[SOUNDING GAVEL] >>ORLANDO GUDES: GOOD MORNING, GENTLEMEN. GOOD MORNING, CITIZENS OF TAMPA. WE HAVE A SPECIAL CALLED AGENDA TODAY. JUNE 14, 2021. AT THIS TIME WE'LL HAVE AN VOCATION. AND WE WILL HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE. AND THEN WE'LL GO FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. (MOMENT OF SILENCE) [ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ] MADAM DEPUTY CLERK, LL CALL, PLEASE. >>BILL CARLSON: HERE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: HERE. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: HERE. >>JOSEPH CITRO: HERE. >>LUIS VIERA: HERE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HERE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: HERE. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, DEPUTY CLERK. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING MEMBERS. TAMPA CITY COUNCIL. MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. TODAY IS MONDAY, JUNE 14, 2021. WE ARE HERE AT OLD CITY HALL FOR A SPECIAL CALL MEETING PURSUANT TO CITY OF TAMPA'S COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE RULE 3 B 7 IT'S BEING HELD DURING THE COVID-19 STATE OF EMERGENCY. THE PURPOSE THIS MUCH SPECIAL CALLED MEETING IS TO DISCUSS THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAIR AND THE MAYOR RELATING TO ISSUES INVOLVING THE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD. THERE WILL BE NO OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY. NO OFFICIAL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. ANY OFFICIAL ACTION WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN AT A SUBSEQUENT NOTICED PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE PUBLIC HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. NOW, THE PUBLIC TODAY IS ABLE TO VIEW THIS MEETING ON ABLE TV ON SPECTRUM CHANNEL 640 AND FRONTIER CHANNEL 15 AND STREAMING ON THE INTERT AT TAMPA.GOV/LIVESTREAM. THIS MEETING IS BEING CONDUCTED IN PERSON, VIRTUALLY IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS WITH BE A PHYSICAL QUORUM PRESENT. HOWEVER, IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO CABLE TV OR THE INTERNET CAN COME TO THE SECOND FLOOR OF OLD CITY HALL THIS MORNING TO VIRTUALLY WATCH THE MEETING THROUGH AUDIO AND VIDEO, THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA TECHNOLOGY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I CALLED THIS SPECIAL CALLED MTINGO TRY TO BRING SOME ISSUES TO A LANDING. BETWEEN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THIS COUNCIL. BACK ON THE 27th, MEETING, ROLL CALL VOTE TO MEET WITH THE MAYOR IN REFERENCE TO OH SO THINGS THAT TRANSPIRED AT OUR MEETING VERSUS CRB. THIS MORNING I WANT TO TELL YOU HOW THAT MEETING WENT SO THERE'S FULL TRANSPARENCY OF WHAT WAS SAID IN THE MEETING AND WHO WAS IN ATTENDANCE AT THE MEETING. I ATTENDED THE MEETING AT 3:00. MARTIN SHELBY ACCOMPANIED ME, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY, JOHN NNET WAS THERE, MARTY, AND THE MAYOR. THE MEETING STARTED OUT CORDIALLY WITH EVERYONE INTRODUCING THEMSELVES, A LITTLE CHIT HATH CHAT AS AN ICE BREAKER. I STARTED THE MEETING OFF FIRST. I TOLD THE MAYOR STRAIGHT OUT THAT COUNCIL WAS A LITTLE BIT UPSET ABOUT THE PRESS CONFERENCE. WE FELT AT THAT PRESS CONFERENCE HER AND THE CHIEF SAID WE DIDN'T DO OUR JOB AND WE THOUGHT THAT WAS UNFAIR. I TOLD HER THAT WE RECEIVED INFORMATION AT THE 9th HOUR SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS DID NOT RECEIVE THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE AGENDA ITEM THAT CAME UP. I TOLD THE MAYOR USUALLY, WE DIDN'T GET IT IN THE 9th HOUR AND THAT CAN'T HAPPEN WHEN COUNCIL GETS IN AN UPROAR WHERE COUNCIL AREN'T ABLE TO CHIME IN ON WHAT'S GOING ON. I TOLD THE MAYOR THAT BASICALLY THAT IN FEBRUARY, WE THOUGHT THAT WE HAD BROKERED A DEAL THAT WAS 7-4 WITH A 5-2 VOTE. I TOLD THE MAYOR THAT WE THOUGHT IT WAS COME BACK, BECAUSE NORMALLY IF WE MAKE A DEAL A DECISION, WITH STAFF OR ADMINISTRATION DOESN'T LIKE IT, THEY WILL RUN DOWN OR THEY WILL GET AND ASK US TO HOLD. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. I TOLD THEM THAT DID NOT HAPPEN THAT DAY SO THEY COUNCIL THOUGHT WE WERE DOWN A PATH. AND THEN ALL A SUDDEN THIS COUNCIL HAD BEEN WAITING AND AT THE 9th HOUR WE GOT THAT INFORMATION. AND THEN APPARENTLY WE HAD A TRAIN WRECK ON THAT DAY. I TOLD HER THAT -- AND I APOLOGIZED FOR SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS MADE BUT I ALSO SAID I FELT IT WAS UNFAIR ON BOTH PARTS, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WORK TOGETHER AND NOT DO BATTLE AGAINST ONE ANOTHER. I DID TELL THE MAYOR THAT COUNCIL FELT THAT THE 7-4 WOULD GIVE EVERY COUNCILMEMBER A VOTE OF A PERSON, AND SHE HAD 4, AND AGAIN JUST TO MAKE SURE -- I KEPT SAYING IT'S NOT A POWER THING. PEOPLE SAY IT'S A POWER THING. AND TO ME IT'S NOT POWER BUT I DID TELL THE MAYOR, I THINK THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE WILLING TO MAYBE COMPROMISE, MAYBE A 6-5. I DON'T KNOW. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE COUNCIL, BUT I AM JUST SAY THOUGHTS TRANSPIRED, IT COULD HAPPEN. I PRETTY MUCH FINISHED UP WITH WHAT I THOUGHT COULD TRY TO GET WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AND WORK OUT SOME ISSUES. I DID TELL THE MAYOR I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD ORDINANCE. WE HAD A LOT OF GOOD THINGS IN THERE. A LOT OF GOOD THINGS IN THERE. A FEW OF THOSE THINGS I SAID WE KICKED DOWN THE ROAD, IN THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT IN TIME, BECAUSE WE WANTED TO GET MOVING. AND I LET THE MAYOR SPEAK. AND THE MAYOR TOLD ME, BEFORE I SPOKE, I DID SAY THAT I DIDN'T AGREE WITH SOME OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S INTERPRETATION, BUT SHE'S THE CITY ATTORNEY, MS. GRIMES, AND SHE'S A WONDERFUL PERSON, THAT'S HER JOB, AND I DID TELL THE MAYOR THAT I BELIEVE HER JOB IS TO SET POLICIES FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO LEGISLATIVE MAERS, THIS BODY IS ENTRUSTED TO LEGISLATIVE MATTERS. BUT THAT WAS FEIGN. WE WOULD SETTLE THOSE THINGS OUT LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD ABOUT WHO DOES WHAT, HOW, WHEN AND WHERE. SO I LET THE MAYOR SPEAK. AND THE MAYOR SAID SHE FELT THAT SHE DID HAVE THE POWER AND AUTHORITY BECAUSE THE CHARTER TELLS HER ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND I AGREED ABOUT THE POLICY AND SO FORTH. CHARTER ISSUES, I THE ISSUE I WANTED TO GET ON WAS BASICALLY HOW WE PROCEED, HOW WE DEAL WITH OSE THINGS WAY DOWN THE ROAD OR WHATEVER. THE MAYOR SAID SHE FELT THAT SHE HAD DONE EVERYTHING SHE COULD DO AS FAR AS GIVING EVERYTHING SHE THOUGHT SHE COULD GIVE AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME. SHE FELT THAT -- AND I TOLD HER, I CAN SAY YOU HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB, AND MR. BENNETT SAID, WE ARE DEBUNK DIAGNOSIS BUCKHORN SITUATION, AND I FELT GIVING MORE, AND I FELT THE ORDINANCE DID HAVE MORE. THE MAYOR THOUGHT A 5-5 SPLIT ULD GIVE EQUAL BALANCE. I TOLD HER I THOUGHT THE ONE WAS CONFUSING BECAUSE THE ONE, HOW WOULD THAT ONE GO? THAT'S WHY I KEPT SAYING STRAIGHT 6-5. SO APPARENTLY MY INTERPRETATION OF THE ONE WOULD BE EITHER COUNCIL WOULD MAKE THE APPOINTMENT, AND THEN -- OR MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION, THE MAYOR WOULD SAY OKAY OR VICE VERSA. BUT THEN I SAID, WELL, MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I CAN'T MAKE ANY DECISIONS FOR THIS COUNCIL. I WILL NOT MAKE ANY DEALS. THE ONLY THING I WILL TELL YOU AS CHAIRMAN IS WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER. I ADOPT WANT ANY LAWSUITS BECAUSE WE HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS RATE NOW. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT HOUSING RIGHT NOW. AND ALL THE MONEYS THAT WE HAVE ARE FOR SPENDING ON HOUSING. AND I MADE IT CLEAR, I DIDN'T WANT TO GET INTO A FIGHT ABOUT AN ISSUE GOING TO COURT OR ANYTHING IN REFERENCE, THAT I THOUGHT HOPED WE WOULD BRING THIS IN FOR A LANDING. THEN THE MEETING ADJOURNED COIALL AND I LEFT, AND THEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT HOW THIS ALL PLAYED OUT, AND I GOT A CALL ON FRIDAY. MR. CITRO, YOU MADE A POINT AT THE LAST MEETING, YOU SAID NO ONE HAD TALKED TO THE CRB. WELL, I GUESS YOU WERE RIGHT, BECAUSE THE CRB CALLED, CHAIRMAN OF TAMPA CITY COUNCIL. I RECEIVED CALLS FROM THESE FOLKS SAYING THEY LIKED THE ORDINANCE. NO ONE TALKED TO THEM BECAUSE WOD LED TO HAVE TALKEDHINGS THEY ABOUT. AND I LISTENED TO THOSE FOLKS. THESE ARE INCREDIBLE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THIS BOARD, SOME VERY SMALL PEOPLE WHO ARE KNOWN IN THE COMMUNTY AND DO A LOT OF GOOD WORK, AND FELT THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN ON THE CONVERSATION. AND I SIT BACK AND I PONDERED IT ALL DAY FRIDAY, AND THEN I CALLED -- I SAID GIVE ME THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CRA, I WANT TO TALK TO THE CHAIRMAN. AND VE THESE THOUGHTS, AND WISHED THAT WE HAD TALKED, AND SAID HE LIKED THE ORDINANCE, BUT ONE THING THAT CAME AWAY FROM ALL OF IT, AND MR. SHELBY BROUGHT UP IN THE MEETING AS WELL, IS THAT THE ONE IS THE KICKER THAT'S COMING UP, IS THE ORGANIZATIONAL PIECE TO THAT, AND THEY ALL SAID THE SAME, AND MR. SHELBY BROUGHT UP, WELL, WHAT IF THERE'S ANOTHER ORGANIZATION, WHY THAT ORGANIZATION, WHY NOT THIS ORGANIZATION, OR HOW DO YOU FIX IT SO EVERYONE GETS AN OPPORTUNITY? I HAD NO ANSWER. I THINK THAT ONE HAS BEEN THE ISSUE. AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION KNOWS THAT WE WANT TO WORK WITH THEM, AND I'M SURE THEY WANT TO WORK WITH US. WE ARE HERE FOR THE CITIZENS. YOU KNOW, THE MEETING, KEPT COMING UP IN THE MEETING SOMETIME, AND I KEPT SAYING THAT AS FAR AS A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN PART OF THE UNION, WHO UNDERSTANDS UNIONS, I'M IN A DIFFICULT POSITION, BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN A POLICE OFFICER. I UNDERSTAND, I WAS ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE TO DO A JOB. SO I PROBABLY WON'T MAKE ANYBODY HAPPY. AND I AM NOT GOING TO MAKE ANYBODY HAPPY. BUT DECISIONS HAVE TO BE MADE. I AM GOING TO PULL MY BIG BOY SHORTS UP AND MAKE DECISIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES OF IT. BUT I WANT TO KNOW CLEAR, GENTLEMEN, AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO BRING THIS IN FOR A LANDING. LO OR DRAW.O ME IT'S NOT WIN, I DON'T CARE ABOUT SOMEBODY SAID, WELL, THE MAYOR -- I DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT. I CARE ABOUT THE CITIZENS, AND WE CAN ALWAYS ADD TO THE GAME IF SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT. I THINK WE CAN ALWAYS DO BETTER. 2015, WE GOT SOME STUFF IN, AND TO GET IT MOVING. NOW, HERE WE ARE IN 2021 TO MAKE IT BETTER. IT MAY BE 2023, IF IT BECOMES BETTER 2222. I JUST GOT ONE LAST WEEK. 2022. SO MY PURPOSE TODAY IS TO HEAR WHAT EVERYONE HAS TO SAY. SEE HOW WE CAN GO SO THE ADMINISTRATION KNOWS, TO WORK THIS THING OUT, BECAUSE ON THE 17th, I DON'T WANT TO COME ON THE 17th AND WE ARE HERE WITH THE WHOLE AGENDA ITEM ALL DAY. WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THAT. WE ARE GOING TO MAKE SOME DECISION, A, B, C OR D, PUT THEM ON THE TABLE, AND ON THE 17th COME AWAY WITH WHATEVER WE WANT TO COME AWAY WITH. BUT WE HAV T MAKE DECISIONS, AND WE CANNOT BE HOLDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT -- THEY TAKE ORDERS. SO NO MATTER WHAT THE MAYOR SAYS, WHEN IT COMES DOWN, THEY ARE GOING TO FOLLOW RULES, AND MAKE IT WORK. THAT'S HOW IT WORKS OVER THERE. I WAS THERE. I DIDN'T LIKE IT BUT I GOT OVER IT, DID MY JOB AND THAT WAS IT. THAT'S WHAT POLICE OFFICERS DO. WHAT HAPPENS? SAME THING WITH SOME SOCIAL JUSTICE GROUPS. SOME MAY BE UPSET. THEY WILL BE MAD FOR THE MOMENT. AND THEN WE MOVE ON AND WE DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN TIME. I'LL START OFF WITH MR. MANISCALCO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. I BROUGHT UP A LOT OF COMMENTS AT ONE OF THE LAST MEETINGS, IS GIVING MY HISTORICAL POINT OF VIEW ON THIS WHOLEISCUION. I WAS ELECTED IN 2015 AND A FEW MONTHS LATER THIS DISCUSSION BEGAN AND HERE WE ARE 6 YEARS LATER WITH THE SAME DISCUSSION, DIFFERENT MAYOR, DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATION. THINGS HAVE CHANGED. CERTAIN THINGS HAVE HAPPENED SINCE THEN. I MYSELF -- AND I HAVE SAID IT BEFORE, I TRIED TO BE A PEACEMAKER, SEND AN OLIVE BRANCH EVEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO MAY HATE ME, MAY WANT TO HURT ME. I BELIEVE IN FORGIVENESS. I BELIEVE IN MOVING ON. I DON'T LIKE BEING ON A STALEMATE WITH ANYBODY. I DON'T LIKE BEING AT ODDS WITH AND UNFORTUNATELY IT SEEMS AS WAS PRESENTED, A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, AND YOU SAID IT ALREADY, YOU KNOW. WE VOTED ON SOMETHING IN FEBRUARY, AND IT WAS QUIET UNTIL BASICALLY THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY OF, AND THE DISCUSSION OPENED UP AGAIN, AND HERE WE ARE. YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT, THURSDAY IS GOING TO BE A LONG MEETING BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU KNOW, WE SAW A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT, AND RIGHTFULLY SO LAST SUMMER U.I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HPEN THIS THURSDAY. MY THING IS THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION IS THE MAYOR IS A FORMER CHIEF OF POLICE. YOU KNOW, WHO APPOINTS THE CHIEF OF POLICE. SO THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WILL SAY OR CAN ASSUME THAT, WELL, THE POLICE RUN THE CITY. NO. WE ARE ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE CITY COUNCIL IS ONE BODY. THE ADMINISTRATION IS ANOTHER BODY. WE RESPOND TO THE PEOPLE. WE TRY TO PASS A BUDGET AND WHATNOT. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THIS BOARD, YOU KNOW, WE NEED A BALANCE. AND I HAVE SAID AND WE VOTED ON, WHY D'T WE CHOOSE SEVEN MEMBERS? SEVEN MEMBERS ONE FOR EACH CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AND THEN THE MAYOR HAS THE REMAINING. AND THEN THE NAACP, HOWEVER THAT WOULD WORK. I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH IT. BUT SOME DON'T AGREE WITH IT AND I UNDERSTAND IT. I THINK IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH CITY COUNCIL POINTING THE 7 PEOPLE AND THEN THE MAYOR HAVING THE REST, BUT TAKING THE DISCUSSION OF SUBPOENA POWER AND OUTSIDE COUNSEL OFF THE TABLE AND JUST CLOSE IT OUT, YOU KNOW. IF IT'S ABOUT A BALANCE THERE, WHO APPOINTS WHAT, AND THEN END THE DISCUSSION THERE, NEXT YEAR WE CAN REVISIT IT OR IN THE FUTURE WE CAN REVISIT IT. YOU ALREADY MADE MENTION TO SOMETHING WAS APPROVED AND PASSED THE BOARD CREATED IN 2015, NOW WE ARE MAKING IT BETTER. THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO US. YOU KNOW, IT'S BETTER AS AN IMPROVEMENT. IN THE FUTURE WE CAN IMPROVE IT EVEN FURTHER. YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T DO EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE BECAUSE WE SEE HOW THINGS WORK, AND THEN WE FIX WHAT WE HAVE TO FIX AND MOVE FORWARD. IT'S A PERPETUAL THING. IT A CONSTITUTION IS A LIVING, BREATHING DOCUMENT. WE CAN REVISIT THIS IN THE FUTURE IF WE SEE MORE ISSUES. I DON'T KNOW WHERE COUNCIL STANDS. I KNOW WE HAVE HAD OUR VOTES, THAT 5-2 VOTE, WE BONNIE 7 AND THEN THE ADMINISTRATION APPOINTS FOUR. PERHAPS WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AND THEN TAKE OFF THE DISCUSSION IN THE FUTURE, TO WORKSHOP WHATEVER REGARDING SUBPOENA POWER AND OUTSIDE ATTORNEY. I THOUGHT ABOUT THE OUTSIDE COUNSEL. THERE IS SOMEONE THAT IS HIRED. I BELIEVE IT'S MR. BRODY T LOOK AT THIS. HE'S NOT FROM HERE. DOE'T HAVE A DOG IN THE FIGHT. I THINK HE CAN BE FAIR, IMPARTIAL AND NEUTRAL. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THAT. WHICH IS SEPARATE FROM OUR CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, SO THAT'S BALANCED. THE SUBPOENA POWER PEOPLE HAVE ISSUE WITH, YOU ARE NOT SUBPOENAING POLICE OFFICERS BUT YOU ARE SUBPOENAING PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS. WHAT ABOUT THOSE PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY NOT WANT TO APPEAR AND TESTIFY? HOW DO THEY GET OUT OF A SUBPOENA? I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, CAN WE REACH AN AGREEMENT WHERE WE JUST AGREE ON THE APPOINTMENTS AND CLOSE OUT EVERYTHING OUT AND MOVE FORWARD? I THINK WE CAN DO THAT. IF NOT, WE FIGURE OUT A WAY. THOSE ARE JUST MY THOUGHTS. AND I'M HAPPY TO LISTEN TO WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS TO SAY. THANK YOU. >>LUIS VIERA: MR. CHAIRMAN? >>ORLANDO GUDES: I KNOW YOU HAVE TO LEAVE AT 10:00 SO YOU ARE GOING TO GO NEXT. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. CAN WE GET SOME VOLUME FOR MR. VIERA PLEASE I.T.? >>LUIS VIERA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR, AND FOR PEOPLE, THE MANY WATCHING THIS AT HOME. I'M IN DC RIGHT NOW. THAT'S WHY I AM APPEARING HERE IN WHAT APPEARS TO BE A HOTEL ROOM. I AM NO HOTEL ROOM. MR. CHAIRMAN, I FIRST WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND VOLUNTEERING. A LOT OF -- ONE OF THE GREAT ESSENCES OF LEADERSHIP IS WHERE YOU HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN BUT A LOT TO LOSE. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE GO AFTER THINGS WHERE THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO GAIN. YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING TO GAIN IS TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND WE APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK WE ALL APPRECIATE THAT. AND STICKING YOUR NECK OUT, BY ASSERTING YOURSELF LIKE YOU DID, I AM AN ADMIRER OF THAT. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATE IT BECAUSE THAT REALLY, REALLY SHOWS LEADERSHIP, AND I THINK THAT TODAY, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY, BUT I REMEMBER COUNCILMAN'S MANISCALCO'S WORDS. AND I'M SURE WHAT YOU SAID AT THE BEGINNING. BUT I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO DIALOGUE AND TALKING ON THIS, I THINK WE ALL WANT TO HAVE YOUR BACK IN THAT REGARD. SO I THINK WE ALL JUST REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATET, AND WHATNOT. HEARING FROM THE CRB IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. I'M GLAD THAT FOLKS ARE REACHING OUT. I REACHED OUT TO SOME OF THE MEMBERS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT BOTHERED ME THROUGHOUT, WHICH IS WE HAVE NOT REACHED OUT TO THE CRB. I HAVE SPOKEN TO I THINK MEMBERS THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THIS PROCESS BUT THERE'S KIND OF BEEN A CLOUD, IF YOU WILL, OVER SOMEF HOW THE 2015 BOARD OCCURRED, AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO IS WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT CREATED CLOUD WORSE. WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER BY PASSING AN ORDINANCE THAT DOES THE JOB THAT I THINK WE ALL WANT TO HAVE DONE. I THINK IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT AND WHATNOT. WHEN I LOOK AT THE VOTE THAT HAPPENED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR, THERE'S A LOT OF MISUNDERSTANDING GOING ON THERE. THERE IS ONE THING THAT DIVIDE US AND TT'SNE VOTE. WHETHER YOU CALL IT 5-5-1, WHETHER YOU CALL IT 6-5, WHATEVER, ONE VOTE. 7-4 VERSUS 6-5, 7-4 VERSUS 5-5-1. I TALKED ABOUT FOR PROBABLY SEVEN OR EIGHT MONTHS HAVING A 5-5 SPLIT WITH ONE, WHATEVER ORGANIZATION POTENTIALLY CONFIRMED BY COUNCIL, WHATEVER IT MAY BE, HAVING THAT VOTE, THAT'S VERY LITTLE THAT DIVIDES THIS FROM BEING A UNIVERSAL AND I THINK WE HAVE TO KEEP OUR EYE ON THAT 110%, IN MY OPINION. THERE'S A LOT OF LEGAL ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP IN THAT REGARD. THAT IF COUNCIL MOVES FORWARD, AS I UNDERSTAND, THE POSITION OF THE ADMINISTRATION, IF COUNCIL MOVES FORWARD WITH THE 7-4, AND CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, THIS ORDINANCE THEN WON'T BE IMPLEMENTED. AND THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE A LEGAL FIGHT. AND SO MY QUESTION IS, OVER ONE VOTE, DO WE WANT TO HAVE THAT FIGHT WITH THE ASSIATE COST AND TIME, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, WHEN WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT IN MY OPINION, I THINK IN MOST PEOPLE'S OPINION, IS VERY, VERY GOOD, IN MY OPINION. AND WHATNOT. YOU KNOW, LAST TIME I TALKED ABOUT DEESCALATING THINGS, HAPPENS TO ME, HAPPENS TO EVERYBODY, WHERE PASSIONS RISE, ET CETERA. BUT I THINK IF WE FOCUS ON THE FACT THAT WE ARE ONLY TALKING ABOUT ONE APPOINTMENT, ONE APPOINTMENT. THERE'S OTHER ISSUES OUT THERE, SUBPOENA POWER. AND WITH THE ATTORNEY I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE TERMINOLOGY. EVERY ATTORNEY IS INDEPENDENT. EVERY ATTORNEY HAS TO BE BY VIRTUE OF THEIR ETHICAL CONSTRAINTS INDEPENDENT. THE ISSUE IS WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN ATTORNEY WHO IS OUTSIDE OR NOT. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LOOKED AT. BUT THOSE ARE ISSUES THAT ARE NOT BEFORE US TODAY. ESPECIALLY ON THE SUBPOENA ISSUE. WE KP HEARING ABOUT SUBPOENA POWERS, SUBPOENA POWERS. WHERE DOES CITY COUNCIL STAND ON THAT ISSUE? JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT IN MY OPINION. I THINK WE ARE ALL ON BOARD WITH 99% OF THIS ORDINANCE. WE GOT TO TALK ABOUT THAT 1%. AND WE HAVE GOT TO REMEMBER WHY WE ARE DOING THIS. YOU KNOW, WHY WE DID THINGS OVER THE YEARS LIKE SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON BODY CAMERAS, SOMETHING WE SHOULD HAVE DONE, SOMETHING THAT -- ABOUT AEAR AGO, THINGS LIKE BODY CAMERAS, THE IMPLICIT BIAS TRAINING THAT WE ARE HAVING NOW FOR ALL OF OUR CITY OF TAMPA EMPLOYEES, SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN 2018, I REMEMBER BRINGING THAT UP, AND I BELIEVEMAN MANISCALCO SECONDED IT AS I RECALL, KIND OF WENT NOWHERE OVER THE LAST YEAR. WE HAVE TO THANK OUR FRIEND COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER FOR HAVING MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELORS GO WITH POLICE OFFICERS ON CALLS THAT DEAL WITH EMOTIONAL OR PSYCHIATRIC ISSUES, TAKING A LOOK AT THE USE OF FORCE, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT I THINK ARE REALLY, REALLY GOOD. YOU KNOW, THESE BOARD CHANGES, THERE ARE SO MANY GOOD BOARD CHANGES THAT WE ADOPT WANT TO LOSE PERSPECTIVE OF THAT. SO AGAIN WE ARE VERY CLOSE IN MY OPINION AND THE QUESTION WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES IS DO WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS LEGAL BATTLE WITH ALL THE ASSOCIATED TURMOIL OVER ONE VOTE? THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. T MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANT TO AGAIN THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, AS WELL AS FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND WHATNOT. I LOOK FORWARD TO GOING FORWARD WITH THIS ORDINANCE. WE WANT SOMETHING THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO LEAD US, THAT'S NOT GOING TO LEAD US ON THIS TRAIN THAT I DON'T THINK ANY OF US TO A DESTINATION THAT I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WANT TO GO. THAT'S IT FOR NOW. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK EVERYBODY. I WILL BE LOGGING OFF ABOUT 10 A.M. BECAUSE I WANT TO GO WITH MY SON, BUT THANK YOU AGAIN EVERYBODY. I APPRECIATE IT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MR. SHELBY BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, I HAD SO MANY THOUGHTS IN MY HEAD AND I FORGOT TO MENTION IT, CITY ATTORNEY GRIMES WILL ALSO SPEAK. MR. CARLSON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: I WANT TO ECHO THE COMMENTS OF MY COLLEAGUES. THANK YOU FOR MOVING THAT FORWARD. IT SHOWS GREAT LEADERSHIP AND WISDOM AND TRYING TO MAKE SE THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY AND MAYOR'S OFFICE ALL MOVE TOGETHER MOVING FORWARD. ALSO WANT TO THANK CHIEF OF STAFF BENNETT FOR HIS ONGOING HELP THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS BUT IN PARTICULAR THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS. THE MEETING THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT WAS VERY DIFFICULT. I WAS NOT BRIEFED IN ADVANCE ON THE OPTIONS THAT WERE GOING TO% BE PRESENTED. I FOUND OUT ABOUT THEM THAT DAY AND I WAS SURPRISED BY THE COMMENTS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND IN PARTICULAR ALSO FROM THE POLICE CHIEF. AND THEN ALSO FROM THE PRESS CONFERENCE. AND THEAYORS A POLITICAL PERSON SO SHE CAN SAY WHAT SHE WANTS. BUT THE POLICE CHIEF SAID THINGS IN THIS ROOM AND ON TV CAMERAS THAT NIGHT THAT WERE INFLAMMATORY AND I THINK SOME OF THEM WERE BORDERLINE NOT TRUE IF NOT TRUE. ONE OF THEM IS THIS ISSUE ABOUT SUBPOENA POWER U.WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE MEETING FROM LAST TIME AND AS FAR AS I COULD TELL THE ONLY TIME SUBPOENA POWER CAME UP IS WHEN MR. DINGFELDER SAID THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY TOLD US WE COULDN'T DO ANYTHING UNLESS WE HAD A CHARTER AMENDMENT. WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY MOTION ON IT. WE DIDN'T PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. BUT SOMEHOW THAT BECAME THE KEY MESSAGE AND THE TV NEWS COVERAGE S HIGHLY INFLAMMATORY. IT WHATS NOT CALLED FOR, AND I THINK THAT THAT WE SHOULD BE HONEST AND DIRECT WITH THE PUBLIC. THE OTHER THING THE POLICE CHIEF SAID ON TV WAS WE DIDN'T DO OUR JOB, WE KEPT KICKING THIS THING DOWN THE ROAD AND IT'S NOT TRUTH. IT'S COMPLETELY FALSE TO STAND UP ON TV AND SAY WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WHEN WE JUST PASSED SOMETHING. SO I THINK WE HAVE NO POWER APPARENTLY BY STIPULATION ATTORNEY OVER THE POLICE CHIEF BUT I WOULD CALL ON HIM TO TELL THE TRUTH IF HE'S GNG TO GET BEFORE CAMERAS AND ALSO IN FRONT OF THIS BODY. WHY ARE WE HEAR IN THE FIRST PLACE? I WAS AN ACTIVIST A FEW YEARS AGO AND THE COMMUNITY WAS VERY UPSET ABOUT WHAT WAS A RACIST POLICY THAT OPPRESSED THE BLACK COMMUNITY. IN PART IT WAS BIKING WHILE BLACK BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY OTHER POLICIES AND IT WASN'T SOMETHING CREATED BY THE POLICE. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WHERE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THE POLICE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE HAD A MAYOR WHO PUSHED RACIST POLICIES, AND NOT THIS MAYOR, THEAST MAYOR. AND IT IS A FACT. THE U.S. JUSTICE CAME IN AND CONDEMNED THE CITY OF TAMPA FOR CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. AND SOMEHOW WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. AND PART OF THE FIGHT WAS STRENGTHENING THIS CRB. PART OF IT WAS MAKING SURE THAT IN THE FUTURE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS MORE OF A CHOICE IN IT. AS I SAID LAST TIME, IF WE HAVE A 7-4 VOTE IT DOESN'T MEAN WE ARE GOING TO PICK SEVEN ANTI-POLICE PERSON. IN FACT IF I DID I WOULD GET THROWN OUT OF OFFICE. SO I THINK IF WE HAD SEVEN, IF WE FULLY REPRESENT THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS OF THE COMMUNITY WE WOULD REPRESENT A CROSS SECTION OF THE COMMUNITY. THE REASON WHY I DID SPEAK TO A COUPLE OF THE CRB MEMBERS, AND ONE IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET ON TV AND SAY WE DIDN'T SPEAK TO CRB MEMBERS I WISH THEY QUO ASK US FIRST. THEY DIDN'T ASK US WHETHER WE MET WITH THEM OR NOT. BUT AS MR. VIERA SAID THE REASON WHY PEOPLE HAVEN'T MET WITH THE CRB MEMBERS IS UNFORTUNATELY FOR THEM IS BECAUSE THERE'S A CLOUD, CAUSOF THE WAY THIS WAS DESIGNED THE LAST TIME. THEY WERE SEEN AS BEING -- MANY OF THEM WERE SEEN AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE LAST MAYOR WHO IS THE ONE WHO PUT THESE BAD POLICIES IN PLACE IN THE FIRST TIME AND WE ARE SPENDING OUR TIME TRYING TO FIX THIS. AND I APOLOGIZE, I SHOULD HAVE MONEY TO MORE OF THEM AND GOTTEN THEIR POINT OF VIEW AND I'M GLAD THAT CHAIR GUDES DID THAT. I APPRECIATE THE MAYOR WORKING WITH US ON THIS FOR A YEAR. IT HAS BEEN TO AND FRO. I HAVE ALSO SPOKEN TO THE PBA FEUARY AND MAY THERE WEREN CHANGES MADE THAT BENEFITED NOT JUST THE ACLU BUT ALSO THE PBA. SO WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A FAIR PROCESS, AND THE REASON WHY IT'S TAKEN SO LONG IS BECAUSE WE HAVE HEARING FROM ALL VOICES WHICH DIDN'T REALLY HAPPEN IN THE LAST ADMINISTRATION. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THIS IS A DEMOCRACY AND WE LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE THINK, AND WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE. I TELL PEOPLE THAT ON THE DAY THAT THE MAYOR ANNOUNCED HER VERSION OF THIS ABOUT A YEAR AGO, I ALREADY HAD A MEETING SET UP WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WITH SOME ACTIVISTS FROM THE COMMUNITY AND THE MAYOR ALLOWED THAT MEETING TO CONTINUE. AND WE EDITED THREE OR FOUR TIMES SINCE THEN SO I APPRECIATE HER. I APPRECIATE CHIEF BENNETT HELPING US MOVE THIS FORWARD. SOME KEY TECHNICAL THINGS. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE VOTE IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY. I PREFER 7-4 VOTE. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ONE VOTE, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY. AS I SAID TO DARLA FROM THE PBA WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU GET AN ANTI-POLICE MAYOR? DO YOU WANT TO HAVE AN ANTI-POLICE MAYOR? NOBODY THINKS THATOULD HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE ARE NOT DESIGNING IT FOR THIS ADMINISTRATION, WE ARE DESIGNING IT FOR THE FUTURE. BUT THE TWO THINGS THAT I REALLY WANT TO MISS IN TRYING TO REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY, NUMBER ONE, THERE WERE SOME CHANGES MADE FROM FEBRUARY TO MAY. SO IF WE END UP CHANGING THE 7-4 VOTE WE NEED TO KEEP THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE. CAN I JUST ASK CHIEF BENNETT -- WELL, I WANT TO ASK TWO QUESTIONS. ONE IS, IF WE ENDED UP CHANGING THE VOTE CAN WE USE THE MAY VERSION THAT HAD 2 CHANGES THAT HAPPENED BETWEEN FEBRUARY AND MAY? THE SECOND THING, AS I UNDERSTA THIS, THIS VERSION, OTHER PEOPLE USE THE NAME OF THE LAST MAYOR, BUT THE PUBLIC, MANY PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC SEE THE LAST VERSION AS BEING VERY BIASED, IT HAS WHEREAS CLAUSES THAT ARE VERY BAD, THAT INFRINGED ON THE CHARTER, THEY SAW IT AS BEING DESIGNED, BUT THE ORDER WAS SEEN AS SPITEFUL AGAINST CITY COUNCIL. BUT THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THIS IS THAT IF WE PASS AN ORDINANCE ON THURSDAY, IF THE MAYOR IS OKAY WITH IT, THEN SHE WILL NOT ONLY ACCEPT THE ORDINANCE AND WORK WITH IT BUT SHE WILL ALSO REPLACE THE EXECUTIVE SO THERE WILL BE A NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER AND ORDINANCE THAT WILL SUPERSEDE THE LAST EXECUTIVE ORDER AND THE LAST ORDINANCE. AND WE ARE WORKING FROM THE MAY VERSION. ARE THOSE TWO POINTS CORRECT? >>JOHN BENNETT: GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF. GOOD MORNING, PUBLIC. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION SPECIFIC, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO FILL IN SOME OTHER COMMENTS AT SOME POINT TODAY. THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, IT IS THE ADMINISTRATION'S VISION TO HOLD THE MAY VERSION EXCEPT FOR THE PORTION OTHE BALANCE OF THE BOARD. YOU KNOW, THE ADMINISTRATION IS LOOKING FOR THE SAME THING, A PROGRESSIVE UNBIASED BALANCED BOARD TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY. AND THE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE. SO YES, TO BE SPECIFIC IT WOULD BE THE MAY VERSION, EXCEPT FOR THE WAY THE BOARD IS STRUCTURED. >>BILL CARLSON: THIS ORDINANCE AND THE MAYOR, SO WE PASS THIS ORDINANCE, THAT ORDINANCE WOULD SUPERSEDE THE OLD ORDINANCE, AND THEN THE MAYOR WOULD PASS A NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT WOULD SUPERSEDE THE LAST EXECUTIVE ORDE >>JO BENNETT: THAT IS CORRECT. ONE OF THE GOALS AS I UNDER IT AT LEAST FROM A FEW COUNCILMEN IS TO HAVE A NEW ORDINANCE SUPPORTED BY A NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER, AND START ANEW. AND IF THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG PEGS. THE OTHER WAS TO MAKE SURE BEYOND THE PROGRESSIVENESS, THE UNBIASED AND THE BALANCED ORDINANCE WAS TO HAVE A BALANCED BOARD. >>BILL CARLSON: AND I THINK MENTIONED IN TALKING TO THE PBA OVER THIS TIME, THERE ARE MANY SAFEGUARDS FOR THE POLICE SO IT'S NOT ANTI-POLICE. IT ALSO HAS MORE SAFEGUARDS FOR THE COMMUNITY. AS I SPEAK TO THE COMMUNITY THAT'S INTERESTED IN CHANGING IT, THEY WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE THE MAY VERSION WITH ONE LESS VOTE THAN HAVE THE FEBRUARY VERSION WITH ONE MORE VOTE. AND THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I THINK FOR MOST PEOPLE IS TO MAKE SURE WE DO AWAY WITH VERSIONS IN THE PAST AND SUPERSEDE IT. SO THANK YOU, ALL. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CITRO, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >>JOSEPH CITRO: MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE LEADERSHIP IN THIS. THIS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR THE CITY. NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR US. IN MY OPINION IT'S LIKE TWO PARENTS FIGHTING AND LEAVING THE CHILDREN WITH NO SUPERVISION. NOT CALLING OUR CITIZENS CHILDREN. I AM NOT CALLING THE CITY OF TAMPA MAYOR'S OFFICE AND CITY COUNCIL PARENTS. HOWEVER, I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. I ALSO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME WHEN I MADE THE STEME, HAS THIS COUNCIL TALKED TO THE CRB BOARD? FOR THIS BOARD TO CHANGE AND BECOME ORGANIC AND CHANGE, THIS BOARD NEEDS TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND TELL US WHAT THEY LIKE, WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE, WHAT THEY NEED, WHAT THEY WANT. NOW, I HAVE SPOKEN TO A NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS I HAVE ALSO GONE TO SENSITIVITY TRAINING WITH THE ACLU, AND LLOYD FRIDELL. I HAVE HEARD LOTS OF CITIZENS TALKING ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS ISSUE. I'LL MAKE IT SHORT AND SWEET. I THINK THANK THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, I THANK CHIEF BENNETT, EVERYBODY INVOLVED, ESPECIALLY YOU, MR. CHAIR, IN THIS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PEOPLE THAT WE SELECT, THE PEOPLE THAT WE, AND SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE THAT SIT ON SO MANY OTHER BOARDS, WE SHOULD HAVE SIX MEMBERS ON THAT BOARD, WITH ONE MORE, INCLUDING THE ACTIVISTS, WHETHER IT BE NAACP, WHETHER IT SOME OTHER OUTSIDE ACTIVIST GROUP WHICH WILL MAKE A TOTAL OF 7. I WOULD ALSO LIKEO REVERT BACK TO THE MAY ORDINANCE, AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE THE WORKSHOP AND THE SUBPOENA POWERS TAKEN OFF BACK THAT DAY. AGAIN, IF WE WANT THIS BOARD TO GROW, MATURE, PROSPER, THEY CAN COME TO US AT THE ANNUAL REPORT WE ASKED THEM TO GIVE US AND TELL US WHAT THEY WANT, WHAT THEY NEED, WHAT THEY LIKE, WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE. RIP ANEPLA 6-5-1 WITH CITY COUNCIL GETTING THAT ONE FOR THE ACTIVIST AND GOING BACK TO THE MAY ORDINANCE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. DINGFELDER, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: AT THIS POINT, I CAN'T SAY ENOUGH ABOUT HOW MUCH WE APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS. JUST TO JUMP IN LIKE THAT, TRULY SAYS -- TELLS US AND THE COMMUNITY WHAT KIND OF PERSON YOU ARE AND WE APPRECIATE IT GREATLY AND I HOPE THE COMMUNITY DOES AS WELL NO MATTER HOW THIS COMES OUT SUBSTANTIVELY, PROCEDURALLY. IT'S VERY BRAVE OF YOU. MR. SHELBY, I WILL START WITH YOU HOPEFULLY ON THE EASIER ONE. OBVIOUSLY, IF WE LEFT IT AT THIS 7-4, THE WAY WE DID WHERE WE WERE BACK IN MAY WITH THE 5-2 VOTE, WE WOULD BE IN A PROCEDURAL POSITION ON THIS COMING THURSDAY TO JUST PROCEED WITH THE SECOND READING AND BE DONE WITH IT. I THINK THE OTHER QUESTIONS YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT IS IF THERE WAS A SLIGHT TWEAK AND WE WENT TO SOME OTHER COMBINATION OF 5-5-1, 6-5, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD CONTINUE WITH SECOND READING THIS COMING THURSDAY? BECAUSE I THINK EVERYBODY INVOLVED FROM THE MAYOR TO COUNCD LIKE TO SEE THIS DONE ON THURSDAY. SO HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY YOUR ANSWER IS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.% YOU TELL ME. >>MARTIN SHELBY: GENERALLY WHAT I BELIEVE YOU ARE ASKING IS, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER YOU GO TO SECOND READING ON THE ORDINANCE AS IT IS, OR YOU COME TO AN AGREEMENT TO COME TO A CONSENSUS TO SUBSTITUTE THE EXHIBIT A, RELATIVE TO JUST THE APPOINTMENTS, AND THE APPOINTMENT OF THE APPOINTMENTS, CAN YOU STILL GO FORWARD TO SECOND READING? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: HE CAN CORRECT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IN MY OPINION IS YES, THERE MAY BE A FEW LITTLE CAVEATS IN THERE, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, FORTUNATELY -- AND I AM VERY GRATEFUL I DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH MS. GRIMES AND TO MS. ZELMAN AND TO MR. MASSEY REGARDING THIS AND I UNDERSTAND SHE IS ONLINE. IF SHE WISHES TO ADDRESS THAT TO COUNCIL, BUT I WOULD PREFER YOU HEAR IT FROM HER SHE BEING THE CITY ATTORNEY. AND I CERTAINLY WOULD CONCUR WITH HER OPINION IF THERE'S ANYTHING I NEED TO ADD, I CERTAINLYOULD BUT I CERTAINLY BELIEVE THAT CITY COUNCIL, IF THAT IS YOUR DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD ON SECOND READING WITH THOSE MINOR PARAMETERS THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE A CHANGE TO THE TITLE OR A CHANGE TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF WHAT THAT ORDINANCE IS, FOR INSTANCE, EVEN WITH REGARD TO THE APPOINTMENTS, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE PURPOSE OF THAT BOARD, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THAT BOARD'S DUTIES. SO MY OPINION IS THAT YOU COULD PROCEED TO SECOND READING AND ADOPTION AND BE ABLE TO PRESENT THAT TO THE MAYOR ON THURSDAY, IF THAT'S COUNCIL'S PLEASURE. IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT THE ADMINISTRATION AGREES TO, AND THE MAYOR WOULD AGREE TO, TO EXHIBIT A. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MS. GRIMES? >>GINA GRIMES: GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. MR. SHELBY AND I HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE ON FRIDAY. AND OUR OFFICE DID CONDUCT RESEARCH ON THE QUESTION OF MAKING CHANGES BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING. AND WE BELIEVE THAT IF YOU DECIDE TO MAKE THE CHANGE FROM THE 7-4 TO 5-5-1, THAT IT IS LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE. BUT LIKE ANYTHING IT'S NOT IRONCLAD. AS YOU KNOW, YOU MAKE CHANGES BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING OFTEN. AND WHENEVER YOU DO THAT, THERE'S ALWAYS A RISK SOMEONE MAY CHALLENGE THAT VARIATION IN THE PROCESS. SO IN THIS CASE, GIVEN OUR OPINION THAT IT IS A LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE CHANGE, WE DECIDE WHETHER YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT RISK, GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF PROCEEDING WITH SECOND READING ON THURSDAY. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU, MS. GRIMES. MR. BENNETT? I KNOW WE ALL LIKE TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION BEFORE WE OPINE ON ANY PARTICULAR ISSUE. YOU ALLUDED TO SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU WANTED TO SHARE WITH US. >>JOHN BENNETT: I DID, CHAIRMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO BACK UP FOR JUST A QUICK SECOND BEFORE I GET INTO SOME OF THE ACTUALLY VERY SMALL SUBSEQUENT POINTS. YOU KNOW, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANTED TOO TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP. I THINK WE HAVE TRIED AS AN ADMINISTRATION ESPECIALLY FOCUSING IN ON MY OFFICE AND MY RESPONSIBILITIES WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH COUNCIL OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS AND LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO DO THAT. THE OTHER COMMENT YOU SAID I MAY NOT MAKE ANYBODY HAPPY. AND I HAVE GOT TO TELL YOU THAT SINCE 2003 WHEN WE CHANGED OUR MISSION STATEMENT IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND YOU WERE PART OF THAT JOURNEY, ACCORDING TO MY FORMULA, EVERY TIME YOU SAVE A VO RESAVE THAT VICTIM TO GET ANOTHER REDUCTION THE NEXT YEAR. IT'S AN ADDITIVE FORMULA. I AND I LOOK LOOKED AT THIS OVER THE WEEKEND TO REFRESH MY DATA FROM WHEN I RETIRED IN 2015 FROM THE ACCURATE DATA THAT'S RECORDED ON OUR CRIME REDUCTION, THAT AMOUNTS TO 357,529 PEOPLE THERE ARE GOING TO BE HAPPY BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS POLICE DEPARTMENT DOES. WHAT'S VERY INTERESTING IS THAT EVERY MAJOR CITY OVER 250,000 IN THE REGION HAS TWO CRIME VICTIMS FOR EVERY ONE IN TAMPA. SO IT'S ALMOST DOUBLE THE RATE OF WHAT WE HAVE. AND THAT IS BECAUSE YOUR LEADERSHIP, SUPPORTING THEIR RESOURCES, THEIR OUTPUTS, THEIR INPUTS AND THEIR INCOMES AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY, WE HAVE 400 THAT YOU PEOPLE THAT INTERACT WITH THIS POLICE DEPARTMENT IN SOME FORM OR RESPECT. THERE'S A CALL, 69 CALLS EVERY HOUR IN THIS CITY THAT THE POLICE ARE WORKING ON TO TRY TO KEEP THAT CRIME RATE AS IT IS. AND I THINK WE ARE ALL VERY PROUD OF THAT A A CITY. NOW TO THE SUBSTANTIVE PART. AND THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN DINGFELDER FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY. AS YOU KNOW, AS THIS PROGRESSED, SINCE APPROXIMATELY A YEAR AGO, AND THOSE ITERATIONS INCLUDE PUBLICKEN GAGE ENGAGEMENT, SCHOLAR PRACTITIONER ENGAGEMENT, AS WELL AS -- >>BILL CARLSON: MR. CHAIR, THERE'S A TERRIBLE FEEDBACK SQUEALING. BUT IS IT POSSIBLE TO TURN OFF ALL THE MIKE OTHER THAN THAT ONE? DO YOU ALL HEAR THAT SOUND? IT'S. >>JOHN BENNETT: MY EAR HAS BEEN RING FOG ARE FIVE YEARS. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I CAN TELL THEY ARE RINGING. >>JOHN BENNETT: AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. I JUST WANT TO GO BACK AND SAY, THROUGH THIS JOURNEY, AND WE WON'T REHASH IT BECAUSE HERE HERE TO NARROW IN THERE, WAS TWO THEM ALREADY IN COUNCILMAN CARLSON'S QUESTIONS IS WE WANTED PROGRESS. THEY ARE IMPORTANT. WE WANT AN UNBIASED AND A BALANCED BOARD. AND THAT REQUIRED TWO THINGS. ONE, TO RIP AND REPLACE THE FORMER ORDINANCE. I'LL TELL YOU, I GOT PARTIALLY ET MEETING WITH THE MAYOR WHEN MR. SHELBY SAID, I REALLY ENVISION BEING AROUND THE TABLE AT A SIGNING CEREMONY AFTER THURSDAY. AND THAT'S AMAZING TO ME. THAT'S AN AMAZING SHOW OF WHAT MR. CITRO SAID A FEW MINUTES AGO ABOUT THIS CITY LOOKING AT THEIR LEADERSHIP, EIGHT ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THIS CITY, AND OVER 4,000 EMPLOYEES SERVIN THEM IN A MANNER THAT JUST IS TO ME INDESCRIBABLE SUCCESS AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE THAT MENTU AND OPPORTUNITY WITH ALL THE ACCOUNTABILITY AND THINGS THAT WE PROGRESSED WITH. SECONDLY, BEYOND THE BALANCE AND UNBIASED BOARD THERE, WERE TWO THINGS. ONE WAS TO RIP AND REPLACE THE OLD ORDINANCE AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEW ONE, WHICH ALLOWS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY. THAT WAS A REQUEST FROM COUNCIL TO HAVE A NEW ORDINANCE, AND THAT'S THE MAYOR ACKNOWLEDGED THAT. ON TOP OF THAT, RIP AND REPLACE ORDINANCE, THE SECOND THING WAS THE MAYOR WENT INTO THIS WITH A 7-4, 7 ON THE ADMINISTRATION AND 4 ON COUNCIL, AND THE BIG THING WAS TO MOVE THAT NEEDLE TO THE CENTER AND HAVE A BALANCED AND OF COURSE UNBIASED BOARD. SO THE 5-5-1 USING THE MAY PLATFORM AND ALL THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES THAT WORKED ITS WAY TO MAY, AND MS. GRIMES IS ON AS WELL, MAKES A GREAT COMPROMISE FOR THE JOURNEY WE HAVE BEEN ON, THE STAKEHOLDERS WE HAVE BEEN ON, INCLUDING THE UNION, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE ADMINISTRATION, AND WHAT IT DOES IS IT ALLOWS COUNCIL TO HAVE 5, THE ADMINISTRATION TO HAVE 5, AND THEN WHETHER COUNCIL MAKES A RECOMMENDATION ON THE MIDDLE PERSON, AND THE MAYOR CONFIRMS IT, OR IT FLIPS THE OTHER WAY AROUND, THE MAYOR MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, WE WOULD HAVE THAT BEAUTIFUL BALANCE OF 5-5-1 AND A BALANCE UNBIASED AND PROGRESSIVE CRB AND THE BEAUTY OF THAT GOING FORWARD IS THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM TO PROGRESS, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE JOURNEY THAT THE CRB IS ON, THE FACT THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BRING ANNUAL REPORTS, THE FACT THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A TRANSPARENT ENGAGIG PROGRESS WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. I MEAN, WN YOU UNPACK THIS, AND I HAVE TO CREDIT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR THIS, THEY REALLY DID A REALLY SOLID JOB FOR A MODEL POLICY CONFIGURATION THAT WAS EFFICIENT, EFFECTIVE AND EQUITABLE TO GO FORWARD. SO THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM TO GROW. SO I THINK THE ONLY TWO THINGS ARE THE CONTENT OF THE MAY ORDINANCE, WITH AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE 5-5-1. AND I AM GLAD TO HEAR FROM MR. SHELBY'S OFFICE, AND MS. GRIMES' OFFICE, THAT THEY AGREE THAT THOSE MINOR MODIFICATIONS CAN BE MADE, AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO A VOTE ON THURSDAY. I'LL HOLD THERE. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A BALANCED AND UNBIASED BOARD, IT ALMOST MAKES ME CHUCKLE A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT, OKAY, I CAN TEST EVERYBODY HERE INCLINGHD EVERYBODY ACROSS THE STREET, THE ADMINISTRATION, TELL US ABOUT THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD, OKAY? WHO SITS ON THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD? WHO ARE THE MAYOR'S PICKS, WHO ARE COUNCIL'S VOTES? NOBODY WOULD KNOW, OKAY. MAYBE THE COURT KNOWS. BUT OTHER THAN THAT NOBODY WOULD KNOW BECAUSE THEY ARE PART OF THAT. WE PICK SOME OF THOSE BOARD MEMBERS, THE MAYOR PICKS SOME OF THOSE BOARD MEMBERS. YOU KNOW, THEY ARE ALL GOOD PEOPLE, REGULAR PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY. OKAY. THIS CITY COUNCIL IS 7 MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL, WE ARE A NOT RADICAL BODY, ALL RIGHT? THERE IS NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF THAT IF WE HAD, GOD FORBID, IF WE EACH HAD ONE MEMBER TO PICK IN A 7-4 SITUATION, YOU KNOW, THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE FROM THE RELATIVELY MODERATE AND ALMOST CONSERVATIVE BOARD, BODY THAT WE ARE, TO SOME RADICAL GROUP THAT'S PUTTING FLAME THROWERS ON THE CRB. THAT IS ALWAYS SORT OF -- I THINK THAT'S BEEN A SAD STATEMENT TO MAKE THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT MIGHT BE AFRAID OF THAT. AND I THINK, MR. CARLSON, I THINK YOU MADE THAT POINT VERY WELL ABOUT A MONTH AGO. PROBABLY EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO ME IS WHATEVER WE DO AS A CITY COUNCIL, OKAY, THE SUBSTANTIVE PART OF IT, 7-4-1, 5-5-1, YOU KNOW, THOSE ISSUES COME AND GO, AND THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL FOUR YEARS FROM NOW CHANGES, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT MAYOR, X NUMBER OF YEARS FROM NOW WORKI WITH CITY COUNCIL COULD PROPOSE A CHANGE. THEY COULD ABOLISH THIS. THEY CAN DO ALL SORTS OF THINGS. BUT THE REAL ISSUE THAT CONCERNS ME GREATLY IS STRUCTURAL. THE STRUCTURE AND INTEGRITY AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT BODIES IN CITY HALL. AND I MEAN THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN. YOU BROUGHT IT UP. AGAIN, TO REINFORCE THE FACT THAT THE CHARTER SAYS IT, WE ARE A REPRESENTATIVE BODY. AND I THINK THIS IS A VERY HEALTHY PROCESS BECAUSE IT DOES REMIND ME OF WASHINGTON, D.C., JO BENNETT. IT REMINDS ME OF WASHINGTON, D.C. WHERE THE PRESIDENT SENDS HIS PEOPLE DOWN TO THE CAPITOL AND SAYS, WE DON'T LIKE THIS PART OF THE LEGISLATION, WE SUGGEST OTHERWISE, AND IT'S A TUG AND PULL, TUG AND PULL, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, OTHER THAN THE VICE PRESIDENT AND A TIE AT THE END OF THE DAY, LEGISLATIVE DECISION IS MADE BY THAT LEGISLATIVE BODY IN CONGRESS AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN THAT. SO THE NOTION THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME SORT OF THREAT OUT THERE, THAT MAYOR MIGHT NOT UPHOLD THE LAW, UPHOLD THE LAW? OKAY. I DON'T KNOW. I FIND THAT VERY DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND AND EVEN BELIEVE. BECAUSE THIS IS A WOMAN WHO HAS SPENT HER ENTIRE LIFE UPHOLDING THE LAW. SPENT HER ENTIRE CAREER AND HAS BEEN TAKING THE ORDINANCES, TAKING THE LAWS OF THE LAND, WHETHER OR NOT THE FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL, AND UPHOLDING IT. BUT LET ME BACK UP A LITTLE BIT AND TALK TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS. AND THAT MAY MEETING WAS VERY UNFORTUNATE, AND NONE OF US FELT GOOD AFTER IT. AND TO THE EXTENT THAT I MIGHT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE CONTROVERSY, I APOLOGIZE TO ANYBODY I MIGHT HAVE INSULTED. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK. WHEN I LEFT THAT MEETING, THE NEXT DAY -- AND JOHN, I WILL BREAK OUR CONFIDENCE HERE, BECAUSE I STARTED IT -- BUT THE NEXT DAY I CALLED JOHN BENNETT AND I SAID, JOHN, I THINK WE SHOULD WORK TOWARDS SOME SORT OF . AND MR. MANISCALCO, YOU BROUGHT IT UP, AND SOMEBODY ELSE, I THINK MR. CITRO, YOU MIGHT HAVE I SAID THE SAME THING THE DAY AFTER THAT MAY MEETING. I SAID, NOW WHAT? I SAID COUNCIL MADE A DECISION, WE MADE A VERY STRONG DECISION TO SUPPORT MR. CARLSON'S MOTION ON 5-2 WITH THE 7-4, 7-4 MEMBERSHIP. I SAID WE MADE THAT DECISION VERY STRONG, WE PASSED IT ON FIRST READING. THAT WAS THIS LIFT BODY'S DESION I SAID, HOWEVER, I THINK E AREA THAT WE COULD GIVE AND TAKE A LITTLE BIT IS ON THE OTHER SORT OF, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PERSON IN THE ROOM, THE OTHER THING IN THE ROOM, WHICH WAS THIS ISSUE OF SUBPOENA POWER AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL. BECAUSE WE HAD PUSHED THAT OFF UNTIL NEXT FEBRUARY. AND AS MR. MANISCALCO POINTED OUT, I THINK THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HORSE TRADE ON THAT ISSUE, BECAUSE THAT ISSUE IS NOT SET IN STONE. THAT ISSUE IS NOT PART OF AN ORDINANCE THAT'S HALFWAY THROUGH, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, AND I WAS AMENABLE THREE WEEKS AGO, JOHN, WHEN YOU AND I SPOKE ABOUT IT AND I AM STILL AMENABLE TODAY TO PUTTING THAT DISCUSSION OFF, IF SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION TO TAKE THAT FEBRUARY WORKSHOP OFF THE TABLE AND PUT IT OFF FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL COMES ALONG, THE NEXT COUNCIL MIGHT WANT TO BRING IT UP OR MAYBE THEY WON'T. OKAY, SO BE IT. SO I MADE THAT OFFER THEN BEFORE, MR. CHAIRMAN, BEFORE YOU JUMPED IN AND SAID YOU WANT TO TAKE THE LEADERSHIP ON IT. I MADE THAT OFFER THEN AS A PROPOSAL, AND I STILL THINK THAT THAT'S THE APPROPRIATE COMPROMISE TODAY. WHENIS LISTENED TO THAT PRESS CONFERENCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT SUBPOENA POWER AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, AND THEY WERE ALL TALKING ABOUT THO ISSUES. SO IF IT'S A MATTER OF COMPROMISE, THEN I THINK THAT THAT'S ANOTHER AREA THAT COULD BE COMPROMISED -- NOT TO BE COMPROMISED, COULD BE AN AREA OF COMPROMISE THAT WE WOULD ALL WORK ON TOGETHER. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE GOT TODAY. I PROMISED MY WIFE I WOULDN'T TALK AT ALL SO I GUESS SHE'LL BE MAD AT ME. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I WANTED EVERYBODY TO TALK TODAY SO SHE CAN BLAME ME ON THAT ONE THEN. MR. MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR EFFORTS TO COME TO SOME TYPE OF CONCLUSION ON THIS MATTER. WHEN YOU GO BACK AND LOOK, IN 2019 SEEMS LIKE IT WAS YESTERDAY. WE ALREADY PASSED THE HALFWAY MARK. SEVEN HERE AND ONE NEXT DOOR. 8 OFFICIALS THAT GOT ELECTED TO SERVE THE PUBLIC. AND I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, TO SERVE THE PUBLIC. AND WHEN YOU GO BACK -- AND I AM NOT SPEAKING FOR ANY ONE ISSUE. I ADOPT CHALLENGE PEOPLE. ONCE I LEAVE THESE TWO DOORS, AND I WALK OUT, I FORGET HOW EVERYBODY VOTED. IT'S UP TO THE INDIVIDUALS THAT GOT ELECTED TO VOTE THE WAY THEY SHOULD AND BECAUSE YOU ONLY NEED ONE PERSON UP THERE, NOT SEVEN. WHEN YOU LOOK -- AND I KNOW SUBPOENA POWER IS NOT ON THE TABLE BUT THAT'S LIKE USURPING THE POWER OF THE STATE ATTORNEY AND THE GRAND JURY, AND NO ONE SHOULD HAVE THAT POWER OTHER THAN THE STATE ATTORNEY AND THE GRAND JURY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CHARTER, WHAT THIS BROUGHT UP I THINK WAS SECTION D, THE FIRST SENTENCE IN THAT SECTION, THE LAST SEVEN WORDS, AS A MATTER OF FACT. THEN YOU GO BACK AND UNDERSTAND HOW THINGS ARE DONE. NO DEPARTMENT HEAD IS APPNTED BY ONE PERSON. THEY ARE RECOMMENDED BY ONE PERSON. AND THEY ARE VOTED ON BY SEVEN OTHER PERSONS. THAT'S US. PAST COUNCIL, THIS COUNCIL, AND FUTURE COUNCILS. SO WHAT I AM SAYING IS, WE HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WHEN THEY APPOINT ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS, INCLUDING THE POLICE CHIEF, AND INCLUDING THE CITY ATTORNEY. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN DISCUSSED. ALREADY, AND MID 2021. ANOTHER MONTH IT WILL BE HALFWAY. THEN YOU HAVE 2022. AND IN 2022, TOWARDS THE END OF 2022, GUESS WHAT HAPPENS. UP FOR ELECTION. WHAT A WONDERFUL TIME TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS ON THE BALLOT. LET THE PUBLIC DECIDE. THAT'S CALLED DEMOCRACY BY LARGE NUMBERS, NOT BY 8. NOT BY 7-4. NOT BY 5-5-1. NOT BY 6-3-1, 6-3-2, WHATEVER. IT'S CALLED DEMOCRACY. IT SETTLES THE SITUATION ONCE AND FOREVER. I DON'T LIKE TO SIT HERE AND UNDERSTAND TELL MYSELF, XI, I WONDER WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN 2025. THAT WOULD BE CUT DRIED WHAT'S GOING DO HAPPEN BECAUSE THE PUBLIC VOTED ON IT AND YOU DON'T HEAR ME SPEAKING MUCH ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THE PUBLIC ELECTED US. BUT WHEN THERE'S SOME TYPE OF GIVE AND TAKE, AND TWO BODIES, WHOEVER THE BODIES MAY BE, AND YOU KNOW WHAT? THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH HAVING A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AMONG 8 INDIVIDUALS. THAT'S ALSO CALLED DEMOCRACY. AND SOME PLACES IN THE WORLD, IN MOST PLACES IN THE WORLD, NOT SOME, THERE IS NO VOTE BETWEEN 8 PEOPLE. ONE INDIVIDUAL HE OR SHE VOTES AND THAT'S THE WAY IT IS. AND THEY GO OUT AND THEY MAKE IT HAPPEN THAT WAY. NO GOVERNMENT GETS ELECTED 85 THE PERCENT TO 15% OR 99% TO 1. AND THAT HAPPENS IN THE MAJORITY OF THE WORLD. HERE WEAVE CLOSE BALLOT. EVERYBODY WANTS TO SAY WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON BECAUSE WE HAVE DEMOCRACY. AND YOU WIN THE POPULAR VOTE AND YOU LOSE THE ELECTORAL VOTE. THAT'S DEMOCRACY. THAT'S NOT RIGHT OR WRONG, THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS MADE HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? AFTER ALL THE TUGGING, ALL THE DRAGGING, ALL THE MISINFORMATION BY BOTH SIDES, ALLEGEDLY, NOT THIS SIDE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WORLD, SOMEHOW DEMOCRACY WORKS IN THIS COUNTRY. AND MAYBE ANOTHER COUNTRY -- NAME ME ANOTHER COUNTRY THAT HAS THE SAME FORM OF GOVERNMENT. THINK ABOUT IT FOR A LONG TIME. THERE AREN'T ANY, IN MY BOOK. NONE WITH A STRUCTURAL LIKE THIS THAT SURVIVED THIS LONG. NONE. SO MAKE THIS AN ELECTION OF THE PEOPLE TO VOTE ON, BECAUSE GUESS WHAT, COULD BE THAT THE SAME INDIVIDUALS HERE AND NEXT DOOR WILL BE SEEKING OFFICE, ALL OF US OR SOME O U BUT IT WOULD BE A POINT TO SPEAK ON WHERE I GUARANTEE YOU, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE THE LARGEST TURNOUT POSSIBLY IN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY. YOU SEE, WHEN I FIRST STARTED ON THIS THING, THERE WERE MORE PEOPLE VOTING REPRESENTING THAN THERE IS NOW. YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME? CHECK THE RECORDS. WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU GO OUT AND GATHER MONEY TO BE GO TO TV ADS OR GO TO DIRECT MAIL, BUT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED WHO VOTES. SO YOU GO TO THEEW TECHNOLOGY. SEE, I'M FROM THE OLD SCHOOL. AT SPAGHETTI DINNERS. SOME OF YOU REMEMBER THAT. SOME OF YOU DON'T. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE YELLOW RICE AND CHICKEN DINNERS? WHAT HAPPENED TO WHEN WE GO OUT TORN SPEAK TO THE ICE FACTORIES AND HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE SHOW UP? AND I SAID IT BEFORE, YOU HAVE TO -- NOW WE GOT LAZY. WE WANTS TO STAY HOME. WE GOT TV. WE HAVE ALL THE AMENITIES. WE HAVE AIR CONDITIONING. WHEN I STARTED, FEW PEOPLE HAD AIR CONDITIONING. THERE WAS NO DIRECT MAIL TO SPEAK OF. AND LET ME TALK ABOUT ABSENTEE BALLOTS. IN ORDER TO GET AN ABSENTEE OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY OR IN A HOSPITAL. AND IT WORKED FOR A WHILE. NOW, THE SAME GOVERNMENT WANTS TO TELL THE WORLD WORLD THAT WE LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY, YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ABSENTEE BALLOT AND YOU MAIL IT BACK. YOU CAN'T HAVE A DROP BOX TO PUT IT IN. WHEN THEY FIRST START OUT MAILING OUT BALLOTS TO YOUR HOUSE, THEY PAID THE MAIL GOING IN AND YOU HAD TO PAY THE 89 CENTS GOING OUT. NOBODY SAID ANYTHING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. NOW THEY PAY THE MAIL COMING IN, RETURN MAIL GOING BACK OUT. SO YOU GET MORE PEOPLE IN DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY IS LIKE A BALLOON FILLED WITH WATER. ONE SIDE. GRAB THE OTHER SIDE IT MOVES. AND MAYBE THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF IT BECAUSE IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE BALLOON YOU POP IT. AND THIS BALLOON I HOPE NEVER POPS BECAUSE IF IT DOES, DEMOCRACY IS GONE IN THE WORLD. LOOK WHAT HAPPENED IN ISRAEL JUST THE OTHER DAY. IT HAPPENED IN ALL THE OTHER COUNTRIES THE OTHER DAY. AND I AM NOT SINGLING OUT ISRAEL. BUT WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT THIS ABOUT ANGER, NOT ANGER, SOMEBODY WANTS TO HURT SOMEBODY. NOBODY HURTS SOMEBODY, NOBODY HATES US. THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION OF US. AND I AM HAPPY WITH THAT. NO ONE HERE SHOULD BE 100% CORRECT ALL THE TIME. SOMEWHERE UP IN THE WORLD, NOT A DEMOCRACY, A DICTATORSHIP. HEAR YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE GO MEET WITH THE MAYOR AND DISCUSS THINGS OUT, TO SOME TYPE OF A COMPROMISE. WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR NOW, AND HAS BEEN ALLUDED TO SIMILAR TO A ZONING HEARING, WHERE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS ON WHETHER IT CHANGES THE FACTS OF THE ORIGINAL HRING THERE'S A CHANGE BEING MADE. AND SOME OF THESE ARE VERY MINOR, AND CAN GO BETWEEN FIRST, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY SAYS YOU CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE AND IT CAN GO. HOWEVER, DOING THIS, IN MY OPINION, SOLE OPINION, GOING FROM THIS, AND FIRST OR SECOND READING, WITHOUT GOING BACK TO FIRST READING, COULD BE A DETRIMENT TO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO. IF THIS IS CHALLENGED AND IT LOSES, WHAT HAPPENS THEN? ALL THESE THINGS NOT OF TODAY AND NOT OF TOMORROW BUT WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY, TOMORROW, WHAT HAPPENED YESTERDAY, TODAY, TOMORROW, AND IN THE FUTURE, IS WE OUGHT TO LOOK AT, NOT JUST FOR GETTING THIS OFF THE TABLE, TO SAY NOBODY WON, NOBODY LOST, WE ARE HAPPY. IT'S TAKING A RISK THAT I WILL NOT TAKE. BECAUSE IF THIS IS CHALLENGED, THEN THIS IS ANOTHER TUG-OF-WAR. AND I DON'T MEAN PHYSICAL TUG-OF-WAR. I WANT THIS, IF WE ARE REALLY, REALLY THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS DOCUMENT THAT WE HAVE AND THE STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN THE CITY -- AND I BELIEVE IN THAT. I BELIEVE IN A STRONG MAYOR OF THIS CITY. AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY. IT PINPOINTS RESPONSIBILITIES. AND HE OR SHE, WHOEVER SITS IN GOT TO MAKE THE CHOICE OF HAVING WHAT TYPE OF PERSON THEY ARE GOING TO BE IN THE HISTORY OF THIS CITY. SO THAT'S HOW FEEL. AND I FEEL WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITIES, A, TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE DEPARTMENT HEADS AT TIME OF AN ELECTION THAT'S COMING UP IN A FEW MONTHS, LESS THAN TWO YEARS. THE URGENCY IS HERE, BUT IS IT GOING TO TEAR A CHAPTER OUT OF THE FOUR YEARS THAT THIS GOVERNMENT SERVES TOGETHER? I DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL. BUT IT COULD. SO TO TAKE A RISK OF THAT SIZE OVER ONE VOTE -- AND SOMETIMES ONE VOTE MAKES A DIFFERENCE.% A BIG DIFFERENCE. IT'S ONE VOTE THAT CHANGES, CHANGE OF THE FUTURE OF THINGS THAT COME FOR MANY YEARS TO COME. AND THEREFORE I AM NOT WILLING TO TAKE THAT CHANCE RIGHT NOW WITH WHAT I THINK CAN HAPPEN. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS PUT OFF TO A CHARTER CHANGE. AND LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS. LET THE PUBLIC VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT IS SO DELICATE THAT WILL PUT THE RECORD STRAIGHT FOR MANY, MANY, MANY YEARS TO COME. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>LUIS VIERA: MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY. I WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT I AM LEAVING. I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: OKAY, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>LUIS VIERA: THANK YOU. PARDON ME. >>ORLANDO GUDES: LET ME SAY THIS GENTLEMEN. WHEN I FIRST BECAME A PART OF THIS COUNCIL, YOU ALWAYS HEARD OF CHARLIE MIRANDA. YOU HEAR ME AT TIMES CALL HIM A GEND. SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN AROUND THIS COUNCIL A LONG, LONG TIME AND SEEN IT ALL. WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THIS COUNCIL, AND VOTED ONE WAY AND MR. MIRANDA VOTED ONE WAY, AND EVERYBODY VOTES. MR. MIRANDA, I DON'T CARE HOW ANYBODY VOTES. IT'S YOUR VOTE. WHATEVER VOTE YOU MADE, IT'S YOUR VOTE. AND I EXPECTED IT EVER SINCE I HAVE BEEN ON THIS COUNCIL TO NEVER GET MAD HOW SOMEBODY VOTED, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW THEIR REASON WHY THEY VOTE. SO I THANK YOU FOR THAT, SIR. NUMBER TWO, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT COMPROMISE, THE LEGEND CAME AGAIN WHEN WE ARE REVEALING WITH THE BUDGET IN REFERENCE TO THE FIRE RESCUE IN EAST TAMPA. GOING BACK AND FORTH, AND THE LEGEND STEPPED IN AGAIN AND ASKED FOR A RECESS. AND WENT IN BACK AND MET WITH MR. BENNETT, TD MR. BENNETT, COME AWAY WITH A COMPROMISE, MAKE IT HAPPEN. IT HAPPENED. I DIDN'T WANT TO GET INTO ANY CHARTER ISSUES. I REALLY DIDN'T. BUT WANTED TO CHIME IN ON THAT. AGAIN THE LEGEND SPOKE ABOUT THE PEOPLE. IT'S THE PEOPLE'S POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT'S THE PEOPLE'S WATER DEPARTMENT. IT'S NOT OURS. MANY TIMES YOU HEARD MAI ME SAY THAT DELEGATING ON A SITUATION, I SAID OUR CHARTER IS A LITTLE BI OUTDATED. EVEN THOUGH WE HAD A BE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH EVERYTHING IN THAT CHARTER, AND SOMETIMES WE WERE KIND OF UPSET BECAUSE WE WERE STONEWALLED ON TRYING TO DO SOME STUFF. AND THE COUNCILMEN WHO WERE HERE, WE GET FRUSTRATED BECAUSE OF WHAT PEOPLE FEEL A STRONG FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS. THERE IS NOTHING IN OUR CHART BER A STRONG FORM OF GOVERNMENT. IT SAYS TWO BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. I DON'T RECALL EVER SEEING STRONG MAYOR. I GUESS PEOPLE COME UP WITH WORDS, AND IT'S BEEN THAT WAY. IT'S THE WAY WE HAVE ALWSONE IT. AND I AM NOT ADVOCATING TAKING A AWAY STORM MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. BUT WHAT I AM SAYING WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW WE LEGISLATE HOW THE ADMINISTRATION DOES POLICY, I SAID THIS MANY TIMES, IT BECOMES CONTRADICTORY SOMETIMES. IT BECOMES INTERPRETATION. THAT'S WHY FOR THE LAST MONTHS BEFORE WE GOT TO THIS ISSUE IN REFERENCE TO POLICE ISSUE OR WHATEVER, I HAVE ALWAYS SAID WE HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE CHARTER AS IT RELATES TO INTERPRETATION OF TWO BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. NOW THAT HAS TO HAPPEN. AND IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, NOT ONLY THESE ISSUES BUT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH MS. GRIMES, AND MR. SHELBY, ADMINISTRATION DOWN THE ROAD, INTERPRETATIONS OF CERTAIN THINGS IN THE CHARTER. THAT HAS TO BE CLEARED UP. SO I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. MR. SHELBY, I TOLD YOU MANY TIMES IT HAS TO BE DONE AND IT'S GOT TO GET DONE. THAT'S DOWN THE ROAD. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DEPARTMENT HEADS, MR. LEGEND IS RIGHT AGAIN. THIS BODY, BEFORENY DEPARTMENT HEAD BECOMES OWNERSHIP OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, WE HAVE TO EMPOWER THEM. MANY TIMES, I TELL PEOPLE, THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE MAYOR ARE THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT POSITIONS OF THIS CITY. EVERYBODY RELIES ON THE POLICE CHIEF, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, TO SERVE SAFETY. RESCUE TIME, THEY DO IT ALL. THEY DON'T JUST DO ONE JOB. THE WATER DEPARTMENT, THE POLICEMAN IS THE PERSON IN THAT E ARE DISTRESSED AND IN NEED AND SO THE POLICEMAN HAS TO FIND A WAY TO DO IT. BEEN THERE. UNDERSTAND THAT. I ALWAYS WONDERED, IT'S BEEN A THING TO YOU TALK ABOUT APPOINTMENTS THAT ARE COME FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. I HAVE NEVER SEEN COUNCIL QUESTION IT, THEY JUST RUBBER STAMP AND IT GOES ON. THERE'S NEVER ANY CONFIRMATION OF MEETING WITH THOSE DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT COME BEFORE THIS BODY TO SEE IF THIS BODY LIKES THAT PERSON. THEY JUST SAY, WELL, E WILL GO WITH WHATEVER TH ADMINISTRATION SAYS. MR. MIRANDA LEGEND BRINGS UP A LOT OF DIFFERENT POINTS, GENTLEMEN. AND THOSE ISSUES HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH DOWN THE ROAD. BUT TODAY WE HAVE GOT TO KIND OF COME UP WITH SOMETHING TO GET THIS GOING, AND THEN DOWN THE ROAD, LIKE MR. MIRANDA SAID, IT'S GOT TO COME TO THAT POINT AND IT HAS. TIME IS CHANGING. HE'S SEEN IT ALL. SO I WANT TO KIND OF BRING IT TO A LANDING. KEEP TO THE AT LEAST UNDER AN HOUR AND A HALF SO THE ADMINISTRATION CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THIS COUNCIL IS HEADED. FOR ME, I AM WILLING TO TRY TO MAKE A COMPROMISE NOW, AND THEN TRY TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES DOWN THE ROAD, LIKE YOU SAID, 2022, AND PUT ALL THIS TO BED. THE INTERPRETATION OF ANYTHING IN THAT CHARTER, BE IT DEPARTMENT HEAD, ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE -- WE SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE VOTERS. HE'S RIGHT. THERE ARE 8 ELECTED VOTE OFFICIALS IN THE CITY AND WE SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PEOPLE. IT'S THEIR HOUSE. THIS IS THE HOUSE -- IT'S THEIR HOUSE. I THINK THEY DESERVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THEIR HOUSE. WE HAVE HAD OUR FIRST ROUND. I HAVE KIND OF TAKEN SOME NOTES ON WHAT I SEE THAT THURSDAY COULD GO. WHEN I DO THE NUMBERS, I SEE ONE ON A 5-5, AND MR. MIRANDA MADE HIS STATEMENTS ON HOW HE FEELS, AND HE DOESN'T FEEL IT NEEDS TO BEEVES THERE COULD BE AOF IT, CHALLENGE, ON A BUNCH OF ASPECTS. I THINK HE COULD BE RIGHT. I THINK -- I KNOW THE CITY ATTORNEY SAYS -- DO WE WANT TO SPEND THE TIME ON IT? I HAVE GOT HOUSING ISSUES, GENTLEMEN. I WANT TO WRAP IT UP. I WANT TO KEEP IT AT AN HOUR AND A HALF. I WANT TO TAKE FINAL COMMENTS. THAT WAY I HAVE MY MIND, I WILL LET JOHN BENNETTAVE THE LAST PORTION SAY. MR. MANISCALCO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS. YOU KNOW, THE 5-5-1 SPLIT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, LIKE YOU SAID, I HAVE OTHER THING ABOUT. WE HAVE BIGGER -- WE HAVE BIG ISES IN THIS CITY TO WORRY ABOUT. I DON'T WANT TO GO DOWN THE ROAD OF A LAWSUIT, OR, YOU KNOW, MORE STRIFE AND DIVISION, ESPECIALLY GOING INTO THE BUDGET SEASON WHICH IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF STUFF COMING UP. THE 5-5-1 IS IT FAIR? IT BRINGS A BALANCE, SOMETHING THAT YOU MENTIONED, COUNCILMAN MIRANDA MENTIONED. REGARDING DEPARTMENT HEADS. YOU KNOW, THE MAYOR APPOINTS THE CHIEF, BUT THE CHIEF NEEDS THE APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL. SO THERE IS A CHECK AND BALANCE, AND IT'S NOT -- THE POLICE DEPARTMENT RUNS THE SHOW AGAIN, IT GOES TO -- COMES TO US, COMES TO THE MAYOR, DIFFERENT SIGNATURES ARE REQUIRED AND APPROVAL, CHECKS AND BALANCE. THE 5-5-1, I GET IT. THAT ONE THING THE NAACP MEMBER, THAT ONE BEING THAT IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, SO REALLY WE HAVE THAT MAJORITY, 5-6. -- 6-5. AT THE END OF THE DATE WHY NOT A 7-4, WHY NOT THIS? BUT WE ARE DEALING WITH DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES, AND DIFFERENT FEARS, AND WHATNOT. AGAIN, WHAT DOES THE BOARD THINK ABOUT IT? THE CRB BOARD? HOW DO THEY FEEL? WHAT DO THEY WANT? WHAT TOOLS ARE IN THE TOOL BOX? THEY FEEL LIKE THEY ARE DOING A GOOD JOB. WHAT WAS PROPOSED TO US, AND THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES, IF WE CALL IT THE MAY ORDINANCE OR WHATEVER, BASICALLY THE ONLY THING THAT AT A STALEMATE ARE THE APPOINTMENTS. THE OTHER THING WE ESSENTIALLY AGREE UPON, SHOULD WE REVISIT IN THE FUTURE IF THINGS ARE NOT WORKING? WE CAN DO THAT. CAN WE PUT THINGS ON THE BALLOT, AS COUNCILMAN. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:ED? WE CAN DO THAT AND LET THE PEOPLE VOTE. BUT TO BRING THIS TO BED, I MEAN, WE ARE REPEALING AND REPLACING WHAT WAS PUT IN IN 2015, SO THERE ARE CHANGES. THERE'S OTHER MODIFICATIONS THAT PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT AND WHAT MAKES THIS ORDINANCE DIFFERENT AND BETTER. BUT BASICALLY COMES DOWN TO THE APPOINTMENTS. AGAIN, I AM NOT LOOKING TO FIGHT. I AM NOT LOOKING TO FLEX ANY MUSCLE. I DON'T HAVE MUCH. BUT I AM NOT LOOKING TO DO A POWER PLAY HERE. I AM JUST LOOKING TO PUT THIS TO BED AND MOVE FORWARD AGAIN. I HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS FOR SIX YEARS. WE HAD SOMETHING, MAYBE IT'S NOT GOOD. WE ARE REPLACING IT, REPEALING THE PREVIOUS WITH SOMETHING BETTER. AND AGAIN IN THE FUTURE, ANOTHER COUNCIL CAN DECIDE DIFFERENTLY, ANOTHER COUNCIL CAN ADD MORE TO IT, THE CRB BOARD MEMBERS CAN SAY THEY HAVE CONCERNS THAT THEY WANT TO ADDRESS AND THEY CAN CHANGE IN THE FUTURE. WE LET A FUTURE MAYOR, A FUTURE COUNCIL DECIDE OR TAKE IT TO THE BALLOT ON OTHER BIGGER ISSUES. AND THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU, SIR. FOR THE PUBLIC WATCHING, AND WE SPENT A YEAR TRYING TO MAKE SURE POLICE, WE WANT TO BE FAIR TO EVERYONE, AND WE HAVE ADDED A LOT OF THAT IN HERE. WHAT YOU WITH SEEN PLAY OUT AND IN THE MEETING BEFORE FOR ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHED IS WE ARE AT THE END OF THE NEGOTIATIONS ON THIS ROUND. IT'S ALWAYS POSSIBLE THAT WE CAN ADD SOMETHING ELSE IN THE FUTURE AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID. BUT IN THIS ROUND, WE HAVE GONE BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH. THIS IS AS FAR AS WE CAN GET IN THIS ROUND. THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT IF WE CHANGE THE VOTING, WE HAVE TO USE THE MAY VERSION. AND WE NEED A NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT SUPERSEDES THE ORDINANCE AND THE EXECUTIVE ORDER SUPERSEDES. MR. BENNETT, DO WE HAVE A COPY OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER? AND WOULD THERE BE A NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER OR HOW? >>JOHN BENNETT: I KNOW THAT THE MAY VERSION IS AVAILABLE. I WOULD NOTIFY LEGAL AND MAKE SURE THE EXECUTIVE ORDER IS READY OR COULD BE PREPARED FOR THURSDAY. >>BILL CARLSON: BECAUSE WE COULD SEE -- I DON'T KNOW HOW THE VOTE IS GOING TO GO DOWN BUT REAFFIRMS 5-5. >>GINA GRIMES: THE EXECUTIVE ORDER WAS A DRAFT THAT WAS PROVIDED IN NOVEMBER. REVISE IT, PROVIDED IT IN FEBRUARY. I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS PROVIDED IN THE MAY MEETING BUT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED, MR. CARLSON, AND I AM HAPPY TO E-MAIL YOU A COPY. >>BILL CARLSON: IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND E-MAIL US AND ALSO POST IT TO SIRE SO THE PUBLIC CAN SEE IT AND THEN PEOPLE CAN SEE THAT WHATEVER LANGUAGE IS IN BOTH OF THEM THAT SUPERSEDES THE OLD PART OF IT. BUT THANK YOU ALL FOR WORKING ON THIS. ONE OTHER LAST POINT, AND JUST TO CLARIFY THE PRESS CONFERENCE% FROM A COUPLE WEEKS AGO. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE MS. GRIMES OR THE CLERK CAN CORRECT ME, BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE SUBPOENA POWER UP ON ANY AGENDA. IS THAT CORRECT? WE ONLY HAVE -- WE PUT A FEBRUARY WORKSHOP TO TALK ABOUT INDEPENDENT COUNSEL BUT NOT SUBPOENA POWER. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN. MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. I HAVE THE CALENDAR IN FRONT OF ME AND CERTAINLY THE CLERK CAN CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG BUT ON FEBRUARY 24th, YOUR CALENDAR READS AS FOLLOWS, AND BOTH OF THEM AT 9 A.M., BESIDES THE PRESENTATION OF THE COMMENDATION OF THE OFFICERS OF THE MONTH, A CONTINUED WORKSHOP, MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY AND LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO PRESENT A DRAFT ORDINANCE REGARDING THE CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD DISCRETION TO HIRE OR RETAIN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED AS A CHARTER QUESTION FOR CITIZENS AND THE COMPANION THAT FOLLOWS WORKSHOP. COUNCIL COULD DISCUSS ANY PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT CHANGES TO THE CITY CHARTER. THOSE ARE THE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS THAT COUNCIL HAD ADDED. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST TO CLARIFY, SO WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER PRESS CONFERENCE, THE SUBPOENA POWER IS NOT -- THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WANT IT BUT WE WERE TOLD BY THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT WE CAN'T JUST ADD IT WITHOUT A CHARTER AMENDMENT, WE CAN ANYTIME BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION ADD IT AS A CHARTER AMENDMENT, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW THE ADMINISTRATION DOESN'T WANT US TO BRING IT, TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA SO WE HAVEN'T PUT IT ON THE AGENDA YET. THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL IS ON THE AGENDA. THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD ASK IS IF AT SOME POINT SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION TO TAKE THAT OFF THE AGENDA, I THINK WE OUGHT TO LEAVE THE PLACEHOLDER DISCUSSION FOR ANY OTHER CHARTER DISCUSSIONS, THE PURPOSE OF THAT WAS SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE MULTIPLE MEETINGS TO TALK ABOUT CHARTER AMENDMENT, WE WOULD ONLY HAVE ONE AND IF THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT DATE WE COULD MOVE IT BUT IF WE COULD SEPARATE THOSE TWO ISSUES. BUT I APPRECIATE CHIEF BENNETT AND CHAIR GUDES FOR GETTING US TO THIS POINT. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. CARLSON, I THOUGHT I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THURSDAY TO STRIKE THE ONE, BUT THE LADDER -- LATTER HAS TO BE DONE TO RETAIN THE WHOLE CHARTER, SO MR. SHELBY AND MRS. GRIMES TO GIVE REFERENCE TO THE ALCOHOL CHARTER BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME INTERPRETATIONS WE MUST CLEAR UP. MR. CITRO, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JOSEPH CITRO: I HAVE ALWAYS SAID I KNOW YOU HAVE YOUR SAYING DON'T TELL ME WHAT YOU CAN'T DO, TELL ME WHAT YOU CAN DO. >>ORLANDO GUDES: CORRECT. >>JOSEPH CITRO: AND YOU HEARD MY SAYING, SAYING DIALOGUE WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING. THANK YOU FOR OPENING THIS DIALOGUE. THANK THE MAYOR FOR OPENING THIS DIALOGUE. AGAIN, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS RIP AND REPLACE, GO BACK TO THE MAY ORDINANCE,, AND DO A 6-5-1 OF APPOINTEES TO A CRB, 6 FROM CITY COUNCIL, 4 FROM THE MAYOR, AND THAT THE COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS AGAIN WHETHER IT BE NAACP OR ANY OTHER ACTIVIST BE APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE. GENTLEMEN, I FEEL THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE OUR BEST WAY OF GOING ABOUT IT. LET THE BOARD COME BACK TO US ONCE A YEAR AND LET US KNOW WHAT THEY WANT, WHAT THEY LIKE, WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE. LET'S LET THIS BE ORGANIC. LET'S LET THE BOARD GO ON ITS OWN. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. DINGFELDER RECOGNIZED SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, YOU STARTED BY SAYING 6-5-1. >>JOSEPH CITRO: I KNOW THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN. 6-4-1. THAT MAKES 11. I MISSPOKE MY FIRST TIME AROUND. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE RECORD WAS CLEAR. I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD BEYOND WHAT I SAID BEFORE, MR. CHAIRMAN, BUT I WILL SAY -- AND I HAVE SPOKEN REQUEST MS. GRIMES ABOUT B THIS. I KNOW SHE HAS SOME ISSUES WITH THE TERM INDEPENDENT COUNSEL VERSUS OUTSIDE COUNSEL. AND MAYBE SHE WAS RIGHT ON. THAT SO IF AND WHEN WE EVER GOT TO THAT DISCUSSION IN FEBRUARY, THEN PERHAPS A BETTER TERM MIGHT BE OUTSIDE COUNSEL. KIND OF SPLITTING HAIRS. BUT AGAIN, AS I STATED EARLIER, AND I MENTIONED TO MR. BENNETT A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, I THINK THAT, AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. CARLSON, THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM SEEMS TO BE SUBPOENA POWER, SO MIGHT AS WELL ADDRESS IT. I THINK IF THOSE ARE BIG ISSUES TO THE ADMINISTRATION, AND PBA, WHAT HAVE YOU, THEN THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY NOT DEAL WITH DURING THIS 4-YEAR TERM. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I DO THINK THE ORDINANCE HAS COME A LONG WAY. BUT I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO COME OUT OF ALL OF THIS IS WHO ARE WE AND WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? YOU KNOW. BECAUSE IF WE ARE NOT THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, REGARDLESS IF YOU WANT TO CALL THIS A STRONG MAYOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT, WEAK FORM OF GOVERNMENT, WHAT HAVE YOU, IF WE ARE NOT THE LEGISLATIVE BODY TO MAKE THE LEGISLATIVE DECISIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS WHO ARE IN TOUCH WITH US EVERYWHERE, IN THE GROCERY STORE, IN THE DRUGSTORE, ON THE STREET, ON THE PHONE, BY E-MAIL, ET CETERA, BECAUSE WE ARE THE DAY-TO-DAY CONNECTION WITH THIS COMMUNITY. AND THEREFORE IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US TO BE THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, AND WE SHOULD BE MAKING THESE DECISIONS, AND ONCE WE HAVE MADE THEM, WE SHOULD STICK WITH THEM UNLESS THERE'S SOME COMPELLING REASON NOT TO. SO I AM COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF THE DECISION WE MADE BACK IN MAY 5-2, AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. BUT WITH THAT SAID, I THINK AS A MATTER OF COMPROMISE, IF THE OTHER TWO ISSUES OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND SUBPOENA POWER, I THINK COULD BE DEALT WITH ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER YEAR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. MIRANDA, THEN TO MR. SHELBY FOR HIS COMMENTS. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I HAVE SAID ENOUGH AND I HAVE HEARD ENOUGH. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU. MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN, THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD, MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR DISCUSSION. AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND INCLUDING ME IN THE MEETING. I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH TO SEE TWO BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT WORKING COLLABORATIVELY TOGETHER AND WORKING CORDIALLY TOGETHER AND I APPRECIATE YOUR OPPORTUNITY TODAY AND THE PUBLIC FORUM TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AMONG YOURSELVES SO THE PUBLIC IS CLEAR ON THE DECISIONS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE MAKING ON THURSDAY. IF THERE IS THE ABILITY FOR YOU TO COME TO A CONSENSUS, COUNCIL, IT MAY BE TO YOUR ADVANTAGE TO BE ABLE TO COME TO A CONSENSUS TODAY. YOU HAVE THE CHIEF OF STAFF PRESENT IN THE ROOM, IF THERE IS A QUESTION AS TO THE ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET CLEAR ON AT THE TIME, AND IMPORTANTLY BY THE END OF THIS MEETING IF IT'S THE CHAIR'S INTENTION TO DO SO, EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT TAKE OFFICIAL ACTION, YOU CAN TELEGRAPH WHAT THE CONSENSUS OF THIS BOARD IS, OF WHAT THE OFFICIAL ACTION WILL BE ON THURSDAY, SO THERE ARE NO SURPRISES TO ANYBODY, AND THE PUBLIC CERTAINLY WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE INPUT AT A PUBLIC HEARING AS THEY WOULD BE BEFORE YOU TAKE FINAL ACTION. SO PLEASE TAKE ADVANTAGE, IF COUNCIL IS CAPABLE -- FORGIVE ME TO USE THE WORD CAPABLE -- TO FORMULATE A CONSENSUS TO CONVEY TO MR. BENNETT AND HAVE MR. BENNETT'S RESPONSE AND PERHAPS GET SOME SORT OF ASSURANCE FROM HIM OF WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION BE IS OR WOULD BE PERHAPS ON THAT CONSENSUS. >>ORLANDO GUDES: I WAS GOING TO DO THAT, MR. SHELBY. HE'S THE NUMBER TWO MAN IN THE CITY. HE'S HE HAS THE MAYOR'S EARS AND HEARD FROM COUNCIL TODAY. I AM SURE HE WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE BACK SOME OF WHAT HE'S HEARD. WE ARE WILLING TO COMPROMISE. I DON'T THINK THE ADD -- THIS IS MAKING THE CITY GO IN THE RIGHT PATH. MR. BENNETT, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JOHN BENNETT: CHIEF OF STAFF. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, FOR PULLING THIS SPECIAL CALLED MEETING TOGETHER. THANKS, MR. SHELBY, FOR WORKING WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AS WELL OFFLINE ESPECIALLY. THANKS TO OUR STAFF FOR THE LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT TO DATE. I WILL BE VERY PRESCRIPTIVE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE COLLECTIVE OF THE ADMINISTRATION. I DON'T NEED TO REHASH AGAIN THE DUE DELL GENERALS THAT WE FELT. WE WORKED COLLABORATIVELY TOGETHER WITH ALL FACETS OF THE COMMUNITY TO BRING US WHERE WE ARE TODAY. I WILL SAY THOUGH THAT WHEN YOU SERVE A CITY OF THIS SIZE AND THIS MAGNITUDE, I HEARD THINGS ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THERE'S BEEN FOUR POLICE ADMINISTRATIONS UP TO THIS POINT SINCE WE CHANGED THE MISSION STATEMENT AND REDUCED CRIME BY 80% IN THIS CITY, AND TO SUSTAIN THAT. I THINK THE VALUE HERE IS IN MY OPINION THE EXPERIENCE OF THE MAYOR WHEN SHE SAID, ONE, IT'S TIME TO PROGRESS THE ORDINANCE, AND WAS WILLING TO RIP AND REPLACE IT AND BRING IN A NEW ORDINANCE, SIGNED BY THE MAYOR, AFTER THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION FROM COUNCIL, AND COMPLEMENT THAT WITH THE APPROPRIATE EXECUTIVE ORDER TO ALLOW NOT ONLY PROGRESS TODAY BUT PROGRESS IN THE FUTURE. THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF ADDITIONAL PROGRESS. IF WE ARE NOT CONTINUING TO IMPROVE, WE ARE SITTING STILL. AND IF WE ARE SITTING STILL WE ARE GOING BACKWARDS. SO I THINK THAT'S THE ELEMENT OF PROGRESS. I THINK THE ELEMENT OF UNBIASED AND BALANCE COMES DOWN TO THE MAKEUP OF THE BOARD. THE MAYOR CLEARLY GAVE UP A 7-4 FOR THE RECOMMENDATION TODAY, AND BEING VERY PRESCRIPTIVE ON THE 5-5-1, FIVE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM COUNCIL, FIVE FROM THE MAYOR, AND ONE RECOMMENDED AND CONFIRMED BY COUNCIL OR THE ADMINISTRATION AND CONFIRMED BY COUNCIL OR THE ADMINISTRATION. AND I THINK THERE'S VALUE IN THAT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON, AND ESPECIALLY IN LAW ENFORCEMENT. YES, LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMENTS TO DO THEIR JOB AND THEY ARE GOING TO ENFORCE THE LAW. BUT I THINK THE DIFFERENCE COMES DOWN TO LEADERSHIP. WE ALL KNOW THAT WHATEVER TEAM YOU ARE MANAGING OR COACHING, IT COMES DOWN TO LEADERSHIP AS THE DIFFERENCE MAKER, IN THE COMMUNITY, AND THIS DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN LED BY GREAT LEADERSHIP AND ELECTED POSITIONS, PARTNERS IN THE COMMUNITY, THE PUBLIC AND OF COURSE THE VERY OFFICERS THAT ARE DOING THE WORK ON THE FOLLOWING, AND THE SUPPORT STAFF THAT SUPPORTS THEM EVERY DAY. A I'M VERY CONFIDENT THAT IF COUNCIL, AND OF COURSE THE ADMINISTRATION, CAN FIND THAT BALANCE OF MAKING SURE THAT WE DO A RIP AND REPLACE, EVERYBODY SIGNING ON SIGNING DAY, AND A 5-5-1 BY NEXT THURSDAY, AND WE HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN AT LEAST A LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CONFIRMED BID MR. SHELBY THAT THESE MINOR ADJUSTMENTS CAN BE MADE AS OF THURSDAY, I THINK WE CAN MOVE THE CITY FORWARD, AND THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, AND I THINK THIS APPEASES THE CRB AS A BOARD, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE UNION, THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN ALL THE ITERATIONS THAT LED US TO THE MAY VERSION, WHICH WE ARE TODAY, AND I THINK TO COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO'S POINT, THAT LEAD US INTO THE NEXT CHAPTER OF WORKING ON THE BUDGET. >>BILL CARLSON: CHIEF BENNETT, JUST ONE QUICK THING. THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THIS AND HAVE BEEN FOR SIX YEARS, THIS FINAL ISSUE, I SHOULD SAY THE PUBLIC, THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS IN THIS THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE ORIGINAL VERSION IF YOU GO BACK SIX YEARS. IT'S VERY DIFFERENT. >>JOHN BENNETT: CORRECT. >>BILL CARLSON: WE HAVE BEEN TALKING FROM ONE VERSION TO ANOTHER BUT THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IN THIS MAY VERSION. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SOME ADDITIONAL ISSUES THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS IS THE WAY THEY SEE IT IS THEY WANT CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE MAJORITY APPOINTEES ON THIS. IT WOULD HELP IF WE ARE GOING TO GO TO 5-1-5, IT WOULD HELP WITH THE COMMUNITY IF WE COULD SAY THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTS BUT THE MAYOR APPROVES. I KNOW YOU SAID BOTH AND I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S WRITTEN BUT IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO SAY THAT CITY COUNCIL APPOINTS AND THE MAYOR APPROVES THAT WOULD JUST HELP US IN TALKING TO THOSE NUMBERS IN THE COMMUNITY. >>JOHN BENNETT: UNDERSTOOD. AND I THINK THE ADMINISTRATION WILL BE RECEPTIVE TO THAT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: [OFF MICROPHONE] WORDS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION'S POINT OF VIEW. MR. CITRO? >>JOSEPH CITRO: JUST CLARIFICATION FOR MYSELF. THE COMMUNITY ACTIVIST GROUP, AGAIN, WHETHER IT BE NAACP WHOMEVER THAT WOULD BE, CHIEF BENNETT, WOULD BE POINTING THERE, CITY COUNCIL OR MAYOR? >>JOHN BENNETT: BASED ON COUNCILMAN CARLSON'S RECOMMENDATION WHAT I HEARD IS THAT COUNCIL COULD MAKE THE NOMINATION, THE MAYOR CONFIRM THE NOMINATION. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>ORLANDO GUDES: >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. MIRANDA SAID IT MAY BE A LEGAL MATTER SO IF WE LOOK AT GOING WITH THE MAY 5-5-1, AND MR. MANISCALCO IS KIND OF LEANING IT WOULD BE BOBBLE TO MAYBE COMPROMISE, STILL 7-4? ARE WE GETTING CLOSE, GENTLEMEN, THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH A COMPROMISE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION, THOSE OTHER ITEMS GET KICKED DOWN TO -- >>BILL CARLSON: I WANT TO -- I APPRECIATE CHIEF BENNETT WORKING WITH US, AND WE ALL NEED TO GO BACK AND TALK TO OUR CONSTITUENTS ABOUT IT. BUT I THINK THAT IN THE VERSION THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, IT'S BETTER THAN HAVING NOTHING AND STARTING A LEGAL WAR, AND WE COULD GO BACK AND NEGOTIATE THIS MORE ANOTHER TIME. WE HAVE GOT SO MANY GOOD THINGS THAT WE HAVE NEGOTIATED. AND I WOULD ASK EVERYBODY PLEASE GO BACK TO THE VERSION FROM SIX YEARS AGO AND WHEREI LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE TODAY. IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT AND WE NEED TO APPROVE A VERSION SO THAT WE CAN COME BACK. BUT IF WE END UP IN A BIG FIGHT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE APPROVED FOR MONTHS OR YEARS. BUT I THINK IF WE ARE GOING TO BE PARTICULAR OR PRESCRIPTIVE ABOUT THURSDAY WE NEED TO CLARIFY ONE FINAL POINT. ORIGINALLY THE ONE WAS THAT THE MAYOR'S OFFICE PROPOSED THE ONE WOULD BE THE NAACP AND THE NAACP WOULD PROPOSE SOMEBODY, AND THEN CITY COUNCIL OR THE MAYOR WOULD APPROVE THEM. BUT ARE YOU CHAINING THAT DEFINITION? I THINK LEGAL NEEDS SOME DEFINITION OF WHAT WOULD BE IN THIS SO THEY CAN PRESENT THE LANGUAGE TO US FOR THURSDAY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. BEFORE MS. GRIMES WOULD ADDRESS THAT, I DO HAVE THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED ON FIRST READING IN FRONT OF ME, AND I'M SURE CITY ATTORNEY DOES, TOO. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY, BEFORE YOU GET TO THAT POINT, THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP BY THE CRB TOO. I THINK THE ORGANIZATION VERSUS SPECIFIC NAME OF AN ORGANIZATION, AND AGAIN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY THE CRB, AND AGAIN, CITY COUNCIL BROUGHT THAT UP TOO. SO I JUST WANT TO SHED LIGHT ON THAT AS WELL. MR. CITRO. >>JOSEPH CITRO: I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ON THAT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I BELIEVE, COUNCIL -- AND COUNCILMEMBER CARLSON RAISES A VERY GOOD POINT, OBJECT BETWEEN NOW AND THURSDAY, COUNCIL WILL NEED TO SEE THAT LANGUAGE, AND SO WILL THE PUBLIC TO THE DEGREE THAT THEY CAN. BY THE TIME OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO GO FORWARD WITH THE SECOND READING. AS IT STANDS NOW, THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CLARIFIED. I DON'T RECALL HOW IT WAS DRAFTED IN THE FEBRUARY ORDINANCE. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME SO MAYBE MS. GRIMES CAN ADDRESS THAT. BUT YOU RAISE A VERY GOOD POINT AS TO GETTING A CONSENSUS AND GETTING CLEAR, AS TO WHAT WILL BE PREPARED AS A RESULT OF TODAY'S CONSENSUS. THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT HAS TO ADVANCE OF THURSDAY'S MEETING SO YOU CAN GO TO SECOND READ IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT. LET ME JUST ADDRESS THAT ONE MORE TIME JUST VERY BRIEFLY AND ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND MS. GRIMES CERTAINLY CAN ADD TO TO THIS. IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH ADOPTING THAT MINOR AMENDMENT TO SUBJECT A, ADOPTING IT ON SECOND READING, IF THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THAT ORDINANCE IT IS OF A TECHNICAL NATURE THAT SOMEBODY IS GOING TO CHALLENGE IT ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT IT DIDN'T COMPLY WITH FLORIDA STATUTES, HAVE TO BRING A LAWSUIT AND THE REMEDY IS TO GO BACK TO WHAT IS ALREADY EXISTING. AND THE WAY COUNCIL CAN CURE THAT IS GO THROUGH ANOTHER FIRST READING AND SECOND READING. ON A COST BENEFIT BASIS TO ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO CHALLENGE THAT ORDINANCE THERE'S NOTHING REALLY TO BE GAINED EXCEPT TO BE A SPOILER. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THE RISK EVEN ON A FAST TRACK, BECAUSE OF COUNCIL'S RECESS FOR THE SUMMER, IT WOULD NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO COME BACK, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, FOR SECOND READING, IF YOU HAD TO GO BACK TO FIRST READING THIS THURSAY, IT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER MONTH INTO JULY. SO IT DEPENDS ON HOW COUNCIL WANTS TO WEIGH THE COST AND BENEFITS OF HOW IT WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD. AND ULTIMATELY YOU HAVE THE ISSUE THAT COUNCILMAN MIRANDA RAISED THAT ULTIMATELY THAT IF YOU WANT TO PUT 24 BEFORE THE VOTERS, THEN YOU WOULD BE OPERATING CONTINUOUSLY UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE OF 2015 ORDINANCE UNTIL IT'S PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS, AND THEN DEPENDING ON WHAT THE VOTERS DO, AND DEPENDING ON WHAT BE QUESTION YOU PUT BEFORE THE VOTERS YOU WON'T KNOW WHAT THAT DECISION IS. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT INTO CONTEXT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY, I WANT MR. DINGFELDER TO CHIME IN AND I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: SO MR. CHAIRMAN AND MR. CITRO, ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT INSTEAD OF USING THE WORDS NAACP, THAT REGARDLESS OF WHICH ORDINANCE WE GO WITH, WHICH HEAD COUNTS WE GO WITH, THAT WE SUBSTITUTE INSTEAD OF THE WORDS NAACP SOMETHING LIKE "A LOCAL CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION"? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING? BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT MS. GRIMES AND MR. SHELBY NEED SOME DIRECTION FROM THIS BODY. AGAIN, I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE A MINOR TECHNICAL CHANGE, THAT REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY WE GO, 7-4, WOULD BE THIS COMING THURSDAY. >>JOSEPH CITRO: THAT'S WHAT I AM PROPOSING. ORGANIZATION IS THE KEY WORD THERE. THAT WAY, THEY ARE RECOGNIZED AS A COMMUNITY ACTIVIST GROUP, ORGANIZATION, EXCUSE ME, WHETHER IT BE NAACP, WHETHER IT BE SOME OTHER COMMUNITY ACTIVIST GROUP. SO YES. >>ORLANDO GUDES: AND THAT GIVES EVERYBODY A CHANCE. MR. SHELBY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DO THINGS ABOVEBOARD, AND I DON'T WANT TO WHERE WE HAVE TO BE CHALLENGED ON ANYTHING. IF WE ARE GOING TO DO SOMETHING WE ARE GOING TO DO IT AND DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. I DON'T CARE IF IT COMES BACK IN JULY. THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE RIGHT. AND WE HEARD FROM THE LEGEND, I KNOW WE HAVE DONE SOME STUFF, PROBABLY WE SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE BUT WE HAVE DONE IT, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE WE DO IT RIGHT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MS. GRIMES OFFICE HAS DONE THE LEGAL RESEARCH, THE ATTORNEYS UPSTAIRS, AND HAVE TAKEN A LOOK AT IT, AND THEY CAN GO MORE INTO DEPTH BUT IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE SAFIST COURSE OF ACTION IS, AND COUNCIL COMES TO A CONSENSUS, YOU COULD GO BACK TO FIRST READING ON THURSDAY BUT THEN YOU HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING AND A SECOND READING IN JULY. IF THAT PUTS COUNCIL AT EASE, THEN THE DELAY IS NECESSARY. THE QUESTION IS -- AND I AM JUST RESPONDING TO CONCERNS FROM PEOPLE WHO WANT TO -- AND I DOWNTOWN KNOW WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS A PARTICULAR POSITION ON THIS -- BUT TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY COME TOGETHER AND PUT THIS MATTER TO REST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITIZENS OF TAMPA WITH A DEGREE OF FINALITY. WHEN I SAY FINALITY, THE PROCESS IS JUST BEGINNING BECAUSE THE WHOLE PROCESS IS A PROCESS IN AND OF ITSELF. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WHAT'S YOUR OPINION? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WELL, IT'S NOT THE OPINION. IS 30 DAYS GOING TO BE A DEAL BREAKER AS FAR AS THE CHANCES OF SOMETHING NOT BEING APPLICABLE TO SOMEONE, AND YOU HAVE A CHALLENGE, AND YOU HAVE ALL OF THIS, YOU GET BACK AGAIN. I AM NOT LOOKING FORWARD TO SOMETHING THAT BELONGS TO KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD OUT INTO THE STREETS AND TO GO FOREVER AND NOT DOING ANYTHING. NO. BUT IF THE ISSUE IS, IS 30 DAYS THAT IMPORTANT RELATIVE TO WHAT THE POSSIBILITY COULD BE THAT IT'S TURNED DOWN SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD? THAT'S WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. 30 DAYS. IS IT GOING TO BE A DEAL BREAKER ON 30 DAYS VERSUS THAT? I DON'T KNOW. BUT I CAN TELL YOU ONE THING. I WOULD RATHER HAVE SOMETHING THAT IS MORE CODIFIED SO IF IT IS TAKEN UP, IT WAS DONE WITHOUT ANY -- WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT THE CHANCES ARE HERE. ANYTIME YOU GO TO COURT IT AIN'T 90-10. IT'S 50-50 GOING IN. DO YOU REALLY TAKE THE CHANCE OF 50-50 OR 99 TO 1? THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU, SIR. CHIEF BENNETT, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND SPEAKING WITH STAFF, AND THEN WATCHING THE PRESS CONFERENCE WITH THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE MAYOR, IS THAT THEIR PREFERENCE IS TO RESOLVE THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. IS THAT STILL THE DIRECTION, OR DOES THE ADMINISTRATION CARE WHETHER -- DOES THE ADMINISTRATION HAVE A PREFERENCE AS TO WHETHER WE DO SECOND READING ON THURSDAY VERSUS DELAYING IT UNTIL JULY? >>JOHN BENNETT: NO. THE PREFERENCE HENCE THE RESEARCH IS TO CALCULATE THE LEGAL -- WHICH I THINK HAS BEEN DONE AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO TRY TO MOVE FORWARD ON THURSDAY. AGAIN, WITH THE 5-5-1. AND I MENTION IT IT TOP MR. SHELBY AND HE CAN INTERPRET MY QUESTION IF HE WANTS TO IN ADDITION TO MY COMMENTS, BUT THE REASON I HAVE A LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE -- I'M NOT A LAWYER BUT THE REASON I HAVE A LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE IN NOT ONLY THE RESEARCH OF WHAT THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT HAS DONE IN SHARING THAT WITH MR. SHELBY IS THAT THE 5-5-1 RECOMMENDATION HAS ALREADY BEEN IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC IN A PRIOR VERSION. IT'S NOT A COMPLETELY NEW METHODOLOGY, IF YOU WILL, FOR CONFIGURING THE BOARD. THAT WAS PRESENTED IN THIS CONTINUUM. AND SO IF WE WERE GOING TO 20 AND 2 OR SOME OTHER CONFIGURATION AND IT WAS RADICALLY DIFFERENT, I THINK IT BRINGS AN ELEMENT OF CONSISTENCY. WE ARE JUST TOGGLING BACK TO A PREVIOUS VERSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL. >>BILL CARLSON: COULD I ALSO JUST ASK CITY ATTORNEY MS. GRIMES, COULD YOU TELL US, WITHOUT OPENING A HUGE LEGAL DISCUSSION, BUT COULD YOU JELL JUST TELL US, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF THERE WAS A LEGAL CHALLENGE THAT WE COULD JUST SCHEDULE THIS FOR FIRST AND SECOND READING SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE AND PASS THE EXACT SAME LANGUAGE, AND WOULD SUPERSEDE IT AND THEN ALLOW US TO HAVE THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? >>GINA GRIMES: IF THERE IS A CHALLENGE IN THE ORDINANCE BASED ON THE PROCESS, AND IF WE DID NOT PREVAIL, THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE VOID, WOULD THEN REVERT US BACK TO WHERE WE ARE IN AND OUT WITH THE LAST MAYOR HAVING APPOINTMENTS AND THE COUNCIL 4 AND THE BOARD WITH VERY LIMITED POWERS. AND THE POINT THEN COULD YOU BRING BACK WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW, IN THE NORMAL COURSE. >>BILL CARLSON: IF SOMEBODY FILED A LAWSUIT DURING THAT LEGAL PROCESS COULD WE NOT HOLD FIRST AND SECOND READING AND REPLACE? >>GINA GRIMES: YES. >>BILL CARLSON: I WOULD RATHER HAVE US VOTE THIS AS SECOND READING ON THURSDAY. THANK YOU. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. DINGFELDER, THEN MR. SHELBY. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU, MR. CARLSON. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. THE THING I HAVE BEEN AGONIZING OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS -- AND I PUT A CALL TO MS. ZELMAN, TO MR. SHELBY, TO ANYBODY WHO WILL LISTEN, I THINK I MENTIONED IT TO MR. BENNETT AS WELL, WHATEVER WE DO, LET'S JUST BE DONE WITH THIS THIS THURSDAY, OKAY? I MEAN, I CAN AGREE WITH ANYTHING THAT MS. GRIMES CAME UP WITH AND SAID TO US A FEW WEEKS AGO, IS THAT THIS THING HAS DRAGGED ON LONG ENOUGH, ALL RIGHT? AND YES, ANYBODY CAN SUE US ABOUT ANYTHING. IT DOESN'T COST VERY MUCH TO WALK INTO THE CIRCUIT COURT AND SUE US. BUT THE BASIS FOR IT WOULD BE SILLY. IT WOULD BE FRIVOLOUS, OKAY. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING, AND LIKE YOU SEWED, BILL, THE MINUTE SOMEBODY SUES US ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS AND PASS IT. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO WAIT FOR A JUDGE TO SIGN. THEN THE LAWSUIT BECOMES MAT. SO LET'S JUST BE DONE WITH THIS, THIS THURSDAY, NO MATTER WHAT. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND JUST TO ADD TO COUNCIL'S LEVEL OF COMFORT, IF THIS WOULD HELP, IS THE VERY FACT THAT YOU ARE HAVING THIS MEETING TODAY, BEFORE THE PUBLIC, WITH FULL NOTICE BEFORE THURSDAY, I THINK ALSO ADDS TO THE WEIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THIS COUNCIL IS TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT IT ATTEMPTS TO ACCOMPLISH, AND THE FACT THAT THE PUBLIC IS ON NOTICE, AND WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU TAKE FINAL ACTION. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO A LANDING, AND THINK WE HAVE HEARD FROM EVERYBODY TO SEE WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT FOR THURSDAY TO BRING THIS TO BED. MR. BENNETT, I WOULD SAY ONE THING, IF YOU WOULD COME TO THE PODIUM SIR. YOU BEING THE SPOKESMAN FOR THE ADMINISTRATION. THIS COUNCIL IS WILLING TO WORK WITH THE ADMINISTRATION. BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE TRANSPARENCY ON THESE ISSUES. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU HEAR TIME AND TIME AGAIN FROM THE COUNCIL, TRANSPARENCY AND GETTING THE INFORMATION TO US ON TIME, SO WE CAN VET THE INFORMATION. HOW IT GOES ON THURSDAY, I THINK IT WILL COME OUT TO WHERE EVERYBODY WILL BE ABLE TO WALK AWAY WITH OUR HEADS HIGH. I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY, THE PUBLIC, THE ADMINISTRATION, CITY GROUPS, TO THIS BODY, THERE IS NO WINNER IN THIS. THE ONLY WINNER IN THIS WHOLE THING WILL BE THE CITY OF TAMPA. SO THERE'S NO WIN FOR THE MAYOR, NO WIN FOR THIS COUNCIL. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR. IT'S A WIN FOR ALL OF US. AND IF IT'S A DONE DEAL ON THURSDAY, WE'LL HAVE A FRESH CONFERENCE THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS WE CAME TOGETHER TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN FOR CITIZENS. AND WHATEVER GOES DOWN THE ROAD IS DOWN THE ROAD FOR WHATEVER OH ADMINISTRATION WHATEVER COUNCIL, WHATEVER WORKSHOP. ON THURSDAY WE BRING IT TO A CLOSE WITH EVERYBODY COMING TOGETHER. NO WIN FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OR THIS COUNCIL BUT A WIN FOR THE CITIZENS OF TAMPA, SIR. >>JOHN BENNETT: [OFF MICROPHONE] I APPRECIATE THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN. AND -- [OFF MICROPHONE] JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF, CITY OF TAMPA. I JUST WANT TO LEAVE THE LECTERN CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND BASED ON THE DOLLAR THIS MORNING, AND I AGREE WITH MR. SHELBY ON EVERYTHING ABOUT TRANSPARENCY PART, IS THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WILL BRING BACK A 5-5-OPTION ON THURSDAY FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND BE MORE SPECIFIC TO THE 5-5-1 THAT IS THE APPOINTMENT AS TO -- AND I KNOW THE CITY ATTORNEY HEARD THIS, BUT TO BE CLASSIFIED AS A CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION? IS THAT THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ACTIVIST. ANY ORGANIZATION. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IT DEPENDS WHAT YOUR DEFINITION. >> COMMUNITY >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THAT COULD BE THE PBA? I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S AN ORGANIZATION. [NO ENCODER] >>GINA GRIMES: YES, WE CAN REFER TO IT AS A CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION OR A SOCIAL JUSTICE ORGANIZATION, WHICHEVER WAY YOU WOULD LIKE. AND THIS IS A PROCEDURAL QUESTION. I AM NOT CLEAR WHETHER YOU WANT ME TO PREPARE THIS CHANGE BEFORE THURSDAY, OR TO HAVE IT AVAILABLE ON THURSDAY. I AM MORE THAN WILLING TO WORK ON IT TODAY, AND TRY TO GET IT INTO SIRE LATER ON TODAY OR TONIGHT. >> BEFORE THURSDAY. MR. CHAIRMAN. >>GINA GRIMES: I WOULD TAKE THE EXIST WILLING DRAFT, THE MAY DRAFT, AND I WOULD MODIFY SECTION 18-8-B, PROVIDE THAT COUNCIL HAS FIVE APPOINTMENTS, THE MAYOR HAVE FIVE APPOINTMENTS, THEN THERE WOULD BE ONE APPOINTMENT BY CITY COUNCIL OF A MEMBER OF A CIVIL RIGHTS OR SOCIAL JUSTICE ORGANIZATION, AND THAT COUNCIL APPOINTMENT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CONFIRMATION BY THE MAYOR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WELL, THE QUESTION IS, DOES COUNCIL WANT TO BE CLEAR? DOES IT WANT TO REFER TO IT AS BOTH OR JUST CHOOSE IT TO BE A CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION, OR USE THE TERM SOCIAL JUSTICE AS IS DEFINED? >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MS. GRIMES RIGHTS OR SOCIAL JUSTICE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IS THAT THE CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL? RECOGNIZED SIR. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: THANK YOU. MRS. GRIMES, I APPRECIATE THIS CONSENSUS BUILDING EXERCISE THAT WE ARE IN. WHAT I WOULD ASK, RESPECTFULLY, IS THAT YOU ALWAYS TAKE THE 7-4-1 DRAFT THAT'S ALSO PENDING AND MAKE THAT NOT SAME MODIFICATION, YOU KNOW, CIVIL RIGHTS OR SOCIAL JUSTICE, TO THAT DRAFT, SO THEN THAT WAY ON THURSDAY WE HAVE TWO CHASES WE CAN GO 5-5-1 OR 7-4-1, BUT WE HAVE A PERFECT DRAFT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. >>GINA GRIMES: [ INAUDIBLE ] >>JOHN DINGFELDER: RIGHT NOW SHE HAS THE OLD DRAFT OF 7-4-1 THAT DIDN'T INCLUDE THE NAACP UPDATE. NOW SHE'S GOING TO CHANGE IT PURSUANT TO WHAT I JUST SAID. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THANK YOU, SIR. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IF I COULD JUST FOLLOW UP. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: ALSO INCLUDE THE DRAFT THAT'S 5-5-1 WITH THE NAACP CHANGE SO WE CAN BRING TWO DOCUMENTS TO US THAT WE CAN VOTE ON, ON THURSDAY. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY, YOU ARE RECOGNIZED, SIR. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEFORE THE CLERK TODAY THAT'S BEEN ADVERTISED FOR SECOND READING IS THE ORDINANCE THAT HAS THE EXHIBIT A AS IT STANDS TODAY, WHICH IS WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING BEING CHANGED. SO IN EFFECT YOU ARE ASKING FOR TWO THINGS TO COME BACK IN ADDITION TO THE ORDINANCE THAT'S ON THE AGENDA. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT -- >>JOHN DINGFELDER: SAYING THERE MIGHT BE THREE THINGS. >>MARTIN SHELBY: YOU HAVE JUST RAISED A THIRD. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: YES. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE THAT ORDINANCE IS AS IT IS ON THE CALENDAR AGENDA FOR SECOND READING. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WAS YOUR HAND UP SIR? >>JOSEPH CITRO: YES, SIR. MRS. GRIMES, THERE IS A WOMAN TO YOUR LEFT. WOULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE HER? >>MARTIN SHELBY: URUULA. >>JOSEPH CITRO: THIS WOMAN HELPED ME OUT IMMENSELY. THERE ARE TIMES THAT SHE INFORMED ME SO I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO THANK YOU, MS. URSULA, FOR YOUR HELP. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MS. URSULA RICHARDSON, CHIEF LITIGATE OR, IS THAT CORRECT, MRS. GRIMES? AND SHE HAS BEEN CRAFTING THE CORRECTIONS. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: JOE KNEW WHO SHE WAS. HE WAS JUST RECOGNIZING HER. >>GINA GRIMES: THE ONE PERSON THAT CONSISTENTLY APPEARED IN FRONT OF THE CRB DURING THIS WHOLE PROCESS, AND TO INSTRUCT THEIR OFFICE ON THE STATUS OF THE ORDINANCE. SO SHE HAS DONE A REALLY NICE JOB OF MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE AT LEAST AWARE OF WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE. >>JOSEPH CITRO: THANK YOU, MS. GRIPES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST TO ECHO THAT, I WANT TO THANK HER FOR NOT ONLY THE THINGS THAT WERE SAID WITH YOU SHE DID EXTENSIVE RESEARCH TO LOOK INTO OTHER CRBS THROUGHOUT FLORIDA AND THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THAT DILIGENCE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY, I SEE YOU GOING BACK AND FORTH. YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >>MARTIN SHELBY: A CONSENSUS PLEASE WITH REGARD TO THE FEBRUARY WORKSHOP ON THE DISCUSSION -- OF THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD TO HIRE OR RETAIN INDEPENDENT COUNSEL WOULD BE PRESENTED AS A CHATTER QUESTION. THAT WAS SOME DISCUSSION IF THAT WAS THE ADMINISTRATION'S REQUEST TO HAVE THAT TAKEN OFF THE FEBRUARY AGENDA. >> [OFF MICROPHONE] >>MARTIN SHELBY: BECAUSE IF THE ADMINISTRATION -- THAT CAME UP AT THE MEETING. >>ORLANDO GUDES: WE HAVE ALREADY CONCEDED. WE HAVE ALREADY SAID THAT'S DOWN THE ROAD AND WE ARE GOING TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF THE VOTE. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: LET'S GET THROUGH THURSDAY FIRST. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT'S THE QUESTION. IF THIS IS GOING TO COME UP ON THURSDAY, I THINK YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DISCUSS IT WITH THE ADMINISTRATION. IF COUNCIL DOESN'T R WISH TO DISCUSS IT AND IT'S FINE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION -- >>ORLANDO GUDES: LET'S GET TO THE VOTE RIGHT NOW IN REFERENCE TO THE NUMBER AND THEN DEAL WITH IT LATER ON. I DON'T WANT TO MIX THE TWO. AND THEN WE GO TO A WHIRLWIND. >> I APOLOGIZE. >>GINA GRIMES: ONE PROCEDURAL QUESTION. SO I WILL PREPARE TWO NEW ORDINANCES CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION YOU GAVE ME, AND I WILL SUBMIT TO SIRE AND IF YOU COULD ASK THE CLERK TO ACCEPT THEM INTO SIRE IF IT'S PAST THE DEADLINE DATE, I WILL GET THOSE TO YOU ALL SO YOU CAN REVIEW THEM AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC HAVING ACCESS TO THOSE DOCUMENTS TO REVIEW. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: MR. CHAIRMAN, MOVE THE CLERK TO ACCEPT THEM TO SIRE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. MIRANDA, MAKE YOUR POINT, SIR. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I AM NOT OPPOSED AT ALL TO MR. CARLSON TO PUT IT ON SIRE AND SO FORTH AND SO ON. BUT IF THERE'S ONE LITTLE COMMA THAT'S OUT OF PLACE, THEY MIGHT HAVE THE WRONG INFORMATION. WHY DON'T WE JUST GET THE THING, LOOK AT IT AND PUT IT ON WHOEVER, LET MR. SHELBY AGREE WITH THE ITEM AND THEN PUT IT ON THE SIRE. FOR MS. GRIMES TO PUT IT ON NOT ON THE SPOT BECAUSE SHE'S CAPABLE OF DOING A FINE JOB, AND IF SHE MAKES ONE ERROR, THEN WE ARE ALL GOING TO LOOK LIKE WHAT ARE YOU DOING NOW? PLAYING TRICKS? WE ARE NOT PLAYING TRICKS BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE 110,000 PERCENT THAT WHATEVER GOES TO THE PUBLIC IS WHAT WE DISCUSSED. HAT'S ALL. >>ORLANDO GUDES: MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, MR. MIRANDA, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THE CONFIDENCE AND EXCELLENCE IN YOUR CITY'S LEGAL DEPARTMENT, I DON'T WANT TO SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS BY HAVING IT TO COME THROUGH ME IF TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: THAT'S NOT WHAT HE'S SAYING. HE'S SAYING, AND I CONCUR WITH HIM, THAT YOU ARE OUR CITY ATTORNEY, SHE'S GOING TO WRITE IT, SEND TO YOU FOR REVIEW AND YOU SEND IT BACK TO HER, AND THAT WAY IT'S YOUR JOB -- MR. CHAIRMAN, I MET WITH EVERYBODY AND IT'S GOING THROUGH MRS. GRIMES, IT GOES TO SIRE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU WANT HER TO SEND IT TO ME AND THEN I MEAT WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS? >> NO. >>ORLANDO GUDES: NO. I WANT YOU TO RECEIVE IT FROM MRS. GRIMES, APPROVE IT. YOU HEARD WHAT THE COUNCIL ASKED. ONCE YOU APPROVE IT BECAUSE YOU ARE THE COUNCIL ATTORNEY, SAY I APPROVE, AND SHE CAN DO WHAT SHE NEEDS TO DO WITH IT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THANK YOU. WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING I AM VERY HAPPY TO DO THAT. THANK YOU, MR. MIRANDA. YES, I AM HAPPY TO DO THAT. >>JOHN DINGFELDER: WHEN IT COMES BACK FROM GINA, AND SEND IT TO THE CLERK, I THINK MRS. GRIMES ASKED YOU TO HAVE THE CLERK -- THAT'S FINE. >>ORLANDO GUDES: HAVE YOU GOT THAT? >>BILL CARLSON: AND MRS. GRIMES, A REMINDER, THE LATEST VERSION OF THE MAYOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT SUPERSEDES THE LAST ONE. THANK YOU. >>GINA GRIMES: YES, SIR. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ANYONE ELSE? [OFF MICROPHONE] >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. >>JOSEPH CITRO: SECOND. >>ORLANDO GUDES: ALL IN FAVOR? WE STAND ADJOURNED.