SPENT. I THINK THAT'S CRUCIALLY IMPORTANT FOR OUR COMMUNITY TO GIVE THOSE DOLLARS TO BE USED IN MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES. HAVEEEN ASKED THAT A COUPLE TIMES AND I WAS THROWN ON THE SPOT AND DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THAT. BUT YOU ARE OUR FINANCIAL OFFICER. YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE THOSE ANSWERS TO THIS BOARD SO WE KNOW WHERE OUR MONEY IS HOUSED, HOW MUCH IS HOUSED IN THOSE BANKS. AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE COMMUNITY DOLLARS, USED IN COMMUNITIES, ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE HOUSING MONEY THERE, WHERE ARE THOSE FUNDAL OH INDICATED AND HOW MUCH? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MR. CHAIRMAN, I RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I CAN DO THAT, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: BECAUSE MR. BENNETT SEEMS TO THINK THAT LIFE GOES BETTER THAT WAY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT. I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THE MOTION IS CLEAR. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SECOND. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MR. MANISCALCO SECONDS. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? >> [OFF MICROPHONE] >>ORLANDO GUDES: I'M ASKING THAT ALL THE CITY BANKS THAT WE UTILIZE, WHO ARE THEY, HOW MUCH DOLLARS WE HAVE IN THEM, ALSO WANT TO KNOW THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT MONEY THAT THOSE BANKS USE THAT WE HOLD OUR MONEY THERE, WHERE HAVE THE MONEYS BEEN ALLOCATED AT, AND HOW MUCH DOLLARS HAVE BEEN UTILIZED? AND I WOULD GO FIVE YEARS, MR. ROGERO. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A CLARIFIED MOTION. MR. MANISCALCO SECONDS IT. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I DON'T THINK WE NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT, DO YOU, MR. SHELBY? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTI PASSED UNANIMO. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. ALSO, MR. ROGERO, I RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM MY PAST CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND HAD DIFFICULTIES TRYING TO GET THESE MEETINGS SCHEDULED. I CAN SEE ON THE CALENDAR THAT WE DO HAVE SOME MEETINGS SCHEDULED. I AM HOPING THAT WE GET GOOD COOPERATION. GET THE COOPERATION OF STAFF.'T- THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT VOTE FOR MONEY AND SITUATIONS SO I AM HOPING -- I KNOW YOU ARE OVER THAT PARTICULAR AREA THERE. SO I WONDER IF WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE ADMINISTRATORS WHO HAVE DEATH DEPARTMENTS THAT DEAL WITH MONEY THAT THEY MAKE THE MEETINGS AS REQUIRED AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY MAKE IT A TO LEVEL ISSUE AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, SIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I KNOW MOST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE CHANGED SOME OF THE MEMBERS, BECAUSE THE PAST YEAR, FINANCIALLY SOUND, WERE FOUND TO HAVE BUDGETARY ISSUES. I KNOW THERE ARE SOME NEW MEMBS THERE. AND JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE TRANSPARENCY FOR THE CITIZENS' DOLLARS. SO WITH THAT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 56 HAS BEEN WAITING A LONG TIME. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I AM GOING TO GET TO IT. YES SIR. ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU, MR. ROGERO. GREAT PRESENTATION AS USUAL. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ITEM 56. >>RYAN MANASSE: I WILL REFRESH ITEM 56, REZ 20-103. THIS IS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5426 BAY CENTER DRIVE, MEDICAL OFFICE, HOTEL, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL. CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 11, THEN APRIL 1st, TO TODAY'S HEARING I.DO HAVE BEEN MY STAFF ON LINE IN CASE THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FROM MY PREVIOUS PRESENTATION. I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU, CHAIR. I BELIEVE THE AGENT HAS SOME SUCH TO MAKE BUT STAFF ISNS AND AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MANASSE? I BELIEVE THEY HAVE BEEN SWORN. CORRECT, MADAM CLERK? >>DAVID MECHANIK: MY NAME IS DAVID MECHANIK. MR. CHAIRMAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF CRESCENT RESOURCES. I'M SORRY, NOT RESOURCES. DAN WOODWARD WITHIN HIGHWOODS, AND RANDY COEN OF COHEN AND COMPANY. I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF PRESENTATION TO DISCUSS MATTERS THAT CAME UP AT OUR LAST HEARING. AND JUST TO REFRESH COUNCIL'S MEMORY, THE PROPERTY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION TODAY IS THE CURRENT APPROVAL FOR THIS PROPERTY INCLUDES 546 -- [INDISCERNIBLE] OUR PROPOSAL TODAY IS REQUESTING ONLY 292 MULTIFAMILY UNITS. ONE ISSUE THAT WAS -- WAS A CONCERN OVER THE FOUR WAIVERS AS WE REQUESTED FOR THIS PROJECT. WE TOOK A LOOK AT THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS, AND WE STUDIED THE WAIVERS, AND I AM HAPPY TO REPORT THAT WE ARE PREPARED T ELIMINATE ALL OF THE WAIVERS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT. AND IN PARTICULAR, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE PROPOSED APARTMENTS WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY, WHICH WAS A PARTICULAR CONCERN, AND WE WILL NOT REQUIRE ANY WAIVERS FOR LOADING SPACES, PARKING, OR -- WE HAVE ZERO WAIVERS FOR THIS PROJECT. WE WOULD AO LIKE TO ADDRESS WHAT IS AN APPARENT DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TODAY AND WHAT SOME OF THE RESIDENTS SEEM TO ASSUME WHICH HAPPENED THE DAY WE WERE DENIED, THAT IS RESIDENTS THINK THAT NOTHING WILL GO ON THIS PROPERT. ONE OF THE OBJECTORS STATED THAT THEY OBJECT TO LOSS OF A DEDICATED PARK. THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT A PARK. AND AS I SEWED, IT'S CURRENTLY APPROVED FOR 546 MULTIFAMILY UNITS. A GREAT DEAL OF TIME ANALYZING WHAT TYPES OF APARTMENT PROJECTS CAN BE ON THIS SITE UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING, AND WE ARE DOING THIS TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT CAN OCCUR ONHE PROPERTY TODAY REGARDLESS OF WHAT COUNCIL'S ACTION IS. AND AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO ASK RANDY COEN TO PROVIDE A COMPARISON OF WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TODAY VERSUS WHAT COULD BE PUT UNDER THE EXISTING [INDISCERNIBLE] MR. COEN. >>RANDY COEN: I HAVE BEEN SWORN. I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE MY SCREEN. IS MY SCREEN VISIBLE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. THIS WILL BE A BRIEF PRESENTATION.% THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. ON BAY CENTER DRIVE. THE FIRST OFFICE BUILDING HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED. THE FRONT PORTION OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED. SO THE SUBJECT OF THE REZONING TODAY IS TO MODIFYHE APPROVAL FOR THIS PARCEL OF LAND HERE. CURRENTLY, IT'S APPROVED FOR A BUILDING THAT WOULD FIT A FOOTPRINT GENERALLY OF THIS, IN A LONG RECTANGULAR SHAPE, AND FOR THE COMMUNITY WHICH IS NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPER, THOSE SUGGEST THAT IF THIS PROPERTY, THE TYPE OF MULTIFAMILY THAT WOULD BE HERE WOULD BE CONSIDERABLY DIFFERENT THAN THE TYPICAL MARKET MULTIFAMILY WHICH IS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED ON THE PROPERTY. SO WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS MOVE US FROM A LARGE RECTANGLE TO A MORE LINEAR BUILDING, AND THAT'S WHAT TRIGGERED THIS REZONING. AS MR. MECHANIK STATED, THERE WOULD BE 293 UNITS AS OPPOSED TO THE 546 UNITS THAT ARE CURRENTLY APPROVED. THE PARKING STRUCTURE, THE LIGHTER COLOR HERE, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, THE PARKING STRUCTURE WOULD BE EXPANDED BY ONE BAY, HALF OF WHAT'S APPROVED FOR THE EXPANSION, AND WLD BE EIGHT STORIES RATHER THAN THE 11 STORIES THAT'S CURRENTLY APPROVED FOR THIS ENTIRE PARKING GARAGE EXPANSION. THIS IS A LOOK AT IT WITH THE BUILDING IN PLACE THANKS TO GRAPHICS AND THE VARIOUS THINGS WE CAN DO. YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING IS LINEAR SHAPED. IT'S POSITIVE CONNECTION TO THE PARKING STRUCTURE. THE FACT THAT THE BUILDING WILL THEN SCREEN THE SOUTH FACADE OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE WHICH I BELIEVE IS VERY IMPORTANT FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT, WHENEVER POSSIBLE. YOU WILL SEE THAT THE PARKING STRUCTURE ITSELF IS ONLY WIDENED BY ONE BAY AS OPPOSED TO THE TWO BAYS. THIS IS A LOOK AT THE PROPOSED 293 UNIT MULTIFAMILY PROJECT, WITH THE LARGE AREA ACTUALLY SPANS UNDER THE BUILDING ALL THE WAY INTO THIS. THE PROJECT WOULD BE GOOD FOR EVERYONE TO HAVE A VERY CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON HERE TODAY. SO WE DEVELOPED THE SECOND MULTIFAMILY CONCEPT THAT IS QUINT THE EXISTING PROPOSED ZONING ON THE PROPERTY. THIS IS A RENRING OF IT. IT IS 450 UNITS. IT STAYS WITHIN THE APPROVED BUILDING FOOTPRINT, THAT LARGE RECTANGULAR FOOTPRINT. YOU CAN SEE THE GARAGE IS EXPANDED BY ONE BAY BUT EXPANDED BY TWO BAYS AND THEN ITS HEIGHT IS 11 STORIES RATHER THAN 8. THAT IS WHAT YOU SPECIFICALLY APPROVED IN THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY. THIS IS A LOOK FROM BAY CENTER. YOU SEE THE BUILDING OVER HERE. YOU SEE THE PARKING STRUCTURE NATURE AND FUL VISIBILITY. SO WHAT I WANT TO DO NOW AT THIS POINT IS SIMPLY PROVIDE WITH YOU COMPARISONS SO THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS WHAT IS HAPPENING TODAY. THE PROPOSED LUXURY AS IT'S CALLED IS A LARGE UNIT PRODUCT ON VERY UPSCALE, 293 UNITS. THE APPROVED MARKET RATE AS WE ARE CALLING IT, APARTMENT, WHICH IS WHAT'S SHOWN HERE TO THE RIGHT, IS 450 UNITS. THAT'S 158 UNITS MORE THAN THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IN THIS REZONED. THE SIZE OF THE UNITS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT. 921 VERSUS 521. BASICALLY THE UNITS ARE ABOUT 50 PERCENT OF THE SIZE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE THE TYPE OF UNITS IN THE TWO BUILDINGS WITH THE PROPOSED ZONING TODAY, THEY ARE 1 AND 2 BEDROOM UNITS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT WOULD BE BUILT UNDER THE CURRENT APPROVED ZONING, THEY WOULD BE STUDIO AND 1 BEDROOM UNIT, MORE AKIN TO WHAT IS BEING CALLED NOW MICROUNIT APARTMENT COMPLEXES. THE RENTS FOR THE PROPOSED PRODUCT THAT WE HAVE IN THE ZONING TODAY ARE TWICE THAT OF WHAT THEY WOULD BE FOR THE MARKET RATE, SO 50% LESS. SAME NUMBER OF STORAGE. JUST A DIFFERENT BUILDING FOOTPRINT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT TRAFFIC, THE TRAFFIC IS SUBSTANTIALLY LESS FOR THE PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY AS OPPOSED TO THE APPROVED. AND I DO HAVE A TYPO. IT SHOULD BE 34% MORE TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING. 32 MORE TRAFFIC IN THE AFTERNOON. WITH THE APPROVED MULTIFAMILY PHAM CONCEPT. CORRIDORS AIR CONDITIONED AS OPPOSED TO OPEN AIR JUST IN THE QUALITY OF THE BUILDING THAT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED. WITH THE PROPOSED REZONING THEY WOULD BE PROFESSIONAL AND EMPTY NESTERS, WITH THE WHAT PROVED MARKET RATE IT WOULD BE JUST THAT, TYPICAL MARKET RATE, TYPICAL APARTMENT COMPLEXES YOU SEE THROUGHOUT TAMPA. AS I SAID BEFORE THE GARAGE LEVELS, WE HAVE 8 LEVELS, EXPANSION FOR THE PROSED REZONING, FOR THE APPROVED REZONING IT WOULD REQUIRE ALL ELEVEN OF THE CURRENTLY APPROVED PARKING STRUCTURE LEVELS, THAT WOULD BE AN INCREASE MUCH THREE. UNDER THE PROPOSED REZONING, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE GARAGE EXPANSION WOULD BE HALF THAT, THAT IT IS WITH THE MARKET RATE, SO MUCH LOWER PARKING REQUIRE, 11 STORIES VERSUS THE 8, ONE BAY VERSUS THE TWO BAYS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE ELIER NO SCREENING OF THE GARAGE UNDER THE MARKET RATE CONCEPT. OF COURSE UNDER WHAT'S PROPOSED TODAY, IT WOULD BE SCREENED EFFECTIVELY. WESTSHORE OVERLAY WOULD BE REQUIRED. THIS BUILDING WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY FOR THE PROPOSED REZONE. THE MARKET RATE DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY, AND IT WOULD NOT COMPLY WITH THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY. NUMBER OF A MEN ADVERTISE UNDER THE LUXURY OR PROPOSED REZONING UNDER THE MARKET RATE, HIGHLY UNLIKELY THOSE THINGS WILL OCCUR. BO OF THESE PROJECTS ARE FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE. SO WE SIMPLY WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT A SITUATION WHERE MULTIFAMILY WILL NOT OR CANNOT BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S A MATTER OF WHAT MULTIFAMILY WILL BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY. AND WITH THAT, THANK YOU. I AM GLAD TO BE ANXIOUS ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANY QUESTIONS, GENTLEMEN? MR. DINGFELDER, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU. MR. COEN, JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I THINK SOME OF THESE CAME UP THE LAST TIME BUT IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO THE PROJECT THAT YOU SPOKE TO, OR THAT MR. MECHANIK SPOKE TO IS 546 UNITS, ADDITIONAL UNITS. I'M SORRY? >>RANDY COEN: I JUST SAID, YES, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: OKAY. THAT WAS APPROVED BY A PRIOR COUNCIL IN WHAT YEAR? >>RANDY COEN: 2018. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: OKAY. AND SO YOUR PREMISE, YOUR ARGUMENT IS THAT UNDER THAT PD, ALL YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO TODAY, IF YOU WERE GOING TO BUILD OVER THAT PD WITH 546 UNITS, IS GO DOWN AND START PULLING PERMITS, RIGHT? >>RANDY COEN: THAT'S CORRECT. WE EVEN WENT TO THE EXTENT OF DEVELOPING A CONCEPT TO DETERMINE WHETHER WE COULD PHYSICALLY GET 546 DWELLING UNITS ON THE PROPERTY. IT LOOTS LIKE THE MAXIMUM THAT CAN ACTUALLY BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY ARE 450 UNITS. AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE, BE VERY TRANSPARENT WITH WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, AND THE FACT THAT WHILE 556 UNITS ARE APPROVED, THE LIKELY MAXIMUM WILL BE 450 UNITS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. OOPS OOPS. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 450 UNITS WHICH IS STILL MORE THAN THE 292 THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR. >>RANDY COEN: YES, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: LET'S TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC FLOW. I THINK THAT'S BEEN ONE OF THE BIG OF THE CONCERNS WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY DURING THE PRIOR HEARING. HAVE YOU MODELED -- I KNOW IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT BASED UPON THE TRAFFIC FLOW OF OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES INCLUDING BOTH MARINERS BUILDINGS, HAVE YOU MODELED WHAT DIRECTION THAT TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OUT OF YOUR NEW BUILDING, IF YOU ARE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BUILD IT, WHAT DIRECTION IT'S GOING TO GO? IS IT GOING TO GO OUT HOOVER? WHAT PERCENTAGE IS GOING TO GO OUT HOOVER TO KENNEDY AND 275 AS COMPARED TO GOING ZIGZAGGING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMING OUT AT AZEELE? ARE YOU ABLE TO MODEL THAT? >>RANDY COEN: WE HAVE B 5% OF THE PROPERTY IS LIKELY TO USE AZEELE REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE DO WITH RESTRICTIONS OR DIRECTIONALITY, THAT SORT OF THING, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE PROJECT, TRAFFIC WILL GO TO HOOVER AND THAT WOULD BE TRUE FOR THIS CONCEPT OR THE MULTIFAMILY CONCEPT. INTERESTINGLY HERE, SINCE WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS A MULTIFAMILY CONCEPT THAT'S LITERALLY VIRTUALLY 50% LESS TRAFFIC THAN WHAT THE OFFICE BUILDING, SECOND OFFICE BUILDING THAT WOULD BE BUILT HERE, WE ACTE INCREASE IN THE RESIDENTIAL DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC AS OPPOSED TO THE VERY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES THAT WE HAVE WITH AN ADDITIONAL OFFICE BUILDING THON PROPERTY. AND THAT OFFICE BUILDING IS APPROVED FOR A LITTLE OVER 223,000 SQUARE FEET. VERY SUBSTANTIAL BUILDING. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: AND MY LAST QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN, IN REGARD TO THE WAIVERS, HAVE YOU ALREADY SUBMITTED A REVISED SITE PLAN THAT ELIMINATES THE WAIVERS? OR IS THAT WHAT YOU ANTICIPATE DOING BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READ IF YOU GET THAT FAR? >>RANDY COEN: THE MATTER OF THE PROCESS WE ARE IN WE WOULD BE SUBMITTING TO YOU TODAY TO BE LISTED AS PART OF THE REVISION BUT WE WILL MAKE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING. WE ALSO ARE GOING TO PROFFER A CONDITION REGARDING NOT OVER THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY BEING REMOVED BUT THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE PROJECT WILL BE REVIEWED AND DETERMINED TO BE COMPLAINT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PERMITS BEING ISSUED. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: AND I LIED, MR. CHAIRMAN. ONE OTHER QUESTION. YOU MENTIONED PUBLIC AMENITIES I.DIDN'T RECALL -- I DON'T RECALL WHAT THEY WERE. I AM NOT DOUBTING YOU, BUT WHAT WOULD THE PUBLIC AMENITIES BEING PROPOSED TODAY? >>RANDY COEN: A SERIES OF PUBLIC AMENITIES WHICH ARE ON THE PROPERTY WOULD BE LISTED ON THE REVISION SHEET. THEY ARE BICYCLE STATION, WATER STATION, PET STATION, ALONG THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE ALSO TALKED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND AGREED THAT WE WOULD LIKE SOME ADDITIONAL ON-SITE AMENITIES, IF IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE CITY OF TAMPA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, TO APPROVE THOSE, BECAUSE THOSE WOULD BE RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. SO THEY CANNOT BE PART OF THE REZONING. BUT WE ARE CERTAINLY WILLING TO PUT AMENITIES, AND PROVIDE ONSITE IN ADDITION. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MRS. WELLS REMIND US WE ARE NOT A CLOUD TO INCLUDE THOSE IN OUR CONSIDERATION. >>RANDY COEN: I AM LEARNED THAT AS WELL AS OTHER THINGS. >> >>DAVID MECHANIK: AND THE FIRST CONDITION WHICH RANDY TALKED ABOUT IS ON-TE AND WE HAVE ALREADY SUPPLIED THAT TO RYAN, SHOULD COUNCIL APPROVE THIS ON FIRST READING. IT WOULD ADD THAT CONDITION, ALONG WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE WAIVERS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND. >>ORLANDO GUDES: YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, MR. CITRO. >>JOSEPH CITRO: JUST ADD BEING ONTO COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER ABOUT THE AMENITIES, THIS IS NOT A QUESTION, IT'S A COMMENT. WITH FIVE OF THE MAJOR AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS GOING ELECTRIC IN THE NEXTIVE YEARS I THINK IT WOULD BE HOPEFUL THAT MORE AND MORE DEVELOPMENTS ARE PUTTING IN CHARGING STATIONS IN THEIR PARKING AREAS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYONE ELSE? ANYTHING ELSE, MR. COEN? >>DAVID MECHANIK: LET ME WRAP UP OUR INITIAL PRESENTATION. JUST TO RECAP WHAT RANDY SAID. OUR PROPOSAL TODAY REDUCES THE NUMBER OF UNITS, REDUCES TRAFFIC, AND REDUCES THE POPULATION OF THE PROJECT. ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE ITEMS THAT APPARENTLY ARE DESIRED BY THE NEIGHBORS, BUT THEY ARE STILL OBJECTING TO THIS PROJECT. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE THINK WE ARE DOING WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ASKING TO BE DONE. THAT CONCLUDES OUR INITIAL PRESENTATION. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. WE WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. HOW MANY DO WE HAVE ON THE SECOND FLOOR? >> LAST I HEARD IT WAS APPROXIMATELY ABOUT THREE PEOPLE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL START WITH THEM. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN, MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. I JUST WANTED TO BRING TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PUBLIC AND PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, THIS IS A CONTINUED FIRST READING PUBLIC HEARING, AND IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO COUNCIL AT THE FIRST READING, FIRST ON FEBRUARY 11 OF 2021, THEN ON MARCH 18 OF 2021, AND LAST ON APRIL 1st OF 2021, AND HERE YOU ARE AGAIN STILL WITHIN YOUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, COUNCIL, AND WITH THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE REGISTERED, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT IF YOU HAVE SPOKEN PREVIOUSLY AND HAVE OFFERED TESTIMONY PREVIOSLY, THAT YOU OT REPEAT YOURSELF, PLEASE, BECAUSE ALL OF THAT INFORMATION IS IN THE RECORD, AND ALSO THAT IF YOU HAVE SPOKEN PREVIOUSLY, PLEASE DO LET US KNOW SO THAT COUNCIL IS AWARE OF THAT. AND FINALLY, THAT THE DEGREE THAT YOU CAN, TO LIMIT YOUR SUBJECT AND YOUR EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION, WHATEVER YOUR POSITION IS, RELATIVE TO THE PURPOSE OF THE CONTINUANCE, AND WHAT'S BEFORE CITY COUNCIL TODAY FOR ITS CONSIDERATION. AND I THANK THE PUBLIC FOR THEIR UNDERSTANDING AND THEIR COOPERATION. ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, MR. SHELBY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE OUR FIRST PERSON. IS ANYBODY DOWNSTAIRS TO SWEAR THEM IN? >>THE CLERK: I HAVE NOT BEEN SWORN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT. SHE'LL SWEAR YOU IN. >>THE CLERK: PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. (OATH ADMINISTERED BY CLERK). >> I DO. MY NAME IS MICHAEL BUCHAMP, AN ATTORNEY. MY PARTNER KATIE WAS HERE AT THE PRIOR HEARING VIRTUALLY AND SPOKE TO CERTAIN POINTS. I WANT TO ADDRESS A FEW MORE POINTS TO WRAP UP IN LIGHT OF TODAY'S PRESENTATION I.ALSO WANTED TO TAKE A BRIEF MOMENT IF IT'S POSSIBLE OUTSIDE OF MY TIME AND ADDRESS THAT MRS. BURKEY LAST TIME SHE PRESENTED HER QUALIFICATIONS BUTT THEY WERE THEN SOL MERELY DISMISSED BY COUNCIL FOR THE APPLICANT. AND I DIDN'T WANT HER TESTIMONY TO BE DISREGARDED FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WHAT HER QUALIFICATIONS WERE AS ALANN AND A BOARD CERTIFIED LAND COUNTY GOVERNMENT ATTORNEY, AND WANT IT READ INTO THE RECORD FROM THAT RESPECT. IN CONTEXT OF TODAY'S COMMENTS AND PRESENTATION, WE APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE WAIVERS RELATED TO THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY HAVE BEEN DROPPED, AND WE CERTAINLY URGE THAT IF THIS IS APPROVED, THAT THOSE CONDITIONS BE MADE PART OF THE APPROVAL VERY CLEARLY, AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOP TO THOSE AND SPEAK TO THOSE. THE MORE IMPORTANT PART I THINK TODAY COMES DOWN TO OUR CONCERN, PREVIOUSLY STATED, AND MMARED DLING WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THAT THE PROPOSAL OF THE APPLICANT REALLY DOES FAIL TO PROPERLY ACCOUNT FOR AND ADDRESS EVACUATION RATES AND SHELTER CAPACITY AS IT SITS TODAY REQUEST THE SCOPE IN SIZE. WE REALIZE THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT IS SMALLER. HOWEVER, ALSO IT'S A SITUATION WHERE YOU ARE BRINGING INTO A VERY CONFINED AND LIMITED AREA ALL THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC AND PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE WITH POOR QUALITY AND WHICH TENDS TO FLOOD WHICH IS THE HISTORY HERE IN SOUTH TAMPA, AND AROUND BEACH PARK. WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE PROJECT IS IN COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCALE AND CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE BUT FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS WHICH ARE CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS IT'S STILL SHORTER THAN WHAT'S PROPOSD AND THE BUILDING NEXT TO IT SHORTER THAN PROPOSED, EVERYTHING ELSE IS MUCH SMALLER, LOWER RESIDENTIAL AND LOWER DENSITY IN THAT RESPECT. AND THAT'S THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED, PROTECTED AND PROA PRESERVED AND THE CONTEXT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND IN YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY. AND AGAIN IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. >>THE CLERK: I NEED TO BE SWORN IN. (OATH ADMINISTERED BY CLERK). >>THE CLERK: THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS POLLY PERRY, A RESIDENT MUCH BEACH PARK. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS. I REALIZE IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED TO BUILD SOME BUILDINGS. I AM VERY CONCERNED AS A RESIDENT REGARDING THE DENSITY AND THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. IT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE RE. I REALIZE THIS IS AN AREA THAT IS ADJACENT TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT STILL IS PART OF IT AND WILL PARTICIPATE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR RESOURCES. IT INCREASE IT IS RISK FOR EMERGENCY EVACUATION BY ADDING THESE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTS, AND CARS OR VEHICLES. WHILE THERE MIGHT BE 292 UNITS AS REQUESTED, A THOUSAND PARKING SPOTS, THEY ARE GOING TO BE FILLED WITH CARS. WE ALREADY HAVE INCREASED EVACUATION ISSUES, AND WE ARE IN A COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR COMMUNITY OR OUR RESIDENTS TO BUILD SOMETHING OF THIS MAGNITUDE. ON OTHER ISSUES INCLUDE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, DEVELOPMENT WOULD STRAIN OUR EXISTING NATURAL RESOURCES AND ACTUALLY COULD DAMAGE SOME OF WILDLIFE ALL THROUGHOUT BEACH PARK. AND THE CONSTRUCTION, AND THE BUILDING ITSELF IS AN ONGOING CONSTRUCTION COULD DAMAGE THE SURROUNDING AREA WHICH IS THE HABITAT TO HERONS, WHITE IBIS, MANTLES, AND GRAY FERNELLS. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SCHOOLS BEING OVERCROWD EVEN THOUGH IT IS EMPTY NESTERS. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING OUR ALREADY CROWDED SCHOOLS BEING EVEN MORE CROWDED. AND JUST OVERALL CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE. AND AS A BEACH PARK IS A WONDERFUL NEIGHBORHOOD. AN IT S BEEN A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE THERE AND BE PART OF TAMPA. BUT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEING ALLOWED AND CONTINUED, AND THIS IS NOT THE ONLY PROJECT BUT I UNDERSTAND THE ONLY ONE WE ARE SPEAKING ABOUT THIS TIME, JUST SEEMED TO BE NOT ADDING TO OUR QUALITY OF LIFE, FOR OUR CITIZENS. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. ANY MORE SPEAKERS? ANYBODY ELSE ON THE SECOND FLOOR? ALL RIGHT. WILL GO TO REGISTERED CALLS. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE GEORGE, WHICH IS VISIBLE. WE NEED DOMINIQUE COSTILLO. TURN ON YOUR VIDEO. AS WELL AS JANE STROHMEYER. AND HUBBARD. AND TIM McGOFFEY. IF YOU COULD PLEASE ENABLE YOUR VIDEO. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. (OATH ADMINISTERED BY CLERK) THANK YOU. MAKE SURE YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF. >> GEORGE CHIANG? >> THANK YOU YES. THAN Y FOR THE. I PERSONALLY HAVE RENTED AT A LUXURY APARTMENT CALLED THE SKY HAWK IN CHANNELSIDE JUST A FEW -- JUST A FEW MAILS FROM HERE. I RENTED FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE AND A HALF YEARS BEFORE I GOT OUT OF THAT AND BUY A HOUSE. I WAS THINKING LUXURY, NO DOWN PAYMENT, SECURED ACCESS, IT WAS A GREAT OPTION. BUT AFTER LIVING THERE FOR SO LONG, AND PAYING CLOSE TO $2400 A MONTH TO STAY IN THE PENTHOUSE THERE, I LEARNED THAT RENTERS HAVE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MIND-SET THAN HOMEOWNERS. AND MANY RENTERS, THEY DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT DISTURBING THEIR NEIGHBORS AND THEY DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THEY ARE MOSTLY TRANSIENT, AND THEY ARE JUST COMING IN FOR MAYBE SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR AND THEN THEY ARE GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO I WILL GIVE YOU A PERFECT EXAMPLE WAS PAYING $2400 A MONTH LIVING IA PENTHOUSE, A NEIGHBOR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE -- JUST ACROSS FROM ME, SOMEONE ELSE MOVED IN, AND SHE WAS ALSO PAYING $2400 A MONTH TO RENT THAT PENTHOUSE. BUT SHE WAS ON DRUGS, AND THREW PARTIES ALL THE TIME, AND THEY WERE JUST A COMPLETE NUISANCE. THREE OR FOUR TIMES A WEEK, 3 OR 4:00 IN THE MORNING. THESE ARE THE TYPES OF PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE LUXURY APARTMENT BUILDINGS ATTRACT. ALSO, YOU WOULD SIMPLY NOT BELIEVE HOW MANY DRUG DEALERS LIVE IN THESE LUXURY APARTMENTS. I MET A HANDFUL MYSELF BECAUSE YOU WANT TO MEET YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOU WANT TO MAKE FRIEND, AND I WAS VERY SURPRISED TO HEAR THAT, THESE PEOPLE THAT I MADE FRIEND WERE WERE ACTUALLY DRUG DEALERS. YOU CAN'T TELL, BUT THAT'S AN ELEMENT THAT THESE LUXURY APARTMENTS BRING IN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND NOT ONLY JUST I MET PERSONALLY. I HEARD THAT THERE WERE PROBABLY 20 OR 30 MORE, AT LEAST, IN THE BUILDING DEALING DRUGS THAT I NEVER MET. AND IT'S OBVIOUS IT WOULD INCREASE THE CRIME RATE, IT WOULD INCREASE DRUGS COMING THROUGH THE AREA, AND IT WOULD INCREASE THE USAGE OF DRUGS IN THAT AREA BY MAYBE THE YOUNGER GENERATION. ALSO, I HAVE BEEN AN ACTIVE REAL ESTATE BROKER IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR OVER 25 YEARS, AND IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THE SATURATION OF THIS AREA WITH AN ADDITIONAL, WHAT, 300 APARTMENTS WOULD BENEFIT SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, WHICH BEACH PARK IS PRIMARILY AN AREA FOR. ALSO, WITH PETS, OVER 50% OF PERSON HOUSEHOLDS, THEY OWN PETS. AND, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX IS GOING TO HAVE ABOUT 296 UNITS, 292 DWELLING UNITS, DIVIDE THAT BY TWO, LET'S SAY 156 PETS. [BELL SOUNDS] IT'S REPORTED 40% -- >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU, SIR. >> ARE YOU CUTTING ME OFF? >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, SIR. YOU HAVE HAD YOUR TIME. YOUR THREE MINUTES. >> I DIDN'T NOTCH I HAD THREE MINUTES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, SIR. NEXT IS DOMINICK CASTELLANO. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? I SPOKE PREVIOUSLY AT THE LAST MEETING IN APRIL AND I HAVE COME ON AGAIN TO ADDRESS OTHER ISSUES. I HAVE BEEN A NATIVE OF SOUTH TAMPA MY WHOLE LIFE. I HAD TO GO DO MY TRAINING. AND A COUPLE ISSUES THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. ONE FIRST AND FOREMOST IS NOTIFICATION. NOTIFICATION. NOBODY IN MY COMMUNITY, MARINERS STREET, IN THE MARINER TOWN HOME TOWERS NOR BEACH PARK KNEW ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ITSELF WAS ORIGINALLY SLIGHTED TO BE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING IN 2018 AND THEN THEY SOLD THE LAND TO DECREES TONIGHT DEVELOP INTO MULTIFAMILY. THE AREA IN QUESTION IS A BIG GREEN SPACE AREA. NOW, IF WE WOULD HAVE KNOWN AS CITIZENS, I CAN TELL YOU WE WOULD BE OUT THERE IN DROVES AND OPPOSING IT FROM THE FIRST START. WE DON'T NEED THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT IN OUR AREA. AND I CAN TELLOU, REPRESENT A LOT OF PEOPLE ON MY STREET MARINER WERE NOT OPPOSED TO THEM DEVELOP THE RESIDENTIAL, BUT THE SCOPE AND THE SIZE OF IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THAN THE AREA IN QUESTION. THE TWO LARGE TOWERS ALREADY ARE CONDOMINIUMS, THEY ARE NOWHERE NEAR THAT SIZE. AND I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO REVISIT THIS SITUATION AND SPEAK TO THE DEVELOPER AND TRY TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT, NOT WITH WHO ARE GOING TO BE MOSTLY IMPACTED BY THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE SIZE. IT'S A HUGE BLDINOT TO MENTION LOSING GREEN SPACE. AND THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR IS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOU FIND OUT HOW VACANT IT IS. THERE ARE BARELY ANY TENANTS IN THERE. WHY NOT INCLUDE LOOK INTO INTO CONVENIENCE OVATING THAT BUILDING INTO MULTIFAMILY VERSUS KEEPING A BUILDING THAT IS NOT OCCUPIED FROM A COMMERCIAL STANDPOINT VERSUS AN ENTIRELY NEW RESIDENTIAL TOWER. I GET THE FINANCIAL TERMS ARE IN, IN REGARDS TO LOW INTEREST RATE AND ABILITY TO FINANCE THESE KIND OF DEALS BUT IT'S NOT RIGHT FIT FOR THE COMMUNITY. I WOULD ALSO STRONGLY RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL RECONVENE AND HAVE A MEETING AND MAKE US THE FIRST ITEM. I HAVE BEEN OPERATING DUAL PROCEDURES, TRYING TO SEE PATIENTS, HANGING ON TO GET IN ON THIS MEETING, AND IT'S CONSTANTLY BEING KICKED DOWN THE ROAD. HAVE A MEETING IN THE MORNING WHERE THE CITIZENS OR HOMEOWNERS LIKE MYSELF CAN SCHEDULE TO BE THERE AND THEN IT GOES ON THE AGENDA FIRST AND WE CAN VOICE OUR OPINION. I THINK YOU WILL FIND A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF ARE NOT FOR THIS. IT JUST NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING THAT WHEN WE ARE -- IT'S BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION AND IT WASN'T. THE SECOND PARTLY I WANT TO BRING UP IS WHAT'S RIGHT FOR SOUTH TAMPA? WE HAVE SEEN ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS GOING ON SOUTH OF GANDY ON WESTSHORE, AND YOU HAVE AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY, AND YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT IT-- AND THEY ARE UP IN ARMS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON. THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT PROJECT FOR US. SOUTH TAMPA IS DEVELOPING TOO QUICK. YOU HAVE 1500 UNITS GOING INTO WESTSHORE MALL. HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED AT ALL? NO. YOU HAVE GEORGETOWN APARTMENTS THAT'S BEEN TORN DOWN, A HUGE PARCEL OF LAND BETWEEN KENNEDY. . WHY ARE WE GOING TO PUT ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT WHEN WE HAVE TWO OTHER DEVELOPMENTS ALREADY APPROVED TO DO THIS? IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. SOMETIMES, I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO STEP BACK, LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS, AND TAKE A PAUSE. WE NEED TO THINK THIS THROUGH. COMMISSIONER DINGFELDER IS GOING TO MEET WITH US NEXT WEEK IN OUR AREA. I RESPECTFULLY INVITE ALL THE COMMISSIONERS TO SHOW UP ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. WE THE CITIZENS HAVE NO IDEA THIS IS GOING TO BE PUT FORTH. AND WE ARE JUST NOT INTERESTED IN WHA IS OCCURRING SOUTH OF GANDY, OCCURRING TO US NOW. IT'S NOT RIGHT. AND IT'S NOT THE RIGHT FOOTPRINT. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TOP DRIVE DOWN THERE AND LOOK AT WHAT'S THERE. THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THERE ARE MAINLY TWO STORIES. AND THEY WANT TO PUT HUGE CONDOS IN? IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT. IT'S JUST WRONG. AND I REALLY THINK THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD HAVE ANOTHER MEETING, HAVE US SEE THE FIRST AGENDA AND I THINK YOU WILL SEE MANY MORE CITIZENS LIKE MYSELF SHOW UP. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO BE UNREASONABLE. WE UNDERSTAND TAMPA HAS TO GROW. [BELL SOUNDS] >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. >> SOMETIMES WE HE TOAKE A PAUSE AND ASSESS THINGS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT JEAN STROHMEYER. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE CAN HEAR YOU. >> I'M JEAN STROHMEYER. AND THAT'S KIND OF ALL WE WANTED, AS DOMINICK SAID, IS A PAUSE. WE HAVE BEEN YOU WANTING A PAUSE FOR NOW GOING ON 20 MONTHS, I BELIEVE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. YOU CAN'T MAKE SENSE OUT OF NONSENSE. WE ALL KNOW THAT. BUT THEY JUST KEEP TRYING AND TRYING. AND I DID SPEAK AT THEAST ONE, AND I BELIEVE THIS IS THE CORRECT ONE, AND THIS IS GOING TO CHANGE THEIR ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT CHANGES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHAT'S AGAIN B AGAIN ON. IT JUST CHANGES WHO WE ARE, OUR IDENTITY, OUR VERY ESSENCE OF WHO WE ARE. THEY KEEP WANTING MAKE ROW APARTMENTS AND STUDIO APARTMENTS. NOBODY BUT YOUNG KIDS ARE GOING TO LIVE IN THOSE FOR THE MOST PART. I HAD A STUDIO APARTMENT WHEN I WAS 15 YEARS OLD AND I MOVED OUT AND I HAVEEVER MOVED INTO ONE AGAIN. I LIVE IN MY HOME, AND YOU WANT TO HAVE A HOME FOR YOUR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES TO COME AND VISIT. THE LAST MEETING, I RECALL A PARTICULAR PERSON, MR. COEN, MADE SOME SENSITIVE REMARKS TO OUR CITY COUNCILMEN, IT OFFENDED THEM AND US, TOO. WE DID HEAR YOU APOLOGIZE BUT WE CITIZENS HEARD IT AND IT WAS INSENSITIVE FOR YOU TO SPEAK LIKE THAT IN OUR CHAMBERS. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MADAM CLERK, WHAT ARE THE NEXT THREE? >>THE CLERK: I HAVEN'T BEEN SWORN IN. >>THE CLERK: I WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE AND HUBBARD, IF YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK, YOU HAVE TO BE ON A DEVICE THAT YOU HAVE TO ENABLE YOUR VIDEO. CURRENTLY IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE NOT ON A DEVICE WHERE YOU CAN ENABLE YOUR VIDEO. JENNIFER SPARKS, IF YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK, PLEASE UNABLE YOUR VIDEO ALONG WITH TRAVISSICLES. IN THE MEANTIME I WILL SWEAR IN THE TWO THAT WE HAVE. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. MR. JOHN MUELLER, THANK YOU. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? >> YES. >>THE CLERK: ALL RIGHT. >> IT JUST WENT AWAY. OKAY. WELL, WHILE WE ARE FIGURING THAT OUT, LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE IT HERE. STILL NOT. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I WILL REFER TO A COUPLE OF THINGS. HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS CAN LOOK THEM UP IF I CAN'T SHARE. MY NAME IS TIM McGAHEE, 211 SOUTH MANHATTAN AVENUE, PRESIDENT OF THE BEACH PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. AS YOU CAN PROBABLY TELL OUR NEIGHBORHOOD INCLUDES THE PROPOSED PROJECT. WHEN I LAST SPOKE TO BUT THIS PROJECT IN FEBRUARY I BROUGHT UP A NUMBER OF ISSUES, MUNICIPAL CODE OF 27-136, AND I ALSO DISCUSSED SOME DESIGN ISSUES THAT WEREN'T FRIENDLY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE STILL TRUE. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO USE MY LIMITED TIME TO REVISIT A QUESTION THAT WAS POSITIVITIED BY COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER IN FEBRUARY AND CARLSON IN APRIL. BASICALLY I HEARD IT AGAIN TODAY, WHICH I WILL PARAPHRASE. THIS BETTE THAN 500 APARTMENTS THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED? AND THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO. COUNCILMAN, THE PETITIONERS HAVE HELPED YOU CREATE A FALSE EQUIVALENCE. IT IS TRUE THAT THE COUNCIL IN 2018 APPROVED A REZONING. THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION WAS A PE TO A PD WITH THE ONLY USE AS OFFICE PROFESSIONAL. ALONG THE WAY, CITY STAFF MADE A SUGGESTION ALTERNATE USES TO THE PROJECT, AND FRANKLY DIDN'T DO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ANY FAVORS IN THE PROCESS. SO I WILL REFER YOU TO THE MEMO FROM ABB FEEY DATED JULY 24, 2018. AS A SMART COMPANY, AT NO CHARGE EXTRA, I WAS OF COURSE CAPITALIZED ON THE OPPORTUNITY AND ADDED ADDITIONAL USE. IT'S CLEAR THAT THEY FULLY INTENDED THE BUILDING TO BE AN OFFICE BUILDING AND NOT APARTMENT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS EVEN REFLECTED ON YOUR CURRENT STAFF REPORT WHERE IT SAYS THAT THE CURRENT REZONING IS FOR TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS. SO PETITIONER IS NOW PRESENTING AN APARTMENT BUILDING WITH CRESCENT, AS PRESENTED CRESCENT AN APARTMENT BUILDING, BUT THIS APARTMENT BUILDING ALSO HAS OTHER USES ATTACHED. SO YOU ARE NOT BEING ASKED TO APPROVE AN APARTMENT BUILDING, BUT ALSO AN OFFICE BUILDING OR PERHAPS A HOTEL. AND THE REASON I STATE SO FIRMLY THAT THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THIS IS BETTER IS BECAUSE DECIDING BETWEEN THESE TWO BUILDINGS WITH THOSE OVERLAPPING USES, THIS REZONING ACTUALLY MAKES IT CLEAR THAT BOTH BUILDINGS ARE OPTIONS FOR THIS SITE. SO AGAIN I DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 2 OF THE STAFF REPORT DATED FEBRUARY 4, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU ARE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE BOTH OPTIONS TODAY WITH A MYRIAD OF USES. THE CONTRACT BETWEEN WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2018 VERSUS THE INTENT OF 2021 IS ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT. THE APPLICANT HAS MADE CLEAR THAT WHAT IS APPROVED MATTERS MUCH MORE THAN THE INTENTION. SO YOU ARE ACTUALLY DECIDING WHETHER TO APPROVE ALL OF THE POTENTIAL OUTCOMES. THEREFORE, WE URGE THE COUNCIL VOTE TO DENY TS PROJECT AND ALSO ISSUES WITH THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA WITHIN THE CODE. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MR. MUELLER? JOHN MUELLER: THANK YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME? >>ORLANDO GUDES: YES, SIR. >> I'M GOING TO MODIFY MY REMARKS BECAUSE I DID SPEAK AT THE APRIL COUNCIL'S MEETING. ONE THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS IF THIS WERE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OR TO BECOME AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, DEALING WITH THE TRAFFIC, I THINK EVERYONE IN BEACH PARK THAT NEEDS TO WORK FOR A LIVIN UNDERSTANDS THE TRAFFIC DILEMMA. ONE THING THAT I DON'T THINK THIS PROJECT HAS, WHAT HAPPENS TO WEEKEND TRAFFIC? PEOPLE GO TO WORK IN BEACH PARK OFTEN DO ALL THEIR CHORES AND NECESSARY THINGS ON THE WEEKEND. AND THEY WILL BE COMPETING FOR ROAD SPACE AND RESOURCES SUCH AS PUBLIX DOWN THE STREET, WITH THIS PROPOSED NEW APARTMENT BUILDING. THEY WERE INTIMATING IF THEY WERE AN OFFICE BUILDING, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE THE SAME TRAFFIC DILEMMA. HOWEVER, YOU WOULD BE COMPETING FOR RESOURCES, AND I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP. AND I'M OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MADAM CLERK, OUR NEXT THREE? >>THE CLERK: FOUR WE HAVE. IF YOU ALL COULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. TO BE SWORN IN. PLAINTIFF WILSON, IF YOU ARE GOING TO TESTIFY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THANK YOU. (OATH ADMINISTERED BY CLERK) >>ORLANDO GUDES: I FIRST SAW MR. LINDSAY HE STOURELLOS. >> MY NAME IS DANTE. LINDSAY IS MY WIFE AND SHE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TODAY. THANK YOU FOR THIS TIME, COUNCIL. I'M HERE TODAY AS A PARENT WHO LIVES IN BEACH PARK IN CLOSE PROXIMITY, AND SEVERAL OTHERS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED THAT WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS. I HAVE THREE CHILDREN TURNED AGE OF SIX, ONE OF THEM WITH SPECIAL NEEDS. IT IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE -- [INDISCERNIBLE] THERE'S SOME FEEDBACK WITH SOMEBODY. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MAYBE EVERYBODY ELSE CAN MATT THEMSELVES WHILE MR. STOURELLOS IS SPEAKING. >> THANK YOU. AND THE INCREASED TRAFFIC WOULD PROVIDE A SAFETY CONCERN FOR US AND OTHER YOUNG FAMILIEIN OUR COMMUNITY. AND TO THAT END, HISTORY PROVIDES US WITH A GREAT DEAL OF INFORMATION. I'M A LOCAL ATTORNEY, HAVE BEEN FOR THE PAST 17 YEARS. I LOOKED UP A UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CASE THAT I WAS AWARE OF REGARDING ISSUES SUCH AS THIS DEALING WITH APARTMENT HOUSES BEING PUT IN A QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD, AND OUR ATTORNEY FOR THE BEACH PARK LLC PUT THIS VERY ACCURATELY. WE TALK ABOUT THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HERE FOR OUR FAMILIES. AND IN THE VILLAGE OF EUCLID VERSUS AMBER COMPANY, FROM 1926, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT SAID THE FOLLOWING, THAT OFTENTIMES APARTMENT HOUSES ARE A NEW PARASITE, CONSTRUCTED IN ORDER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPEN SPACES AND -- SURROUNDINGS CREATED BY THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT. MORE OVER THE COMING OF ONE APARTMENT HOUSE IS FOLLOWED BY OTHERS, INTERFERING BY THEIR HEIGHT, WITH THE FREE CIRCULATION OF AIR, MONOPOLIZING THEAYS THE SUN WHICH OTHERWISE WOULD FALL UPON THE SMALLER HOME AND BRINGING DISTURBING NOISES, INCREASE IN TRAFFIC, BUSINESS, OCCUPATION BY MEANS OF MOVING PARKED AUTOMOBILES ON LARGE PORTIONS OF THE STREET, PARKING COMPLEXES, DETRACTING FROM SAFETY AND DEPRIVING MUCH THE CHILDREN OF THE PRIVILEGE OF QUIET OPEN SPACES FOR PLAY ENJOYED BY OTHERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DESIRABLE OF A PLACE OF RESIDENCES ARE UTTERLY DESTROYED. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, APARTMENT HOUSES, WHICH IN A DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT WOULD NOT BE UNOBJECTIONABLE, AND COULD BE DESIRABLE, COME VERY NEAR TO BEING A NUISANCE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE. THIS PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX REGARD IT'S 292 UNITS, OR 150 UNITS, IS AN OBJECTIONABLE NUISANCE TO THE CHARACTER, QUALITY OF A FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. >> CITY COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO -- THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. STEPHANIE POYNOR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: CAN'T HEAR YOU. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. CAN YOU HEAR ME? >>ORLANDO GUDES: GOOD AFTERNOON. >> OKAY. PARDON ME IF I DON'T KISS MR. COEN AND MR. MECHANIK FOR BUILDING A SMALLER COMPLEX THAN THEY POSSIBLY COULD. I WAFT JUST 2021 SPEAK BRIEFLY IN SUPPORT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGAINST THIS PROJECT FOR THE EXPANSION OF IT. AS YOU ALL KNOW WE FEEL -- HOW WE FEEL ABOUT BUILDING APARTMENTS IN SOUTH TAMPA. IT HAS BECOME YOU CAN RIDICULOUS. THIS IS THE WESTSHORE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR SO I AM KIND OF CONFUSED BECAUSE THIS IS SOUTH TAMPA, AND SOUTH TAMPA -- BUT THAT'S JUST ME. THE EXPERT CAN CONFIRM OR DENY THAT. IN THE PREVIOUS PERMITTING WAS DONE WITHOUT THENOWLGE OF BEACH PARK BECAUSE THIS AREA IN THE CITY WOULD NOT INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS SO THEY WEREN'T EXPECTED TO NOTIFY ANYBODY. WHILE NOTHING IS DESIRED BY THOSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SOMETHING WOULD BE PREFERRED TO THE PLYWOOD CALLUSES PROPOSED. WE AVOID HOMES BUILT OF WOOD. WHY WOULD WE CONTINUE TO BUILD A MULTI-STORY APARTMENTS WITH SUCH MATERIALS, ESPECIALLY IN THE CHHA? THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE NO BRAINER TO DELINEATE BETWEEN APARTMENTS AND CONDOS WHEN Y DVE PAST THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS. THE APARTMENTS ONLY HAVE BLOCK TOWERS WITH ELEVATOR SHAFTS AND THE REST IS PLYWOOD. WHAT HAPPENS TO PLYWOOD IN FLORIDA? THESE FOLKS WHO WANT TO THROW OUT THE FASTEST AND CHEAPEST WIMBLEDON BUILDINGS, THEY ARE DESTROYING OUR CITY. NO WORRIES ABOUT TERMITES OR HURRICANES HERE. THEY'LL MAKE THEIR MONEY AND LEAVE. FOR EXAMPLE, CASA BELL A WAS BUILT IN 2007 OF WOOD AND SYSTEMATICALLY OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS HAS BEEN TORN APART AND REBUILT ONE SECTION AT A TIME. SECTION OF THE PROPERTY.VERY- IF YOU ACTUALLY STOP AND LOOK AT SOME OF THESE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED SINCE THE 2016 COMP PLAN WAS PUT IN PLACE, THE DETERIORATION ON THE OUTSIDE OF THESE BUILDINGS IS VERY NOTICEABLE. IF YOU ASK WHY DO WE CONTINUE TO BUILD TRASH WITHIN OUR CITY? WHY DO WE KEEP ALLOWING THEM TO BUILD ONE AND TWO BEDROOM APARTMENTS RATHER THAN HOMES FOR FAMILIES? WHY DOES THE CITY OVER AND OVER AGAIN GIVE THE DEVELOPERS FREE RIDES, WHI EXPTING THE CITIZENS TO FILL IN THE GAP FOR THESE SORTS OF PROJECTS. WE HAVE NO PUBLIC SAFETY IMPACT FEES, TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES, RAISED IN 30 YEARS, THE CHHA BUILDING GUIDELINES FALL FAR BELOW THAT OF OTHER MUNICIPALITIES EXPECT. IT'S TIME FORTUNATE CITY OF TAMPA TO STEP UP THEIR GAME AND HAVE HIGHER EXPECTATIONS FOR THESE BUILDERS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. SHAUN LTREL >> CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY? I'M A LITTLE UNDER THE WEATHER SO MY VOICE CRACKS. I'M AT 5825 MARINER STREET. I'M ALSO A PRACTICING ARCHITECT IN TAMPA. WE HAVE AN ARCHITECTURE LICENSE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AS WELL AS TEXAS. MY BACKGROUND STARTED OUT IN CONSTRUCTION, AND FROM THERE I HE INVOLVED INTO ARC TERITURE, AND GOT MY MASTER'S DEGREE FROM ARCHITECTURE DESIGN IN SOUTH FLORIDA. BEYOND THAT, I HAVE STUDIED IN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AT CORNEO GIVE MY IN PUT FROM A PROFESSIONAL STANDPOINT. FIRST OF ALL WITH AN ARCHITECTURE I WAS BUILDING FROM AN ARCHITECTURE STANDPOINT. I CAN SAY THAT, I PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO IT AND THE BUILDING ITSELF LOOKED VERY WELL DESIGNED. MY CONCERN IS WITH THE PROJECT. FROM MY STANDPOINT WE LOOKED AT THE CONDOS, THEY DON'T BELONG ON OUR STREET. DENDIN ON WHERE YOU ARET TALL GETTING -- THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS 138 FEET. SO THERE'S CONCERN OBVIOUSLY ABOUT THE SCALE OF THE PROJECT. A BIGGER CONCERN FOR ME PERSONALLY AND I THINK FOR EVERYBODY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS APPROVED, IT'S GOING TO BE A SNOWBALL EFFECT FOR EVERY OTHER PARCEL IN THAT OFFICE DISTRICT AREA THERE, WHERE THEY WILL ALL BE TORN DOWN IN THE NEXT TEN YEARS AND CONVERTED OVER TO RENTAL PRODUCTS. WHETHER IT'S MARKET RATE OR HIGH END LUCKS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I AM PRETTY CONFIDENT, I GET QUERIED WEEKLY FOR TAKING DOWN EXISTING OFFICES, AND CONVERTING THOSE OR REDEVELOPING THOSE ON A REGULAR BASIS. EVEN MICROUNITS, BUILDINGS THAT ARE SOMEWHAT CLOSE TO WHAT THEY HAVE OVER THERE. WE ARE TALKING 350 TO 450 SQUARE FOOT UNITS. WE TRY TO STAY AWAY FROM THOSE AND WE CERTAINLY DON'T DO THEM WHEN IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE. AND IN OUR CASES WE FEEL THIS IS INAPPROPRIATE, AND TO ME PERSONALLY, ALL THOSE PARCELS WILL BE DEVELOPED AS APARTMENTS. AND IF THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, I THINK THE CITY DOES NEED TO TAKE A PAUSE AND LOOK AT WHAT THE IMPACT IS GOING TO BE FOR THE COMMUNITY. YOU GUYS ARE THERE, CITY COUNCIL IS THERE TO LOOK OUT FOR THE RESIDENTS, THE COMMUNITY, AND WE ARE RESIDENTS. THIS DEVELOPER HAS AN AGENDA, AND LET'S BE HONEST, HIS AGENDA IS THE GREATEST RETURN ON HIS INVESTMENT. FOR US WE WANT THE BEST COMMUNITY POSSIBLE. AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE LOOKING OUT FOR OUR BEST INTEREST. AND WE THINK FOR OUR NEIGHBORS, FOR ALL OF BEACH PARK AND REALLY FOR ALL OF SOUTH TAMPA. THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY SO I WILL LET YOU GUYS CONTINUE ON. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. MARK WOLFSON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. I WILL BE BRIEF. OTHERS HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT THAT KNOW A LOT MORE THAN I DO. I AM HERE TO SAY THAT OBVIOUSLY ONCE THE DECISION IS MADE, THAT FOREVER CHANGES THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I AM A 29 YEAR REDENTF BEH PARK AND A LIFE-LONG RESIDENT OF TAMPA. IT FOREVER CHANGED CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND YOU CAN'T THINK ABOUT THAN -- COME TO CITY COUNCIL AS INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS. THERE'S A SERIES OF THESE THAT ARE PLANNED OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS, DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS, DIFFERENT INTERESTS, ET CETERA, BUT NONETHELESS, CONTINUING THIS MARCH TOWARD BUILDING MULTIFAMILY TYPE OF PROJECTS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND CHANGING AS I SAID THE CHARACTER FOREVER. AND I SEE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AS FIDUCIARY OF THE CITIZENS, ET CETERA, NEED TO THINK ABOUT IN THE CONTEXT OF JUST THIS ONE UNIT UNIT AND SOMEBODY MADE A COMMENT ABOUT LOOK AT OVERALL WHAT THE IMPACT OF ALL THESE PROJECTS ON TRAFFIC. WE TALK ABOUT POTHOLES HOLES. I CAN'T THINK, MAYBE SOME SPANISH NAME, THERE'S A BIG SERIES OF POTHOLES THAT'S GOING TO GET WORSE, TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GET PUSHED ONTO AZEELE MORE AND CLEVELAND MORE, AND THEN YOU WALK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND PUK AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AS WELL AS IMPACTING THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS. YOU HAVE GOT MORE PEOPLE MEANS HOW IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS? PEOPLE CAME TO BEACH PARK TO BE IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, AND WHAT'S THE IMPACT THEY ARE GOING TO BE? SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS, YOU HAVE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THESE PROJECTS FROM THE LARGER PICTURE, NOT JUST FOCUS ON THE ONE REQUESTED BEFORE YOU, ALTHOUGH THE DEVELOPER HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE THAT REQUEST. YOU ALSO SOMEWHERE THE RIGHT TO SAY NO, OR NO BUT, ET CETERA. ANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WHO IS NEXT? >> CHAIR, WE HAVE AND HUBBARD AND TRAVISSICLES WHO ARE HAVING TROUBLE ENABLING THEIR VIDEO, AND JENNIFER SPARKS HAS YET TO ENTER HER VIDEO. OTHER THAN THAT NOON ONE ELSE HAS LOGGED ONTO THAT MEETING AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC COMMENT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MR. CHAIRMAN, BEFORE WE GET INTO REBUTTAL, I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND MR. SHELBY, THAT SEQUENCE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. DINGFELDER, IF YOU CAN, IF THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT, IS THAT CORRECT, MR. CHAIRMAN? >>ORLANDO GUDES: THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THAT CORRECT, DEPUTY CLERK? >>MARTIN SHELBY: I WOULD ASK CITY COUNCIL TO HEAR FROM MRS. WELLS. I BELIEVE SHE WANTS TO ADDRESS COUNCIL RELATIVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: IS THAT CORRECT, DEPUTY CLERK? NO MORE? >> CORRECT. BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ENABLE YOUR VIDEO IN ORDER TO SPEAK. >>ORLANDO GUDES WE WILL MOVE ON TO MS. WELLS. >>CATE WELLS: CATE WELLS, CHIEF ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. I WANT TO BRIEFLY ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE DURING PUBLIC COMMENT. SOME OF THE COMMENTS WERE SPECULATIVE AND THUS WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE COMPETENT EVIDENCE BUT BY NO MEANS AM I GOING THROUGH EVERY COMMENT, BUT JUST BRIEFLY THERE, WAS DISCUSSION WITH REGARD TO THE TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL THAT OWNS A NDOMINIUM OR A HOME VERSUS THE TYPE MUCH PERSON THAT WOULD RENT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OR AN APARTMENT UNIT. THAT FORM OF OWNERSHIP, WHETHER IT'S A FOR-SALE PRODUCT OR A LEASE PRODUCT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL REGULATES AS PART OF THE REZONING PROCESS, SO I JUST WANTED TO IN ANY CASE CLEAR FOR THE RECORD. THERE WAS SPECULATION ABOUT LUXURY APARTMENTS BEING USED BY DRUG DEALERS, AND THAT DRUG USAGE WOULD INCREASE. AND WHILEHAT Y HAVE BEEN THE SPEAKER'S EXPERIENCE WHEN ELISEED A UNIT AT SKYHOUSE, TO SUGGEST THAT THAT SAME EXPERIENCE WOULD TRANSLATE INTO TO THIS PROJECT IS AGAIN SPECULATIVE AND NOT COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. ALSO, DISCUSSION ABOUT PET OWNERSHIP. AGAIN, NOT SOMETHING THAT COMES INTO PLAY WHEN THIS CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERS AN APPLICATION FOR REZONING TO A PD SITE PLAN. THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSION ABOUT CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND MATERIALS. AGAIN, NOT RELEVANT AT THIS POINT IN YOUR REVIEW. THEN THERE WAS ALSO SPECULATION ABOUT THE FUTURE CONVERSION OF OFFICE BUILDINGS TO MICROUNITS. SPECULATIVE TESTIMONY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. SO JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD FOR YOU. AND I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MR. DINGFELDER, YOU HAD A QUESTION SIR? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I DID. THANK YOU, MRS. WELLS, FOR THOSE CLARIFICATIONS. IS RYAN WITH US? THERE HE IS. MR. MANASSE, THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE ABOUT THE STAFF REPORT, AND I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE STAFF REPORT. I THINK THIS IS THE CURRENT STAFF REPORT. UNDER SUMMARY OF REQUESTS, AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH, IT SAYS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS REZONED IN 2018, FILE REZ 18-84, TO ALLOW FOR TWO SEVEN-STORY OFFICE TOWERS, 115 AND A 7-STORY PARKING GARAGE, BUILDING HATE 106. AND THEN YOU GO ON TO TALK ABOUT OTHER ISSUES. THERE WAS AN ASSERTION DURING PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THAT'S ALL THEEN THAT'S BEEN APPROVED, IS THE OFFICE HOW FEWERS, NOT THE 540 UNITS OR 450 UNITS OF RESIDENTIAL THAT MR. COEN WAS SPEAKING ABOUT EARLIER. SO I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT QUESTION THAT NEEDS CLARIFICATIO FRO YOU AS BEST YOU CAN. >>RYAN MANASSE: THANK YOU, SIR. YES, AND I AM SEE WHAT YOU ARE READING THERE. IT COULD HAVE BEEN AN ERROR ON THE STAFF REPORT. BECAUSE I DO HAVE REZONING CERTIFIED SITE PLAN ON MY SCREEN FOR A REQUEST REZONED THAT IS SIGNED BY COUNCIL ON 12-6-18 WAS FOR PD TO PD FOR OFFICE, PROFESSIONAL, MEDICAL OFFICE, HOTEL, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND ALSO ON PAGE 1 OF THE STAFF REPORT YOU WILL SEE IT DOES STATE OFFICE BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL HOTEL AND REDENTL MULTIFAMILY. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THEN THE SECOND PART OF MY QUESTION IS, CAN YOU CONFIRM WHAT MR. COEN SAID AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS PRESENTATION, THAT CURRENTLY IT'S APPROVED, I THINK, FOR 546 UNITS MAXIMUM, AND I GUESS THEY ARE PROPOSING 450, OR THEY ARE SAYING THAT 546 WASN'T REALLY REALISTIC UNDER THE EXISTING PD FOR 450 UNITS MIGHT HAVE BEEN REALISTIC, AND NOW THEY ARE SUGGESTING 292. CAN YOU CONFIRM THOSE THREE NUMBERS? >>RYAN MANASSE: YES, SIR. ON THE FIRST HEARING I DID CONFIRM THAT WHEN THE QUESTION WAS RAISED ORIGINALLY. SO IT'S ON THE PLAN THAT'S APPROVED FOR 1884, THEY COULD% GET UP TO THAT TOTAL 546 UNITS. WHAT MR. COEN WAS EXPLAINING I THINK WAS THE FEASIBILITY AND THE DESIGN AND HOW MUCH THEY CAN ACTUALLY FIT SO I CAN'T REALLY COMMENT ON THAT. BUT AS FAR AS THE REZONING 18 WILL 4, I CAN SAY YES, THROUGH THAT CONSISTENCY MATRIX AND THE ALLOTMENT THAT'S ALREADY APPROVED THEY CAN GET THAT MANY DWELLINGS. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS SAID IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY WE ARE APPROVING THE NEW ENTITLEMENT AND THE OLD ENTITLEMENT FROM 2018. IS THAT HOW YOU READ IT? IS IT NOT A NEW PD COMPLETELY AND SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE PLAN THAT'S PRESENTED? OR WOULD IT ALSO INCLUDE THE 2018? >>RYAN MANASSE: DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION. COUNCILMAN CARLSON, IT IS OPTION 1 AND 2 AND THAT' WHA WAS SENT OVER ORIGINALLY. SO IT IS TO RETAIN THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT THEY HAVE FROM 18 AND THEN THE OPTION NUMBER 2 IS SHOWING THAT SEPARATE VERSION THAT WAS PRESENTED BY MR. MECHANIK AND MR. COEN. SO IT'S TWO OPTIONS. >>BILL CARLSON: HOW OFTEN DOES THE CITY DO THAT, TWO OPTIONS? >>RYAN MANASSE: THERE'S BEEN A FEW SINCE I HAVE BEEN DOING REZONINGS, BUT WE ACTUALLY WANT-HAD ONE SECOND READING TODAY. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S RELEVANT. I'M SORRY IF IT ISN'T, CATE. BUT WE HAD ONE WITH THE DRI. >>BILL CARLSON: YOU DON'T HAVE TO TELL ME A NUMBER. THANK YOU. >>RYAN MANASSE: ALL RIGHT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS REBUTTAL, MR. SHELBY? >>MARTIN SHELBY: YES THERE. F THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR THE PETITIONER. OR ANYBODY ELSE THAT COUNCIL HAS ANY QUESTIONS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT. WE TURN IT BACK TO MR. MECHANIK. >>DAVID MECHANIK: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I THINK THEY TOOK OVER 45 MINUTES, AND I DO NOT NEED ANYWHERE NEAR 45 MINUTES, BUT THERE IS A LOT TO COVER HERE. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY, WE HAVE CHARGING STATIONS IN THE GARAGE, A, AND THE PLAN WOULD BE TO ADD MORE CHARGING STATIONS AS THE PROPERTY.OPMENT OURS THE BUILD BE WILL BE MADE OUT OF CONCRETE, NOT OUT OF WOOD. I RESPECT MRS. WELLSA COMMENT IT IS NOT A BASIS FOR REZONING DECISION. SIMILARLY, THE CHARACTERIZATION OF RENTERS AS BEING CRIMINALS AND UNDESIRABLE, I GUESS, IS SORTF PEADE ALMOST ALL THE COMMENTS AND EVEN BACK TO THE 1925 AND 1926 [INDISCERNIBLE] VERSUS KIMBLER REALTY WOULD NOT CONDONE THE IDEA THAT YOU CAN PREVENT A HOUSING TYPE BECAUSE OF THE CHARACTER OF THE RESIDENTS WHO WILL OCCUPY THAT HOUSING. AND, MY GOODNESS, THE CITY IS -- ONE OF THE PRIORITIES OF THE CITY IS TO IS CREATES MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. HOW ON EARTH WOULD YOU ACHIEVE THAT GOAL IF YOU DIDN'T ALLOW FOR RENTAL PROPERTY? THE WHOLE PREMISE OF THESE OBJECTIONS IS CLEARLY INAPPROPRIATE, AND I THINK AND I HOPE COUNCIL WILL RECOGNIZE THOSE COMMENTS FOR WHAT THEY ARE WORTH. I WOULD NOTE, THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMENTS ABOUT HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, PROPOSED HEIGHT IS NINE STORIES. WE ARE ADJACENT TO EIGHT-STORY CONDOMINIUM TOWERS. YOUR STAFF FOUND THAT THE HEIGHT WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THOSE TWO BUILDINGS AND WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE IS ALMOST AN IMPERCEPTIBLE DIFFERENCE OF THE HEIGHT BETWEEN OUR PROPOSED BUILDING AND THOSE CONDOMINIUM TOWERS. THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC. ANYWAY YOU LOOK AT IT, WE ARE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC FROM WHAT IS CURRENTLY APPROVED ON THE PROPERTY. I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO NOTE THAT THE ASSOCIATION W BACK IN 2018 WOULD HAVE RECEIVED THE NOTICE THAT GOES TO ASSOCIATIONS, MAILED OUT A NOTICE TO EVERY ASSOCIATION THAT IS DIRECTED BY THE I ASK. WE ALSO NOTIFIED EVERY PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN 250 FEET WITH THE IDEA THAT SOMEONE DIDN'T GET NOTICE IS TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE. I WAS INVOLVED IN THAT REZONING AND WE HANDLED ALL OF THE NOTICE, WHICH ALSO, BY THE WAY, INCLUDES A SIGN, TWO OR THREE SIGNS ON THE PROPERTY, SO EVEN IF YOU HADN'T GOTTEN THE MAILED NOTICE, YOU WOULD HAVE DRIVEN BY THE PROPERTY IF YOU LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD HAVE SEEN THE SIGN ON THAT PROPERTY. THE FIRST SPEAKER, THE ATTORNEY, SUGGESTED THAT I HAD SOMEHOW ATTACKED THE CREDENTIALS OF HER PARTNER WHO SPOKE AT AN EARLIER HEARING. I DIDN'T AACK HER CREDENTIALS. I ATTACKED THE ACCURACY OF HER STATEMENTS. SHE SAID THAT THERE WAS A CAPACITY IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, INDICATING THAT THERE WAS ADEQUATE ACCESS. SO I WAS REFUTING HER STATEMENT ACTUALLY, NOT HER QUALIFICATIONS. SIMILARLY, HE CLAIMED THAT WE FAILED TO MEET OUR BURDEN OF PROOF IN REGARD TO THE REZONING SINCE WE HAVE NOT DEMONSTRATED COMPLIANCE WITH THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. I MADE THE REBUTTAL COMMENT THAT WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO -- CONSTRUCTION PLANS DURING THE ZONING APPLICATION, BUT THE IDEA OF OUR HAVING TO PROVE OUR COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODE IS INAPPROPRIATE AS PART OF A ZONING APPLICATION. WITH THAT, I WOULD JUST ASK EITHF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL REBUTTAL POINTS. AND MY CLIENT DID ASK ME TO MENTION, WE ARE PROPOSING -- FOR THE PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY. >>RANDY COEN: THIS IS RANDY COEN. THOSE COMMENTS MADE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING WAS VIRTUALLY EMPTY. THAT OFFICE BUILDING IS 94% LEASE OCCUPIED. HOWEVER, WE ARE STILL DEALING WITH FOLKS NOT NECESSARILY MING TO THE OFFICE. BUT THAT OFFICE BUILDING IS 94% LEASED AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. >>DAVID MECHANIK: WE ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: MR. MECHANIK, WE ARE OFTEN PRESENTED WITH SITUATION WHERE THE COMMUNITY COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIALUT THEN EVIDENCE SAYS THAT WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT ANYWAY OR SOMETIMES WE HAVE DIFFICULT CHOICES. SOMETIMES, AFTER WE REJECTED SOMETHING, A DEVELOPER GOES BACK TO WHAT THEY ARE ALREADY ENTITLED TO DO, AND MANY TIMES THE COMMUNITY IS EVEN MORE UPSET WITH THAT OPTION, IN FACT THERE'S ONE NEAR MY HOUSE THAT THEY ARE UPSET ABOUT, AN OPTION OF WHAT THEY WERE ENTITLED TO DO ALREADY THAT WE DIDN'T REJECT. AND SO THAT'S ALL LEADING TO -- THANKS WAS THE BIG DECISION ABOUT HOUSING IN THIS AREA. AND MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS, I KNOW SOME OF THEM, AND I FEEL EMPATHY FOR THEM BECAUSE I WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD LEADER, TOO, BUT THAT BIG DECISION WAS MADE IN 2018. IF WE HAD TO LOOK AT THAT VERSUS WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING TODAY, IT DOES SEEM TO BE BETTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T WANT THAT EITHER. BUT WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REJECT THAT. BUT THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS NOW, MAYBE I MISSED IT IN YOUR PRESENTATION BUT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT WE WERE IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOUR CLIENT WOULD ONLY BEEN ABLE TO APPROVE THE ONE PD TODAY AND NOT REINFORCE THE 2018 ONE? BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO NOT VOTE ON THE 2018 DECISION IF I DON'T HAVE TO. >> PINEWOOD, WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY, AND -- THAT HAS NOT BEEN PULLED -- HIGH WOOD IS NOT A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPER. IT IS AN OFFICE DEVELOPER. SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- AND HIGHWOOD INVOLVES THE FACT THAT IF THIS ZONING WERE TO APPROVE, CRESCENT QUO GO FORWARD AND BUY THE PROPERTY AND BUILD THE 292 UNIT PLAN THAT WE ARE PRESENTING TO YOU TODAY. THE PROBLEM, THE LEGALROBL IN CON LIKE THIS, AND THIS IS VERY COMMON, IS THE THERE WAS BETWEEN THE TIME THIS PROPERTY WAS REZONED, ASSUMING COUNCIL APPROVES IT, AND TAKE T TIME OF CLOSING WHERE CRESCENT WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO CLOSE, IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THE MARKET CRASHED IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO DATES, AND CRESCENT DIDN'T BUY THE PROPERTY, FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT MIGHT BE, HIGHWOOD DOES NOT WANT TO BE LEFT WITH ONLY THE ABILITY TO BUILD A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING. >>BILL CARLSON: MR. MECHANIK -- SORRY, IF I COULD JUST ASK A FOLLOW-UP AND THEN I WILL LEAVE IT. PARDON MY IGNORANCE TO ANY ATTORNEYS LISTENING. BUT IS IT POSSIBLE TO SET THAT CONTINGENCY IN THERE SO THAT THE 2018 ONE DOESN'T GO IN PERPETUITY THAT WE WOULD JUST SAY THAT IT'S CONTINGENT O A DEAL OR CONTINGENT FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, INSTEAD OF JUST APPROVING BOTH GOING FORWARD? >>DAVID MECHANIK: I THINK I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO MS. WELLS, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PUT A CONDITION THAT WOULD -- THE ZONING DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS BETWEEN 2001 PRIVATE PARTIES. I JUST CAN'T CONCEIVE OF THAT BEING A LEGAL MECHANISM. >>CATE WELLS: THIS IS CATE WELLS FOR THE RECORD. AND I DO AGREE WITH MR. MECHANIK'S STATEMENT. ALTERNATIVELY, WHEN COUNCIL LOOKS AT A REZONING YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED UPON THE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, IF THEY HAVE MET THEIR BURDEN OF PROOF, WITH RESPECT TO THE CRITERIA IN THIS CASE I THINK WE ARE SEEING SECTION 27-136 OF THE CODE. BUT TO INCLUDE THAT KIND OF CONDITION UNDERMINES COUNCIL'S FINDINGS ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT CRITERIA WAS MET. >>BILL CARLSON: WHAT COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WOULD WE HAVE HEARD TO ALLOW TWO ZONING APPROVALSS TO GO FORWARD SIMULTANEOUSLY? AND PARDON MY IGNORANCE. THIS THE IS THE FIRST ONE THAT'S HAPPENED SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE. >>CATE WELLS: WE HAVE HAD AN FEW APPLICATIONS LIKE THIS SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE. AND THAT'S ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF NOW. IN THE FACT, AS RYAN MENTIONED THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE DAN APPROVED ON SECOND READING. SO COUNCIL HAS DONE IT. WITH RESPECT TO THE 2018 APPROVAL, THAT FINDING HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE THAT WAS APPROVED. SO YOU ARE NOT -- COUNCIL WOULD NOT BE LOOKING AT THE 2018 APPROVAL AND MAKING THAT FINDING ALL OVER AGAIN. AND THEN WITH RESPECT TO OPTION NUMBER 2, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS A DENSITY THAT IS LESS THAN WHAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2018. SO ALL OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY MR. MECHANIK AND HIS TEAM AS WELL AS THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY RYAN MANASSE, CITY STAFF, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHEN JENNIFER MALONE, I BELIEVE, SPOKE AT THE VERY FIRST HEARING IN FEBRUARY, THAT BEING YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION BY MR. MECHANIK, THE EVIENCE INTRODUCED BY HIS TEAM IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION. >>ORLANDO GUDES: YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >>LUIS VIERA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. I WANT TO ASK MR. MECHANIK, BECAUSE I WAS INTERESTED IN THIS. EUCLID CASE THA WAS CITED. I HAVE KEPT QUIET. I WAS AMAZED BY SOME OF THE WORDS USED AND I AM A LITTLE UPSET. YOU SAID THAT WAS IN 1925 CASE IF YOU SAY? >>DAVID MECHANIK: 1925 OR -- IT WAS THE FIRST ZONING CASE WHERE THE COURT UPHELD THE RIGHT OF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO CREATE ZONING LAWS. >>LUIS VIERA: AND THAT'S FINE. AND I AM NOT SURPRISED SINCE 1925 BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD HAVE A JUDGE TODAY OR IN THE LAST 10, 20, 30 YEARS, CALL A DEPARTMENT PARASITES. SO WHEN I HEAR THAT TERM PARASITES, THAT WAS CITED TO US TODAY IN PUBLIC COMMENT, THAT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME ONE BIT THAT IT'S FROM 1925. YOU KNOW, I WANT TO TOUCH ON SOME THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TOUCHED ON. TALKING ABOUT ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS SAYING THAT IT'S GOING TO INCREASE DRUG USERS, DRUG DEALS BD AND THAT APARTMENTS ARE PARASITES DISTURBS ME. THAT HAS NO BEARING WHATSOEVER ON THE ISSUES TODAY. THAT SHOULD HAVE NO BEARING. I KNOW THAT EVERYBODY AGREESN THAT. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS -- WE TALK ABOUT UNDESIRABLE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS UNDESIRABLE IN A LAND USE CASE. GO ON THE MERIT. GO ON THE FACTS. GO ON THE THINGS THAT YOU CAN RELY UPON LEGALLY. BUT TO CALL INTO QUESTION THE CHARACTER OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MOVE IN AND INFLUENCE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS AWFUL AND DISTURBING, DISTURBS THE HELL OUT OF ME. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT MY OBJECTION THERE. YOU KNOW, TALK ABOUT APARTMENTS. BOY, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC, PACKING THEM IN LIKE SARDINES. THAT'S FINE. BUT TO TALK ABOUT THE PRESUMPTIVE AND EXPECTED AND FORESEEABLE CHARACTER OF PEOPLE MOVING INTO APARTMENTS, IN THE YEAR 2012nd 1, SHOULD DISTURB US ALL. IF YOU ARE GOING TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL AND ARGUE A LAND USE CASE, DON'T MAKE THOSE KIND OF APPEALS, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK -- IT'S NOT GOING TO BE WELL TAKEN. I HAVE LIVED IN APARTMENTS. I REMEMBER IN 2010 DUE TO PERSONAL FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCES, I LIVED IN APARTMENTS FOR TWO, TWO AND A HALF YEARS. I WAS A WELL-OFF ATTNEY, HAD TO MOVE INTO AN APARTMENT. THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. BUT I JUST WANTED TO JUST REGISTER MY THOUGHTS IN THAT REGARD. NOT A SURPRISE AT ALL THAT THAT'S A CASE FROM 1925. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYONE ELSE? I'LL TELL YOU, A LOT OF INTERESTING COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC COMMENTS, VERY DISTURBED BY SOME OF THE WORDS THAT WERE USED THAT REFERRED TO PEOPLE. TALKED ALL DAY ABOUT HOUSING CRISIS, ALL DAY LONG. AND I HEAR A BUNCH OF NIMBY SITUATIONS TODAY, NOT IN MY BACKYARD. NOT IN MY BACKYARD. SO I WONDER IF IT WAS CONDOS, WOULD YOU BE SAYING THE SAME THING? IT'S JUST STRANGE. THAT WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT THOSE . IT'S JUST A STRANGE THING. WE NEED TO THE BRING IT IN FOR A LANDING BECAUSE I'M TIRED. MR. DINGFELDER, YOU ARE REC RECOGNIZED SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I DON'T KNOW IF MR. SHELBY WANTS TO HEAR THESE COMMENTS BEFORE WE CLOSE OR AFTER WE CLOSE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: LET ME ASK YOU THIS. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO ASK OF STAFF? OKAY. SO IT'S GOING TO BE PART OF DELIBERATION? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE ASKING? BECAUSE I GUESS MY REQUEST WOULD BE TO HAVE MR. MECHANIK HAVE THE LAST WORD BEFORE YOU CLOSE THE HEARING, AND THEN EITHER DISCUSS IT OR PUT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR THEN DISCUSS IT, HOWEVER COUNCIL WISHES TO PROCEED. BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING, MR. MECHANIK, THAT HE WOULD WISH TO ADD, I BELIEVE NOW WOULD BE THE TIME BEFORE YOU CLOSE THE HEARING. UNLESS YOU THINK THAT IT WOULD GENERATE DISCUSSION WHICH MAY THEN CAUSE THE HEARING TO BE REOPENED. EITHER WAY, COUNCILMEMBER DINGFELDER. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: RECEIPT ME JUST SPEAK TO A -- LET ME JUST SPEAK TO A COUPLE OF THINGS. COUNCIL, WE HEAR CASES, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY CASES EVERY WEEK, EVERY OTHER WEEK, 10, 15 CASES. AND IT'S UP TO US TO FILTER OUT, AS MS. WELLS SAID, THE IRRELEVANT THOUGHTS. AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT'S LEGAL ADJUVANT AND WHAT'S NOT RELEVANT. MS. WELLS INSTRUCTS US IN THAT FOR THE RECORD WHICH IS IMPORTANT. SO I FILTERED OUT THE SILLY STUFF, YOU KNOW, DRUG USE, SOME OF THAT OTHER NIMBY THINGS LIKE THAT. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE GENTLEMAN WHO SAID IT, IT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE. BUT WHAT IS REAL IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS TRAFFIC. I THINK MR. MIRANDA USED TO REPRESENT THAT DISTRICT FOR MANY YEARS. MR. MANISCALCO REPRESENTS THAT DISTRICT. MR. CARLSON SORT OF REPRESENTS THAT DISTRICT BECAUSE EVERYBODY THINKS THAT WHEN YOU ARE THE SOUTH TAMPA REPRESENTATIVE, EVERYBODY SOUTH OF KENNEDY. AND I USED TO AS WELL. MR. CITRO IS CITY-WIDE, SO HE REPRESENTS THAT DISTRICT. SO WE ALL KNOW THAT TRAFFIC IS A BIG CONCERN IN THAT LITTLE POCKET. IT'S A STRANGE LITTLE POCKET. OVER THERE AT THE CORNER OF WESTSHORE AND KENNEDY. THAT IS A VERY REAL CONCERN. ANOTHER COMMENT THAT JUMPED OUT AT ME DURING THIS DELIBERATION, OR DURING THE DISCUSSION, WAS ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN SAID, COUNCIL, YOU HAVE A CHOICE. WELL, I WOULD AGREE THAT IN VIRTUALLY EVERY SINGLE CASE WE HEAR, WE HAVE A CHOICE. BUT IN THIS CASE WHAT COMES TO MIND IS WE HAVE A HOBSON'S CHOICE. I JUST GOOGLED IT UP TO MAKE SURE I WAS USING THAT WORD CORRECTLY, BUT IT'S A HOUSING CHOICE IS IN A CHOICE AT ALL BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I THINK WE ARE FACED WITH. SADLY ENOUGH. AND LET ME ADDRESS ONE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO MAKE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVERYBODY WHO HAS BEEN SPEAKING. IS THAT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE REZONINGS STANDS ON ITS OWN MERITS. AND WE ARE ADVISED BY THAT BY LEGAL COUNSEL WEEK IN AND WEEK OUT, THAT THEY SAID, THIS IS JUST THE FIRST OF SEVERAL THAT MIGHT BE COMING DOWN THE PIKE. THAT DOESN'T MATTER. OKAY. BECAUSE EACH ONE OF THESE CES STANDS ON ITS OWN. AND I AM VERY SAD TO SAY THAT I'M FACED WITH A HOSTAGE CHOICE, THAT I HAVE NO CHOICE AT ALL BUT TO SUPPORT. THIS AND I SAID IT AT THE VERY FIRST HEARING. THEY WERE APPROVED IN 2018 FOR 546 UNITS. AND THEIR FALLBACK POSITION IS DO GO BUILD THE 546 UNITS, OR GENEROUS LIP REDUCE PERHAPS B MR. COEN TO 450 UNITS. WHY WOULD IT MAKE SENSE FOR COUNCIL TO REJECT A 290 UNIT PROJECT, RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, WHICH IN EFFECT WOULD EITHER FORCE THEM TO, A, SUE US, AND IN MY OPINION PROBABLY WIN, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ASKING FOR ANY WAIVERS, AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO WIN THESE NON-WAIVER CASES, WHY WOULD WE ASK THEM TO DO THAT, TO GO FROM 450 UNITS, OR FROM 292 UNITS TO BE 450 UNITS? THAT'S ALMOST TWICE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC. AND TO ME, THAT'S WHAT MATTERS. THAT'S WHAT MATTERS. I'M EXTREMELY FAMILIAR PERSONALLY FAMILIAR WITH THE MARINER AREA WITH THE MARINER NEIGHBORHOOD. I KNOW WHAT THE ISSUES ARE. BUT IN THIS CASE, THE 2018 CITY COUNCIL, FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHETHER OR NOT THE NOTICE WAS RIGHT OR WRONG, WE CAN'T GO BACK AND REVISIT THAT. THOSE STATE OF LIMITATIONS AND THOSE ISSUES HAVE ALREADY RUN RUN SEVERAL YEARS AGO. SO ALL WE CAN DO IS ASSUME THERE WAS PROPER NOTICE, AND UNFORTUNATELY, FOR WHATEVER REASON, IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WASN'T ABLE TO TURN OUT BACK IN 2018, I'M SORRY, I WASN'T HERE IN 2018. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE WAS, THIS LARGER PROJECT WAS APPROVED IN 2018. AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE TODAY. THERE'S NOTHING -- I PRIDE MYSELF ON, NOW IN MY THIRD TERM, SUPPORTING NEIGHBORHOOD AFTER NEIGHBORHOOD AFTER NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT IN THIS CASE, I CAN'T. IN GOOD CONSCIENCE. AND I'M SORRY FOR THAT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. MIRANDA, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. I APPRECIATE IT ALONG WITH THE STATEMENTS THAT MR. DINGFELDER MADE. AND I USED TO SAY ALL THE TIME WHEN I WAS CHAIRPERSON, 50% OF YOU WHO COME TO THOSE MEETINGS WILL LEAVE NOT TOO HAPPY WITH THE DECISION. IN THE PAST. OR ANY COUNCIL ME IF YOU COME BACK AGAIN, THE OTHER ONES THAT WERE FOR IT WILL BE AGAINST YOU. SO THE SAME INDIVIDUALS COME BEFORE US, ALL OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE AGAINST US. AND YOU HAVE TO BASE YOUR DECISION ON WHAT YOU HEARD ON THIS SIDE OR THIS SIDE TO THE LAWS THAT HAPPEN AT THE TIME THAT YOU MAKE THE DECISION. FOR INSTANCE, ONE SIDE SAID ABOUT CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL. THE OTHER SIDE SAID THERE WILL BE CONSTRUCTION OF CONCRETE. THE HEIGHT OF ONE STORY ON THE OTHER SIDE TO THE SOUTHERN PART OF THIS AREA IS A 9-FOOT CONDO TOWER. EXCUSE ME TWO, EIGHT-STORY CONDO TOWERS ON THIS SIDE, AND ONE A 9-FOOT -- 9-STORY, I SHOULD SAY. THEN YOU NOTICE ONE SIDE SAYS IMPROPER NOTICE. THE OTHER SIZE ALL THE NOTICES WERE MADE TO EVERYONE THAT WE HAD WITHIN 250 FEET INCLUDING THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. ANOTHER ONE SAYS THE SCHOOL ARE NOT ADEQUATELY ABLE TO SUPPORT THE POPULATION. THEN THERE'S LETTERS AND I THINK I READ THEM SAYING THAT THEY HAVE ADEQUATE AVAILABILITY SPACE FOR WHAT'S COMING. ANOTHER SAYS THE BUILDING CODES. WE DON'T HANDLE BUILDING CODES. THAT'S THE BUILDING DEPARTENT THAT HANDLES THOSE BUILDING CODES, NOT US. AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON. SO THEY WERE ALL SWORN IN. SO WHO IS TELLING WHAT, AT WHAT TIME? ONE GOES BACK TO 1925. THOTHE SIDE GOES BACK NOT TO 19256789 SO IT'S NOT ABOUT WHETHER YOU WANT TO VOTE FOR SOMETHING BECAUSE YOU LIKE IT OR NOT, NOT ABOUT WHO SERVES THAT DISTRICT. IN ESSENCE THERE ARE FOUR INDIVIDUALS ON THIS COUNCIL THAT SERVE THAT DISTRICT. FOUR. THAT THIS COUNCIL THAT SERVES- EVERY DISTRICT, FOUR, FIVE, SIX AND SEVEN. SO NO ONE IS ALONE. EVERYONE HAS A VOTE. EVERYONE HAS TO PASS THE JUDGMENT OF WHAT HE FEELS, I WAS GOING TEE HE AND SHE BUT I LOOK AROUND AROUND AND THEY ARE ALL E'S, SO WHAT HE'S THINKING IS RIGHT ACCORDING TO THE LAW. DOES IT MEET THE CRITERIA OF THE BASICS OF THE LAW? DOES IT MEET THE STANDARD? DOES IT MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS? AND IT'S DIFFICULT TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE AND UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THE SAME PUBLIC WHO ELECTED YOU TO OFFICE, BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT IS A RIGHT THING TO DO? BASED ON WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD, NOT WHAT YOU FL. WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD. AND YOU HAVE SOME RHETORIC THAT WAS, I THINK, SAID IN HASTE. THAT'S WAY BELIEVE. I HOPE I'M RIGHT. BECAUSE WHEN YOU DISLIKE SOMETHING, YOU REALLY, REALLY GOT INTO IT. AND IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE HOME OWNERS TO SAY, WELL, LOOK WHAT HE DID, LOOK WHAT HE DID, AND, YOU KNOW, AND THIS BUSINESS THAT WE ARE IN, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT. NOTHING COMES EASY FOR BOTH SIDES. FOR OR THOSE THAT ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF. AND THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE STRUGGLE WITH, AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH. LIKE MR. DINGFELDER SAID, 15 OR 20 CASES OR TWICE A MONTH SOMETIMES THAT WE HAVE. AND IT'S NOT THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BE POPULAR OR UNPOPULAR. WE BASE OUR DECISIONS ON ACCORDING TO THE LAW, AND ACCORDING TO WHAT'S APPLICABLE. DOES IT MEET THE CRITERIA OF WHAT WAS PROPOSED? AND THERE'S WHERE WE ARE AT, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT DECISION. LIKE MOST OF THEM ARE. THERE'S NO EASY ONES. SO THESE WHAT WE TOOK THE OATH OF OFFICE FOR. WE SAID, I D ATHE END. IF NOT WE WOULDN'T BE HERE. SO THESE MY CLOSING STATEMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I AM LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE. MR. MANISCALCO MADE A MOTION, SECOND BY MR. MIRANDA. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED. WHO WOULD HAVE LIKE TO DO THE HONORS? MR. VIERA. >>LUIS VIERA: I MOVE AN ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING CONSIDERATION, AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY IN THE GENERAL VICINITY OF 5426 BAY CENTER DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF TAMPA, FLORIDA, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 FROM ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OFFICE BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL HOTEL RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY, TO PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, OFFICE, BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL, MEDICAL, HOTEL RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I FIND THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MET ITS BURDEN OF PARAGRAPH AND PROVIDED QUESTION SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY CODE AND I FIND THAT THE -- THERE ARE NO WAIVERS A. THERE YOU GO. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. VIERA MADE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? ANY SECOND? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'LL SECOND IT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON SECONDED IT. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED SIR. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IF I CAN INQUIRE OF MR. MANASSE IS THERE ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD TO MAKE SURE IT IENDS- COMES BACK AS INTENDED AT SECOND READING? >>RYAN MANASSE: IN THE PREVIOUS CONDITIONS, THE WATER FOUNTAIN, THE BICYCLE REPAIR STATION, THE TWO BICYCLE RACKS, PET WASTE STATION, TO INCLUDE THE MODIFICATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE PowerPoint AS PRESENTED ON THE FIRST READING, AS WELL AS THE MODIFICATIONS THAT MR. MECHANIK AND MR. COEN STATED TODAY, WHICH REMOVING THE WAIVERS AS RELATES TO THE PROPOSED REVISIONS FROM THE LAST CONTINUANCE, REMOVING THOSE WAIVERS. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND THERE IS NO REVISION SHEET SOD THEN INVOLVED IN THIS MATTER. >>RYAN MANASSE: THERE IS A REVISION SHEET SUPPLIED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS WELL AS THE PowerPoint PRESENTATION WITH THE REVISED SITE DATA TABLE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND THAT WOULD BE MODIFIED BY THE REPRESENTATIONS MATED MADE BY MR. MECHANIK? >>RYAN MANASSE: THAT'S CORRECT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THANK YOU, SIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. MR. VIERA HAS MOTIONED. I BELIEVE MR. CARLSON SECONDED IT. NO WAIVERS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>BILL CARLSON: YES. >>JOSEPH CITRO: YES. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: SADLY, YES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: SADLY, YES. >>THE CLERK: MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION WILL BE HELD ON JULY 15th, 2021 AT 9:30 A.M. >>LUIS VIERA: MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, I NEED TO LEAVE TO PICK UP MY SON. I WANTED TO WAIT UNTIL -- I HAVE 28 MOTIONS BUT WILL WAIT. [ LAUGHTER ] THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU EVERYBODY. HAVE A GOOD DAY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. MANISCALCO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GENERAL COMMENTS SINCE WE DISCUSSED THE C.I.T. AND THE BUDGET AND ALL THAT IS COMING UP. THE BUDGET SPECIFICALLY. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON QUALITY OF LIFE AND PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES AND EVERYBODY SAID EVERYTHING. COUNCILMAN VIERA TALKED ABOUT FIRE RESCUE AND THE LACK OF SERVICES NEEDED. WE TALKED ABOUT ROADS AND SIDELKS AND EVERYTHING. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT SPECIFIC REQUESTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHEN THE TIME COMES DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING OR WHATEVER YOU DO, KNOW THAT YOU HAVE MY SUPPORT. WE ARE ALL OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY LISTENING TO WHAT PEOPLE WANT, AND IT'S ALL ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE, INVESTMENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY, THAT ARE MUCH NEEDED, AND IF WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A WINDFALL, SOME MONEY COMING IN FROM THE FEDERAL LEVEL AND WHATNOT, INVEST THAT WISELY. IT'S NOT ABOUT COUNCILMAN VIERA SAID IT, NEEDS AND QUANTITIES. WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON THOSE NEEDS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU, SIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST FOLLOWING ON DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WAY EARLIER TODAY, MR. CHAIR, YOU SUGGESTED MAYBE I MAKE A MOTION. THIS IS REGARDING THE NONPROFITS THAT RELATED TO THE CITY SO I WILL THROW THIS OUT TO SEE IF YOU ALL WILL ACCEPT IT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ASK CITY STAFF TO PROVIDE AN THIS-PERSON REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 2nd TO GIVE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC INFORMATION ON THE NONPROFITS THAT ARE CONTROLLED BY THE CITY OF TAMPA, THEIR PURPOSE, THEIR BOARD MEMBERS, THE PROCESS FOR POINTING BOARD MEMRS, THEIR PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS, THEIR BUDGET, AND ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MOTION BY MR. CARLSON. SECOND BY MR. CITRO. ALL IN FAVOR? ANYTHING ELSE, SIR? >>BILL CARLSON: JUST QUICKLY, I MENTIONED THE EDC REGULARLY AND YOU BROUGHT IT UP. JUST SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS, I HAVE BEEN HAVING A LOT OF BEHIND THE SCENES CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS. YOU ALL ARE GOING TO BE LOBBIED HEAVILY. YOU ALL APPROVED THEIR BUDGET TWO YEARS AGO. ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO. IT'S COMING UP, I THINK, IN AUGUST. SO YOU ARE GOING TO BE LOBBIED HS TO SUPPORT A RENEWAL OF THAT BUDGET. THREE THINGS, A FEW THINGS REAL FAST TO MENTION JUST TO START TO SET THE STAGE. NUMBER ONE, WHEN WE MET ABOUT THEIR BUDGET A COUPLE YEARS AGO YOU ASKED THEM TO HAVE TRANSPARENCY. ONE OF THE THINGS WAS TO LIST THEIR BOARD MEMBERS ON THEIR WEBSITE. A FEW MONTHS LATER THEY REDID THEIR WEBSITE AND DID NOT LIST THEIR BOARD MEMBERS UNTIL CAROLE POST CAME ON THE CITY AND INSISTED THAT THEY DO IT SO THEY SHOWED THEY FLAGRANTLY DID NOT WANT TO ADD TRANSPARENCY. SECOND, IT'S WELL KNOWN IN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY THAT IT'S AN INSIDER GROUP. THE CITIES THAT SUCCESSFUL HAVE OPEN PROCESSES, AND WE SAW THE PRESENTATION THAT THE CONEY'S GAVE ON ST. PETERSBURG, OPEN PROCESSES THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE BY EVERYBODY SHALL THE ONES THAT SUCCEED. IF YOU TALK TO THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY FOR EVERY ONE PERSON THAT'S ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THERE ARE TWO OR THREE APPOINTMENT LEADERS WHO WANT A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE AND THIS PROCESS DOES NOT WORK. THE EDC CAN CONTINUE BUT WHETHER K IS THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE CITY SHOULD PUT 500,000 AND THE COUNTY SHOULD PUT 500,000 IN. THEIR MODEL IS OLD SCHOOL. YOU TALK ABOUT BRINGING BUSINESSES TO EAST TAMPA. THAT'S THE MODEL FROM THE 1980s. IT'S A GENTRIFICATION MODEL, A MODEL THAT ASSUMES THAT PEOPLE IN EAST TAMPA AND OTHER PARTS OF HE CITY CANNOT DEVELOP THEIR OWN BUSINESSES AND BUILD UP THEIR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SOMEBODY FROM THE OUTSIDE HAS TO COME IN AND BUILD SOME BIG BOX DEVELOPMENT. THOSE KIND OF PROJECTS ARE COMING TO FLORIDA LIKE CRAZY. I AM VERY INVOLVED IN THE STATE LEVEL. EVERY ECONOMIC GROUP IN THE STATE IS BOMBARDED WITH ENTERPRISE FLORIDA FEEDS THESE TO THE EDC. THE EDC IN ST. PETE ARE KICKING TAMPA'S BUTT AND THEY WON DO IT MORE IF THEY HAD ACCESS TO OFFICE BUILDINGS. THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH OFFICE SPACE BECAUSE THEIR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS DIFFERENT. OURS IS OLD SCHOOL STUCK IN THE 80s. WE CAN'T KEEP FOCUSING ORPHAN HAVING A PROCESS THAT JUST TAKES THESE LEADS THAT COME IN AND OFFERING THEM SUBSIDIZE, AND HELP TO MOVE. WE NEED TO HAVE A WHOLE DIFFERENT LOOK AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE LAST THING I WILL SAY, YOU HAVE SEEN THE NUMBERS. EVERYBODY HAS SEEN THE NUMBERS. TAMPA, THE EDC IS ALMOST 12% YEARS OLD. TAMPA IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, I CAN GO BACK 12 YEARS IF YOU WANT, BUT THE LAST TEN YEARS TAMPA COMPLETELY FAILED AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, COMPLETELY FAILED. IT'S ON US NOW. WE HAVE GIVEN TWO MORE YEARS TO SEE IF THE NUMBERS WILL CHANGE AND THEY HAVEN'T. IT'S ON US NOW TO CHANGE THE WAY WE LOOK AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND MY PROPOSAL, WHICH I HAVE TOLD THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, I TOLD THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, IS WE NEED TO SET UP LIKE PINELLAS COUNTY HAS, AND CHIEF BENNETT USED TO OVERSEE THIS, WE NEED TO SET UP A CITY-COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN STAFF, TAKE THAT MILLION DOLLARS, WE CAN STILL HAVE A MEMBERSHIP TO THE EDC LIKE THE CITY OF ST. PETE DOES AND ST. PETE. WE CAN STILL HAVE MEMBERSHIP AND THE EDC CAN DON'T ZO THINGS TO PARTNER WITH US. BUT WE NEED A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO FOCUS ON REAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NOT JUST PROCESSING THOSE OUTSIDE COMPANIES THAT WANT SUBSIDIZE. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MAYBE YOU NEED TO TAKE THE LEAD ON THAT, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: I HAVE BEEN HAVING LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS. SO IF WE CAN HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE WE CAN RADICALLY CHANGE -- OTHERWISE IN TWO YEARS OR SIX YEARS WEE WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE CHANGEDCH JUDGED AND OUR NUMBERS L BECAUSE WE AREN'T CHANGING THINGS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CITRO. >>JOSEPH CITRO: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. COUNCILMEN, CITIZENS OF TAMPA, FLORIDA IS FACED WITH A NEW $1.1 BILLION BUDGET. AND I JUST WANT TO READ OFF A FEW THINGS THAT REALLY UPSET ME THAT WERE LEFT OFF THIS BUDGET THIS YEAR, THE STATE OF FLORIDA BUDGET, FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. INTERNATIONAL PROSTHETIC EXPANSION. FEEDING TAMPA BAY. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS. SUMMER BRIDGE PROGRAM. FLORIDA MUSIC EDUCATION. ZOO TAMPA. BUT HERE IS THE TWO THAT REALLY FRY ME. $350,000 TO MAKE SCHOOL PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS SAFER. $350,000 FOR LOIS AVENUE COMPLETE STREET PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE SAFETY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M ALWAYS ASKING YOU TO DO THIS. CALL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE. CALL YOUR STATE SENATOR. AND SAY THESE THINGS ARE REALLY NEEDED. NOW FOR SOMETHING ON A LIGHTER NOTE. I MAKE A MOTION TO PRESENT THE 2021 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA MEN'S BASEBALL TEAM MEMBERS AND COACHES A COMMENDATION RECOGNIZING THEIR AAC CHAMPIONSHR SUCCESSFUL 2021 SEASON. THIS COMENDATION WILL BE PRESENTED OFF-SITE JUNE 8th AT 4 P.M. GO BULLS! >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CITRO MADE A MOTION. MR. MANISCALCO SECONDS IT. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. ANYTHING ELSE? >>JOSEPH CITRO: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, THAT'S ALL FOR ME TODAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. DINGFELDER. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. SHELBY PROVIDED ME WITH A COPY OF THE FORM FOR MY CONFLICT OF INTEREST AS RELATED TO EARLIER ITEM TODAY, WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE RECEIVED AND FILED. ITEM 53. >>ORLANDO GUDES: SECOND BY MR. MIRANDA. ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYTHING ELSE, SIR? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THAT'S IT FOR TODAY. THANK YOU. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA SPARTANS WON THE REGIONAL IN PENSACOLA AND I WILL NOT BE MAKING A COMMENDATION FOR THEM, JUST TO WIN THE REGIONAL. THEY WILL BE STARTING JUNE 5th AND GARY, INDIANA FOR ANOTHER WORLD CHAMPION FOR DISTRICT DIVISION 2. AND THE AMOUNT OF PLAYERS THAT DO BETTER, IT'S REALLY UNBELIEVABLE I.2021 THANK THE WHOLE COACHING STAFF, ESPECIALLY THE MANAGER, JOE HERSCHEL AND THE PITCHING AND ASSISTANT MANAGER OF THE CLUB, SAMMY PATELLA. THAT'S IT, SIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: GENTLEMEN, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT YOUNG PEOPLE TODAY, ATHLETICS, BUT I DON'T RECA I THIS COUNCIL RECOGNIZING ROBINSON HIGH SCHOOL. THEY WON THEIR SIXTH HIGH SCHOOL ASSOCIATION FLAG FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP. THEY WERE HERE LAST WEEK WITH THE MAYOR BUT THIS COUNCIL NEEDS TO RECOGNIZE THEM. MR -- I MAKE A MOTION RECOGNIZING THE KNIGHTS -- MR. DINGFELDER AS WELL -- A COMMENDATION, AND WE WILL GET A BIG FORTHCOMING. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MOTION AND SECOND. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ONE MORE. EARLIER WE MADE A MOTION TO LOOK AT THOSE BANKING INSTITUTIONS AND SO FORTH. SO A DATE, JULY 29th AS A COMEBACK DATE ON THAT. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: ANY OBJECTION? WE'LL ADD THAT TO THE MOTION. >>ORLANDO GUDES: LAST ONE, WE JUST HAD MEMORIAL DAY. I WAS ABLE TO BE THE GUEST SPEAKER FOR VFW 1040. MR. COLLINS IS THE COMMANDER OVER THERE. AND THEY HAVE BEEN PUTTING FLAGS AT THE REST HAVEN CEMETERY FOR 16 YEARS NOW. I WAS GLAD TO BE PART OF THAT THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS OTHER CEMETERIES DOING GREAT THINGS, SO TO GO OUT AND PARTICIPATE. BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING GREAT WORKS ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN AS WELL. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO GIVE SERGEANT COLLINS OF THE VFW 1040 VIETNAM WAR VETERAN WHO SERVED OUR COUNTRY, 26 YRS, HONORING VETERANS BY PLACING FLAGS ON THE GRAVES OF FALLEN SOLDIERS ON MEMORIAL DAY. THE PRESENTATION ON JUNE 17th. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MOTION AND SECOND. ANY COMMENTS? ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE? >> SO MOVED. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE ARE ADJOURNED GENTLEMEN.