CITY OF TAMPA. [ SOUNDING GAVEL ] >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE TAMPA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL STAND FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [MOMENT OF SILENCE] THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE] >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL HAVE ROLL CALL. >>THE CLERK: CARLSON? >>BILL CARLSON: HERE. >>LYNN HURTAK: HERE. >> CLENDENIN? HENDERSON? >>GWEN HENDERSON: PRESENT. >>LUIS VIERA: HERE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HERE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: HERE. >>THE CLERK: WE HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. SHELBY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO REVIEW THE RULES AND PROCEDURES? >>MARTIN SHELBY: YES, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. TODAY IS A COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA. AND FOR THE PUBLIC'S INFORMATION AND TO REMIND COUNCIL, YOU ARE OPERATING UNDER YOUR NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE, BUT THE AGENDA IN THIS CASE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED AS YOU JUST PASSED THE RULES JUST LAST WEEK. SO A REMINDER OF THOSE RULES, THERE ARE NO COMMENDATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS SCHEDULED FROM THIS POINT FORWARD ON THE AGENDA. AND WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC COMMENT, I'D LIKE TO INFORM THE PUBLIC SO THAT YOU ARE AWARE THAT THIS COUNCIL IS NOW GOING BACK TO ITS PRE-PANDEMIC POLICIES WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH MEANS THAT AFTER TODAY, THERE WILL BE NO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT AT WORKSHOPS. AGAIN, THERE WILL BE NO PRESENTATIONS, NO COMMENDATIONS, NO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. CITY COUNCIL WILL GO DIRECTLY INTO THEIR BUSINESS OF WORKSHOP ITEMS. PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE FUTURE, AS IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS NOW, WILL TAKE PLACE AFTER EACH WORKSHOP ITEM. SO THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE COUNCIL TAKES ANY ACTION TO SPEAK TO WHAT THEY HEARD THE PRESENTATION, TO COMMENT ON IT, AND THEN COUNCIL WOULD THEN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ACTION IF IT SO CHOOSES. TODAY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AGENDA, PUBLIC COMMENT STILL APPEARS AT THE START OF THE MEETING. SO TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEOPLE WHO CAME TODAY, YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, AS YOU HAVE SINCE THE PANDEMIC, TO TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT IN TWO FORMS. YOU CAN EITHER STATE WHATEVER YOU WISH, WHATEVER SUBJECT AT THE START OF THE MEETING, EITHER AN ON WORKSHOP ITEM OR OFF WORKSHOP ITEM. AFTER EACH AGENDA ITEM, YOU CAN THEN ALSO ONE OR THE OTHER, YOU CAN EITHER TALK BEFORE OR TALK AFTER EACH ITEM AND SPEAK TO WHAT THE PARTICULAR WORKSHOP ITEM IS. THERE IS NO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER THE START OF THE MEETING. SO IN THE FUTURE, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT IF YOU DO COME DOWN TO CITY HALL OR YOU DO WANT TO REGISTER, PLEASE DO NOT DO IT ON A WORKSHOP DAY BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE WORKSHOP. AGAIN, PLEASE BE REMINDED THAT THE RULES OF DECORUM DO APPLY AND WE ASK THAT YOU DO NOT ENGAGE IN DISRUPTIVE COMMENTS OR BEHAVIOR. I THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AND I TURN THE MEETING BACK TO YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I SENT OUT A MEMO REGARDING THIS AGENDA, REQUESTING THAT ITEMS 2, 3, AND 4 BE HEARD AHEAD OF ITEM 1, SO IT WOULD BE 2, 3, 4, 1, 5. ANY OBJECTION? ANY ISSUES? >>LUIS VIERA: IF I MAY, FOR ITEM 3, I'VE SPOKEN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THIS, REPRESENTATIVES ON THIS YESTERDAY. AND THEY WANTED TO FOCUS MORE SO ON THE FOWLER STUDY. SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO WAS HAVE THE REPORT FOR THAT RECEIVED AND FILE AND MAKE A MOTION AT THE END OF THE MEETING, IF I MAY. IT WILL SAVE US TIME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YOU DON'T WANT TO GO INTO ITEM 3. >>LUIS VIERA: UNLESS IF COUNCIL WISHES TO. I THINK IT'S BETTER TO FOCUS ON THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: I READ THE REPORT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SO YOU'RE GOOD. >>LYNN HURTAK: YEAH, YEAH. >>LUIS VIERA: THE REPORT WAS OBVIOUSLY VERY COMPREHENSIVE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THAT. >>LUIS VIERA: I'LL MAKE A MOTION AT THE END, IF I MAY. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION NOW FROM COUNCILMAN VIERA. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR. THIS IS ITEM 3. >>MARTIN SHELBY: OFF THE AGENDA THEN, RECEIVE AND FILE? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>LUIS VIERA: I MOTION FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND THE NEXT STEPS FOR THE FOWLER VISION PLAN AND THAT THAT REPORT RETURN TO COUNCIL AT THE NOVEMBER 21st, 2024 MEETING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER VIERA. SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? >>LUIS VIERA: NOVEMBER 21st. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS A WORKSHOP? >>LUIS VIERA: YES, MA'AM. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL RIGHT. THAT SETTLES THAT. WE HAVE A MEMO RECEIVED FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON REQUESTING ITEM 7, 8, 9 BE CONTINUED TO THE SEPTEMBER 26 WORKSHOP. >>BILL CARLSON: SO MOVED. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IS THAT CORRECT SIR?% >>BILL CARLSON: YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON. SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. >>BILL CARLSON: MR. CHAIR, JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, MS. FEELEY ASKED FOR IT BEING MOVED TO AUGUST. THEN WE LOOKED AND THE SCHEDULE IS FULL. SO WE MOVED IT TO SEPTEMBER. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE'LL BE MINDFUL THAT SEPTEMBER 26, WE'RE REACHING OUR LIMIT. IN CASE ANY MOTIONS ARE MADE, WE KNOW TO NOT LOOK AT SEPTEMBER 26. WE VOTED -- >>LUIS VIERA: THE ITEM ON SULPHUR SPRINGS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY REQUEST TO CONTINUE THIS WORKSHOP. THEY HAD ASKED FOR IT TO MARCH 27 IN A MEMO. HOWEVER IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE, GIVEN THAT WILL TAKE MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES, I DO MOVE FOR THE SULPHUR SPRINGS DISCUSSION ON APRIL 24 AT THE WORKSHOP. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER VIERA. SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THAT SETTLES THE AGENDA. A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. WE ARE NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, COME ON UP. >> DAVID ADAMS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GO AHEAD, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING, DAVID ADAMS. 2501 WEST FOUNTAIN BOULEVARD. I NEED A SOLUTION FOR THE CHRONIC FLOODING ON SWANN, HOWARD AND PARKLAND ESTATES. IN 2015, MY HOUSE FLOODED. I HAD TWO AND A HALF FEET OF WATER COME IN MY GARAGE WHICH RUINED EVERYTHING ON THE FLOOR INCLUDING WEDDING PICTURES. REPLACED TWO AIR-CONDITIONERS, FIVE CARS FLOODED, AND MY 80-YEAR-OLD MOTHER'S CAR. I ASKED THE CITY'S STORM WATER DEPARTMENT FOR NINE YEARS FOR FLOOD RELIEF. 2019, THE CITY HIRED A CONSULTANT. THE REPORT IS THIS THICK. THE CONSULTANT RECOMMENDED STORMWATER PIPING TO GET WATER OUT OF PARKLAND ESTATES INTO THE BAY. NOTHING WAS DONE. IN 2021, THE CITY ASSESSED A NEW STORMWATER FEE. I SUPPORTED THOSE TO GET FLOOD RELIEF. AGAIN, NOTHING WAS DONE. IN 2022, THE CITY HIRED ANOTHER CONSULTANT. THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PARKLAND ESTATES HAD FLOODED FOR DECADES AND NEEDED A LARGE BOX CULVERT TO MOVE THE STORMWATER FROM PARKLAND ESTATES TO THE BAY. AGAIN, NOTHING WAS DONE. MY OFFICE IS 18.5 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. I DIDN'T PURCHASE A HOUSE IN THE FINGER CANALS OF TAMPA BAY OR DAVIS ISLANDS. MY HOUSE SHOULD NEVER FLOOD YET MY NEIGHBORHOOD FLOODED THREE TIMES JUST IN THE LAST MONTH. MANY OF YOU LIVED HERE A LONG TIME. HARDWARE STORE USED TO BE ON THE CORNER OF SWANN AND HOWARD. NOW A CVS. AND THERE WAS A DRY-CLEANING STORE ACROSS THE STREET, NOW A CHASE BANK. CHATTERBOX WAS A BLOCK AWAY. SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER THAT. THAT WAS REPLACED WITH PANERA. 1999, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED DEVELOPMENT OF 6.5 ACRES OF LAND BETWEEN ARMENIA AND HOWARD TO BUILD 375 APARTMENTS. ALL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS CREATED A VIRTUAL AQUEDUCT THAT PUSHES WATER INTO PARKLAND ESTATES. THIS YEAR THE CITY ANNOUNCED THAT PARKLAND ESTATES FLOOD RELIEF PROJECT. IT IS A $65 MILLION PROJECT AND 20 MILLION OF THE PROJECT FUNDING WILL BE BY THE EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY AND FDEP. IF YOU DON'T ACT NOW, THAT MONEY WILL BE LOST. THE STORMWATER DEPARTMENT NEEDS CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL TO FUND A ROUTE PLANNIG FOR THE PROJECT. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S CONTROVERSY ABOUT BRINGING THE PROJECT THROUGH PARKLAND ESTATES. LAST WEEK YOU ELIMINATED ROUTE PLANNING THROUGH BRISTOL AVENUE. SO THAT MEANS THE PROJECT HAS TO GO DOWN SWANN AND DOWN TO THE BUSINESS DISTRICT OF HOWARD. IF YOU DO THAT, THE SOUTH HOWARD BUSINESS ALLIANCE WILL MOST CERTAINLY TRY TO BLOCK THE PROJECT. YOU'LL BE HEARING FROM MR. MICHELINI AND YOU'LL PROBABLY HAVE SEMINOLE HEIGHTS ALL OVER AGAIN. WE DON'T NEED POLITICS FOR FLOOD RELIEF. WE NEED ENGINEERS, PLEASE. PLEASE EXERCISE SOME LEADERSHIP ON THE SOUTH HOWARD FLOOD PROJECT TO MOVE IT FORWARD PREVENTING FLOODING IS A CORE GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTION. IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN POLICE OR FIRE PROTECTION. IT'S TIME TO STOP THE FLOODING AND I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR NINE YEARS. I REALLY NEED SOME ACTION AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING FOR THE STORMWATER DEPARTMENT TO COME FORWARD TO YOU AND GIVE YOU SOME SOLUTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SPEAKER, YES, SIR. GOOD MORNING. >> MENTESNOT. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, THESE TWO INDIVIDUALS WOULD LIKE TO YIELD A MINUTE. THESE ARE MY SONS. I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD ONE MINUTE OF THEIR TIME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE DON'T DO THAT. SO YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, UNLESS THEY WANT TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF. >> HOLD ON ONE SECOND. BEG YOUR PARDON? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. IT IS GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IF THE SPEAKER WISHES TO SPEAK, HE CERTAINLY CAN, AND THEN EACH INDIVIDUAL PERSON CAN HAVE UP TO THREE MINUTES. WE DON'T HAVE -- OR THE POLICY IS THAT YOU DON'T YIELD YOUR TIME DURING GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE DON'T USE A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM. SO THEY ARE WELCOME TO SPEAK, BUT IT WOULD BE THEIR OWN TIME. AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO SPEAK FOR UP TO THREE MINUTES. >>BILL CARLSON: [INAUDIBLE] >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. >> THANKS FOR THE EXTRA MINUTE -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANY OPPOSED? WE HAVE ONE OPPOSED. TWO OPPOSED. >>THE CLERK: MOTION PASSED WITH CLENDENIN AND HENDERSON VOTING NO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GO AHEAD, SIR. >> WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE MOTION? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: TO GIVE YOU AN ADDITIONAL MINUTE. >> ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THANKS FOR THE ADDITIONAL MINUTE. IF I NEED IT OR DON'T NEED IT, BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS IT SHOWS THIS ECLECTIC BUNCH RGHT HERE HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT THEY ARE DOING. IT IS A REAL ECLECTIC BUNCH. NO IDEA OF WHAT THEY ARE DOING. THE RULES CHANGE EVERY DAY. SIGN UP TO SPEAK. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK. IT IS A WAY OF INTIMIDATING PEOPLE. IT SPECIFICALLY IS A WAY OF INTIMIDATING MINORITIES. IT'S A WAY OF INTIMIDATING ALL THE PALESTINIANS THAT CAME DOWN HERE TO SPEAK. IT IS A WAY OF INTIMIDATING AFRICANS WHO WANT TO COME DOWN HERE AND SPEAK ALWAYS SAY YEARS AGO, AFRICANS, BLACK PEOPLE ARE SCARED TO COME DOWN HERE. WE HAVE NO LEADERSHIP AND WE HAVE NO REPRESENTATION. I'VE BEEN COMING DOWN HERE FOR 30 SOME YEARS AND THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM OUR DISTRICT SAY NAY, THEY ARE OPPOSED TO ME HAVING AN ADDITIONAL MINUTE AS I BRING MY KIDS HERE, IT'S EMBARRASSING AND IT'S INSULTING. IT'S DEMEANING. IT'S DEROGATORY AND IT IS RACIALLY MOTIVATED. MOST OF THE STUFF YOU DO IS RACIALLY MOTIVATED AND -- WHO MURDERED JULIO? DID THE SHOT SPOTTERS, WERE THEY INSTRUMENTAL IN PREVENTING THAT CRIME? YOUNG MAN MURDERED RIGHT NOW CITY. YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY DEPEND ON AFRICAN PEOPLE BEING IGNORANT BECAUSE THEY HAVE UNDERDEVELOPED US FOR THE LAST 624 YEARS. THEY HAVE DISPOSSESSED US. THEY HAVE DE-EDUCATED US. AND LIKE LAUREN HAIL SAY, MISEDUCATED US. MISEDUCATION. NOW A YOUNG MAN WAS MURDERED RIGHT HERE IN TAMPA, FLORIDA. VIOLENTLY MURDERED. AND NO ONE WOULD HAVE THE SENSE TO SAY HIS PARENTS OR ANYONE ELSE, NOBODY IN THE AFRICAN COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE THE SENSE TO SAY FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE RECORDING INDUSTRY. DO YOU THINK THE RECORDING INDUSTRY, DO YOU THINK WHITE PEOPLE, YOU SEE WHAT JUST HAPPENED, BAUMAN IN NEW YORK, HE SAID HE WAS PROPALESTINIAN, OR DIDN'T SAY HE WAS PROPALESTINIAN. HE SAY HE WAS ANTI-GENOCIDE AND THEY GOT RID OF HIM. THEY GOT RID OF HIM. RID OF HIM AND TALKING ABOUT IT GLEEFULLY PUTTING IT OUT THERE. THEY GOT RID OF HIM. DO YOU THINK ALL THE AFRICAN YOUTHS THAT'S IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY THAT'S N THIS, BITCH THIS, DO YOU THINK THEY CAN GET ON THE RECORD AND SAY JEW THIS, KITE THIS, KITE THAT, NO THEY CAN'T. SO THE PARENTS OF JULIO FULIO NEED TO FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE RECORDING INDUSTRY AND THE CITY OF TAMPA. IF THEY CAN SPEND $300,000 ON SHOT SPOTTERS AND COULDN'T GET OUT THERE TO CATCH THE PERPETRATORS OF THE HEINOUS ACT, THAT TELLS YOU SOMETHING. BUT EVERYTHING THEY DO TOWARDS AFRICAN PEOPLE IS HATEFUL AND THEY BROUGHT AN ELDERLY BLACK MAN IN HERE THE OTHER DAY TO TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM IN 1967. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A BATHROOM. THEY HAD TO GO AND RELIEVE THEMSELVES BY THE RIVER AND IN THE BUSHES AND ALL THAT. AND THE ELDERLY BLACK FOOL COULDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT, HEY, I WANT TO FILE REPARATIONS FROM THE CITY OF TAMPA AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND OTHER PLACES AND THE NATIONAL -- THE BASEBALL LEAGUE OR ANYBODY ELSE. THEY COULDN'T SAY IT. IT'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THAT PROCESS. AND EVERYTHING THIS CITY DOES IS ABOUT TRICKING AFRICAN PEOPLE AND WE CAN'T STAND FOR IT. WE'RE 26% OF THE POPULATION. WE WANT 26% OF THIS BUDGET. AND WE WANT IT RETROACTIVELY.% WE WANT OUR REPARATIONS FROM THIS CITY, FROM THE BUSINESSES IN THIS CITY, AND FROM CITY GOVERNMENT. WE WANT OUR REPARATIONS. AND WE NEED REPRESENTATIVES THAT IS GONNA SPEAK UP FOR THE AFRICAN COMMUNITY, NOT BUFFOONS. WE HAVE BUFFOONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. GOOD MORNING, SIR. GOOD MORNING. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS PASTOR WILLIAMS, LOCATED 1112 EAST SCOTT STREET. THE YOUNG MAN IS TELLING YOU THE TRUTH AND YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR HIM AND I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR ME. I'LL READ SCRIPTURE. O GIVE THANKS UNTO THE LORD BECAUSE HE IS GOOD. BY HIS MERCY, GO GIVE THANKS UNTO THE LORD FOR HIS MERCY. TO HIM WHO ALONE DO GREAT ONE FOR HIS MERCY AND DO IT FOREVER. YOU KNOW, I CAN'T READ MUCH BECAUSE I AIN'T GOT MY GLASSES ON. YOU KNOW WHAT? WE DON'T REALIZE IT, BUT WE ARE HERE TODAY BECAUSE OF THE MERCY OF GOD. A LOT OF US DON'T EVEN DESERVE TO BE HERE, BUT BECAUSE OF THE MERCY OF GOD UPON US, HE BLESS US TO SEE ANOTHER DAY. YOU KNOW, THE YOUNG MAN GETTING UP AND SPEAKING, BRINGING LITTLE BOY WITH HIM SO THEY CAN SEE THE TRUTH AND HEAR THE TRUTH. YOU KNOW, THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE A DEBATE TONIGHT. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I SEE IT. THEY GOT A CRIMINAL GOING TO BE A DEBATE AGAINST THE PRESIDENT. DOESN'T SEEM LIKE NOBODY WANT TO DO NOTHING ABOUT IT. JUST WANT HIM TO COME UP AND SAY WHAT HE WANT TO SAY AND SAY THAT HE -- YOU KNOW -- AND SAY THAT HE WON THE DEBATE. YOU KNOW, I KEEP MY TRUST IN GOD. I KNOW WHAT GOD CAN DO, AND I KNOW WHAT GOD GOING TO DO. MIGHT NOT REACT RIGHT NOW, BUT THE DAY OF SALVATION IS COMING BIG TIME. WE'VE GOT TO REALIZE, WE GOT TO LEARN TO TREAT EACH OTHER LIKE PEOPLE, LIKE CITIZENS, LIKE GOVERNMENTAL PEOPLE. TREAT US LIKE WHO WE ARE, WHETHER WE ARE BLACK. WHETHERER NER OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL US. YOU CALL US EVERYTHING BUT A CHILD OF GOD. BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT. KEEP DOING IT. GOD WILL SHOW YOU ALL, TO ALL OF US. I'M NOT THE BEST PERSON IN THE WORLD, BUT I TRY TO DO THE RIGHT THING REGARDLESS, WHETHER YOU WANT TO HEAR ME OR NOT. I COME UP HERE SOMETIME AND I SEE SOME HEADS BENT DOWN. YEAH, BEND YOUR HEAD DOWN. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HEAR ME. I'LL TELL YOU ONE THING, WE'LL ALL HAVE TO HEAR GOD ONE DAY SOONER OR LATER. I WANT TO LEAVE YOU ALL WITH THIS HERE. MAY GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU ALL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. YES, MA'AM, NEXT SPEAKER. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> LITTLE DIFFICULTY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IS THAT A TOUCH SCREEN OR USE THE MOUSE? >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. MY NAME IS CARROLL ANN BENNETT. I AM A LIFELONG TAMPA RESIDENT. AS YOU ALL KNOW, APRIL WAS A VERY, VERY DRY MONTH. THE CITY WAS UNDER A DROUGHT. AND IT RAINED ONE DAY IN SOUTH TAMPA AND I WENT TO THE GROCERY STORE. WHEN I WENT TO THE GROCERY STORE, THIS IS WHAT I SAW COMING HOME. APPARENTLY I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING BECAUSE IT'S NOT PLAYING PROPERLY. THIS IS JUST A RAIN. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY HURRICANES IN APRIL. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY TROPICAL STORMS. THIS IS CHURCH STREET. I TOOK VIDEO OF OTHER STREETS TOO. BAY TO BAY, MANHATTAN. THIS IS JUST CHURCH STREET WHICH IS JUST AN 8th OF A MILE FROM DALE MABRY. THIS IS THE KIND OF FLOODING THAT I GOT JUST DRIVING HOME FROM THE GROCERY STORE. SO I JUST WANT TO REMIND PEOPLE OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IN SOUTH TAMPA ON A REGULAR BASIS. THE FLOODING HAS GOTTEN WORSE AS THE POPULATION HAS INCREASED. FLOODING HAS GOTTEN WORSE AS MORE PERMEABLE SURFACE HAS BEEN PAVED OVER. SHOOT. I DON'T KNOW. I'M AN IDIOT. [ LAUGHTER ] THIS ONE I REALLY WANTED TO SHOW YOU TOO. I WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT WHEN IAN CAME THROUGH THAT IT WAS 150 MILES OFFSHORE. IT NEVER HIT TAMPA. AND YET ALL OF SOUTH TAMPA HAD TO EVACUATE, ALL OF IT, EXCEPT FOR THIS LITTLE AREA RIGHT HERE. THIS LITTLE AREA ZONE C DID NOT HAVE TO EVACUATE. THE ENTIRE REST OF THE PENINSULA HAD TO EVACUATE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM HAVE BEEN UNDER A MANDATORY EVACUATION ORDER. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM HAVE BEEN UNDER MORE THAN ONE MANDATORY EVACUATION ORDER, HOW MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM HAVE HAD TO EVACUATE. LET ME TELL YOU, IT IS EXTREMELY STRESSFUL. I HAD A NEIGHBOR AT USF WANTED TO TALK TO HER ABOUT THE EVACUATION DURING IRMA. SHE SAID I WON'T TALK TO THEM. IT WAS SO STRESSFUL AND SO TRAUMATIC THAT I CAN'T BEAR TO THINK OF IT. THIS IS A PERSON OF MEANS. I ALSO WANT TO SHOW YOU THIS MAP THAT SHOWS -- THIS IS FROM THE ST. PETE TIMES. THIS IS CATEGORY 2 SURGE. IAN WAS CATEGORY 4. THE ENTIRE PENINSULA WOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER WATER IF IAN HADN'T SWERVED. I WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT AS WE ENTER INTO HURRICANE SEASON. I'M SORRY I'M SO TECHNICALLY INEPT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES MA'AM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> GOOD MORNING. STEPHANIE POYNOR. TECHNOLOGY IS KICKING BOTH OF OUR BEHIND US THIS MORNING. BECAUSE MY LAPTOP LAID DOWN ON ME. TO READ A NOTE FROM SANDY SANCHEZ. SHE'S NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY. SHE'S NOT FEELING WELL. I HAVE EVERY INTENTION OF GOING TO CITY COUNCIL AND THANKFUL TO STAFF FOR WORKING ON THE 2045 COMP PLAN, ESPECIALLY FOR YOU LISTENING TO MY RANTINGS. AND I WAS HOPING TO BE THERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. UNFORTUNATELY I'M UNDER THE WEATHER. PLEASE KNOW THAT THOSE OF US WHO LIVE IN HERITAGE COMMUNITIES APPRECIATE ALL YOU HAVE DONE TO MOVE HERITAGE COMMUNITIES FORWARD AND GIVING THEM RECOGNITION. THESE COMMUNITIES ARE PARAMOUNT IN VISIONS FOR THE FUTURE OF TAMPA. BESIDES THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, THEY ALSO PROVIDE THE MANY OPTIONS FOR FUTURE TAMPA PAINOS -- TAMPEÑOS. WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE REGARDING HOUSING. I KNOW THIS IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS, BUT THE RECOGNITION FOR THE COMMUNITIES WILL BE HELPFUL. HOPEFULLY HELP SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS TO UNDERSTAND MANY TIMES THE QUALITY OF LIFE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE BOTTOM LINE FOR PROFIT. WE EMBRACE CHANGE AS LONG AS IT'S DONE RESPONSIBLY. THANK YOU, SANDY SANCHEZ. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL GO TO ITEM NUMBER 2. >> GOOD MORNING, CITY COUNCIL. JENNIFER MALONE WITH YOUR PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. I'M HERE TO PRESENT ON ITEM NUMBER 2, WHICH IS THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE WITH A FOCUS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE SECTION. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH OUR PARTNERS AT THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. STEVEN AND EVAN. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THEIR COLLABORATION ON THIS TOPIC. SO WHERE WE'VE BEEN AND WHERE WE'RE GOING, THIS IS OUR FINAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP IN FRONT OF YOU. MOVING FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE PUBLIC OUTREACH. THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER AMENDMENT WHEN THIS IS INITIATED. AND THEN YOU'LL SEE IT PROBABLY IN THE WINTER/SPRING IN ITS FINAL FORM WHEN IT GETS TRANSMITTED AND HOPEFULLY EVENTUALLY ADOPTED. WORKING UP TO THIS WORKSHOP IN YOUR MEMO, WE DO OUTLINE THE OTHER TIMES WE'VE BEEN BEFORE YOU. IT'S BEEN SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS PROVIDING UPDATES AS WE'VE BEEN MAKING THESE CHANGES. TODAY, WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO OVER THE KEY CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE SECTION. WE HAVE SOME NEW GOALS. WE HAVE NEW PLACE TYPES. SOME COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA REVISIONS, INDUSTRIAL POLICY UPDATES, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AND THEN A BONUS PROGRAM UPDATE. BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE NEW GOALS, I JUST WANT TO REMIND COUNCIL BECAUSE IT WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WE DID A VISIONING EXERCISE WHERE WE TOOK A LOT OF PUBLIC OUTREACH AND WE HAD A LOT OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. WE TOOK EVERYTHING THAT THESE CITIZENS SAID THROUGH A SURVEY AND PUT IT IN A VISION SO THAT WAY WE HAD A BLUEPRINT FOR WRITING THE NEW GOALS AND WRITING THE NEW COMP PLAN. THIS IS THE VISION THAT COUNCIL ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION. I THINK TWO SUMMERS AGO. AND THEN WE USED THAT VISION TO WRITE THESE NEW GOALS. CURRENTLY, THE FUTURE LAND USE SECTION HAS 20 GOALS. WE'VE DISTILLED THAT DOWN TO 6 GOALS. OUR INTENT IS THAT THE NEW FUTURE LAND USE SECTION WILL BE A LITTLE MORE SUCCINCT AND EASIER TO READ FOR BOTH COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC WHEN YOU'RE FLIPPING THROUGH IT AND TRYING TO DIGEST THE FLUE. THE FIRST CONCEPT ARE PLACE TYPES. THIS IS A NEW DESIGNATION TO HELP IMPLEMENT THE GOALS OF THE PLAN WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO PROMOTE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY VISION. THREE BUCKETS. REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, TRANSIT READY CORRIDORS AND HERITAGE NEIGHBORHOODS. I'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF US ONE BY ONE. HERE WE HAVE A MAP OF THE PLACE TYPES. WE SEE REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS ARE IN GREEN. THE TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS ARE IN BLUE, AND THEN HERITAGE NEIGHBORHOODS YOU'LL SEE ON A FORTHCOMING MAP. BUT OUR REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS THAT'S GOING TO BE WESTSHORE, DOWNTOWN, AND OUR TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DEVELOPMENT AREAS, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE REALLY GOING TO SEE THE HIGHEST AMOUNT OF -- WHERE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS GOING TO ANTICIPATE A LOT OF GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THROUGH HIGHER FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES OR A BONUS OPTION. OUR TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS WILL CONNECT TO ALL OF THOSE PLACES. SO, AGAIN, REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS, THAT'S DOWNTOWN, WESTSHORE, ALSO THE FOWLER VISION AREA THROUGH THE WORK THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING ON A SEPARATE PROJECT, WE DEFINITELY SEE THAT AREA AS PRIME TO TAKE A LOT OF THAT DEVELOPMENT THAT'S FORTHCOMING FOR THAT AREA, AS WELL AS TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DEVELOPMENT AREAS. THIS IS YOUR STREETCAR OR ANYWHERE THAT WE MAY HAVE FUTURE FIXED GUIDE WAY TRANSIT. WE'RE LOOKING AT AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. THESE ARE MAJOR EMPLOYMENT AREAS, AND THEY HAVE EXISTING AND PLANNED INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS WHICH I THINK IS KEY. NEXT, WE HAVE TRANSIT READY CORRIDORS. THESE ARE OUR CORRIDORS THAT ARE GOING TO SUPPORT EXISTING AND FUTURE TRANSIT, AND THEY LINK TO OUR REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS. SO WE'RE LOOKING HERE AT HAVING A MIX OF HOUSING, COMMERCIAL AND AMENITIES TO SERVE THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL AS DESIGN STANDARDS TO STILL PROMOTE THAT WALKABLE URBAN ENVIRONMENT. THEY ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE THROUGHOUT THE MAP. AND THEY HAVE THEIR OWN BONUS AS WELL, WHICH WE'LL GET TO LATER. LASTLY, WE HAVE HERITAGE NEIGHBORHOODS. THESE ARE GOING TO BE HISTORIC DISTRICTS AS WELL AS THE AREAS THAT MIGHT BE ADJACENT TO A HISTORIC DISTRICT. ALL OF OUR URBAN VILLAGES THAT WE HAVE IN THE PLAN NOW WILL BE KIND OF SUNSET AND INSTEAD THEY'LL HAVE THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATION. IT'S ALSO NEIGHBORHOOD SERVED BY THE ORIGINAL 1926 STREETCAR SYSTEM, SO WE SEE PORT TAMPA CITY AND THEN MOST OF THIS, IT'S THIS PURPLE LINE RIGHT HERE. SURROUNDING THE CITY. AND SO THESE AREAS, IT'S GOING TO APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES IN THESE AREAS. AND WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FOR, THESE ARE REALLY CHARACTERIZED BY DISTINCTIVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FROM THE EARLY STAGES OF TAMPA'S GROWTH. AND THE PLAN AND LATER THE CODE SHOULD PROBABLY HAVE SOME SPECIAL LANGUAGE THAT REALLY RECOGNIZES THAT, THAT THESE AREAS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT AND HAVE DIFFERENT NEEDS. AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT BALANCE THESE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS WITH THE NEED FOR BETTER TOOLS TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY AND PRESERVE TAMPA'S HERITAGE. NEXT WE HAVE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD REVISIONS. PROPOSED DRAFT POLICY IS THAT PLAN AMENDMENTS WOULD BE PROHIBITED IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. IF THEY INCREASE DENSITY OR INTENSITY. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREAS, PLANNED INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE AREAS HAVE THEIR OWN PLANS THAT WOULD BE A PLACE WHERE AN APPLICANT MAY ASK TO INCREASE DENSITY OR INTENSITY IF THEY ARE IN A CRA. THE OTHER EXCEPTION WOULD BE TRANSITIONAL USE 24. A LOT OF THAT IS ON PALMETTO BEACH. BY THAT NATURE, THE CATEGORY SHOULD TRANSITION OUT OF THE PLAN, BUT THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE NEXT HIGHEST FUTURE LAND USE CHARACTER. COULD NOT MAKE TOO MUCH OF A JUMP IF APPLICANT WISHES TO HAVE A PLAN AMENDMENT OUT OF THE TRADITIONAL USE 24 CATEGORY. THE AREA KIND OF NORTH OF MacDILL, IT'S DOWN HERE ON THIS MAP. A SUBSET AND THEN WE ZOOMED IN. THERE IS A LOT OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PARCELS THAT ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED NEIGHBORHOOD. WE REALLY DON'T SEE THOSE BEING VIABLE. SO THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER AREA WHERE SOMEBODY MAY ASK JUST TO GO TO THE RESIDENTIAL 10 CATEGORY SINCE THAT IS WHAT IS SURROUNDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S ALSO A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW CATEGORY CALLED COMMERCIAL RESTRICTED. THIS WOULD ONLY BE COMMERCIAL USES, NEW FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY, SO AN APPLICANT MAY ASK FOR THAT IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA TO DEVELOP COMMERCIAL, BUT IT WOULD NOT INCREASE DENSITY OR INTENSITY, AND IT'S JUST SOMETHING THE PLAN JUST DOESN'T HAVE. ALL OF OUR CATEGORIES ARE MIXED USE RIGHT NOW. IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT THE PLAN PROBABLY NEEDS. INDUSTRIAL POLICY UPDATES, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON FOR A LONG TIME. BACK IN MAY OF 2020, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FINISHED A REPORT, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT MULTIJURISDICTIONAL ANALYSIS. BUT YOU ALL HAD NOTHING ELSE GOING ON IN MAY 2020. IT WAS REALLY QUIET. IT MIGHT HAVE NOT BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF EVERYONE'S MIND BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF STUFF KIND OF GOING ON AT THAT TIME. SO WHAT WE DID IS WE TOOK ANOTHER LOOK AT IT. WE UPDATED A LOT OF THE DATA THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET SHOWING A LOT OF THE INDUSTRIAL ACREAGE, GAINED OR LOST, PLAN AMENDMENTS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COUNTY. WE DECIDED TO REFINE THE EXISTING POLICY DIRECTION RELATED TO INDUSTRIAL BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE PLAN PROMOTES PRESERVING IT EVERYWHERE WHEREAS NOW THAT WE HAVE OTHER PLANNING PROJECTS SUCH AS FOWLER VISION, MAYBE WE DON'T NEED TO PRESERVE INDUSTRIAL IN THAT AREA OF THE CITY. WE'VE TAKEN A LOOK AT WHERE ALL THE INDUSTRIAL IS AND HIGHLIGHTED THE PRESERVATION AREAS, WHERE WE SHOULD REALLY FOCUS IN ON PRESERVING THAT INDUSTRIAL. SO YOU'LL NOTICE A LOT OF THE INDUSTRIAL NEAR FOWLER ISN'T ON THE MAP. THAT'S BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER PLACE TYPE. SO WE SEE A DIFFERENT FORM OF GROWTH IN FOWLER, BUT WE HAVE HIGHLIGHTED LIKE DREW PARK NEAR THE AIRPORT THAT INDUSTRIAL, ALL OF THIS INDUSTRIAL AND THEN THE INDUSTRIAL DOWN HERE VERY SOUTH. VERY LOW-LYING AREA. FINALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT REVISING THE ENTIRE BONUS STRUCTURE. AS YOU KNOW RIGHT NOW, IT'S A LITTLE CUMBERSOME. WE TOOK A REALLY CLOSE LOOK AT RECALIBRATING ALL OF THE DENSITIES AND INTENSITIES FOR ALL THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES. SO THERE IS A NEW BONUS CEILING FOR ALL THE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES IN EXCHANGE FOR A PUBLIC BENEFIT, SUCH AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO THIS ACTUALLY GIVES COUNCIL THE OPTION TO REALLY SEE MORE BENEFIT FROM ADDITIONAL DENSITY THAT FOLKS ARE ASKING FOR. IT'S DISCRETIONARY AND NOT GUARANTEED TO THE APPLICANT. SO THE MAXIMUM BONUS IS ONLY GOING TO BE IN THOSE REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTERS. WE'LL HAVE A LESSER BONUS ALONG TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS SINCE THOSE ARE KIND OF SURROUNDED BY NEIGHBORHOODS AND WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THOSE. NO BONUSES IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. FINALLY, THERE IS NEW CRITERIA TO EXPAND NEIGHBORHOOD-SERVING COMMERCIAL USES. THE PLAN RIGHT NOW ALREADY HAS LOCATIONAL CRITERIA, ALLOWING SOME NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING COMMERCIAL USES IN OUR RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES, BUT IT IS VERY LIMITED. SO WE JUST LOOK A LOOK AT THAT AND WE DECIDED TO EXPAND THAT CRITERIA SO IF YOU'RE AT THE CORNER OF TWO COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS, THE RESIDENTIAL 10, YOU COULD ASK FOR THROUGH A REZONING, THROUGH APPROVAL BY YOU ALL A NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING COMMERCIAL USE SUCH AS A COFFEE SHOP. IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND TAKE THAT CASE BY CASE. IT IS JUST NEW CRITERIA TO IMPLEMENT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT CONCEPT. AND THAT CAME FROM FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AND THE COUNCIL. SO THAT ACTUALLY CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN, I SAW YOUR MICROPHONE FIRST. GO AHEAD, SIR. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: TWO THINGS. I KNOW WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THE HERITAGE NEIGHBORHOODS INCLUDING NEW SUBURB BEAUTIFUL AND PARKLAND ESTATES. ALSO, I NOTICED, CAN YOU PUT UP THE SLIDE ON YOUR TIMING, YOUR SCHEDULE? >>JENNIFER MALONE: YES. LET ME JUST FIND IT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: ONLY THING I SEE THAT KIND OF CONCERNS ME IS THAT YOU'LL HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS, WHICH I'M ASSUMING WILL TAKE INPUT AND POSSIBLY CHANGES, BUT WE WON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IT AGAIN BEFORE TRANSMITTAL. I THINK WE NEED TO INSERT SOMETHING TO COME BACK TO US TO REPORT IF ANY CHANGES ARE MADE OR THE FINAL LANGUAGE BEFORE IT IS TRANSMITTED. >>JENNIFER MALONE: OKAY, SURE. WE CAN DEFINITELY TAKE A LOOK AT OUR SCHEDULE AND COME BACK TO YOU, TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. PERHAPS EVEN JUST COMING BEFORE YOU FOR BRIEFINGS, IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO GET ON YOUR CALENDAR. I KNOW YOU HAVE A VERY BUSY CALENDAR THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WOULD MOVE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE AT A PUBLIC FORUM FOR THE FINAL LANGUAGE. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT. I KIND OF EXPECT BECAUSE I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE STELLAR WORK. I GAVE YOU KUDOS WHEN WE HAD MY PRIVATE BRIEFING. I THINK YOU'VE BEEN LISTENING TO OUR PREVIOUS COUNCIL DECISIONS ON LAND USE AND YOU'VE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT SO MANY OF THE THINGS WE GUIDED AND PUSHED TOWARDS, WE HAD TO MAKE EXCEPTIONS FOR AND YOU INCORPORATED THAT INTO THIS PLAN. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE SOMETHING DOESN'T SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS THAT HAPPENS WHEN THESE CHANGES HAPPENS AND BEFORE IT GETS TRANSMITTED. >>JENNIFER MALONE: OKAY, YES. AS STEVEN JUST MENTIONED, TOO, WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU DOING A STAFF REPORT DURING A DAYTIME MEETING PERHAPS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: RIGHT. >>JENNIFER MALONE: SO THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WHY DON'T WE WORK ON THAT BEHIND THE SCENES AND FIGURE OUT A DATE AND BRING THAT FORWARD. >>JENNIFER MALONE: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YOU MENTIONED THE HERITAGE NEIGHBORHOODS. >>JENNIFER MALONE: YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I THINK THAT IS A GREAT TITLE. IT'S NOT AS RESTRICTIVE AS A HISTORIC DISTRICT OR A LANDMARK OR, YOU KNOW, ALL THE OTHER MORE COMPLICATED ISSUES, BUT IT STILL PAYS HOMAGE WITH RESPECT TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. I LOVE THE NAME AND THE DETAILS BEHIND IT. I'M GLAD THAT'S ACKNOWLEDGED. ANYBODY ELSE? IF NOT, I'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS FOR NUMBER 2. WE HAVE NO REGISTERED SPEAKERS TODAY, IS THAT CORRECT? ALL RIGHT. IT'S NOW OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM IF ANYBODY WISHES TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 2, COME ON UP. YES MA'AM. GO AHEAD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> HI. CARROLL ANN BENNETT. I HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT WITH THEM ABOUT THIS, BUT I JUST YESTERDAY GOT THIS EXAMPLE OF THE ACTUAL EFFECT OF THE LANGUAGE. AND THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT EXAMPLES OF WHAT WILL HAPPEN. THIS IS WHAT MY BIG CONCERN IS. RIGHT NOW UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN, THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT I GAVE THEM IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT UP TO 50 UNITS PER ACRE. THIS IS IN THE CHHA. BUT WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES, THEY WILL BE ALLOWED UP TO 60 UNITS BY ACRE. IN THE CHHA. LET ME EXPLAIN WHY THAT IS. RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE THESE LAND USE CATEGORIES, AND THEY ARE VERY MISLEADING. R-35 YOU WOULD THINK YOU CAN HAVE 35 ACRES BY RIGHT. BUT YOU CAN'T. YOU CAN ONLY HAVE 30. YOU ONLY GET 35 IF YOU DO A BONUS. THE CITY GETS SOMETHING FOR THAT EXTRA DENSITY. SO THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED. WHAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED IS THE NAME OF THE CATEGORIES. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU KEEP THE PROPERTY RIGHTS EXACTLY THE SAME. YOU JUST CHANGE THE NAME TO REFLECT WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE. SO R-35 BECOMES R-30 BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT. YOU'RE NOT TAKING ANYTHING AWAY. YOU GIVE THEM THE EXACT SAME THING. JUST CHANGE THE NAME. LIKE IF YOU DECIDE TO GO THROUGH AND MAKE THEM ALL R, A, B, C, D, E, BUT KEPT THEIR RIGHTS THE SAME, NOT TAKING AWAY THEIR RIGHTS, JUST CHANGING THE NAME. THEY DID IT THE OPPOSITE WAY. INSTEAD OF CHANGING THE NAME TO FIT THE RIGHTS, THEY CHANGED THE RIGHTS TO FIT THE NAME. COUNCIL VOTED ON NOT ALLOWING BONUS PROVISIONS OR F.A.R. SOUTH OF KENNEDY. FOR SINGLE USE. THE ONLY THING THAT'S ALLOWED IS WHAT YOU ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT. YET WITH THE SWEEPING CHANGE, THEY HAVE NOW INCREASED THEIR BY RIGHT FROM 50 UNITS AN ACRE TO 60 UNITS PER ACRE. AND THE CITY GETS NOTHING FOR IT. IT'S FREE. WHAT THEY SHOULD DO IS JUST CHANGE THE NAME IN OTHER PARTS BESIDES KENNEDY, THE CITY SHOULD GET SOMETHING FOR IT. THE BONUS IS WHAT PROVIDES THE EXTRA DENSITY. THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE RESILIENT STRUCTURE. ALL THE DIFFERENT GOOD THINGS THAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT MAKING TO GET BONUS DENSITY, THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOULD GET. THEY SHOULDN'T GET THIS FOR FREE. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME. ANOTHER EXAMPLE, ALSO IN THE CHHA. THE SINGLE-USE RESIDENTIAL 50, UP TO 60. R-10, THEY ARE GOING TO DOUBLE THE DENSITY IN R-10. AND I SHOWED YOU ALL THOSE FLOODING, THOSE ARE WITHIN AN 8th OF A MILE OF DALE MABRY. SOUTH OF KENNEDY, THESE ARE ALL BONUS AREAS. SOUTH OF KENNEDY. THAT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. CITY COUNCIL VOTED AGAINST ALLOWING BONUS DENSITY FOR SOUTH OF KENNEDY JUST FOR THE REASONS I SHOWED YOU. LOOK AT THE EVACUATION MAPS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I WOULD LIKE TO OBVIOUSLY DISCUSS THIS IN GREATER DETAIL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES MA'AM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> GOOD MORNING. STEPHANIE POYNOR. I WANT TO START OUT BY SAYING THERE ARE SOME REALLY GOOD CHANGES IN HERE. THERE REALLY ARE. BUT THERE'S ALSO SOME PROBLEMS THAT UNTIL YOU START TALKING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU DON'T SEE. AND THIS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR STUFF THAT THEY WANT TO PUT WITHIN AN 8th OF A MILE WHERE WE CAN GET MORE DENSITY, I'M SORRY, BUT THOSE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS SOUTH OF KENNEDY NEED TO BE TAKEN OFF THERE. STAFF CANNOT REMOVE THIS, CANNOT REMOVE THIS PART BUT YOU CAN. YOU CAN ASK STAFF TO TAKE EVERYTHING SOUTH OF KENNEDY OFF -- EXTRA DENSITY. SORRY. I'M A MORON. I FORGOT TO HAND UP FRONT. 9375 UNITS. THAT'S JUST THE MULTIFAMILY. THAT'S JUST THE MULTIFAMILY. SOME NORTH OF GANDY, MOST SOUTH OF GANDY. PURPLE DOTS ARE SOUTH OF GANDY. THIS IS OUR CHHA MAP. HERE IS OUR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR. YOU'RE KILLING US. I MEAN, SERIOUSLY. WE'VE ALREADY TAKEN OUR FAIR SHARE AND MORE. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE AND THESE FOLKS WHO ARE HERE TODAY, THE PLANNING FOLKS ARE NOT THE PEOPLE WHO CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. WHAT'S IN THE PIPELINE? NOBODY HAS EVER TOLD US. THIS IS WHAT'S IN THE PIPELINE AND WHAT HAS BEEN BUILT SINCE THE LAST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT WAS OUR DATE WAS THE LAST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. CARROLL ANN HAS THE NUMBERS. FROM 2010 TO 2020, WE GAINED 14% OF THE POPULATION, BUT THAT'S ONLY WITH ABOUT 4,000 UNITS. WE HAVE 9,000. OVER 9,000 UNITS. IT'S ACTUALLY HIGHER THAN THAT WHEN WE GET INTO THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, BUT WE HAVEN'T PULLED THE GIS NUMBERS RECENTLY. MY TAX NUMBER IS ON HERE. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T HAND THIS TO YOU. OUR INCREASE IN THE TAX BASE IN OUR COMMUNITY ALONE IS ALMOST $9 MILLION ON THESE PROPERTIES. ALMOST $9 MILLION. WE HAVE DONE OUR FAIR SHARE. WE ARE CARRYING IT ON OUR BACK. ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION. ASK THE PLANNING STAFF TO REMOVE THESE CORRIDORS. ALL YOU ARE DOING IS CREATING A MORE DANGEROUS ENVIRONMENT FOR THE FOLKS WHO LIVE SOUTH OF GANDY. YOU DIDN'T PUT ALL THESE THINGS IN PLACE, BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO IS PROTECT US NOW. THE LAST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAID WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO GET MORE GROWTH YET WE'VE HAD THE HIGHEST GROWTH WITHIN THE CITY. THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES TO BUILD OTHER THINGS BESIDES SOUTH OF GANDY AND NORTH OF GANDY. WE NEED YOU TO PROTECT US. WE NEED YOU TO ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE THEY HAVE RULES THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW. THEY CAN'T CHANGE THESE MAPS. THEY CAN'T MAKE CHANGES, BUT YOU CAN. YOU CAN DO THE GRAY WORK. THIS IS GRAY WORK. PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY. CARROLL ANN SHOWED YOU FLOOD MAPS FROM NORTH OF GANDY. I HAVE FLOOD MAPS FROM SOUTH OF GANDY. I'M SORRY, LIKE I SAID, TECHNOLOGY IS KICKING OUR BUTTS THIS MORNING. I WANT TO HAND THESE IN FOR THE RECORD PLEASE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN, YOU HAVE YOUR MICROPHONE ON AND COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I DO. CAN WE ASK STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY STAFF WOULD BE GOOD TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT COME FORTH IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. STARTING TO WITH CARROLL ANN BENNETT'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE ZONING CHANGES AND INCREASE IN DENSITY. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT FOR US, PLEASE? >>JENNIFER MALONE: YES. JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION. >>DAVID HEY: DAVID HEY, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. REGARDING THE COMMENT REGARDING CHANGE THE NAME, JUST LOWER THE NAME DOWN FROM 60 TO 50 AND WE'LL SAY 35 TO 30, THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE CONFRONTED WITH IS HISTORICALLY THERE WAS A TIME WHEN, A, THERE WASN'T A BONUS. AND THEN EVEN WHEN THERE WAS A BONUS, THERE ARE PROJECTS CURRENTLY THAT HAVE ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE BUILT WITHIN THAT RANGE, WE'LL SAY, OF 30 TO 35 OR 50 TO 60. IF WE ENDED UP CHANGING, REDUCING AND JUST SAYING NOW EVERYTHING WILL BE UMU 50, WE'RE CREATING A HUGE AMOUNT OF NONCONFORMITIES THAT LEGALLY WOULD CREATE POTENTIAL ISSUES FOR THE CITY BASED ON THAT HISTORIC THAT THERE WERE PREVIOUS APPROVALS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: QUESTION. ARE WE GIVING AWAY SOMETHING FOR FREE REFERENCE -- SO IF RIGHT NOW THAT PROPERTY IS ZONED SO THEY HAVE A CERTAIN ENTITLEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NUMBER OF UNITS PER ACRE, BUT NOW WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO GRANT THEM WITHOUT BONUS DENSITY AN INCREASE, AREN'T WE GIVING THAT AWAY FOR FREE? >>DAVID HEY: WE MAY NEED THE ATTORNEYS TO ANSWER ABOUT EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS, IF THERE ARE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS, THEY STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE APPROVALS THAT THEY WERE GIVEN BY A PAST CITY COUNCIL FOR DENSITY. SO NONE OF THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED. IT WOULD ONLY BE FOR THINGS MOVING FORWARD TO YOU ALL, LIKE THEY WOULD -- IF SOMEONE SOUGHT A CHANGE TO AN EXISTING ZONING, THEY COULD POTENTIALLY COME IN AND ASK -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I'M CONCERNED, BECAUSE CLEARLY THIS OBVIOUSLY ESCAPED MY NOTICE WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE REVIEW. I'M CONCERNED IF WE ARE ACTUALLY NOW GRANTING ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS WITHOUT HAVING ANY KIND OF PROVISIONS OR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CITY AND TO THE GROWTH OF THE CITY AND THE IMPACT THAT ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENT HAS ON OUR CITY. >>JENNIFER MALONE: SURE. JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. JUST GIVE ME A MOMENT SO I CAN ANSWER THAT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IT'S TOUGH. >>JENNIFER MALONE: THIS CHANGE, THE THOUGHT BEHIND ALLOWING, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW R-20 DOES NOT MEAN R-20. IT MEANS 18 BY RIGHT, 20 WITH A BONUS. THE PUBLIC, I HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT WEEKLY IN MEETINGS WITH THE PUBLIC. THIS WAS REALLY A WAY TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR LAND USE CATEGORIES ARE, WHAT THEY MEAN. I DO THINK DAVID BRINGS UP A REALLY GOOD POINT THAT WE WOULD RUN INTO A LOT OF NONCONFORMITIES. I WENT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PLAN AND FOR SOME REASON IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS SINCE THE '80s. WE REALLY FEEL THAT THE CITY CAN GET MORE BENEFIT WITH THE NEW BONUS STRUCTURE AND USUALLY WHEN, TYPICALLY WHEN A REZONING COMES BEFORE YOU AND THEY ARE SEEKING A BONUS IN THE R-20 CATEGORY TO GET TO THEIR MAXIMUM, IT'S ONE UNIT TYPICALLY. AND SO WE DEFINITELY FEEL THAT THIS WOULD FOCUS MORE WHERE THE CITY NEEDS THEIR DEVELOPMENT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I UNDERSTAND THAT. NOW WE HAVE TO PAINT WITH A WIDE BRUSH, AND IF WE GRANT THESE ENTITLEMENTS FOR EVERY PARCEL, THE IMPACT AND NEGATIVE IMPACT, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW. I'D HAVE TO SEE THE NUMBER OF PARCELS THAT WOULD NEGATIVELY AFFECT SAY THE NONCONFORMING VERSUS THE IMPACT IT HAS WITH THE -- WHAT THE REAL NUMBERS ARE. INTUITIVELY IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE GRANTING AN AWFUL LOT OF DENSITY FOR NOTHING IF WE ARE CARTE BLANCHE CHANGING THIS NOMENCLATURE IT JUST SEEMS, COMMON SENSE WOULD BE CHANGE THE NOMENCLATURE TO REFLECT WHAT THE ENTITLEMENT IS AND STICK WITH THE BONUS DENSITIES. HAVE THE NOMENCLATURE REFLECT EXACTLY THE ENTITLEMENT. >>JENNIFER MALONE: YEAH, I THINK SUSAN -- YEAH. >>DAVID HEY: CAN I SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE BONUSES? FOR A LONG TIME, AND SUSAN MIGHT REMEMBER THIS, A LONG TIME, SOME OF THE BONUSES NEEDED A TRANSIT STOP. YOU NEEDED EXTRA LANDSCAPING. IT WASN'T EVEN A MONETARY AMOUNT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: 100%. I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE STACKED THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TO GET TO BONUSES. I THINK THAT'S GREAT. I HAD A QUESTION LAST NIGHT AT A PUBLIC ORUM ASKING WHY PROPERTIES ARE BEING DEVELOPED ALONG THESE TRANSIT CORRIDORS ARE NOT CONTRIBUTING TO TRANSIT. THAT WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA TO THROW INTO THE MIX. I'M ALL FOR THAT ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS TO DEVELOPING DENSITY. I STILL WANT -- I THINK, AS SUSAN I GUESS ARE CONFERRING. I'LL GIVE YOU A MINUTE. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: I THINK THE ISSUE IS REALLY THE CREATION OF NON--- SUSAN JOHNSON VELEZ, LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THE ISSUE IS NONCONFORMITIES IF WE START CHANGING THE CATEGORIES TO REFLECT WITHOUT THE BONUS DENSITY. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IT APPEARS THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS COMING FORWARD WITH A PROPOSED CHANGE THAT IS GOING TO CHANGE THE DENSITY ALLOWED ON THESE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, FOR FREE. SO WE'RE -- THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO COME TO THE TABLE WITH ANY OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE ASKED FOR THAT WOULD HELP IN DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. >>STEPHEN BENSON: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR. I THINK WE CAN LOOK CLOSER AT IT. THE CONCERN AND NOT TO GET TOO INTO THE DETAILS, THE CATEGORIES USED TO BE R-20 USED TO BE R-20 BY RIGHT. THERE'S EXISTING DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS ENABLED AT R-20, SO WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF NONCONFORMITIES WE WOULD BE CREATING BY DOING THIS. FOR NOW, SOMEONE HAVE TO COME BACK IN -- BUT THEN HAVE TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC BENEFIT WHERE THEY DIDN'T PREVIOUSLY THERE COULD BE A TAKING ISSUE WITH THAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COULD WE CREATE TWO CATEGORIES? EXISTING VERSUS -- >>STEPHEN BENSON: IT WOULD STILL BE THE SAME QUESTION WITH LEGAL. WE WOULD NEED TO WORK WITH LEGAL TO ADDRESS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CLEARLY I THINK THIS IS A CONCERN THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS. AT LEAST HAVE THE DATA TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE OF DOING -- TAKING THIS ACTION AS FAR AS CREATING THIS ADDITIONAL DENSITY FOR NOTHING. >>STEPHEN BENSON: POINT OF CLARIFICATION. IS THIS A CITYWIDE CONCERN OR SPECIFIC TO A GEOGRAPHY? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK CLEARLY OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE ISSUES OF WHERE WE WANT TO DEVELOP GROWTH. I THINK AS FAR AS PLANNING AND MAKING INTENTIONAL DECISIONS AS COUNCIL AND WITH PLANNING COMMISSION AND ZONING THAT I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THIS NAILED DOWN, WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE AND WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE ACROSS THE CITY. OBVIOUSLY, THE IMPACT IS GOING TO BE VERY SPECIFIC IN CERTAIN AREAS, BUT I THINK CITYWIDE WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS DECISION ACTUALLY ARE AND WHAT IT DELIVERS TO THE CITY AND WHAT WE'RE LOSING. >>STEPHEN BENSON: THE REASON I'M ASKING ABOUT GEOGRAPHY, IF WE END UP DISCOVRING THAT A CERTAIN PORTION OF THE CITY HAS MORE NONCONFORMITIES THAN OTHERS, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO LIMIT THE SOLUTION TO ADDRESS EVERYONE'S CONCERN. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE. LOOK AT THE DATA AND UNDERSTAND. CLEARLY WE WANT TO MAKE THE BEST DECISION BASED ON CHANGING THE CHANGES TO AN EXISTING CITY IS ALWAYS HARD BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAN, BLANK SLATE. I GET THAT BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF US SO WE CAN MAKE THE BEST DECISION. THIS WAS SOMETHING, AGAIN, I'M SORRY THAT WE HAD TO DEAL WITH THIS AT COUNCIL. SOMETHING ESCAPED ME BEFOREHAND. GLAD IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN PUBLIC. KUDOS TO PUBLIC COMMENT. A LOT OF EYES ON THIS. SOMETHING THAT I THINK WORKS OUT VERY WELL. THANK YOU. THIS DEFINITELY NEEDS TO COME BACK TO US TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION. >>JENNIFER MALONE: JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. DID YOU ALL WANT US TO ADDRESS THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WAS GOING TO GET TO THAT FIRST. BUT I THINK I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: HOLD THE MOTIONS. WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON AND COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. >>BILL CARLSON: FIRST, I WANT TO ECHO WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE SAID. THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HARD WORK AND LISTENING. THERE IS A LOT OF STUFF THAT WE PUT IN THERE AND THERE'S STUFF THAT THE COMMUNITY PUT IN. IT'S OBVIOUS THAT YOU ALL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AND INPUT SERIOUSLY. PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF WORKING ON IT. SECOND, I PROBABLY HAVE THE OPPOSITE OPINION THAN MY COLLEAGUE ON BONUS DENSITY. I THINK WE SHOULD DO AWAY WITH IT COMPLETELY. I THINK WE SHOULD EITHER OFFER BY RIGHT FOR PEOPLE TO DEVELOP UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT OR SHOULDN'T, AND WE SHOULD HAVE SIMPLE HARD RULES TO SAY YES OR NO. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY NO TO AREAS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DEVELOP AND WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY YES TO AREAS WE DO WANT TO DEVELOP. FEEDBACK FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, BONUS DENSITY GUMS UP THE PROCESS AND TAKES LONGER. IF WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO PAY FOR SOMETHING THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE PAID FOR, IF WE GET THE PROJECTS ONLINE FASTER, WE'LL HAVE AD VALOREM TAXES WE CAN USE TO PAY FOR THINGS. THE INCONSISTENCY IN HEIGHTS AND DENSITY JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME. WE SHOULD BE PLANNING INSTEAD OF INCENTIVIZING. WANT TO INCENTIVIZE, WE CAN PUT MONEY, I GUESS. TO ME THE BONUS DENSITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN A BAD IDEA. TO STEPHANIE POYNOR'S THOUGHT, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DO IT, BUT WE DEFINITELY SHOULD EXCLUDE SOUTH OF KENNEDY ON THAT MAP THAT SHE HAD. AS YOU ALL KNOW, I DISCOVERED THIS BY ACCIDENT FOUR OR SO YEARS AGO. TE ENTIRE CITY OF TAMPA IS IN A TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY EXCEPTION AREA. WHEN I PROPOSED TAKING IT OFF BECAUSE EVERYBODY COMPLAINS THAT THE TRAFFIC IS SO BAD. REASON THE TRAFFIC IS SO BAD BECAUSE THE ROADS ARE OVER CAPACITY IN MOST PLACES COMPARED TO THE DEVELOPMENT. YET CONTINUING TO OVERDEVELOP ESPECIALLY SOUTH OF GANDY AND SOUTH OF KENNEDY. IT'S NOT LIKE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE CAN HANDLE EXTRA GROWTH AND WE'RE ALLOWING IT. PRIOR CITY COUNCIL CREATED AN EXCEPTION AREA THAT SAID WE DON'T CARE THAT THE TRANSPORTATION IS OVERBURDENED AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS OVERBURDENED. WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ANYWAY. I THINK WE CAN'T ALLOW THAT, ESPECIALLY ON A PENINSULA, COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA WHERE PEOPLE CAN'T ESCAPE. I BELIEVE IN ALLOWING, AS I SAID, TAKING AWAY BONUS DENSITY, ALLOWING BY RIGHT DEVELOPMENT. STEVE AND I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE AREAS LIKE CHANNEL DISTRICT AND WESTSHORE AND DALE MABRY NORTH OF KENNEDY. WE SHOULD ALLOW MAXIMUM GROWTH IN AREAS WHERE PEOPLE DON'T OBJECT TO IT. BUT IN AREAS WHERE WE ARE ALREADY BURDENED, WHERE WE HAVE FLOODING AND PEOPLE CAN'T ESCAPE HURRICANES, WE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWING MORE OF IT. YOU ALL CAN ADDRESS THAT IN A SECOND. THE OTHER THING THAT I WISH WAS IN HERE IS, AGAIN, THE MARITIME DESIGNATION OR THE PORT DESIGNATION. THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WHO WANT TO GET RID OF OUR PORT AND BUILD CONDOS. IT IS THE MOST IDIOTIC THING I'VE SEEN BUT THEY ARE FIGHTING AS HARD AS THEY CAN TO GET RID OF THE PORT. IT'S A MAJOR STRATEGIC ASSET. IT IS THE BIGGEST ECONOMC ENGINE THAT WE HAVE. GO BACK IN THE BUSINESS JOURNAL LAST SUMMER HAD A FIVE-PAGE ARTICLE ABOUT IT. THERE ARE THREE DEEPWATER CHANNELS IN THE PORT. THE FIRST THING THEY WANT TO DO IS GET RID OF THE FIRST ONE AND GET RID OF THE CRUISE INDUSTRY. THERE'S BEEN ARTICLE AFTER ARTICLE CRITICIZING THE CRUISE INDUSTRY. IF THE CRUISE INDUSTRY ISN'T THERE, THEN CONTAINER THERE. IT IS ESSENTIAL WE PROTECT OUR PORT. THE AREAS THAT HAVE MOVED TO DEVELOPMENT OF CONDOS AND FESTIVAL MARKETPLACE AND THINGS, THEY HAVE REGRETTED IT AND THEY HAVE ENDED UP NOT WORKING THE WAY THEY WANT. IN THE FUTURE, HUNDRED YEARS FROM NOW, UNLESS WE HAVE STAR TREK STYLE TRANSPORTERS, WE STILL NEED TO BRING GOODS IN AND WE'LL WISH WE HAD MORE PORT LAND, NOT LESS. WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PROTECT IT. THANK YOU. >>JENNIFER MALONE: JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. IF I COULD JUST ADDRESS A FEW OF THOSE. ON THE BONUS MAP, AREAS ELIGIBLE FOR THE TRANSIT BONUS, THE LIGHT YELLOW IS THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. AND THIS KIND OF SHOWS WHERE IT CLIPS OUT THE ROADS WHERE APPLICANTS COULD NOT ASK FOR A BONUS IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, EVEN IF ON A TRANSIT-READY CORRIDOR, LIKE THIS PORTION OF GANDY, THEY COULD NOT ASK FOR A BONUS. THOSE AREAS WE WOULD STILL SEEK PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED DESIGN. THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, BUT WE ARE NOT ANTICIPATING THOSE AREAS BEING ELIGIBLE FOR A BONUS. WE DO SEE HOW IT WOULD CLIP OUT A LOT OF THESE AREAS SOUTH -- OR IN SOUTH TAMPA. SECOND, WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE PORT, AND THIS OVERLAYS THE PORT ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE MAP IN LIKE A PINK COLOR. A LOT OF WHERE WE WERE LOOKING TO PRESERVE INDUSTRIAL ARE PROPERTIES IN THE PORT ACTIVITY CENTER. SO THAT WAS THE RESPONSE TO THEM. INSTEAD OF THE MARITIME DESIGNATION, THIS WAS OUR ATTEMPT AT ADDRESSING THAT. THANK YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT MEANS? HOW IT PROTECTS MARITIME? >>JENNIFER MALONE: YEAH, IF AN APPLICANT CAME IN -- LET ME FIND IT. WE USED THE PORT ACTIVITY CENTER OVERLAY TO SINGLE OUT THE AREAS WHERE WE WANTED TO SEEK INDUSTRIAL PRESERVATION. SO IF SOMEBODY CAME IN AND ASKED FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT IN ONE OF THESE CIRCLED AREAS, AND AS WE SEE, A LOT OF THIS IS IN THE PORT ACTIVITY CENTER, THAT WOULD WEIGH INTO STAFF'S CONSISTENCY FINDING. WE'RE NOT PROHIBITING PLAN AMENDMENTS, BUT STAFF WOULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION IN OUR CONSISTENCY FINDING WOULD HAVE -- ABOUT INDUSTRIAL PRESERVATION IN THOSE AREAS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: AS I'M REVIEWING ALL THIS, THE CITY IS CUT UP TO VARIOUS AREAS. IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF HURRICANE FORGET ABOUT IT. NO ONE IS GETTING OUT UNLESS YOU LEAVE EARLY, I MEAN THREE DAYS EARLY. TAMPA IS JUST NOT A SQUARE BOX. CITY THAT MOVES ALL AROUND. IF THERE IS A PROBLEM IN THE NEW TAMPA AREA AROUND THE INTERSTATE, DO YOU THINK YOU'LL GET OUT? YOU CAN'T DRIVE ON I-4 NOW. WHAT ABOUT 75? IT IS THE SAME THING. IF THERE IS AN ACCIDENT ANYWHERE FROM HERE TO THE GEORGIA LINE, YOU'RE NOT GETTING OUT. YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY CITY BETWEEN HERE AND GEORGIA. YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OF THEM. AND THEY WILL BE IN THE SAME SITUATION WE ARE. THERE IS COMMON GOOD WHAT THE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN ABOUT. I'VE NEVER HEARD OF ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL, INCLUDING ME, WANT TO GET RID OF THE PORT. WE HAVE SAID OR I HAVE SAID THERE IS A REASON FOR COEXISTENCE. THERE WAS A TIME THAT THERE WAS VERY LITTLE GOING ON IN THE PORT. THERE WAS A TIME THERE WAS VERY LITTLE GOING ON IN CHANNELSIDE. THERE WAS A TIME LITTLE GOING ON IN THE CITY OF TAMPA. THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THERE WAS NO HARBOUR ISLAND. THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THERE WERE NOT A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS IN TAMPA BUT 600 PRISONERS. WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THINGS HAVE TO CHANGE FOR A BIT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DRASTIC. BUT I SIT HERE AND I TELL MYSELF, WHAT CAN I DO TO STOP ANYTHING FROM HAPPENING THAT'S CRITICAL TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE CITIZENS THAT WE PROTECT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT -- I'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE. I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. IT WAS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE THERE'S NO PUMPS THAT PUMPS THE WATER NORTH SOMEWHERE. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUMPS THAT GO THAT WAY. SO YOU THINK WE'RE NOT GOING TO FLOOD? ANSWER THAT TO YOURSELF. FROM YBOR CITY TO EAST TAMPA TO WEST TAMPA ARE THE HIGHEST POINTS IN THE CITY. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE NOT GOING TO FLOOD. THAT MEANS THEY WOULD BE THE LAST ONES TO FLOOD. DOWNTOWN WILL FLOOD. WE CAN'T STOP THE INEVITABLE. WE CAN DO SOMETHING TO HELP IT, AND THAT'S THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENT. YOU KNOW WHAT? VERY LITTLE HAS BEEN DONE WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT BONUSES FOR THINGS THAT HELP THE LIFE-SUPPORTING THINGS, LITTLE TO NONE HAVE WE EVER PASSED. GET A BONUS IF YOU DO CERTAIN THINGS FOR A BUILDING SO IT WOULD ALLEVIATE THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE IN SOCIETY OF TRYING TO LIVE. SO WE HAVEN'T DONE MUCH IN THAT AREA AND AT LEAST LOOK AT IT. BONUSES ARE GIVING RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY TO WHAT THE CODE SAYS. HOWEVER, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE YOU CAN DO IF YOU APPLY THOSE BONUSES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, GOVERNMENT PAID 10 OR $15 MILLION TO PUT 20 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND TO HELP SUSTAIN THE SUSTAINABILITY OF LIFE BY HAVING A BUILDING THAT WON'T CRUMBLE LIKE HAS HAPPENED BEFORE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA. WHEN YOU'RE NEAR THE SHORELINE, I DON'T CARE HOW DEEP YOU GO AND HOW WELL YOU BUILT THE BUILDING, SOONER OR LATER, MAYBE IN A THOUSAND YEARS, THOSE PILLARS ARE NOT GOING TO HOLD. I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT BUT I DON'T THINK WE'VE COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. I REALLY DON'T. I THINK EVERYONE WHO SPOKE HAS A RIGHTNESS TO SAY WHAT THEY SAID AND I BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAID. BUT DOES IT SOLVE THE PROBLEM? SO WHAT'S THE ANSWER? THERE IS NO ANSWER RIGHT NOW. WE ARE HAVING PEOPLE MOVING INTO THIS AREA, WHETHER TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, ST. PETE, CLEARWATER, PINELLAS COUNTY, PASCO COUNTY, MULBERRY, BARTOW. I KNOW FRIENDS OF MINE THAT MOVED TO MULBERRY BECAUSE THEY COULD BUY SOMETHING MUCH CHEAPER THAN HERE AND THEY WORK HERE. AND THAT'S WONDERFUL. BUT IT GETS TO THE POINT YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION. AND I DON'T KNOW OF ONE RIGHT NOW. ANYBODY HAVE A SOLUTION, LET US KNOW. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF TO BRING BACK THE MAP OF THE TRANSIT CORRIDORS. I'M GOING TO ASK MS. BENNETT TO BRING BACK HER HIGHLIGHTED SHEETS ABOUT THE SPECIFIC BECAUSE I THINK MY QUESTION IS, IT SEEMS TO BE IF I WAS READING HER SHEETS CORRECTLY, THOSE PARTICULAR BUSINESSES ARE ON WHAT WOULD BE TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS. JUST GO AHEAD. YEAH. I GUESS GIVE THEM TO MS. MALONE AND WE'LL KIND OF LIKE JUST TALK THIS OUT. SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE -- SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WOULD PROVIDE EXPANSION OF DENSITY EVERYWHERE. >>JENNIFER MALONE: RIGHT. >>LYNN HURTAK: THIS WOULD BE SPECIFIC TO THE TRANSIT CORRIDORS? >>JENNIFER MALONE: THE TRANSIT CORRIDORS HAS ITS OWN BONUS UNDER THE NEW BONUS STRUCTURE. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT ABOUT THIS? THIS SINGLE USE RESIDENTIAL, RIGHT NOW IT'S UMU 60, AND THEY CAN GET UP TO 50, BUT UMU 60. >>JENNIFER MALONE: RIGHT, EXACTLY. THE CHANGES, WE'RE PROPOSING THE UMU 60 WOULD BE 60 UNITS BY RIGHT, AND THEN THE BONUS WOULD BE ANYTHING ABOVE 60. SO IT WOULD BE MORE OF A TRUE BONUS STRUCTURE. >>LYNN HURTAK: AND YOU'RE SAYING THE REASON YOU CAN'T DO 50 IS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWED -- THAT WOULD BE REDUCING THEIR ALLOWABLE DENSITY? >>JENNIFER MALONE: RIGHT. IF WE PULL THE CATEGORY BACK DOWN AND CALL IT UMU 50 AND IN THE WHOLE CITY -- I'LL LET DAVID CHIME IN. >>DAVID HEY: SURE. DAVID HEY, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. REPEAT YOUR QUESTION AGAIN. >>LYNN HURTAK: BASICALLY WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT RIGHT NOW UMU 60 MEANS 50, BUT IF YOU CHANGED IT TO UMU 50, YOU WOULD BE REDUCING A PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHT TO BUILD TO A DENSITY. >>DAVID HEY: FOR YEARS WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY OF WHEN WE WOULD WRITE OUR ZONING REPORTS, TO US AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UMU 60 MEANS 60. YOU CAN GET -- THERE IS A WAY TO GET TO 60. IT'S JUST THAT ANYTHING OVER 50 RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE TO DO A BONUS. YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND PAY. THERE IS A VERY ELABORATE CALCULATION THAT I'VE NEVER BEEN ABLE -- BUT IT'S IN THE CODE. IF THEY MEET THAT, THEN -- AND YOU ALL APPROVE IT, YOU HAVE TO APPROVE IT, THEN THEY ARE ABLE TO GO TO WE'LL SAY 55 OR 59 UNITS AN ACRE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AS LONG AS YOU ALL APPROVE OF IT AND THEY PAY THEIR MONEY TO THE CITY. THIS WOULD -- THE CONCERN THAT WE HAD IS THAT THERE ARE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS NOW AND I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE ARE SOME SITTING OUT ON PAPER THAT WE DON'T EVEN SEE OUT THERE THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT. THEY HAVE THE APPROVALS. THEY ARE WAITING TO DEVELOP. IF WE JUST REDUCED IT DOWN TO 50, IF THEY CAME IN FOR A CHANGE, RIGHT, TO THEIR ZONING, IT CREATES -- WELL, IF THEY TRY TO BUILD, THEN IT CREATES A NONCONFORMITY ISSUE AND THE EXISTING ONES THAT ARE THERE NOW. WE'LL SAY ONE GOT DEVELOPED AT 55 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE, RIGHT? AND IT'S SITTING OUT THERE AND A STORM COMES THROUGH AND THE CITY HAS CHANGED IT NOW TO 50, THERE ARE ALL THESE INSURANCE ISSUES, LEGAL ISSUES THAT THE LAWYERS COULD PROBABLY ADDRESS BETTER THAN I CAN, THAT IT ENDS UP CREATING A HUGE PROBLEM FOR THOSE EXISTING PEOPLE THAT HAVE THOSE ENTITLEMENTS. >>LYNN HURTAK: THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN GRANDFATHER THAT IN. >>DAVID HEY: THAT MIGHT BE AN ATTORNEY QUESTION. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS A LEGAL QUESTION, I'M GUESSING. >>JENNIFER MALONE: JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. ANOTHER ITEM THAT KIND OF POPPED INTO MY HEAD ABOUT THIS, RIGHT NOW UNDER THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, UMU 60 DOES NOT MEAN UMU 60. IT MEANS 50 AND THEN 60 BY RIGHT. THE PLAN DOES NOT LIMIT WHERE YOU CAN GET UP TO THAT 60. ANYWHERE IN THE CITY, EVEN IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, YOU CAN GET UP TO THAT 60. THROUGH THE NEW STRUCTURE WE WERE HOPING TO MAKE THE 60, 60, BUT THE BONUS, ANYTHING ABOVE THAT, YOU CANNOT ASK FOR IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA EXCEPT IN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES. SO WE WOULD NEED TO TAKE -- WE WOULD NEED TO RESTRUCTURE IF IT IS THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL, WE WOULD REALLY HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT ALL OF OUR NUMBERS, LOOK AT ALL OF OUR BONUSSING TO MAKE SURE LIKE DAVID SAID WE'RE NOT GOING TO CREATE ANY NONCONFORMITIES BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, TODAY, IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, SOMEBODY CAN ASK COUNCIL FOR UP TO 60 UNITS AN ACRE. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS NOT ALLOW PEOPLE TO GET TO THOSE. THAT IS THE REASON WE'RE DOING THIS RIGHT? TO TRY TO REDUCE THE BONUS DENSITY IN OUR COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, RIGHT? >>DAVID HEY: YEAH, IT'S A DEVELOPMENT RIGHT ISSUE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH BECAUSE IF WE REDUCE IT DOWN, THE CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE CREATING A BUNCH OF LEGAL ISSUES THAT THE BENEFIT WOULD -- THE PROBLEMS WITH THE CREATION OF REDUCING IT, WOULD WE AS STAFF FEEL THAT YOU'RE CREATING A HUGE, BIGGER PROBLEM IN THE LEGAL NONCONFORMITY AREA. >>LYNN HURTAK: OH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I GET IT. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A WAY FOR PEOPLE TO GET TO 60. >>DAVID HEY: OH, YEAH. THEY COME TO YOU. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT IF WE TAKE IT DOWN TO 50, THEN WE'RE STOPPING THEIR ABILITY TO GET WHAT THEY ALREADY HAD. AND THAT'S A LEGAL PROBLEM. MS. JOHNSON VELEZ. >> CAN I EXPLAIN MY THING RIGHT HERE? >>LYNN HURTAK: ONE SECOND. I PROMISE -- LIKE, I'M TRYING TO -- >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: LEGAL DEPARTMENT. YES, IT COULD CREATE SOME LEGAL ISSUES WITH REDUCING PEOPLE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS. I WOULD REMIND COUNCIL SOMETHING THAT JUST OCCURRED TO ME AS WE'RE LISTENING TO THE DISCUSSION IS THAT THERE IS -- I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, SPECIFICALLY THIS MORNING, BUT IN THE COMP PLAN, THERE'S ALSO A PROPERTY RIGHTS ELEMENT THAT REQUIRES COUNCIL TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE IMPACTED PROPERTY RIGHTS WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. MS. BENNETT. >> I WANT TO POINT OUT ON MY THING, THIS IS THE CURRENT PLAN. THESE NONCONFORMITIES EXIST TODAY ALREADY UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN. WE'RE NOT CREATING NONCONFORMITIES. WE ALREADY HAVE THEM. UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN, SINGLE RESIDENTIAL USE CAN DO UP TO 50 UNITS PER ACRE BY RIGHT. IF YOU DON'T CHANGE THE COMP PLAN, THAT STAYS. IF YOU DON'T CHANGE THE NAME OF UMU 60 TO UMU 50, AND YOU DON'T DO THE PROPOSED CHANGES, WHICH GIVES THEM 60 UNITS PER ACRE BY RIGHT, THE NONCONFORMITIES, THEY EXIST TODAY AND THEY'LL STAY THERE. LET ME JUST POINT OUT, THIS IS NO BONUS DUE TO THE CHHA. SO THESE TWO PROPERTIES HERE ARE BOTH IN THE CHHA, YET WITH THE CHANGE, THEY ARE GOING TO GET AN INCREASED DENSITY. LET ME ALSO POINT OUT THAT CITY COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT SOUTH OF KENNEDY FOR SINGLE USE. YOU CAN'T BONUS. YOU CAN'T USE F.A.R. AND YET THIS WILL CHANGE THAT. THIS IS GOING TO THROW THAT INTO CONFUSION BECAUSE NOW YOU UPPED THEIR BY RIGHT. LET ME ALSO POINT OUT THAT THE CURRENT COMP PLAN SAYS YOU CAN'T DO A COMP PLAN CHANGE THAT CHANGES, INCREASES THE DENSITY IN THE CHHA. IT SAYS THAT NOW. BUT THIS INCREASES THE DENSITY IN THE CHHA. BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES ARE IN THE CHHA, AND IT SAYS RIGHT THERE THEY GO FROM 650 -- 50 TO 60. IF THE NAME IS CONFUSING AND I HATE IT, BUT MAKING IT LESS CONFUSING CREATES THIS NEW BY RIGHT, THEN DON'T CHANGE THE NAME AND WE'LL LIVE WITH THE CONFUSION. >>LYNN HURTAK: I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION FOR LEGAL THEN ON A DIFFERENT TOPIC. IF YOU JUST TAKE OFF THE PIECE THAT'S THERE NOW AND JUST LOOKING AT THIS MAP, WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS IN MY PREP SESSION, ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUTLE WAS THE LEGALITY OF BEING ABLE TO TAKE ANYTHING SOUTH OF KENNEDY OFF FOR A -- OR TO TAKE THINGS OFF BECAUSE OF THE COASTAL HIGH -- NOT BECAUSE OF COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, AND IF WE COULD ACTUALLY STOP THE TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS AT KENNEDY LEGALLY OR IF THAT OPENS UP A HOLE FOR DEVELOPERS TO COME FORWARD AND CHALLENGE. >>JENNIFER MALONE: LIKE I SAID EARLIER, WE WOULD STILL WANT THE TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS TO EXIST EVEN IF THERE BE NO BONUS BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO -- THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE DESIGN CRITERIA. BUILDINGS UP TO THE ROAD, PARKING IN THE REAR, THINGS LIKE THAT. WE DID HAVE A LOT OF THOUGHT IN UTILIZING THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA FOR THIS MAP AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF NOT ALLOWING BONUSES WITHIN IT BECAUSE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA IS DEFINED BY STATE STATUTE AND IT IS A PLANNING TOOL THAT WE USE AND THE MAP IS ADOPTED. SO THAT DOES GIVE A LOT OF WEIGHT TO THAT BOUNDARY. >>DAVID HEY: ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: I THINK THERE ARE CERTAIN ELEMENTS THAT KIND OF FLOW ALONG WITH THE TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS THAT AREN'T RELATED TO BONUSSING, RIGHT? ALL THE ELEMENTS KIND OF WORK TOGETHER RIGHT? DESPITE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS SOUTH OF KENNEDY, THAT CAN HAVE BENEFITS IN OTHER AREAS THAT DON'T INCLUDE BONUSSING BECAUSE IT IS IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. >>LYNN HURTAK: SHE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE BONUSES -- >>JENNIFER MALONE: THE DESIGN CRITERIA. SO WE WOULD BE SEEKING A CERTAIN LEVEL OF DESIGN TO KIND OF CREATE THAT WALKABLE MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. YOU HAD A MOTION? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 19 TO PRESENT A PLAN FOR PRESERVING EXISTING DENSITY ON PROPERTIES WITHOUT INCREASING DENSITY AND F.A.R.s IN THIS TRANSMITTAL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>JENNIFER MALONE: CAN I HEAR THE MOTION AGAIN? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MY MOTION WAS YOU COME BACK TO CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 19 TO PRESENT A PLAN TO PRESERVE EXISTING DENSITIES WITHOUT INCREASING DENSITIES AND F.A.R.s ON THE TRANSMITTAL. >>JENNIFER MALONE: ON TRANSIT-READY CORRIDORS? OH, PRIOR TO TRANSMITTING. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PRESENT -- PRESERVES THE PROPERTY RIGHT -- BASED ON THAT MOTION, I WOULD EXPECT YOU ALL TO COME BACK AND EXPLAIN TO US AGAIN -- DISCUSSED ABOUT -- WHILE I'M AT THIS. SUSAN, ON BONUS DENSITIES, IS THAT AN ENTITLEMENT? IS THAT A PROPERTY RIGHT? >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: NO, IT'S NOT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT'S WHAT I'M ASSUMING. AGAIN, SO WE'RE INCREASING THIS -- >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: IT'S NOT BY RIGHT. IT'S SOMETHING COUNCIL HAS TO APPROVE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IF WE ELIMINATE BONUS DENSITIES WE'RE NOT TAKING SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY RIGHTS AWAY. IF WE CITY WIDE REMOVED ALL BONUS DENSITIES, WOULD WE JEOPARDIZE FOLKS' PROPERTY RIGHTS AND WOULD THEY HAVE RECOURSE? >>JENNIFER MALONE: I THINK STEPHEN HAS A PRESENTATION NEXT THAT MIGHT HELP ANSWER MORE OF THESE QUESTIONS. I'M HAPPY TO -- JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF -- TAKE WHATEVER DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL THAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO GIVE US. I DO THINK IN THE NEXT ITEM, SOME PIECES OF THE PUZZLE MIGHT BECOME MORE CLEAR WITH REGARD TO ALL OF THESE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: OKAY. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING IS GOING TO BE SAID THAT'S GOING TO REMOVE MY CONCERN ABOUT THE INCREASE IN DENSITY ON THESE PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE JUST GIVING AWAY FOR FREE. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: LEGAL DEPARTMENT. JUST FOR CLARITY ON THE MOTION, YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO -- THESE PROPERTIES OR EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WANTED TO HAVE A PLAN, WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REFLECT THAT WE DO NOT INCREASE DENSITY ON THE PROPERTIES. THE BY RIGHT DENSITIES AND F.A.R.s. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: THAT'S CITYWIDE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: YES. CITYWIDE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE MORE OF A QUAGMIRE IF WE TRIED TO PARCEL THIS OUT. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE COMPREHENSIVE AND CITYWIDE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT WAS A MUCH CLEARER DIRECTION. COULD YOU INCORPORATE THAT LANGUAGE INTO THAT MOTION THAT YOU JUST MADE? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: REFRESH MY MEMORY OF WHAT I JUST SAID THAT WAS SO CLEAR. [ LAUGHTER ] >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'M JUST LOOKING AT -- WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS WHAT ENDS UP IN PRINT THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RELY ON TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: PLANNING COMMISSION COME TO CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 19 AND PRESENT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT PRESERVES EXISTING PROPERTY RIGHT DENSITY, BY RIGHT DENSITY, WITHOUT INCREASING DENSITY OR F.A.R. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IS THAT CLEAR? >>DAVID HEY: I'M TRYING TO -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: FOR EXPLANATION, NOT PART OF THE MOTION. JUST FOR EXPLANATION. AGAIN, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT WHAT WE JUST DISCOVERED -- WHAT WE DISCOVERED DURING THIS PUBLIC FORUM IS THAT THE CHANGING OF THE DENSITY CLASSIFICATIONS WAS GOING TO INCREASE ENTITLED PROPERTY ENTITLEMENTS AND PROPERTY -- SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT DOING THAT. WE'RE NOT DOING THAT. >>DAVID HEY: OKAY. JUST FOR MY OWN CLARITY SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON. WILL YOU WANT RECOMMENDATIONS BACK OR YOU'RE DIRECTING THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN NOT INCREASE ANY DENSITY ANYONE IN THE CITY? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: DIRECTION. UNLESS YOU GUYS COME WITH A COMPELLING LEGAL REASON WHY IT CAN'T HAPPEN, BUT DIRECTION WITHOUT A COMPELLING LEGAL REASON. >>STEPHEN BENSON: CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: YES, SIR. >>STEPHEN BENSON: THIS IS LIMITED TO THE CHHA BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TO ELIMINATE THE ABILITY TO BONUS. WHAT YOU'RE ASKING -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WELL, NO. >>STEPHEN BENSON: THIS IS MY QUESTION. I KNOW THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I KNOW THE AREAS. THE RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT WE WOULD REMOVE THE ABILITY TO BONUS. YOU CAN GET TO 60 UNITS RIGHT NOW IF YOU BONUS. IF WE CONTINUE TO REMOVE BONUSSING IN THE COASTAL AND THE DIRECTION IS TO MOVE THE DENSITY DOWN TO 50, WE ARE TAKING AWAY THE ABILIT TO HIT 60 FOR PROPERTIES THAT CAN HIT 60 NOW BECAUSE WE ARE ALSO TAKING THE BONUS AT THE SAME TIME. THERE ARE TWO THINGS HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME HERE. AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY EARLIER. I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING MORE CLEAR. WE NEED DIRECTION FOR THOSE SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES, WHAT COUNCIL'S INTENT IS BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHERE LEGAL WILL FOCUS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I BELIEVE YOU ENCAPSULATED THE INTENT. IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, WE'RE REMOVING DENSITY. BUT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE LOOK AT CITYWIDE AND HOW WE'LL ZONE THE PROPERTY, I DON'T WANT TO CHANGE AN ENTITLEMENT THAT TODAY WOULD BE AN ENTITLEMENT TO BUILD TO 50 WITH BONUS TO AN ENTITLEMENT TO BUILD TO 60 WITHOUT BONUS. >>JENNIFER MALONE: CITYWIDE OR COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK CITYWIDE. IF WE CREATE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT NEEDS TO BE CITYWIDE. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT THEY ARE SAYING IT'S ONLY IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: NO ZONING CLASSIFICATION CAN EXIST ANYWHERE AND WE'LL INCREASE DENSITY ANYWHERE, CORRECT? >>JENNIFER MALONE: WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, AT THE END OF IT, WE WOULD MAYBE PERHAPS NEED TO LOOK AT HAVING TWO BONUS STRUCTURES. ONE IN THE COASTAL AND ONE OUTSIDE OF THE COASTAL. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: NO BONUS DENSITY IN THE COASTAL. >>JENNIFER MALONE: ALLOW THE PROPERTIES THAT CAN ALREADY BONUS IN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA FROM 50 TO 60, TODAY THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS ON THAT. WE WOULD NEED TO RETAIN THAT AND THEN PERHAPS OUTSIDE OF THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, THEN THOSE PROPERTIES WOULD PERHAPS BE UNDER THE PROPOSED BONUS STRUCTURE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: EXCUSE ME FOR ONE SECOND. I BELIEVE LEGAL JUST TOLD US BONUS DENSITIES WERE NOT AN ENTITLEMENT SO WE DON'T HAVE TO ENTITLE THEM IN THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >>JENNIFER MALONE: BUT THEY CAN ASK FOR IT RIGHT NOW. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WE'RE TAKING THAT ABILITY AWAY. >>JENNIFER MALONE: YES. BUT THE ABILITY TO COME TO THE TABLE SHOULD PROBABLY BE RETAINED. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: LET'S GO BACK TO LEGAL. DO WE HAVE TO RETAIN THAT? >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: THE ABILITY TO COME -- RIGHT, EXACTLY. THERE ARE PROPERTIES RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE THAT -- I'LL CALL IT AN ENTITLEMENT FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD. IT IS AN EXPECTATION THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO COME AND SEEK THAT APPROVAL FROM CITY COUNCIL. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: BY REMOVING THAT, IS THAT REMOVING A PROPERTY ENTITLEMENT THAT WOULD PROVIDE THEM WITH RECOURSE? >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: I MEAN, IT'S A POSSIBILITY. IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT. BONUS PROVISION AGREEMENT -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: LET'S GET THAT OFFICIAL LEGAL INTERPRETATION PRIOR SEPTEMBER 15 JOHN JOHN WE CAN INCLUDE. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: WE CAN INCLUDE THAT. IF THERE IS A PROJECT THAT HAS APPROVED -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT'S WHAT I SAID ABOUT THE EXISTING PROPERTY RIGHTS AND HAVING TWO CLASSIFICATIONS FOR COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK SAYING ABOUT GRANDFATHERING IN, SO WE HAVE TWO CLASSIFICATIONS. ONE PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXISTING RIGHTS GRANDFATHERED IN VERSUS NEW. >>LYNN HURTAK: EVERYONE HAS EXISTING RIGHTS. THAT'S THE ISSUE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT IS THE LEGAL QUESTION ABOUT THE BONUS DENSITY. THAT IS A BONUS DENSITY QUESTION. IS THAT ENTITLEMENT? >>JENNIFER MALONE: THIS IS WHY WE WERE COMING TO YOU WITH A NEW STRUCTURE IS BECAUSE THE CURRENT STRUCTURE IS VERY CONFUSING. WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND THOUGHT -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. >>LYNN HURTAK: LET HER FINISH HER SENTENCE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I HAVE THE FLOOR BOTH OF YOU ALL. [ENCODER DISCONNECT] JOHNSON LEGAL DEPARTMENT, AGAIN, FOR CLARIFICATION IS THAT DIRECTION COUNCIL IS GIVING TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF OR IS THAT WHERE YOU ARE HEADED BUT SUBJECT TO THIS FURTHER REPORT IN SEPTEMBER? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I HAVE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR SEPTEMBER 19 FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I HAVE A REQUEST FOR LEGAL TO GET US AN INTERPRETATION. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: CORRECT. THERE WILL BE FURTHER DIRECTION THEN. THIS ISN'T THE FINAL DIRECTION. I WANTED THAT FOR CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK AND COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. >>LYNN HURTAK: AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT I SAID BEFORE, I DISAGREE WITH DOING THIS THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE CITY. I THINK THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA IS WHERE WE FOCUS, SO I WON'T SUPPORT THIS MOTION BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA IS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THE REASON THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, YOU CAN'T TELL SOMEBODY THEY CAN GET TO 60 AND THEN TAKE AWAY THEIR ABILITY TO GET TO 60. THE PROBLEM THAT MAKES THIS HARDER IS THAT THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA IS GOING TO CONSISTENTLY CHANGE. SO THE PROBLEM IS THAT SOMEBODY WHO IS OUTSIDE OF THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA IN THREE YEARS WILL BE INSIDE THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA. IF WE HAVE SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM COASTAL -- SO THE COASTAL THEN -- WE HAVE ACTUAL FEDERAL DATA THAT WILL SUPPORT US. I'M VERY CONCERNED. AND I UNDERSTAND THE RESIDENTS' CONCERN, BECAUSE IT IS A TRUE CONCERN. I'M ALSO CURIOUS HOW MANY -- I GUESS IT IMPACTS EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA, CORRECT? YEAH. SO THIS IS A HUGE ISSUE, BUT FOR ME, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT -- AS MUCH AS I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PUBLIC IS TRYING TO SAY AND I ALSO BELIEVE IT CLEARLY, I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE LAWSUITS THAT ARE GOING TO COME FROM THIS BECAUSE IF WE TAKE AWAY PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO ASK, BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE SO IT BECOMES EASIER. I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW MANY PROPERTIES THIS MIGHT IMPACT, I GUESS. AND THAT'S -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY TYPE OF THOUGHT BEHIND THAT OTHER THAN -- I MEAN -- ARE 60 YEAR, WHATEVER, I DON'T KNOW. >>JENNIFER MALONE: WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU WITH SOME SORT OF ACREAGE. IT WOULD PROBABLY BE AN ACREAGE OF PROPERTIES THAT IT MIGHT IMPACT, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE IN SEPTEMBER. AND WE COULD HAVE -- BETWEEN THEN, I CAN MEET AGAIN WITH ALL OF YOU ALL INDIVIDUALLY DURING BRIEFINGS TO REALLY TRY AND UNDERSTAND THESE CONCERNS. >>LYNN HURTAK: I CAN TRY TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I THINK I GET IT. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING MORE DENSITY, BUT I'M ALSO REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THE LEGAL. BECAUSE ESPECIALLY IN SOUTH TAMPA, I 100% SEE DEVELOPERS COMING AND TRY TO FIGHT THIS IN EVERY WAY, SHAPE AND FORM. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. WHEREAS RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE THE OPTION, AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE OPTION, THEN I'M NOT SURE. MR. BENSON. >>STEPHEN BENSON: I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS AND WE CAN DEFINITELY COME BACK. I DO WANT TO BE CLEAR, WHAT YOU SAW TODAY WAS A BALANCE. >>LYNN HURTAK: EXACTLY. >>STEPHEN BENSON: WE TRY TO CLAMP DOWN IN WAYS WE FEEL LIKE WE CAN CLAMP DOWN. IF THAT'S ALL WE DID, YOU WOULD GET THIS ROOM PACKED WITH THE WHOLE OTHER SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY. WE REALLY DID TRY TO ACHIEVE A BALANCE WITH THIS. THERE IS PROBABLY FLEXIBILITY IN WHAT'S COME FORWARD BUT IT'S NOT LIKE A DRAMATIC CHANGE FROM WHAT YOU SEE IN TERMS OF WHAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE. I THINK WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER. I THINK WE CAN MAKE IT BETTER. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WANT TO THANK BOTH INDIVIDUALS TALKING SO WELL ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE CITY AND SO FORTH AND SO ON ABOUT WHAT IF, THE NAME, SO FORTH. IS THIS IN ANY WAY GOING TO IMPEDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WHERE WE CAN GIVE BONUSES? THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, DOES IT TAKE AWAY ANY BENEFIT BUILDING MORE SUSTAINABLE WITH THINGS LIKE SOLAR OR OTHER THINGS THAT ARE COMING ONLINE THAT WOULD MAKE THE ENVIRONMENT MUCH BETTER FOR ALL OF US? I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO. DO WE HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT? >>STEPHEN BENSON: THE REASON WHY THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE HERE AND EVEN WHY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BONUS IS BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF COUNCIL. WE LOOK -- WE'VE LOOKED AT THE PAST ACTIONS. AND THE PAST ACTIONS BY COUNCIL OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS GRANTED OVER 3,000 NEW UNITS ON THE LAND USE MAP WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC BENEFIT. SO WE'RE BRINGING YOU THIS FRAMEWORK AND ALSO GIVING YOU THE TOOL TO SAY NO. IT'S THE FRAMEWORK TO ASK FOR A PUBLIC BENEFIT INSTEAD. THAT IS WHY -- THAT IS WHY WE'RE BRINGING IT. WE KNOW IT IS EASY TO SAY NO WHEN TALKING ABOUT A PROJECT BUT IT'S REALLY HARD WHEN THERE IS A PROJECT IN FRONT OF YOU. THE MORE TOOLS YOU CAN HAVE TO ASK FOR PUBLIC BENEFITS OR TO EXPECT THERE TO BE PUBLIC BENEFITS INCORPORATED, IF THEY ARE ASKING TO BUILD TO THE MAXIMUM, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND GIVE YOU THE TOOLS TO DO IT. NONE OF THIS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING RIGHT NOW IS ADMINISTRATIVE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU, CHAIR. COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN, I THINK I WANT TO WITHDRAW MY SECOND UNTIL I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE MOTION IN PLACE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND IT GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING FOR ME. NO DISRESPECT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M SUPPORTING SOMETHING THAT I CLEARLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND BACK AND FORTH. CAN YOU REPEAT IT AGAIN FOR US? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I KNOW THIS HAS GOTTEN COMPLICATED. PEELING IT ALL THE WAY BACK, MY CONCERN IS, AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP BY CARROLL ANN BENNETT DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, THAT BY MAKING THESE CITYWIDE CHANGES TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION, WE ARE GOING TO INCREASE DENSITY FOR FREE. SO WE'RE ACTUALLY GIVING AWAY DENSITY FOR FREE WITHOUT HAVING COMMUNITY BENEFIT AGREEMENTS OR ANY OF THE ADDITIONAL, COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA SAID, AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE CAN ATTACH TO THIS. THAT JUST SEEMS TO BE NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF TAMPA TO INCREASE CITYWIDE THE DENSITY OF THESE PROPERTIES WITHOUT GETTING SOME TYPE OF BENEFIT AGREEMENT FROM THEM. AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS HOW WE AVOID DOING THAT. HOW TO AVOID INCREASING DENSITY WITHOUT GETTING A BENEFIT AGREEMENT. >>STEPHEN BENSON: I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WITH OR WITHOUT A MOTION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF HAS ALREADY SAID THEY ARE HAPPY TO BRING BACK FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION AT THE I THINK SEPTEMBER DATE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: LEGAL WILL COME BACK WITH AN ANSWER, A LEGAL ANSWER ABOUT THE BONUS DENSITIES AND IS THAT AN ENTITLEMENT THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH? >>JENNIFER MALONE: JENNIFER MALONE, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. MAYBE THE MOTION AS SIMPLE AS COME BACK TO US ON SEPTEMBER 21 FOR UPDATE ON THE CONTINUING WORK OF THE LAND USE -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THE 19th. >>JENNIFER MALONE: THEN WE'RE ON THE AGENDA -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND I ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF TO COME BACK ON SEPTEMBER 19 WITH AN UPDATE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A SECOND. COUNCILMAN VIERA, YOU HAD YOUR MICROPHONE ON. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. I'LL VOTE TO FORWARD THIS ALONG. AGAIN, I SHARE SOME OF COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK'S CONCERNS BUT I WOULD FULLY EXPECT WE COULD TRY THIS, LEGAL DEPARTMENT WOULD SEE HOW THIS COULD BE CURTAILED REFORMED. I'M GLAD TO FORWARD ALONG AS A COURTESY. >>LYNN HURTAK: QUICK QUESTION FOR MR. BENSON. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WHAT YOU JUST SAID WAS THAT YOU LOOKED AT 3,000 PLANS OR 3,000 APPROVALS, AND WE GAVE THOSE BONUSES AWAY WITH GETTING NOTHING IN RETURN. >>STEPHEN BENSON: THOSE WERE THROUGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND THOSE WERE UNITS. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT WE DIDN'T GET ANYTHING. >>STEPHEN BENSON: THERE WAS NO PUBLIC BENEFIT PROVIDED AS PART OF THAT ADDITIONAL DENSITY THAT WAS GRANTED. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I AGREE. I'M TRYING TO STOP THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR THAT RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE THE BONUSES, WHEN WE PROVIDE THE BONUSES, WE AREN'T GETTING ANY. WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY PUBLIC GOOD FOR THEM. >>STEPHEN BENSON: WHEN YOU PROVIDE THE BONUSES, YOU DO. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DOCUMENT THAT IS THROUGH THE BONUS PROVISION AGREEMENT. BUT WHEN YOU GIVE THEM A PLAN AMENDMENT TO A HIGHER CATEGORY, YOU'RE BASICALLY GIVING THE DENSITY AWAY FOR FREE. SOMETIMES THAT COMES WITH A REZONING. THERE IS A LOT GOING ON THERE AND WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE THE TOOL TO NOT -- >>JENNIFER MALONE: ALL OF THE CEILINGS, THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE -- AND IT'S IN THE PACKET -- WHAT YOU CAN ASK FOR THROUGH A BONUS GOT A LOT HIGHER. THAT WAY SOMEBODY DOESN'T HAVE TO ASK FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT TO GET TO ALMOST THE NEXT CATEGORY WITH THEIR DENSITY AND INTENSITY. WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE RIPPED IT APART AND PUT IT BACK TOGETHER. THAT'S WHAT STEPHEN IS SAYING, PERHAPS -- YOU KNOW, I CAN'T GUARANTEE ANYTHING BUT THE HOPE THROUGH THIS IS YOU MIGHT SEE LESS PLAN AMENDMENTS BECAUSE MORE FOLKS CAN GET WHAT THEY NEED WITHOUT CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP BECAUSE CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS A BIG DEAL. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: NOT WHAT THEY NEED. WHAT THEY WANT. >>JENNIFER MALONE: THAT'S WHY I SAID PERHAPS AND THE HOPE IS BECAUSE THERE WILL ALWAYS BE OTHER THINGS THAT HAPPEN. >>DAVID HEY: IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME, I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW OF MY EXPERIENCE. I'VE BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE. WE'VE BEEN IN MULTIPLE MEETINGS WHERE PEOPLE COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WE HAVE TO HAVE A PRE-APP MEETING FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT. AND THE APPLICANTS WILL SAY -- BECAUSE THEY'LL SAY, WELL, WE JUST DON'T WANT TO PAY THE BONUS. WE WANT TO GO AROUND. AND WE SAY WELL, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD ADVISE YOU NOT TO DO THIS OR STUFF LIKE THAT. IT HAPPENS A LOT WHERE PEOPLE -- MY OPINION BEING IN THE MEETINGS, IT HAPPENS A LOT WHERE APPLICANTS COME IN JUST TO CIRCUMVENT THE BONUS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. THE SECOND STILL STANDS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON WITH CLARITY ON THE MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 4, WESTSHORE OVERLAY HEIGHT LIMIT. >>LYNN HURTAK: I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION I WANT TO ASK MS. MALONE. THIS DOESN'T STOP THE PROGRESS OF DOING COMMUNITY MEETINGS. >>JENNIFER MALONE: WE WILL MAINTAIN THE CURRENT TIMELINE TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY. THIS ACTUALLY MIGHT BE HELPFUL BECAUSE THEN WE CAN TELL THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THIS OUTREACH WHAT WE HEARD FROM COUNCIL AND WE WILL TRY TO MAINTAIN THE TIMELINE. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. I WAS JUST CURIOUS. SO THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER 4. >>STEPHEN BENSON: STEPHEN BENSON, CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR. THIS ITEM WAS RELATED TO A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON ABOUT INCREASING THE HEIGHT AND DENSITY IN THE WESTSHORE AREA AND KENNEDY BOULEVARD AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM WHAT WAS JUST PRESENTED WE ARE PROPOSING SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN -- THROUGH THE BONUS PROGRAM FOR WHAT YOU CAN DO. WE ARE GOING TO RESPOND TO THIS MOTION BOTH SPEAKING TO HOW THESE CHANGES THAT WE'RE PROPOSING ARE GOING TO AFFECT THAT AREA AND THEN WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO RECALIBRATE THEM SO YOU DON'T KEEP GETTING PROJECTS COMING FOR HEIGHT WAIVERS AFTER WE INCREASE THE DENSITIES WITH THE COMP PLAN. WE'RE TRYING TO DO ONE STEP AT A TIME SO WE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH THE SHORTEST PATH TO ADDRESS THE MOTION. EVAN JOHNSON IS THE CITY'S CHIEF PLANNER. HE WILL WALK THROUGH THE SLIDES AND PROVIDE THE REPORT. >> THANK YOU. EVAN JOHNSON, CHIEF PLANNER, CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. DEPENDING ON WHICH COMMENTS YOU REFER TO, I'M EITHER GOING TO TELL YOU HOW WE RIP SOMETHING APART AND PUT IT BACK TOGETHER OR -- BUT, NO. WE CAN PULL THE PRESENTATION UP WHENEVER WE HAVE A CHANCE. THE PURPOSE HERE TODAY IS TO WALK YOU THROUGH WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP IN THE BONUS PROCEDURE AND IN THE PROCESS. SO WE'VE HAD THE BRIEFING ON THE COMP PLAN. CHANGES ARE GOING TO BE LOOKED AT AND DISCUSSED AND WE'LL BRING THOSE BACK TO YOU. BUT THEN ULTIMATELY IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THE SYSTEM, WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE CODE CHANGES. WE WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR PROCESS TO GET THERE. WE ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED THREE MOTIONS THAT WE'VE ASSOCIATED THIS PARTICULAR PRESENTATION WITH BECAUSE THERE WAS A SIMILAR DISCUSSION ABOUT KENNEDY AND WESTSHORE AND, OF COURSE, RELATED TO OUR FUTURE LAND USE 2045 UPDATE. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND DOCUMENT THOSE FOR THE RECORD AS WELL. WHAT IS A BONUS? WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THIS ALREADY. NOT SURPRISINGLY GIVEN THE TOPIC IT IS VERY INTERESTING AND NEW. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF NEW CHANGES TO IT. GENERALLY, IT IS THE WAY WE ARE DEFINING IT, IT IS THE GRANTING OF ADDITIONAL UNITS OR FLOOR AREA IN EXCHANGE FOR A PUBLIC BENEFIT. IT HAS TO BE ENABLED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT ENABLING THAT. AND ULTIMATELY IT HAS TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THOSE ARE THE STEPS WE'RE GOING THROUGH, BUT THAT IS HOW WE SEE THE BONUS SYSTEM AND HOW THE PROCESS WILL HAVE TO PLAY OUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD. OUR UPDATE, A COUPLE OF THINGS, ULTIMATELY ONCE THE COMP PLAN IS ADOPTED AND APPROVED, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THE BONUS METHODOLOGY AND SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS LAID OUT IN THE CODE AS WELL AS WE'RE HOPING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME IDEAS ABOUT REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY AND INCENTIVES BECAUSE ULTIMATELY WE'RE TRYING TO FIND WAYS PARTICULARLY FOCUSED ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT ALSO SOME OF THE SUSTAINABILITY ELEMENTS THAT I KNOW COUNCILMAN MIRANDA HAS BROUGHT UP TODAY. WE'RE TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO OFFSET THOSE COSTS. WE'RE ASKING PEOPLE TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON DEVELOPMENT. WE'RE TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO OFFSET THOSE COSTS THROUGH A VARIETY OF MECHANISMS. YOU HAVE SEEN THIS TABLE BEFORE, AND IT KIND OF LAID OUT, I BELIEVE IT WAS FROM THE FEBRUARY HOUSING DISCUSSION. I KIND OF WANTED TO -- IT LAID OUT SOME OF THE GOALS WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, WHAT OUR INTENDED OUTCOMES ARE. I WON'T SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT. IT IS IN YOUR PACKET. WE DID HIGHLIGHT ONE THERE, THE SECOND ROW. CURRENTLY, WE REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 10% SET ASIDE FOR AFFORDABLE UNITS. WE HAD DISCUSSED THE IDEA OF RAISING THAT AS PART OF OUR UPDATES TO THE BONUS SYSTEM. TRUTHFULLY, FOR REASONS THAT I'LL BE DISCUSSING A LITTLE BIT MORE, THAT MAY BE ONE THAT WE END UP KIND OF SITTING ON AND LEAVING AS-IS. AGAIN, WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO TARGET A MARKET REASONABLE, IF YOU WILL OR MARKET FEASIBLE APPROACH TO ASKING FOR BONUS DENSITY. I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT. BUT I WANTED TO POINT THIS OUT AGAIN BECAUSE OUR METHODS AND OUR FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS ARE GOING TO BE EVOLVING AS WE CONTINUE TO DO OUR ANALYSIS. THIS WAS JUST ONE OF THOSE CHANGES ALONG THE WAY THAT WE NOTICED THAT MIGHT NEED TO STAY THE SAME AS IT IS NOW. -- EXCEPT TO SAY THIS IS REALLY FOCUSED ON -- [AUDIO DROPPING OUT] -- -- TIMES WHERE WE HAVE EXISTING TRANSIT OR EXISTING EMPLOYMENT, ET CETERA. SO THIS ALIGNS VERY MUCH WITH THE 2045 COMP PLAN GROWTH STRATEGY. NOW, THESE, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, MAY, IN FACT, CHANGE SOME, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED IN SEPTEMBER WHEN WE COME BACK. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF COMES BACK. I ONLY PULLED UP THESE -- TRANSIT CORRIDORS. SO RM -- [AUDIO BREAKING UP] -- DENSITY CEILING OF HUNDRED DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR 3.5 FLOOR AREA RATIO. WITH THE NEW BONUS CEILINGS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING ABLE TO GO UP TO 150 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR INCREASING THAT F.A.R. UP TO 25%. NOW, YOU HAVE TO -- PUBLIC BENEFIT -- [AUDIO DROP] -- POTENTIAL IS GOING TO BE GOING SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER WITH THIS NEW FRAMEWORK. AND THE WAY YOU GET TO THOSE BONUS CEILINGS IS BY BEING ABLE TO STACK DIFFERENT BONUSES THAT WE HAVE -- THAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS PART OF THIS UPDATE. AFFORDABLE HOUSIN, THE CITYWIDE BONUS, YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GET UP TO YOUR MAX BONUS AMOUNT OF 100%, BUT THAT IS ONLY IF YOU MEET SPECIFIC CRITERIA RELATED TO THE AMOUNT YOU SET ASIDE AND THE SPECIFIC AMI LEVELS, INCOME LEVELS THAT YOU ARE PROVIDING UNITS FOR. SO THAT WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH A CONSULTANT. WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO YOU ALL LATER WITH A DETAILED SLIDING SCALE THAT KIND OF SHOWS YOU HOW THOSE BONUSES CAN BE ACHIEVED ALL THE WAY UP TO THAT MAXIMUM. IT'S NOT GIVE US 10% AT 120 AND THEN GIVE YOU THE ENTIRE 100%. IT'S VERY MUCH BROKEN DOWN. TRANSIT READY CORRIDORS, 50% CEILING. AGAIN, DESIGN CRITERIA AS WELL AS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS AMI LEVELS FOR THE SET-ASIDES. TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE WOULD BE STREETCAR OR MAJOR FIXED GUIDEWAY SO THAT CAN GET YOU UP TO THE 100%. EFFICIENT RESILIENT BUILDINGS, WHICH SPEAKS TO THAT SUSTAINABLE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS ALTERNATIVE POWER GENERATION CAN GET YOU UP TO THAT 25%. CBD PERIPHERY ESSENTIALLY REMAINS THE SAME AS FAR AS BONUS POTENTIAL. BUT THESE CAN BE STACKED. IF YOU THINK BACK TO THE CEILING TABLE, THESE CAN BE STACKED FOR SOMEBODY TO ACHIEVE UP TO THAT MAX ULTIMATE THAT'S IDENTIFIED IN THE TABLE BY EACH LAND USE CATEGORY. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO ONLY DO ONE. YOU CAN MIX AND MATCH DEPENDING ON YOUR BUILDING DESIGN AND YOUR PROPOSAL. I WON'T GO INTO DETAIL, BUT THIS EFFICIENT AND RESILIENT BUILDING, ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS GIVEN UP TO 25% OF AN INCREASE IN DENSITY AND INTENSITY IN EXCHANGE FOR LEED BUILDING ELEMENTS WHICH ARE ANYTHING FROM EV CHARGIG TO BUILDING DESIGN CONSTRUCTION AND EFFICIENCY AND INCLUDES ALTERNATIVE POWER GENERATION OPTIONS AS WELL. BUT THIS IS -- WHAT I REALLY WANT TO SPEND THE REST OF THE TIME IS TALKING ABOUT OUR PROCESS MOVING FORWARD, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WHICH IT HAS BECOME MORE AND MORE CLEAR THE LEVEL OF EXPENSE AND COST THAT IT TAKES TO PROVIDE UNITS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME AT A LOWER RENTAL RATE TO SERVE LOWER AMI. WHAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU ALL WITH SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE SLIDING SCALE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING SET-ASIDES, THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY TRIED TO WITHIN REASON LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT COST AND ACTUAL POTENTIAL RETURN THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD BE LOOKING AT IF THEY UTILIZED THE BONUS SYSTEM. SO WE ARE IN THE PROCESS AND THIS IS A SNAPSHOT OF MANY, MANY SHEETS. BUT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH A CONSULTANT TO BUILD A CALCULATOR, ESSENTIALLY A BONUS CALCULATOR. CURRENTLY WE IDENTIFIED DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION TYPES, DIFFERENT PROPERTY VALUE LEVELS, COST OF PROPERTY BASED ON EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SALES OVER THE LAST I WANT TO SAY LIKE FIVE YEARS WITHIN THE CITY OF TAMPA. WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT AMI LEVELS AS WELL AND KIND OF BUILDING ALL OF THOSE INTO THE MODEL AND ULTIMATELY OUR NEXT STEP WHEN WE'RE COMING BACK, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RATE OF RETURN CALCULATOR BUILT IN. SO YOU COULD ACTUALLY GET A SENSE OF IF I'M PROPOSING DEVELOPMENT A WITH NO BONUS, THIS IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF A RATE OF RETURN. IF I'M FOLLOWING YOUR BONUS CALCULATIONS AND TRYING TO OFFSET THE COST, THIS IS WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. THE OTHER THING THAT ULTIMATELY IT WILL ALSO IDENTIFY IS GIVE A SENSE, AGAIN, THINK MORE OF AN ESTIMATE OF A FINANCIAL GAP. SO IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO DO, AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET MORE UNITS WITHIN A GIVEN AMI OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, IT WILL SAY IN ORDER TO DO THAT, NOT ONLY GIVE BONUS OR PERHAPS CONSIDER GIVING SOME FUNDING TO HELP OFFSET THAT COST. SO THIS CALCULATOR REALLY HAS BEEN ENLIGHTENING TO THE POINT AND WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CONSULTANT TO TWEAK IT, BUT IT REALLY HELPS US UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENT DECISIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE ON THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE WHEN THEY ARE TRYING TO SAY, WELL, CAN WE AFFORD TO PROVIDE THESE UNITS AT THESE RENTS OVER A COUPLE OF THINGS JUST TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FROM UNIT DEVELOPMENT TYPE. WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON WHERE THOSE FOUR LAND USE CATEGORIES I SHOWED YOU EARLIER, WHERE MOST OF THOSE ARE IN THE CITY ARE GOING TO BE ONE OF THESE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT TYPES. WE HAVE WHAT IS CALLED GARDEN APARTMENT. THERE IS A LOT OF THIS -- THIS IS FROM SEMINOLE HEIGHTS AREA. WOOD CONSTRUCTION, THREE, FOUR STORIES, SURFACE PARKING, LOTS IN THE UNIVERSITY AREA AS WELL. CONSTRUCTION COSTS, THIS IS WITHOUT INCLUSION OF LAND COSTS, GENERALLY WE'VE BEEN USING THE LATEST AVAILABLE ESTIMATES FROM REPUTABLE NATIONWIDE DATABASES TO PULL THESE COST ESTIMATES BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE LOOKING IN THOSE MODELS. RAPID CONSTRUCTION, WESTSHORE HAS A TON OF THESE. CHANNEL DISTRICT SEVERAL. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE THERE. GOT A GARAGE BUT THE GARAGE IS NOT PART OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE. SO YOU'RE NOT SITTING ON TOP OF A GARAGE. THAT AFFECTS COST OF CONSTRUCTION. AGAIN, WE BUILT THIS INTO THE MODEL AS WELL. FINALLY WOULD BE YOUR TYPICAL DOWNTOWN, ANYWHERE FROM 10 TO 30 PLUS, BUILDING SITTING ON TOP OF A GARAGE GREATLY INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. SO WE BUILT THAT IN AS WELL. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT AREAS LIKE CHANNEL DISTRICT OR PARTS OF SOUTHERN TAMPA HEIGHTS, LIKE WITH THE YMCA DEVELOPMENT, @THINE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THEY'LL BE LOOKING AT DOING. THE OTHER THING WE WANT TO BE LOOKING AT FROM OUR CODE, FROM THE CODE PERSPECTIVE IS REALLY WHAT ARE THE REGULATORY INCENTIVES THAT WE ALSO CAN CONSIDER. ARE THERE PARKING REDUCTIONS FOR AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT WE BAKED INTO THIS BONUS CODE. COULD BE DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY. IF I LOWER THE GREENSPACE REQUIREMENT, GIVING YOU MORE LAND TO DEVELOP ON, THEREFORE IT IS EASIER FOR YOU TO ACCOMPLISH THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT YOU WANT TO ACCOMPLISH. ALL OF THOSE THINGS AGAIN ARE ABOUT REDUCING DEVELOPMENT COST WITH THE LIMITED TOOLS THAT WE HAVE. TAKE AWAY NEXT STEPS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, AS WE HAVE SAID, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO SAY, IN ORDER TO MAKE WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO TARGET A MARKET REASONABLE OR MARKET FEASIBLE APPROACH, SIGNIFICANT BONUSES ARE GOING TO BE NEEDED TO BE GRANTED TO OFFSET THE COSTS, PARTICULARLY FOR HOUSING. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAMMER THIS HOME BECAUSE IT IS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMPLEMENTING SOMETHING AT A MUCH LARGER PORTION OF THE CITY. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT USING THIS TOOL TO ADDRESS WHAT WE KNOW IS A MAJOR HOUSING CHALLENGE, HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CHALLENGE, CERTAIN AREAS, IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE THE POSSIBILITY OF SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN DENSITY IN THOSE TARGETED AREAS. THE NEXT COUPLE JUST SPEAKS TO THE DYNAMICS OF THE MARKET RIGHT NOW. WE KNOW THERE ARE CHANGES HAPPENING. THE REASON I BRING THESE UP IS BECAUSE THE DATA IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE DAY YOU PULLED IT. THESE ARE ALWAYS SNAPSHOTS. OUR CALCULATOR IS NOT MEANT TO GIVE AN ABSOLUTE YES OR NO, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING AS UP TO DATE AS POSSIBLE. AND ALSO TO SPEAK TO THE IDEA THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND WE ADOPT SOMETHING, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CONTINUE TO REVISIT BECAUSE DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GIVE THAT ONGOING TRACKING OF THE DATA AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE YEARS. AND THE OTHER DISCUSSION MOVING FORWARD OUT OF THIS IS WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS AS IT RELATES TO CODE CHANGES? MAX HEIGHT HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BOTH FROM THE WESTSHORE PERSPECTIVE AND KENNEDY. WESTSHORE HAS A DIFFERENT ISSUE OR CHALLENGE BECAUSE THEY HAVE A MUCH LOWER FAA CEILING RIGHT NOW FOR HEIGHT REZONINGS. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CURRENTLY DO NOT LIMIT HEIGHT IN THE CODE ITSELF. THAT'S LIMITED BY THESE CEILINGS THAT THEN EVERYBODY WHO BUILDS SOMETHING ABOVE ANYWHERE FROM 60 TO 100 FEET HAS TO GO THROUGH A VERY DETAILED PROCESS. HOWEVER ON KENNEDY, THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK AT WITH THE CODE UPDATE AND CODE REFORM WITH OUR CORRIDOR DESIGN STANDARDS. OUR RECOMMENDATION, WE WOULD LOVE TO HEAR ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FEEDBACK QUESTIONS. I KNOW YOU'VE HIT ON A LOT OF THEM ALREADY. WOULD LIKE TO GET YOUR CONCURRENCE FOR US TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING THE BONUS CODE CHANGES BACK TO YOU AS PART OF THE JULY CYCLE, WHICH MEANS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT EARLY 2025 -- [AUDIO DROP] -- ONE AFTER ANOTHER. I THINK THAT'S -- SHOWS THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE TO THIS PIECE, THIS ELEMENT OF THE PLAN UPDATE, BUT THEY ARE GOING TO BE VERY CLOSE. WE WANT YOUR CONCURRENCY THAT WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT. THEN ALSO CONCURRENCY THAT WE CONTINUE TO PURSUE AND LOOK TO PURSUE REGULATORY INCENTIVES AND TO SUPPORT AFFORDABLE UNITS. WITH THAT, THAT'S IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: CLENDENIN AND THEN CARLSON. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE JUST LIKE THE COMP PLAN. I'M A BIG FAN. YOU GUYS HAVE DONE EXTRAORDINARY WORK. BUT I DO HAVE CONCERN AND I LIKE THE BONUS. I LIKE THE STACKING. I LIKE EVERYTHING ABOUT IT EXCEPT I THINK -- UPON THE LEGAL OPINION THAT COMES BEFORE US OF WHETHER GRANTING ADDITIONAL -- ARE WE GRANTING ADDITIONAL RIGHTS? IF THAT OPINION COMES BACK FROM LEGAL THAT BY GRANTING ADDITIONAL BONUS DENSITIES WE'RE GRANTING ADDITIONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT WE CAN NEVER TAKE AWAY, THAT'S GOING TO BE A CONCERN TO ME. I APPLAUD THAT IN YOUR PRESENTATION YOU RECOGNIZE THE CHANGING MARKET BECAUSE I THINK PART OF GOVERNMENT'S PROBLEM IS WE'RE ALWAYS THREE STEPS BEHIND THE MARKET. IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT. I SAW YOU HAD REFLECTED THAT THE RENTAL MARKET IS SOFTEN APPROXIMATING OBVIOUSLY THE WORK DONE AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING HOUSING IS CATCHING UP WITH THE NEED IN THE CITY OF TAMPA. THAT'S A GOOD POINT. GLAD YOU HAD THAT IN THERE. THANK YOU. I WANTED TO MAKE THAT PUBLIC STATEMENT THAT DEPENDING ON LEGAL'S INTERPRETATION OF WHETHER BONUS DENSITIES ARE AN ENTITLEMENT THAT CAN'T BE TAKEN AWAY I THINK IS WHERE I'LL STAND ON THIS AS IT GETS PUT FORWARD. ONE OTHER LAST NOTE, I KNOW THIS WAS COUNCILMAN CARLSON'S ISSUE. I SUPPORTED IT WHEN HE MADE IT. I AGREE WITH THE HEIGHT ISSUE. AS FORMER AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL I'M FULLY AWARE OF THE FAA RESTRICTIONS ALONG KENNEDY BOULEVARD AND ANYWHERE WE CAN FOR THE HEIGHT AND INCREASING THAT, I THINK IT'S A GOOD PLAN. GOOD PLAN FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU ALSO FOR ALL THE HARD WORK AND STEPHEN HAS ALSO WORKED A LOT, A LOT OF TIME ON THIS I KNOW, WITH ME AND OTHERS. AS I SAID BEFORE, IN AN AREA WHERE WE DON'T BJECT TO GROWTH, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE BONUS DENSITY. I THINK IT IS A SPEED BUMP. BOAFERLS COMPLAIN TO ME ALL THE TIME. THE BIGGEST COMPLAINT I GET IS THE MARKET IS STILL KIND OF FALTERING. THE FACT THAT THERE ARE CELEBRATIONS EVERY DAY THAT THE DEVELOPERS ARE GETTING FINANCING IS A CELEBRATION BUT ALSO A CONCERN BECAUSE SIX MONTHS OR SO AGO, WE WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT THAT BECAUSE EVERYBODY WAS GETTING APPROVAL. WE NEED TO MOVE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE IN THE AREAS. IF WE'RE GOING TO RESTRICT AREAS LIKE SOUTH OF GANDY THAT ARE FLOODED AND OVERBUILT WHERE THEY HAVE HAD 10 OR 20 THOUSAND NEW UNITS IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, MORE THAN ANY OTHER AREA, WE'VE GOT TO ACCELERATE GROWTH IN THE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE DON'T OBJECT. IN THE WESTSHORE AREA, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME THERE THE LAST FEW WEEKS. IT'S UNEVEN THE WAY IT WAS DEVELOPED. IT'S UNEVEN THE WAY IT WAS DEVELOPED. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE AS IT'S REDEVELOPED IT NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPED IN AN EVEN WAY. I WISH WE COULD JUST BY RIGHT GIVE FOLKS THE RIGHT TO GO UP. I WISH WE COULD CREATE A CBD THERE SO STAFF COULD ACCELERATE THE GROWTH. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT KENNEDY BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT KENNEDY AS WE BROUGHT THAT UP. AND THERE ARE ALSO NEIGHBORHOODS, ONE OF WHICH OUR COLLEAGUE GREW UP IN THAT'S ON THE EASTERN PART OF WESTSHORE. BEING SENSITIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS, WE NEED TO FIGURE -- THE THING STEVE AND I LOOKED AT AND ALSO TALKED TO DEVELOPERS ABOUT IS THE FAA REQUIREMENT. AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS, AND I THINK THE DEVELOPERS DON'T ALWAYS UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE, THE STATE LAW I THINK IT WAS 1987 SET UP THAT THE AVIATION AUTHORITIES COULD SET UP A PRIVATE BOARD WITH PUBLIC OVERSIGHT THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO PROVIDE EXCEPTIONS TO THE FAA HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO, THE AVIATION AUTHORITY HERE DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD MEET AS THEMSELVES AND THEY WOULD PROVIDE THAT. AND THEN ULTIMATELY GOES UP TO FAA NATIONAL. BUT THAT APPROVAL WE GET COMPLAINTS, TAKES A LONG TIME AND IT IS DIFFICULT. SO WE SEE LIKE MIDTOWN HAS STRUGGLED AND SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TRYING TO DEVELOP UP TO THE FAA LIMIT. ALSO, YOU CAN PIERCE PAST THE FAA LIMIT IF YOU GET THAT APPROVAL. SOMEHOW WORK WITH THE AVIATION AUTHORITY AND THAT BOARD TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO THERE. AND THERE WILL BE UNEVENNESS DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU ARE IN RELATION TO ALL THE DIFFERENT AIRPORTS THAT WE HAVE. WE HAVE ST. PETE CLEARWATER, THERE'S SOME FLYING OVER THERE. TAMPA AIRPORT, MacDILL AND PETER O. KNIGHT. BUT I THINK WE OUGHT TO DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO ALLOW CONSISTENT, EVEN, RAPID GROWTH IN THE AREAS THAT WE DON'T% OBJECT TO IT. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. >>LYNN HURTAK: CAN YOU GO TO YOUR LAST SLIDE? I JUST APPRECIATE THIS. I THINK IT WAS A WONDERFUL PRESENTATION, AND I PARTICULARLY LIKE THE WAY YOU'RE HIGHLIGHTING THE DIFFICULTY OF BUILDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND THAT THIS IS -- THAT IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE. AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE HEARING. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. WE HAD AN AHAC MEETING YESTERDAY, AND THIS IS ONE OF OUR MAIN CONCERNS IS HOW DO WE HELP PROMOTE THIS GROWTH. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE DETAIL THAT'S GOING. I'M HAPPY AT THE END OF THIS TO MOVE THOSE MOTIONS FORWARD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. >>LYNN HURTAK: SORRY. MR. BENSON, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY? >>STEPHEN BENSON: I CAN RESPOND AT THE END, IF YOU LIKE. IT'S UP TO YOU. I JUST HAVE COMMENTS RESPONDING TO COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >> HE WENT OUT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: OKAY. LET'S GO TO COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA AND WE'LL COME BACK. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THIS AREA IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE CHANGED WHAT IT IS NOW BECAUSE SOCIETY HAS CHANGED. ORDER MORE IN ONE DAY ON THE INTERNET THAN 364 DAYS, BECAUSE OTHER DAYS YOU SPEND MORE ON THE INTERNET IT'S EASIER. WE GET LAZY AND DON'T GO OUT AND WALK AND DO THINGS WE NORMALLY DO. I CAN ONLY USE MIDTOWN AS AN EXAMPLE. I THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE A LOT OF TRAFFIC BACK UP. I THOUGHT THEY NEEDED ANOTHER LIGHT. THEY GOT THE OTHER LIGHT. WHY? TECO IS BUILDING, THEY ARE MOVING TO MIDTOWN. IT'S A VERY UNIQUE PLACE, VERY BEAUTIFUL. IF YOU LIVE THERE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO ANYWHERE. BUT YOU ARE 5, 10 MINUTES AWAY FROM WHATEVER YOU WANT. THIS AREA, THAT WESTSHORE AREA, WHERE THE MALL IS AT, IS EVEN CLOSER TO DOING MORE THINGS THAN ANY OTHER IN THE CITY OF TAMPA. YOU CAN BE IN ST. PETE, CLEARWATER 15 MINUTES. UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING BACKED UP IN ONE OF THE TRAFFIC CORRIDORS. ANY PARTS OF THE CITY OTHER THAN THAT, YOU TAKE 30 MINUTES. LIVE IN NEW TAMPA, MIGHT TAKE 45 MINUTES TO GET THERE. IT'S CENTRALLY LOCATED FOR SO MANY THINGS. WHEN YOU'RE LANDING, THE FIRST THING YOU SEE IS WHAT? THE WESTSHORE MALL, UNLESS THE DIRECTION, THEN YOU SEE HILLSBOROUGH AVENUE. SO THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE VERY UNIQUE TO THIS LOCATION. IT LASTED MANY, MANY YEARS AS A GREAT MALL. DID MOST OF MY SHOPPING THERE A LONG TIME AGO. NOW THE ONLY THING I LIKE TO GO THERE AND GET A CUBAN SANDWICH. AND THAT'S BEING A HIT. BUT THE MALL IS STILL THERE, STILL ACTIVE AND STILL DOING RATHER WELL. THE RESTAURANTS ARE DOING FANTASTIC. MAGGIANO'S CATERING AND YOU GO THERE ON A WEEKDAY, YOU HAVE TO WAIT 45 MINUTES TO GET A SEAT. BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. IF YOU DON'T CHANGE IN TODAY'S SOCIETY, YOU WON'T BE AROUND LONG. BUT I'M WILLING TO LISTEN AND MAKE SURE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE PROTECTED AT THE SAME TIME THAT THE DEVELOPMENT GETS WHAT IT NEEDS TO SURVIVE. BECAUSE THIS WHOLE AREA, YES, IT MAY BE SOFTENING. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? DOES THAT MEAN YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT THREE YEARS TO GET A PLACE? ONLY THREE MONTHS? I DON'T KNOW. WHEN YOU SEE IT COSTS THE PUBLIC BENEFIT, DEPENDS WHAT THE PUBLIC BENEFITS ARE. ONLY HAVE $10 AND ASKING FOR NINE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, BUT MAYBE ASKING FOR ONE, YOU MAY DO THAT. THESE ARE THE THINGS YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT AS ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THOSE THAT HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT ON AN ONGOING BASIS EVERY SINGLE DAY. I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT THEY WANT TO DO THE BEST THEY CAN DO, MAKE THAT A GLORIOUS PART OF THE CITY LIKE IT IS AND STILL WOULD BE BETTER FOR SOCIETY. THAT'S ALL I'M LOOKING FOR. AND MAKE SURE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY TO THE SOUTH, ARE PROTECTED. >>STEPHEN BENSON: ONE OF THE SLIDES I THINK WILL HELP SORT OF MAYBE GIVE SOME FINAL CLARITY TO THIS, IF WE COULD BRING THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. THE REASON WHY WE BROUGHT ALL OF THIS TO YOU FOR WESTSHORE IS BECAUSE THAT RMU CATEGORY, THAT'S BASICALLY THE WESTSHORE BUSINESS DISTRICT. IT'S ALL RMU. THERE'S NO BONUSSING THERE NOW. AT THE CURRENT ENTITLEMENT YOU CAN GO 10, 12 STORIES MAYBE UNTIL YOU START HITTING FAA. THAT'S WHEN YOU START HITTING FAA. IF YOU AGREE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE COMP PLAN CHANGES, SOME OF THE AREAS WILL BE ALLOWED TO BONUS. THE HEIGHTS THAT YOU'LL START SEEING, THE HEIGHTS THAT WE'LL NEED TO CALIBRATE TO WILL INCREASE. AND THAT'S WHY THE COMP PLAN DISCUSSION NEEDS TO HAPPEN FIRST BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'LL END UP DOING THIS TWICE. WE'RE HOPING THAT THE CHANGES IN HEIGHT CAN COME AFTER EVERYBODY KIND OF SETTLES ON WHERE YOU WANT THE MAXIMUM BONUSSING TO GO, ESPECIALLY FOR RMU, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THERE'S NOTHING ABOVE THE CEILING NOW IN RMU. YOU CAN'T BONUS. IT IS THE LAST CATEGORY. NOTHING HIGHER THAN RMU. THAT'S IT. THE BONUS THAT GETS THEM THE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENT THAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE THERE ED IN SEEING MORE DENSITY, THAT'S WHAT WILL GENERATE THAT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYTHING ELSE? IF NOT, I'LL OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 4, PLEASE COME UP. STATE YOUR NAME. GO AHEAD. >> CARROLL ANN BENNETT. LIFELONG RESIDENT OF TAMPA. I JUST WANT TO SAY, REITERATE MY CONCERNS BEFORE HAD TO DO WITH WHAT THEY GOT BY RIGHT. WE HAVE A BONUS SYSTEM IN PLACE NOW THAT IS LOUSY. BONUSES ARE NOT BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC THE WAY THEY SHOULD BE. IF WE KEEP A BONUSSING STRUCTURE AND OPTION, THAT NEEDS TO BE REWORKED. MY BIGGEST CONCERN WAS THE BY RIGHT. MY OTHER CONCERN IS THAT SOUTH OF KENNEDY WE HAD THE HIGHEST RATE OF GROWTH IN THE CITY AND CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO ELIMINATE ANYTHING ABOVE BY RIGHT IF IT'S SINGLE USE. WE DON'T WANT TO UNDO THAT. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT A LOT OF THE IDEAS ARE GOOD IDEAS, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE GROWTH HAPPENS WHERE IT'S BENEFICIAL. IF YOU CARE ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES, YOU NEED TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN PLACES WHERE THEY CAN SHELTER IN PLACE. IF YOU HATE PEOPLE WITH LIMITED RESOURCES, BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN EVACUATION ZONE A. BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE -- PEOPLE WITHOUT TRANSPORTATION, THE CITY WILL HAVE TO SEND A VAN TO PICK THEM UP AND TAKE THEM TO THE SHELTER. THEY'LL GET THERE TWO DAYS BEFORE THE HURRICANE HITS. THEN THE HURRICANE HITS. THEN THEY GOT TO GET BACK. PEOPLE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GO TO WORK. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO MISS ONE DAY'S PAY. THEY ARE GOING TO GO HOME AND EVERYTHING IN THE FRIDGE WILL BE SPOILED. THE STRESS, UNLESS YOU'VE DONE IT, YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT. THE STRESS OF BEING IN A SHELTER, UNLESS YOU HAVE DONE IT, TALKING TO ANYBODY WHO HAS EVER BEEN TO ONE, NEVER, EVER WILL THEY GO BACK TO A SHELTER. BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHERE PEOPLE CAN SHELTER IN PLACE. IF PEOPLE CHOOSE TO EVACUATION, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT MANDATED TO DO SO, YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. BUT DON'T MANDATE PEOPLE TO EVACUATE. IT IS GOING TO MAKE THEIR LIFE A NIGHTMARE. I WANT TO REITERATE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHERE PEOPLE CAN SHELTER IN PLACE. THEY CAN GO TO WORK.% THEY CAN TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILIES AND THEIR ELECTRICITY DOESN'T GET TURNED OFF. AS FAR AS KENNEDY GOES, I WANT TO REMIND YOU, WITH THE FUN LAND, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU DID IS YOU STEPPED IT DOWN TOWARD THE RESIDENTIAL. THAT WAS GOOD. I THINK WHAT WAS ON HILLSBOROUGH SHOULD HAVE BEEN HIGHER. BUT YOU STEPPED IT DOWN TOWARD HILLSBOROUGH AND THAT IS A GREAT CONCEPT. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THE SAME THING ON KENNEDY. I UNDERSTAND THE GOAL BUT DON'T PUT THE PARKING LOT ON KENNEDY AND THEN PUT THE FIVE-STORY BUILDING ON SOMEONE'S BACKYARD. DO IT THE OTHER WAY, WHATEVER. ANYHOW, I'M NOT A PLANNER, BUT I KNOW WHAT WORKS. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES MA'AM. NEXT SPEAKER. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> GOOD MORNING. STEPHANIE POYNOR. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING CARROLL ANN SAID. MAYBE NEXT TIME WE HAVE A HURRICANE AND THEY EVACUATE FOLKS, MAYBE YOU GUYS COULD GO CHECK OUT SHELTERS AND SEE WHAT IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE AND SEE WHAT YOU'RE SETTING FOLKS UP FOR. HERE IS MY QUESTION FOR YOU. WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WESTSHORE DISTRICT, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT THAT RUNS ALL THE WAY THROUGH WEST TAMPA? HOW IS THAT GOING TO INTERACT WITH THE HERITAGE COMMUNITIES? OR ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT WHAT THEY CALL THE WESTSHORE ALLIANCE? I JUST LOOKED FOR A MAP, A NEW UPDATED MAP FOR THE FIVE PLANNING DISTRICTS, I CAN'T SEEM TO FIND ONE ONLINE. I WOULD LIKE FOR MR. BENSON AND EVAN -- I CAN'T REMEMBER YOUR LAST NAME AT THE MOMENT -- TO SHOW WHAT AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BECAUSE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARTS OF WEST TAMPA, HOW ARE THEY GOING TO FEEL ABOUT THAT? JUST TALKING ABOUT WESTSHORE OVER BY THE MALL THAT IS A DIFFERENT STORY. A DIFFERENT PART OF THE CITY, DIFFERENT THOUGHT PROCESSES, AND COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON CAN SPEAK MORE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. BUT IF WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE MAPS, WE RAN INTO THIS PROBLEM WITH THE ADUs WHERE SOUTH TAMPA IS EXEMPT BUT THEN WE HAD ALL THE PLACES IN HYDE PARK THAT ARE ACTUALLY PART OF THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MAP. I KNOW THEY SAID THEY WEREN'T GOING TO CHANGE IT FOR THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THEY WEREN'T GOING TO CHANGE THE PLANNING DISTRICT MAP BECAUSE THEY ARE ANCIENT OR WHATEVER, BUT THERE WAS GOING TO BE OTHER DIFFERENTIATION. I CAN'T FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THIS. I KNOW THAT MS. SANCHEZ HAD BIG CONCERNS ABOUT THIS FOR WEST TAMPA AND HOW DOES THIS AFFECT THE OVERLAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES SIR. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> MIKE MARINO, WESTSHORE ALLIANCE. TO FOLLOW UP ON THE LAST COMMENTS. THE WESTSHORE PLANNING DISTRICT RUNS FROM HIMES AVENUE ON THE EAST TO ROCKY POINT ON THE WEST, HILLSBOROUGH AVENUE ON THE NORTH AND KENNEDY BOULEVARD ON THE SOUTH, INCLUSIVE OF THE CORRIDOR -- THE PROPERTIES BORDER THE SOUTH EDGE OF KENNEDY BOULEVARD. FROM OUR UNDERSTANDING, AS RELATES TO THIS, THE WESTSHORE CORE IS WHAT WE KIND OF UNDERSTAND AS THE AREA AROUND SOUTH OF TAMPA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT INCLUSIVE OF WESTSHORE PLAZA. WE THINK OF THAT AS WESTSHORE ALLIANCE AS WESTSHORE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THAT'S SOMETHING YOU ALL APPROVED LAST YEAR, INCLUDE PARKING AMENDMENT SO THAT PARKING WASN'T ENCROACHING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WAS JUST REFERENCED EARLIER. DREW PARK AS A CRA HAS ITS OWN PLAN. TALKING ABOUT BONUS DENSITIES REALLY FOCUSES ON THE CORE OF WESTSHORE. THE OTHER PART WITH THE FAA AND HEIGHT LIMITS, THE WAY WESTSHORE IS SITUATED, YOU ARE UNDER THE FLIGHT PATH OF CERTAIN PARTS OF WESTSHORE. YOU CANNOT BUILD RESIDENTIAL UNDER THE FLIGHT PATH WHEN YOU ARE WITHIN A CERTAIN MILEAGE OF THE AIRPORT. SO AS IT RELATES TO WHAT YOU SAW EARLIER TODAY, IT'S NOT JUST THERE ARE HEIGHT LIMITS BUT ALSO RESTRICTIONS. BASICALLY WEST OF WESTSHORE BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF 275, YOU CANNOT BUILD HOUSING THERE BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO CLOSE TO THE AIRPORT AND TOO CLOSE TO THE FLIGHT PATH. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE AS AN ORGANIZATION HAVE TALKED ABOUT IS THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE WESTSHORE OVERLAY ALREADY IN CODE, THAT THAT CAN BE A GUIDE FOR SOME OF THESE CHANGES. THE OTHER PART ABOUT THAT, SO MUCH OF WESTSHORE, AALLUDED TO BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON, DEVELOPED AT A PARTICULAR TIME WHEN YOU DID NOT HAVE MIXED USE. YOU HAVE VERY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES WITHOUT THAT MIX OF USES. WE ALREADY KNOW BASED ON SOME INFORMATION FROM THE PROPERTY TAX APPRAISER, THE VALUE OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN WESTSHORE WILL GO DOWN ABOUT $70 MILLION THIS YEAR. THAT'S DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE FACT THAT THEY CANNOT BE MIXED USE PROPERTIES CURRENTLY. SO HAVING A FORMER BONUS DENSITY STRUCTURE THAT MAYBE ENCOURAGE THOSE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENTS BECOME MIXED USE BUT ALSO HAVE AN UNDERLYING POTENTIAL WESTSHORE ZONING DISTRICT WOULD THEN ENABLE THOSE PROPERTIES TO BECOME MIXED USE SO YOU CAN DIRECT GROWTH TO WHERE YOU WANT IT TO BE DIRECTED BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE OVERLAY ALREADY EXISTING BUT THEN YOU CAN ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT TO GO WHERE YOU WANT IT TO GO BECAUSE THE OVERLAY ALREADY EXISTS IN YOUR CODE. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, SIR, NEXT SPEAKER. >> MENTESNOT. IT'S CALLED PROACTIVE DEVELOPMENT. IT'S CALLED CIVIL DISCOURSE. THAT MEANS WHERE PEOPLE CAN COLLECTIVELY GET TOGETHER AND RATIONALLY DISCUSS ANYTHING. AND IN THIS CASE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, PROACTIVE DEVELOPMENT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOUTH TAMPA. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WESTSHORE DISTRICT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OTHER AREAS. WE'VE SEEN WHERE THEY HAVE COME BEFORE THIS CITY COUNCIL OVER THE DECADES AND TALKED ABOUT DEVELOPMENT. IF IT'S DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, CHANNELSIDE DEVELOPMENT, DAVIS ISLAND DEVELOPMENT, NOT MUCH GOING ON OVER THERE, HARBOUR ISLAND DEVELOPMENT, AND IT'S REALLY CALLED PROACTIVE DEVELOPMENT. IT'S CALLED CIVIL DISCOURSE WHERE PEOPLE CAN GET TOGETHER. THEY DON'T HAVE TO SHOUT AND SCREAM AT ONE ANOTHER, AND THEY CAN HAVE A CIVIL DISCUSSION. THAT'S VERY INTERESTING. IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE. WHAT'S MOST INTERESTING ABOUT IT IS WE SEE IT HAPPENING RIGHT HERE TODAY IN ITEMS NUMBER 2 AND ITEMS NUMBER 4. WHAT WE NEVER SEE IS WHEN IT COMES TO DISTRICT 5, WE NEVER SEE PROACTIVE DEVELOPMENT IN A POSITIVE SENSE. WE NEVER SEE CIVIL DISCOURSE. WHAT WE SEE IS A BUNCH OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN HERE SCREAMING AND SHOUTING ABOUT, LIKE A SUNDAY MORNING CHURCH SERVICE. HALLELUJAH. HOW BAD THE CITY IS DOING US IN OUR DISTRICTS. AND THAT'S NOT A GOOD LOOK. THAT'S RACIALLY OFFENSIVE. IT'S REALLY RACIALLY OFFENSIVE BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DISTRICT 5, IT'S NOT CIVIL DISCOURSE, AS YOU'VE SEEN HERE TODAY. IT'S NOT PROACTIVE DEVELOPMENT. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS RELOCATION AND GENTRIFICATION IN THE WORST WAY. SO TO THINK TODAY THIS CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS NEED TO TAKE NOTICE OF THAT, DIFFERENCE IN HOW AFRICAN PEOPLE HAVE TO COME DOWN HERE AND WE CAN'T DO PROACTIVE DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S NOT A GOOD LOOK AND THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE. AND FOR YEARS I'VE BEEN SCREAMING ABOUT THE FLOODING IN SOUTH TAMPA AND NO ONE HAS DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. ANYBODY ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE NEED A MOTION TO MOVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FORWARD. IS THAT CORRECT? COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK WITH THE MOTION. SECOND FROM COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, PLANNING COMMISSION, EVERYBODY INVOLVED, FOR ALL THIS HARD WORK. WE WILL NOW GO TO ITEM NUMBER 1, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UPDATE. >> GOOD MORNING, CITY COUNCIL. JEAN DUNCAN, ADMINISTRATOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND MOBILITY. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. WE HAVE SUBMITTED TO YOU WHAT WE CALLED A GREAT 8 REPORT, A KEY CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT WE WANT TO HIGHLIGHT TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE PROJECTS WHICH HAVE A LITTLE MORE INTEREST TO THEM EDGE CONTROVERSY OR OTHER DEBATE THAT MIGHT BE INVOLVED. WANT TO BRING THOSE TO YOUR ATTENTION THROUGH THE PROCESS. THE REPORT WAS SUBMITTED. WE ALSO SUBMITTED A POWERPOINT, WHICH I WILL GO THROUGH HERE ONCE THEY LOAD IT UP ON THE SCREEN. I WANT TO MENTION WE STARTED THIS PROCESS FOR COUNCIL'S BENEFIT A LITTLE OVER TWO YEARS AGO. THE MOTION AT THE TIME WAS TO COME BACK TWICE A YEAR WITH THE REPORT BUT ALWAYS AVAILABLE AT ANY TIME WITH ANY QUESTIONS AND ANY OF THE KEY PROJECTS OR ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THIS PRESENTATION IS SEPARATE FROM THE CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGET WORKSHOP THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO HOLD, I BELIEVE A DATE IN JULY. THIS IS A SEPARATE PRESENTATION TODAY. IF I'M DRIVING, PARDON ME. I'M ALSO TECHNOLOGICALLY CHALLENGED APPARENTLY. THERE WE GO. JUST TO REITERATE, THIS PROCESS OUTLINED HERE, I WON'T READ EVERY LINE FOR YOU. YOU'VE SEEN IT BEFORE. BASICALLY IT'S KEY STAKEHOLDERS WITHIN THE CITY. THIS PROCESS EXISTS OR EVERY PROJECT THAT WE DO. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE OF WHAT I'LL CALL HIGH-PROFILE PROJECTS, WE ESSENTIALLY CREATED A WORKING GROUP OF THE ADMINISTRATORS AND DIRECTORS TO DISCUSS THESE PROJECTS ON A MONTHLY BASIS TO MAKE SURE COORDINATION IS TAKING PLACE AMONG THE KEY STAKEHOLDERS WHICH, OF COURSE, COUNCIL IS ALSO ONE OF THOSE KEY STAKEHOLDERS. FOR EACH OF THE REPORT PAGES IN THE PRESENTATION, WE'VE IDENTIFIED A FORMAT THAT WE USE EVERY SINGLE TIME JUST FOR CONSISTENCY AND EASE OF REFERENCE. BASIC INFORMATION SUCH AS OBVIOUSLY THE PROJECT NAME, DEPARTMENT, THE DISTRICT WHICH THE PROJECT RESIDES IN. THE OWNER IS BASICALLY EITHER ADMINISTRATOR OR DIRECTOR, KEY POINT PERSON THAT CAN TAKE IN QUESTIONS AND EITHER ANSWER THEM OR GET THE ANSWERS. OBVIOUSLY, WE ALWAYS INCLUDE A STATUS AND A SCHEDULE AND A MAP AND FUNDING INFORMATION AND SOME PHOTOS. JUST WANT TO MENTION, AGAIN, FOR YOUR INFORMATION FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND FOR THE PUBLIC THAT THE ENTIRE CITY CAPITAL PROGRAM IS ONLINE. LINK THERE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. THIS BASICALLY IS AN OVERVIEW OF ALL THE PROJECTS IN OUR CAPITAL PROGRAM. OBVIOUSLY, NAME AND LOCATION, FUNDING AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT SHOW HOW THE PROJECT WILL PROGRESS OVER A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD. WE DO A FIVE-YEAR SNAPSHOT EVERY YEAR, EVERY BUDGET CYCLE. WE HAVE ALL THE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED ON GIS MAP, WHICH IS THE SECOND LINK THERE. YOU CAN CLICK ON ANY OF THOSE DOTS ON THE MAP AND SEE THE STATUS, LOCATION AND OTHER INFORMATION ABOUT ALL OF OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY. SO, WE HAVE ABOUT 20 PROJECTS ON THE LIST WE TALK ABOUT. WE INCLUDED 13 OF THOSE IN THE REPORT THAT ARE IN SOME SORT OF STATE OF PROGRESSION OR ACTIVITY THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE HELPFUL. OF THAT LIST WE IDENTIFIED 8 THAT WE WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU TODAY. I HAVE EACH OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD OR DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE SPEAKERS HERE TODAY. I ASKED EVERYONE TO BE LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES, SHORT AND SWEET SO IT GIVES YOU ALL TIME TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. OUR FIRST UP AT BAT IS BRANDON CAMPBELL. BRANDON HAD A RECENT PROMOTION TO ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR TRANSPORTATION. WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE WEST RIVER WALK THAT YOU'LL BE SEEING INFORMATION ON THAT AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING ON JULY 18. BRANDON. >> THANK YOU, JEAN. GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. BRANDON CAMPBELL WITH THE MOBILITY DEPARTMENT. I WILL MOVE FORWARD TO TALK ABOUT OUR WEST RIVER DISTRICT MULTIMODAL NETWORK AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WHICH IS SOMETIMES REFERRED TO IN SHORTHAND AS THE WEST RIVER WALK PROJECT AS LABELED ON THE SLIDE. I KNOW YOU ALL SPOKE PRETTY EXTENSIVELY LAST THURSDAY WITH% VIK BHIDE AND DENNIS ROGERO ABOUT THIS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR APPROVAL FOR EXECUTING AMENDMENT ONE FOR OUR GRANT AGREEMENT AND FOR YOUR FIRST CONSIDERATION OF THE DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT WITH HASKELL AND ALSO KNOWING THAT WILL COME BEFORE YOU AGAIN ON JULY 18. I WILL BE PRETTY BRIEF HERE. GENERALLY, I WILL LEAVE THE TEXT ON THE SLIDES FOR YOUR REFERENCE AND AS NEEDED AND LEAVE TIME FOR QUESTIONS IF YOU SO CHOOSE TO ASK THEM. I MENTIONED IT HAS A LONGER PROJECT NAME, AND IT'S A BIT OF A MOUTHFUL, BUT IT IS REPRESENTATIVE OF HOW THE PROJECT IS MORE COMPREHENSIVE THAN JUST THE WEST RIVER WALK, THOUGH WE DO EXPECT THAT TO BE THE MOST VISIBLE SEGMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THIS PROJECT. IT IS BROKEN UP INTO SIX DIFFERENT SEGMENTS, TWO OF THEM BEING RIVERWALK SEGMENTS, TWO OF THEM BEING PROTECTED BIKE LANES ALONG BOTH PLATT AND ROME, AND THEN CONNECTING BACK OVER VIA COLUMBUS AND THE RIDGEWOOD PARK TRAIL, COMPLETING THAT BACK DOWN TO THE EXISTING EAST SIDE RIVERWALK. I WANTED TO MENTION THAT WITHIN THE SLIDES, WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF RENDERINGS OF THE OVER WATER SEGMENTS AND ALSO JUST TO MENTION THAT GENERALLY THE WEST RIVER WALK PORTION WILL BE BUILT ON THE LAND SIDE IN ORDER TO MANAGE THE COSTS OF THE PROJECT. THOSE TWO SEGMENTS, THE OVER WATER SEGMENTS ARE NECESSITATED BY THE PASSAGE UNDER THE BRIDGES AT PLATT AND AT BROREIN. WE DO EXPECT -- BACK ON PREVIOUS SLIDE, WE DO EXPECT THE PROJECT TO BE COMPLETED IN 2027, WITH A BUDGET, AS YOU KNOW, AND CONSIDERED LAST WEEK OF JUST OVER $56.8 MILLION. SO WITH THAT, I WILL PASS THE PRESENTATION TO DEPUTY CHIEF KATE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SLIDE? THIS MAY BE NITPICKY, BUT THE FUNDING SOURCE YOU HAVE HERE IS DIFFERENT. SO THE OTHER FUNDING SOURCES IN THIS PRESENTATION TALK ABOUT BONDS. I WAS WONDERING WHY THEY USE THE TERM LOCAL FUNDS INSTEAD OF MAKING SURE THAT WE MENTION THAT WE'RE FUNDING THIS THROUGH BONDS. >> I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHY THAT WAS PUT ON TO THE SLIDE JUST SAYING LOCAL FUNDS AND NOT IDENTIFYING BONDS. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THAT AND TO REITERATE THAT IS THE PLANNED FUNDING SOURCE OF THE LOCAL MATCH. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: I HAVE THE SAME OBJECTION. ALSO WHEN THE PRESS LEAKS ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY, IT EXCLUDED THE INTEREST COST. MAYBE WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO COUNCIL AT SOME POINT. I THINK THE PUBLIC DESERVES TO KNOW THE ENTIRE COST OF THESE PROJECTS, NOT JUST THE PROPOSED CAPITAL COSTS. IT MAKES IT LOOK ARTIFICIALLY LOW. MY MAIN OBJECTION IS THAT WE'RE BONDING IT. IF WE WERE DOING PAY GO IN STAGES, I WOULD BE FINE, BUT I COMPLETELY OBJECT TO BONDING. ALSO, ISN'T THERE A DEVELOPER THAT NEEDS TO PAY? YOU MENTIONED THE BRIDGES JUST BELOW KENNEDY, A DEVELOPER OBLIGATED TO PAY 6.5 MILLION FOR THEIR PORTION OF IT. >> THE DEVELOPER PORTIONS SOUTH OF KENNEDY BETWEEN, BASICALLY BETWEEN KENNEDY AND BROREIN ARE NOT PART OF THE BUILD GRANT ITSELF. IT IS A SEPARATE CONSIDERATION, AND THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE SLIDE SHOW ITSELF. BUT THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO MENTION THAT THERE IS A SEGMENT THERE BEING -- >>BILL CARLSON: TO BE FAIR, IF THE TOTAL COST INCLUDED -- AND PROPOSE O AND M OVER 30 YEARS WOULD BE INCLUDED TOO. GOING ALL THE WAY FROM BROREIN, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO PUT IN THE DEVELOPER SUBSIDIZED PIECES AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CLARIFICATION, TO COUNCILMAN CARLSON'S POINT. I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH BHIDE ABOUT THE DEVELOPER PORTION, ABOUT MY CONCERNS THAT ONLY KICKS IN IF AND WHEN THE DEVELOPER DECIDES TO DEVELOP. SO WITH CHANGING MARKET CONDITIONS, IF THAT DOESN'T GET CONSTRUCTED, WE'LL HAVE A MAJOR GAP AND CRITICAL ELEMENT OF THE RIVERWALK. I HAD ASKED FOR A REPORT BACK OF WHEN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EXPIRES SO THAT MAYBE WE COULD REVISIT THAT AS FAR AS OUR PLANNING PURPOSES. I DEFINITELY HAVE CONCERN ABOUT THAT. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYTHING ELSE? >> I'LL PASS IT ON TO DEPUTY CHIEF KATE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. RUTH KATE, DEPUTY CHIEF OPERATIONS WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA. LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET THIS GOING. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE TAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNEX PROJECT, WHICH WILL BE HOUSED ON HOWARD AVENUE. IT'S NOT CHANGING. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. SO YOU WILL SEE ANOTHER PRESENTATION AFTER MINE FOR SOLID WASTE. THE ONLY REASON I MENTION IT IN MINE IS BECAUSE THE TAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT IMPOUND LOT WAS FORMERLY HOUSED AT THAT LOCATION ON 34th STREET. WE ARE CURRENTLY AT A TEMPORARY LOCATION OFF OF LOIS AVENUE, AND WE ARE BURSTING AT THE SEAMS. THIS WAS ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE A TEMPORARY LOCATION. THANKFULLY, DUE TO THE HANNA BUILDING WHERE MANY OF OUR CITY EMPLOYEES ARE NOW, WE WERE ABLE TO USE THE 7th FLOOR OF HEADQUARTERS FOR ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY STORAGE. SO WE HAVE PROPOSED THE BUILDING OF A NEW EVIDENCE STORAGE FACILITY ALONG WITH OUR FORENSICS UNIT. THIS WILL BE HOUSED ON THE HOWARD AVENUE. AND IT WILL BE A ONE-STOP LOCATION FOR ALL OUR CITIZENS AND ALL OUR EMPLOYEES TO GO TO COLLECT THEIR EVIDENCE, PERSONAL ITEMS, RETRIEVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT WAS COLLECTED WHERE WE NEEDED IT FOR EVIDENTIARY REASONS AND NEEDED TO BE PROCESSED. FORENSICS INVESTIGATORS WILL BE PROCESS EVIDENCE. DRYING ROOMS WILL BE THERE. EVIDENCE STORAGE. VEHICLE STORAGE WILL BE THERE AND BASIALLY BE A ONE-STOP SHOP. ALSO BE MODERNIZED WHICH WE ARE NOT VERY MODERNIZED IN OUR TECHNOLOGY THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE AT HEADQUARTERS. WE HAVE BEEN AT OUR HEADQUARTERS NOW FOR ALMOST 28 YEARS. I REALIZE THAT WE WILL SOMEDAY MOVE FROM HEADQUARTERS. WE WILL NOT BE MOVING FORENSICS AND THE PROPERTY ROOM ALONG WITH US. IT WOULD BE BEST PRACTICES FOR IT TO BE HOUSED IN ANOTHER AREA. SEVERAL OTHER AGENCIES ARE ALREADY DOING THIS. MANY OF THOSE AGENCIES HAVE LARGE CAMPUSES LIKE THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE. THEIR EVIDENCE STORAGE IS NOT IN THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING BUT THEY HAVE A LARGE CAMPUS SO THEY CAN HOUSE IT ON THE SAME CAMPUS. WE WILL NOT BE THAT WAY. WHEN WE MOVE FROM HEADQUARTERS, WE WILL JUST BE BASICALLY TAKING THE BODIES AND ADMINISTRATIVE FILES. WE WILL NOT HAVE TO TAKE EVIDENCE WITH US. WE ARE CURRENTLY IN DESIGN-BUILD BID PHASE. THE DESIGN IS ABOUT 90% COMPLETE. I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THAT TO YOU SOON. BUT I WILL SHOW YOU IN THE FOLLOWING SLIDE WHAT THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING SHOULD LOOK LIKE. WE'LL BE LOCATING THIS JUST OUTSIDE OF THE WELLS WOOD PLAYGROUND, AND THIS WILL, AGAIN, BE THE ONE-STOP SHOP. WE ANTICIPATE THE BUDGET IS $40 MILLION THAT THIS WILL COME FROM BANK NOTES, GENERAL REVENUE, UTILITY SERVICES, AND IT WILL ALSO BE BONDS TO HELP COVER THE COST OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS A CURRENT RENDERING. THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY A COLD STORAGE FACILITY. SO SEMIS WOULD BACK UP AND UNLOAD. SEAFOOD OR ANY KIND OF FROZEN FOOD ITEMS THAT THIS COMPANY USED. WE WILL HAVE TO BRING THAT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ADA, SO WE'LL HAVE TO LOWER THE THRESHOLD. AND THEN WE WILL SECURE THE ENTIRE FACILITY. WE WENT FROM ABOUT FOUR ACRES OFF OF 34th STREET TO 8 ACRES NOW. I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY HAVE. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU TODAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU SAID THAT MODERNIZE PRACTICES OR BEST PRACTICES -- MODERN PRACTICES OR BEST PRACTICES THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS SEPARATE FROM A MAIN HEADQUARTERS THAT OTHER PLACES HAVE A SPECIFIC HEADQUARTERS AND THEN THEY HAVE A SEPARATE ENTITY? >> SO WITH YOU COMING TO HEADQUARTERS NOW, AND WE DID A LARGE DRUG SEIZURE, YOU'RE GOING TO SMELL IT AND WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT VENTILATION WHERE WE ARE AT. SOME OF THE MODERN FACILITIES HAVE THE CORRECT VENTILATION AND WE WANT TO GET TO THAT. WE'RE NOT THERE. ALSO, THEY HAVE SHELVING IN THE STORAGE FACILITIES THAT CAN GO VERTICAL. ALSO WE ARE KIND OF STACKING BOXES ON TOP OF BOXES, THEY ARE LABELED AND THEY ARE SECURE, THEY ARE NOT IN THE PROPER STORAGE. SO THAT WILL BE THE MODERNIZATION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: OKAY. ANOTHER THING, I THINK THE ORIGINAL NUMBER WAS UNDER $10 MILLION FOR THIS PROJECT, MAYBE 6, MAYBE 8. NOW IT'S AT $40 MILLION. THAT SEEMS TO BE A COMMON THING IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS ON THESE LARGE PROJECTS. MY QUESTION IS, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING $40 MILLION FOR THIS, WHY NOT INCORPORATE -- IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE MOVING, SELLING BIG BLUE, MOVING TO A NEW HEADQUARTERS, AND THEN JUST BUILDING SOMETHING WITH THE PROPER VENTILATION, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, IF THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES. BUT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE -- $40 MILLION AND PARTS WILL BE BONDED WHICH MEANS MORE EXPENSIVE, WHY NOT INCORPORATE THAT TO A MASTER HEADQUARTERS WITH EVERYTHING WHERE IT ALL MAKES SENSE INSTEAD OF SPENDING EXTRA MONEY. IT'S LIKE WE'RE BUILDING TWO HEADQUARTERS AT THIS TIME. IN THIS SENSE. 40 MILLION HERE AND THEN WHATEVER THAT IS GOING TO COST. >> UNFORTUNATELY I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE ORIGINAL BUDGET PROPOSAL. I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO WHAT THE DESIGN-BUILD HAS PROPOSED THE COST. BUT WE WOULD NOT RE-CREATE A NEW EVIDENCE STORAGE FACILITY. ANY NEW BUILDING FOR HEADQUARTERS WOULD BE AT A SIGNIFICANT REDUCED RATE. WE COULD LEAVE PROBABLY NOW AND HOTEL ANYWHERE BECAUSE WE'RE BASICALLY TAKING THE PEOPLE. THE SECURITY THAT WE NEED AT ANY POLICE FACILITY MAINLY SURROUNDS NOT JUST THE PEOPLE BUT MAINLY SURROUNDS THE EVIDENCE STORAGE. THIS IS HIGH-VALUE NARCOTICS, OUR FIREARMS, ALL OF THESE THINGS HAVE TO GO THERE SO THIS STRUCTURE HAS TO BE REINFORCED. WE HAVE TO HAVE SECURITY CAMERAS WHICH THIS FACILITY NEVER HAD. AND THAT'S WHY IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPENSIVE. THE STRUCTURAL HAS TO BE JUST RIGHT. THEY HAVE TO REINFORCE THE CONCRETE. AND WE WON'T HAVE TO TAKE THAT WITH US WHEN WE DO HAVE A NEW LOCATION FOR OUR NEW HEADQUARTERS. AND THE NEW HEADQUARTERS WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE LESS EXPENSIVE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON, HURTAK, CLENDENIN. >>BILL CARLSON: MY QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST. CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT IT IS $40 MILLION NOW? >> SO WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THE DESIGN-BUILD BID, WHAT WE'RE COMING UP WITH IS LOW END 32 MILLION. HIGH END 40 MILLION. UNTIL IT ACTUALLY GOES OUT TO BID, COUNCILMAN, I CAN'T TELL YOU THE EXACT COST, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BUDGETING FOR, AND THAT'S BASED ON THE EXPERTS THAT ARE WORKING ON THE DESIGN FOR US. >>BILL CARLSON: WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR IT? >> CAN I GO BACK TO THE SLIDE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT, BUT IT WILL BE BONDING. IT WILL BE FROM THE GENERAL FUNDS AND ALSO SOME REVENUES THAT THE CITY HAS. >>BILL CARLSON: OKAY. YEAH, I WOULD JUST ASK WHEN YOU ALL PRESENT THIS MORE BIG TEN THAT IT INCLUDE THE INTEREST COSTS AND THE O AND M, ESPECIALLY WITH BUILDINGS, IT NEEDS TO INCLUDE O AND M OVER 30 YEARS SO THE PUBLIC HAS A CHANCE TO SEE. I THINK THE PUBLIC SUPPORTS TPD AND THE SERVICES THAT YOU ALL NEED, BUT ON ALL THESE PROJECTS WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT. ALSO, I WOULD ASK RICHARD MUTTERBACK OR SOMEBODY, MAYBE YOU ALL CAN COME BEFORE US AND TALK TO US ABOUT WAYS OR THE ADMINISTRATION, WAYS TO CUT THESE COSTS. I NEVER HEARD THE $10 MILLION NUMBER, BUT IF THIS WAS 10 MILLION AND IT'S 40 MILLION, WE HAD A PARK THAT WAS 5 MILLION AND THEN 41 MILLION PLUS INTEREST, IT'S A HUNDRED MILLION. WE HAVE A BUILDING THAT WAS 108 MILLION FOR TWO BUILDINGS AND THEN IT WAS 121 PLUS INTEREST AND EVERYTHING FOR ONE BUILDING, WHICH IS 220 MILLION. IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, I SEE COSTS GOING UP, BUT I DON'T SEE THEM GOING UP FOUR, FIVE TIMES LIKE I SEE HERE. IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR GOING UP 20% AND THEN WE'RE GETTING 30% BECAUSE WE'RE GOVERNMENT, I THINK THE PUBLIC WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT -- I'M NOT PICKING ON THIS PROJECT, BUT OTHER PROJECTS, THEY ARE JUST OUT OF CONTROL IN TERMS OF COSTS. SOMEHOW WE HAVE TO GET AHOLD OF IT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT PRIORITIES IN THE COMMUNITY THAT WE NEED TO FUND AND WE CAN'T AFFORD ANY OF THESE PROJECTS. THIS ONE IS A NECESSITY. SOME OF THE OTHERS ARE JUST A WANT. BUT WE HAVE WAY TOO MUCH MONEY. WHAT IS THE STATUS OF REPLACING% THE BLUE BUILDING HEADQUARTERS? IS THAT GOING TO GO -- WHAT YEAR DO YOU THINK THAT WILL START? IS THAT IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS OR GOING TO BE AFTER THAT? >> IT'S NOT STARTING IMMEDIATELY. MAYBE IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS. I KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT LAND, SO WE'RE WAY AHEAD. WE HAVE TO FIND LAND THAT WE COULD USE. I KNOW WE HAD HOPED TO HAVE BEEN ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE HANNA AVENUE PROJECT BUT THAT LAND SWAP FELL THROUGH. SO WE'RE BACK IN THE INFANCY STAGES OF THAT ONCE AGAIN. >>BILL CARLSON: THAT ONE I THINK IT ALWAYS COULD HAVE CONTROVERSY, BUT I THINK THE PUBLIC, FOR THE MOST PART, WOULD SUPPORT IT. BUT WE NEED TO HAVE FULL TRANSPARENCY FROM THE BEGINNING BECAUSE SOME OF THESE PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE FOREVER TAINTED BY THE WAY THE NUMBERS WERE PRESENTED AND THE WAY THE COSTS ESCALATED. AND IT WOULD BE GOOD GOING FORWARD, ESPECIALLY FOR THINGS THAT ARE REALLY NEEDED IF WE CAN HANDLE THAT. AND IF YOU ALL WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT OFF-LINE, WE CAN. I WOULD JUST ASK SOMEBODY ON STAFF TO PLEASE HELP US TO CONTROL THESE COSTS ON THESE PROJECTS. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK, CLENDENIN, MIRANDA HENDERSON. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. YOU GAVE ME A PRESENTATION ABOUT THIS RECENTLY. IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE JUST FOR ME. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHOW. I'M JUST CURIOUS, SO TALKING ABOUT THE FUNDING, ONE MORE SLIDE SO WE CAN SEE WHERE THIS FUNDING SOURCE IS, BANK NOTE, GENERAL GOVERNMENT, UTILITY SERVICES, TAXES, AND NON-AD VALOREM BONDS. THE REAL ISSUE I HAVE WITH THIS IS I DON'T THINK THAT WE AS A COUNCIL CAN REALLY LOOK AT THIS GOING FORWARD UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE CIT. WHEN WE KNOW IF THAT TAX IS PASSED, I THINK THAT CHANGES A LOT OF OUR CONVERSATIONS AND WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. I ALSO -- WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT SELLING THE LAND THAT BIG BLUE IS ON AND USING THAT TO HELP PAY FOR THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER AND MOVING FORWARD WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I BELIEVE THERE ARE WAYS TO PAY FOR THIS. BUT THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY THAT I FOUND OUT DURING OUR SOURCE OF CONVERSATION IS THAT YOU TOLD ME THIS IS NOT JUST CONSTRUCTION, THIS IS ALSO PUTTING IN ALL OF THE SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT THAT WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE RIGHT NOW. SO THE $40 MILLION IS NOT JUST THE BUILDING. THE $40 MILLION IS PUTTING IN THE SPECIAL GUN SAFES, THE SPECIAL -- ALL THE THINGS THAT WE ACTUALLY DON'T EVEN CURRENTLY HAVE. SO FROM THAT, I UNDERSTAND WHY THE NUMBER IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, BUT I STILL WANT TO GO BACK TO HOW WE'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT. I'M JUST ASKING THE ADMINISTRATION, BEFORE WE APPROVE THIS, WE REALLY HAVE TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET CIT-WISE. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THOSE ARE RIGHT ON. EXACTLY. I AGREE. COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN, HENDERSON MIRANDA. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I CAN'T DISAGREE WITH ANYTHING PREVIOUSLY SAID. I KIND OF HAD THE SAME CONCERNS ALSO WITH THE CIT. HAS THERE BEEN A COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF CO-LOCATION AND BUILDING THE NEW POLICE HEADQUARTERS ALONG WITH THIS? IS THERE POTENTIAL OF DOING IT ON THE EXISTING LAND ON HOWARD? HOW MUCH MONEY WOULD WE SAVE BY CO-LOCATION VERSUS HAVING TWO INDEPENDENT STRUCTURES LOCATED AT DIFFERENT FACILITIES? HAS THAT ANALYSIS BEEN DONE? >> NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. CURRENTLY THIS BUILDING IS ONLY ONE STORY, AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE TEN STORIES. SO I IMAGINE THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THIS IS FOUR ACRES. >> YEAH, THAT'S TRUE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: INDIFFERENTABLE. >> WE WOULD NOT DEVELOP THE ENTIRE 8 ACRES DUE TO TREE CANOPY BUT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DEVELOP CLOSE SIX. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: JUST FOR FULL DISCLOSURE, I THINK A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS ASKED BY COUNCIL HAVE TO BE ANSWERED BEFORE WE'RE ABLE TO GIVE THE TWO THUMBS UP ON THIS. I THINK ALSO HAVING A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ON -- RELOCATION OF BIG BLUE, WHETHER THAT WOULD COST, TWO INDEPENDENT FACILITIES VERSUS COMBINED FACILITIES. 8-ACRE SITE I WOULD THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR CITY COUNCIL AND TAXPAYERS TO KNOW THAT. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON AND MIRANDA. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THE LOCATION AT HOWARD AVENUE, DO WE ALREADY OWN THIS BUILDING? >> YES, MA'AM, WE DO. >>GWEN HENDERSON: DO WE CURRENTLY USE IT FOR ANYTHING ELSE? >> IT'S JUST USED FOR MISCELLANEOUS STORAGE RIGHT NOW. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. YOU KNOW EARLIER IN MY TERM, WE RENTED A FACILITY WHERE I THINK WE HOUSED VEHICLES. WE SPENT MAYBE 25, 30 THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH FOR IMPOUND PROPERTY, I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT WAS CALLED. IS THIS GOING TO BE A PART OF THAT? >> THIS WILL REPLACE THAT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. THAT WAS $250,000 A YEAR THAT WE'RE SPENDING I THINK. >> YES, THERE WILL BE A PERIOD OF OVERLAP IN ORDER TO GET EVERYTHING IN THERE BECAUSE WE STORE A LARGE AMOUNT OF VEHICLES THERE. WE'RE HOPING TO REDUCE THAT AMOUNT OF STORAGE OF VEHICLES GOING FORWARD WITH OUR AGENCY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. THE ONE STOP SHOPPING THAT ENGAGES THE COMMUNITY ASPECT OF IT, ALSO YOU SAID OUR STORAGE OF OUR FIREARMS IS GOING TO BE THERE. OBVIOUSLY IT'S GOING TO BE A -- ALSO ANY TYPE OF JAIL FACILITY THERE AS WELL OR NO? >> NO. THIS WILL BE, IF YOU ARE A CITIZEN AND YOU NEED TO HAVE FINGERPRINTS TAKEN OR PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN, SAY YOU WANT TO BE A TEACHER, THEY COME TO HEADQUARTERS ALL THE TIME, THIS IS WHERE YOU'LL GO. CURRENTLY NOW IF YOU ARE A VICTIM OF A CRIME AND, SAY, YOUR CAR WAS IMPOUNDED BUT YOU HAD SOME HIGH-VALUE PERSONAL ITEMS LIKE JEWELRY, YOU'LL HAVE TO COME TO HEADQUARTERS TO PICK UP YOUR JEWELRY AND YOU HAVE TO GO TO LOIS AVENUE OUT IN DREW PARK TO PICK UP YOUR CAR. SO THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT PLACES. NOW THE CITIZEN WILL ONLY HAVE TO GO TO ONE PLACE TO PICK UP THEIR PROPERTY. ALSO BE A REDUCTION IN STAFF BECAUSE WE WILL NOT HAVE TO HOUSE EMPLOYEES AT MULTIPLE LOCATIONS. WE HOUSE THEM IN TWO LOCATIONS AT HEADQUARTERS BOTH ON TWO DIFFERENT FLOORS, AND THEN OUT AT THE CURRENT IMPOUND LOT OVERFLOW STORAGE FACILITY. THAT'S JUST FOR LARGE ITEMS OUT THERE IS WHY THEY ARE OUT THERE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: LAST QUESTION, THE DESIGN-BUILD YOU PLAN TO SHOW US SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE APPROXIMATELY OF THIS FACILITY THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR? BECAUSE I'M THINKING ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF THE $40 MILLION COST. OBVIOUSLY IT IS VERY BIG. >> YES, IT IS. I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT DIMENSIONS IN FRONT OF ME. I'D HAVE TO GET THAT FOR YOU. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU HAVE COMPARING WHAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES LIKE ORLANDO, ST. PETE. I BELIEVE I WAS ABLE TO SEE THOSE WITH YOU. IT'S LIKE CSI. FIND A LITTLE HAIR, THEY CAN TELL WHO YOU ARE, SO FORTH, TO FIND OUT LITTLE THINGS. I DON'T SEE HOW YOU ALL DO IT, ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HOW THEY CAN DO THINGS NOW IS JUST UNBELIEVABLE. I THINK A PICTURE WOULD SAY A THOUSAND WORDS IF YOU HAD THEM WITH YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DO OR NOT. BUT THAT'S ONE THING. JUST TO MENTION, IT CREATES A DIFFERENT, QUICKER, ALSO FINGER PRINTING YOU CAN DO ELECTRONICALLY, I WOULD IMAGINE YOU CAN DO THAT THERE. I KNOW THE STATE DOES THAT AND EVERYTHING IS GOING DIGITAL, FINGERPRINT IN ONE HUNDREDTHS OF A SECOND, FIND YOUR FINGERPRINT IF IT MATCHES OR DOESN'T MATCH. NOT LIKE YOU GO THROUGH A BOOK AND LOOK, DO THEY MATCH WITH A MAGNIFYING GLASS, THAT IS THE OLD WAY OF DOING THINGS. IT IS A HIGH COST. IT IS A DIFFERENT COST. WE HAVE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS AND HOW CAME TO THAT AMOUNT. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KINDNESS AND SHOWING ME ALL THE INFORMATION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIMAN CLENDENIN, YOU HAD A FOLLOW-UP? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I HAD. FIRST, IF THEY ARE LOOKING FOR HAIR FOR ANALYSIS, AT LEAST CHARLIE MIRANDA IS SAFE FROM BEING ACCUSED OF A CRIME. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT MYSELF. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: SECONDLY, REFERENCE THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS. I UNDERSTAND YOUR IDEA OF CO-LOCATION. I THINK IN ADDITION TO THAT BECAUSE THE DIRT IN THE CITY OF TAMPA IS SO EXPENSIVE AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMPOUND LOTS, IS IT REALLY -- IS IT THE BEST USE OF FUNDS? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS. IF SOMEBODY WERE TO DO AN ANALYSIS, THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THE CITY. IT COULD BE A COUNTY PROPERTY, SOMEPLACE MORE REMOTE FOR IMPOUND LOTS, CORRECT? IF WE COULD DO AN ANALYSIS OF A LESS EXPENSIVE PLACE JUST TO IMPOUND VEHICLES, I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A BENEFIT TO US, IF WE HAD TO FREE UP SPACE TO CO-LOCATE A HEADQUARTERS. >> THIS WILL BE WHERE OUR CITY EMPLOYEES WORK. THE IDEAL PLACE WOULD BE WITHIN THE CITY, BUT IT'S NOT -- STORAGE TOO. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK AN ANALYSIS, OKAY, IF WE DID IT HERE, HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST. DID IT HERE WHERE THE DIRT IS SO MUCH CHEAPER, HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST. I THINK A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS. AGAIN, IF THIS MEANT, FREE UP LAND TO CO-LOCATE AND CONSTRUCT NEW HEADQUARTERS. WE ALL KNOW WE HAVE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW POLICE HEADQUARTERS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A $40 MILLION NUT FOR THIS AND THE WHAT-IFS ON THE ADDED COMPONENT OF HEADQUARTERS. THIS IS SOMETHING WE KNOW WE'RE FACED WITH. I THINK WE NEED TO DO A LITTLE MORE DIGGING OF WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE AND HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST. MAYBE THE ANSWER IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF US TODAY. THIS MIGHT BE THE ANSWER, BUT I THINK HAVING THAT AS FULL DISCLOSURE WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> I THINK I HAVE TO CONSULT WITH REAL ESTATE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: ME TOO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. I THINK MR. WASHINGTON IS NEXT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GOOD MORNING SIR. >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. LARRY WASHINGTON, DIRECTOR OF THE SOLID WASTE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. IF THE SLIDES WOULD POPULATE FOR ME. WONDERFUL. I KNOW WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF CONVERSATIONS AS OF RECENT ABOUT THE RELOCATION OF OUR COMPLEX FROM SPRUCE STREET TO 34th STREET AS DEPUTY CHIEF RUTH KATE HAS MENTIONED. BUT WANT TO PROVIDE SOME BRIEF UPDATES IN ADDITION TO THAT, WANT TO OVEREMPHASIZE -- CAN'T STRESS THIS ENOUGH -- THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PROJECT TO THE WASTE STREAM, NOT JUST THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT. SO, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, ON THE CITY OF TAMPA GENERATES ROUGHLY 410,000 TONS OF WASTE PER YEAR, 20,000 OF WHICH IS RECYCLE. WE'RE TRYING TO INCREASE THAT MOVING FORWARD AS WELL. THE NUMBER OF TONS OF WASTE RECEIVED IS FORECAST TO INCREASE. WE'RE EXPECTING ROUGHLY 3,000 TONS OF WASTE PER YEAR MOVING FORWARD BASED OFF OF THE ADDITIONAL POPULATION THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA IS RECEIVING. THIS IS THE WASTE STREAM AS A WHOLE, NOT JUST THE MSW, MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE, WHICH GOES TO THE WASTE ENGINE FACILITY. HOW DO WE GET HERE? 2018 MASTER PLAN STUDY WAS DONE, AND IT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE MASTER PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A MORE CONSOLIDATED, A MORE -- TO MOVE FROM A DISJOINTED OPERATION THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE WITH BUILDINGS FROM SPRUCE STREET OVER TO 34th STREET, TO CONSOLIDATE THAT EFFORT TO BECOME MORE EFFICIENT. AND IN 2019, MASTER PLAN OR RELOCATION PLAN WAS DEVELOPED BY HARRY HOWARD AND ASSOCIATES, AND THIS IS HOW WE ARE HERE TODAY. RIGHT NOW, WE ARE AT 90% DESIGN. COST ESTIMATE IS STILL AT 60%. HOWEVER WE WILL HAVE THAT BACK IN AUGUST. SO WE PLAN ON PRESENTING TO YOU NO LATER THAN OCTOBER FOR THE 90% GMP. ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION IS $107 MILLION. THE ESTIMATED TIME OF COMPLETION IS MARCH OF 2027. SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF THIS PROJECT, DECREASED TRAVEL TIME OF COLLECTION ABOUT 25 MINUTES PER DRIVER. THAT'S HUNDRED DRIVERS ROUGHLY, WHICH WILL SAVE US OVER $300,000 IN OVERTIME IF YOU ALL APPROVE, OF COURSE. DECREASE OVERTIME AND OPERATIONAL COSTS. DECREASE GREENHOUSE GASES, DECREASE NOISE POLLUTION. IN ADDITION TO LIGHT POLLUTION AS WELL FOR THE CARVER CITY AREA. AND IT FREES UP 20 ACRES OF THAT VIABLE LAND FOR DEVELOPMENT. OF COURSE, IMPROVE THE STORMWATER CAPACITY FUNCTION FOR THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT AT THE NEW LOCATION AS WELL. CAN'T FORGET MY DRIVERS, MY TEAM. REDUCES THE DRIVER FATIGUE DUE TO IMPROVED EFFICIENCIES. AS FAR AS FUNDING SOURCES, SHORT TERM -- WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS A FEW WEEKS BACK -- SHORT-TERM FINANCING AND BONDING AS WELL. MOVING FORWARD, HERE IS THE LAYOUT OF THE SITE. WE HAVE OUR WASTE TO ENERGY FACILITY TO THE NORTH AND THEN THE CURRENT IMPOUND LOT WHICH WAS JUST LOCATED, SO THAT'S SOUTH. YOU CAN SEE HOW OUR PLAN OVERLAYS ON TOP OF THAT SITE. NOW TO BREAK DOWN THE SPECIFIC AMENITIES -- DETAIL LAST COUNCIL MEETING WHICH I PRESENTED. COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR TAKING THE TOUR. THAT WILL TAKE ALL OF THE SOLID WASTE VEHICLES OUT OF THE CURRENT LINE AT THE SOUTH SCALE HOUSE AND MOVE THEM UP SO THAT GAINS EFFICIENCIES THERE AND SAFETY AS WELL SO WE CAN TAKE ALL THE LARGE VEHICLES OUT OF THE SAME TRAFFIC FLOW AS YOUR AVERAGE DAY CITIZEN TRYING TO DISPOSE. PARKING GARAGE FOR ALL THE BUSINESSES AND ALL THE OPERATIONS AND OPERATIONAL BUILDING AS WELL. TRUCK YARD WITH CNG, COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A FUELING YARD AT OUR SPRUCE STREET LOCATION. WE HAVE ROUGHLY 50 AND THIS LOCATION WILL HAVE 100. AND THIS DOES HELP WITH EFFICIENCIES AS WELL. IN THE MORNINGS, THERE ARE TIMES WHERE WE HAVE TO -- SINCE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH CNG FILLING STATIONS, WE HAVE A QUICK-FILL STATION WHICH REALLY ONLY GIVES US THE AMOUNT OF GAS TO OPERATE FOR 75% OF THE DAY AND COME BACK AND REFILL. BUT IF WE WERE ON A SLOW FILL STATION WHICH ALL THE CNG FUELING STATIONS, GOOD TO GO FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE DAY. LIKE I MENTIONED, SOUTH SCALE. IMPROVING THAT SCALE HOUSE. ADDING TWO SCALES OR TWO ENTRANCE. WE HAVE ONE MORE INBOUND AND ONE OUTBOUND WITH THE OPTION OF FLIPPING THAT BACK AND FORTH GIVEN THE TRAFFIC AND SOLID WASTE FLEET CONTAINER MAINTENANCE SHOP AND AUTOMATED TRUCK WASHING FACILITY AND A GUARD SHACK. I KNOW THAT WAS QUICK. YOU MAY HAVE QUESTIONS SO I WANTED TO GO OVER THAT REALLY BRIEFLY AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DON'T HAVE A TON BECAUSE YOU HAVE EXPLAINED THIS A LOT, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT EARLIER. SO WHEN YOU BRING THAT TO US IN OCTOBER, IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR CURRENT O AND M AND WHAT THE PROPOSED O AND M WOULD BE BECAUSE THERE IS O AND M. BUT IF YOU'RE CUTTING $300,000 IN OVERTIME, LIKE WHAT IS THAT GOING TO LOOK LIKE? I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE HOW THAT WEIGHS OFF. OBVIOUSLY, WE ALREADY APPROVED THIS AND I'M JUST VERY EXCITED TO SEE THE CHANGES AND THE MODERNIZATION OF THIS. >> WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYBODY ELSE? COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR FINE PRESENTATION. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. I NEVER DISCUSSED IT WITH YOU, SO DON'T WANT TO CATCH YOU OFF GUARD. VEHICLE THAT PICKS UP THE TRUCK ITSELF, THE BIG TRUCK, I THINK THAT IS ABOUT $450,000 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, MAYBE 460. I'VE BEEN WONDERING WHAT IT WOULD COST TO GET ALL THE PARTS FROM SPRINGS TO NEW TIRES TO BRAKES, TAKE THE ENGINE OUT, RECONDITION THE ENGINE, THE TRANSMISSION IF NEEDED AND MAKE A TRUCK OUT OF THE OLD TRUCK LOOK NEW. I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE HALF THE COST OF A NEW TRUCK. THAT'S JUST ME TALKING TO YOU AND 5,000 PEOPLE LISTENING TO US TODAY. I KNOW IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE. MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT, TWO YOUNG INDIVIDUALS, 20 OR 25 YEARS AGO, I SAW IT IN A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE, EITHER IN THE TAMPA TRIBUNE OR THE TIMES, THAT THEY DID THAT. AND IT WAS AN AMAZING THING. AS YOU WELL KNOW WHAT WE DID AND -- I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE OF THAT VEHICLE, BUT IT CAME TO MIND TODAY THAT I LEARNED SOMETHING FROM THOSE ACTIONS THAT WERE DONE WITH YOUR HELP. SO IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN GO I HAVE THIS GOVERNMENT, THIS CITY COUNCIL, THE MAYOR AND US A SCOPE IDEA OF WHAT I'M JUST ASKING, ALL THE HYDRAULICS, WHAT THAT COSTS TO REPLACE, ON A WHOLESALE VOLUME, NOT GOING TO DO JUST -- YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I'M SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT. >> YES, I CAN REACH OUT TO FLEET AND SEE HOW MUCH THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY COST. I KNOW ONE THING, LET'S SAY WE HAVE DAMAGE TO A VEHICLE INSTEAD OF TRYING TO REPLACE THAT VEHICLE, WE'LL SCAVENGE FROM THE VEHICLES WE HAVE -- WE DO THAT CONSISTENTLY. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THESE ARE IN THE THINGS IN MY MIND. SOMETHING THAT LOOKS NEW, THAT RUNS LIKE A NEW ONE, DON'T HAVE TO WAIT A YEAR AND A HALF OR LONGER. IF YOU CAN DO THAT IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. >> THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON, CLENDENIN AND CARLSON. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. REALLY, I WANT TO HAVE THE MIKE FOR A FEW MINUTES TO NOT NECESSARILY ADDRESS EVERYTHING THAT YOU PRESENTED. THIS, OF COURSE, IS A WONDERFUL IDEA TO HOUSE ALL OF OUR SOLID WASTE AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS OVER INTO ONE LOCATION. THE INTERESTING PART IS THAT WE'RE NOW LIVING IN A DIFFERENT TIME, AND SO THIS OPPORTUNITY I DON'T KNOW HISTORICALLY HOW IT CAME ABOUT, BUT THE FACILITY WHERE IT'S CURRENTLY LOCATED, OF COURSE, WAS BUILT IN CARVER CITY ALONG, PRIOR TO THAT THERE WAS ALSO THE STOCK STOCKADE, THE JAL SYSTEM WAS THERE. TYPE OF LAND THAT WAS CONSIDERED, YES, BLACK FAMILIES CAN LIVE, AND BUILD A JAIL HOUSE HERE, PUT THE TRASH THERE, NOW THIS PARTICULAR 20 ACRES OF LAND IS BECOMING AVAILABLE. SO THAT'S REALLY THE PUBLIC COMMENT I'M MAKING BECAUSE I KNOW THE PUBLIC LISTENS TO THESE MEETINGS AND THE FUTURE OF THAT LAND IS SIGNIFICANTLY IMPORTANT IN WHAT WE DO WITH IT. SO I JUST WANT TO CONSTANTLY SAY THAT AND REMIND EVERYONE THAT YOU'RE RIGHT. IT IS VALUABLE NOW. AND SO HOW WE LOOK AT THAT AND HOW WE DEAL WITH RECONCILIATION IS REALLY IMPORTANT, AND THAT LAND IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE AT THE FOREFRONT OF MY MIND WHEN WE HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS. IF YOU DO HAVE ANY BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE, HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHY NOW, IS IT BECAUSE THIS LAND IN CARVER CITY IS EXTREMELY VALUABLE THAT IT PUSHED US TO HAVE THIS PROJECT MOVE OVER INTO A DIFFERENT AREA, WHAT LED TO THIS HISTORICALLY, DO YOU KNOW? >> I CAN SAY THAT FROM THE SOLID WASTE PERSPECTIVE, WHAT LED TO THIS PROJECT WAS THE 2018 STUDY, THE MASTER PLAN AND MASTER PLAN DONE IN 2019 AS WELL TO SEE IF THERE WERE EFFICIENCIES THAT WILL BE GAINED WITH RELOCATING. SO THAT'S WHERE WE CAME IN. AND THAT'S WHEN I RECEIVED THE MARCHING ORDERS TO RELOCATE OUR FACILITIES FROM THIS SITE TO THE 34th STREET SITE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. THAT'S GOD. IT CLEARLY IS GOING TO BE EFFICIENT AND NOW THAT YOU'VE BROKEN DOWN A WHILE AGO AND HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE AN ENTERPRISE ZONE, I THINK WE'LL SEE THE BENEFITS OF THAT AS WELL BECAUSE OF THIS NEW EFFICIENCY IN SAVING NOT ONLY JUST IN OVERTIME, BUT GASOLINE COSTS WHICH IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. WOULD IT REDUCE ANY OF OUR HUMAN CAPITAL BY HAVING US BE IN THIS ONE LOCATION? >> RIGHT NOW, WE'RE CURRENTLY STRUCTURED IN THE DEPARTMENT TO DO SO. SO THIS YEAR, WE HAVEN'T ASKED FOR ANY ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO ACCOMMODATE THE INCREASE OF WASTE THAT'S BEING GENERATED BY THE CITY OF TAMPA. SO THAT'S ONE WAY THAT WE HAVE BEEN MORE EFFICIENT WITH MANAGING OUR PEOPLE. AND THEN WITH POSITIONS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, IF WE REVIEW SOMETHING, LIKE, LET'S SAY YARD WASTE PROGRAM OR SINCE WE HAVE SOME EFFICIENCIES BASED ON THAT PROGRAM ITSELF OR THE AUTOMATED COLLECTION DRIVERS, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REPURPOSE THE POSITIONS VERSUS ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL POSITIONS MOVING FORWARD. WE HAVE DONE THAT ALREADY. I BELIEVE IT WILL. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN, CARLSON, VIERA. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THIS IS AS CLOSE TO A NO-BRAINER THAT YOU CAN GET. CLEARLY, GOOD SEGUE FROM THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION ABOUT PROPERTY VALUES AND BEST USE OF PROPERTY BECAUSE WE'RE GOING FROM SOME PROPERTY THAT'S NOT THE BEST USE OF PROPERTY, FREEING THAT UP FOR THE BEST AND HIGHEST USE TO AN AREA. I THINK YOUR CONSOLIDATION -- I CAN'T SAY ENOUGH ABOUT OUR SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT, THE EFFICIENCIES AND WHAT YOU ALL DO. I THINK YOU DO A TREMENDOUS JOB, APPLAUD YOUR EFFORTS AND CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THIS RELOCATION BECAUSE THIS IS GOOD FOR THE CITY, GOOD FOR THE TAXPAYERS AND WELL DONE. IT'S KIND OF OFF TOPIC BUT KIND OF ON TOPIC BECAUSE YOU HIGHLIGHTED THE FUELING STATIONS.% I HAVE A LITTLE PET PEEVE. AND THIS IS PROBABLY SOMETHING TO PUT IN MS. DUNCAN'S HEAD. MAYBE THIS IS NOT THE PLACE BECAUSE OF THE MIX OF THE TYPE OF VEHICLES AND ALL. BUT THE FUELING STATION THAT WE HAVE IN LOWRY PARK, WE NEED TO FIND PLACES TO RELOCATE THAT. AS WE'RE CONSTRUCTING THESE THINGS, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY OF CONSOLIDATING PEOPLE AND WHENEVER WE HAVE THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS AND WE CAN FIND A WAY TO FACILITATE THAT, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GET THAT, AS THAT HIGHER LEVEL LOOK AND SEE IF WE CAN INCORPORATE THAT FUELING FUNCTION THAT PROVIDES FUEL FOR OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY IN THESE NEW PROJECTS. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON AND VIERA. >>BILL CARLSON: I JUST WANT TO ADD TO THE THANKS. YOU COME BEFORE US ALL THE TIME AND BRIEF US AND THE PUBLIC. I'M SURE THE PUBLIC APPRECIATES THAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOROUGHNESS AND TRANSPARENCY. TO COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON'S COMMENT ABOUT THE SPRUCE STREET SPOT, NOT THIS WESTSHORE ALLIANCE DIRECTOR, BUT THE ONE PREVIOUSLY, WAS PUSHING HARD TO CONNECT WESTSHORE AND DALE MABRY. THEY CAN BRIEF YOU ON IT, BUT THEY WERE HEAVILY PROMOTING IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT IN WESTSHORE THAT THIS WOULD BE THE MAIN BUSINESS CORRIDOR THAT WOULD GO BETWEEN THE TWO. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU MIGHT HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THIS. YOU MIGHT WANT TO ENGAGE THE WESTSHORE ALLIANCE -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION. THEY KNOW EXACTLY HOW I FEEL, BUT THANK YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, THE SOLID WASTE MAY HAVE THEIR OPINION ON WHY THEY ARE MOVING THAT FACILITY, BUT I KNOW THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WAS PUSHING REALLY HARD AS WELL. THE OTHER THING IS THAT MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS PROJECT WAS THE BONDING AND THE DEBT COST. I THINK JUST LIKE WITH THE REST OF THEM, IF WE PRESENT THE COST, WE OUGHT TO PRESENT THE TOTAL COST, INCLUDING INTEREST AND O AND M OVER 30 YEARS. IT'S JUST A CONSISTENT WAY TO DO IT. THE PRIVATE SECTOR DOES THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHY THE CITY HASN'T DONE IT. IT IS JUST AN HONEST WAY OF LETTING THE CITY LOOK, THE PUBLIC LOOK AT IT, NOT THAT YOU'VE BEEN DISHONEST, BUT JUST A MORE THOROUGH WAY OF DOING IT. MY CONCERN WOULD BE ON SOME OF AVENUE, WE'VE SEEN MASSIVE COST ESCALATIONS. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE MASSIVE COST ESCALATIONS ON THIS ALSO. AND IF YOU THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, THEN BRING PEOPLE BEFORE US QUICKLY, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S GOING TO RESULT IN DEBT OR MOVING MONEY AROUND FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE OR WORSE, INCREASING FEES. THE OTHER THING, ON THE POSITIVE SIDE YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SAVINGS IN OVERTIME, TALKING ABOUT THE SAVINGS IN DRIVE TIME AND ALL THAT. THERE'S GOT TO BE MAYBE OUR BUDGET DIRECTOR OR THE CITY BUDGET FOLKS CAN HELP YOU. BUT AT THE SAME TIME AS YOU MIGHT LIST ALL THE TOTAL COSTS, NOT JUST THE CAPITAL COSTS ON THIS, THERE MUST BE A WAY OF CALCULATING THAT SAVINGS. SO IF YOU HAD O AND M OVER 30 YEARS, BUT THEN YOU HAD HOWEVER MANY HOURS OF OVERTIME TALKED ABOUT AND CALCULATED THAT OVER 30 YEARS, THAT IS A HUGE NUMBER ALSO. SO I THINK IT JUST HELPS THE PUBLIC TO SEE THAT WE'RE BEING THOROUGH ABOUT LOOKING AT ALL THE NUMBERS. AND IN THIS CASE, YOU COULD OFFSET THE COST WITH SOME SAVINGS. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCIL MEMBER VIERA. >>LUIS VIERA: YES, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE PRESENTATION. I WANTED TO JUST BUILD ON OR TALK ABOUT COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON'S COMMENTS. I THINK THAT LOOKING AT THIS ISSUE THROUGH THE LENS THAT SHE TALKED ABOUT IS SOMETHING THAT I SUPPORT, ONE OF RECONCILIATION. AND COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT ANY THOUGHTS YOU HAVE ON THINGS THAT WE COULD ACT ON BECAUSE I DO SHARE YOUR SENTIMENTS, WHICH IS THAT GIVEN THE ORIGIN OF THIS COMMUNITY AND WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT IT AND JUST THE PROTECTION OF CARVER CITY AND WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE HISTORICAL INTEGRITY OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IS PROTECTED. I JUST SHARE YOUR SENSE OF URGENCY ON IT. I SHARE THE LENS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THROUGH RECONCILIATION, THROUGH EQUITY AND MORE THAN ANYTHING REALLY, RESPECT. R-E-S-P-E-C-T. I THINK THAT IS THE MAIN THING. I WANTED TO COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR REMARKS AND LET US KNOW HOW WE CAN HELP BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT NOTE. THANK YOU. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AS WELL AS COUNCILMAN CARLSON'S. IN THESE TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTS, WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THE WESTSHORE ALLIANCE, THE WESTSHORE ALLIANCE AND THEY NEVER REALLY CONSIDERED CARVER CITY AND JEFFERSON AS A PART OF THAT. IN FACT, THE TEACHERS, THE WESTSHORE ALLIANCE WAS FORMED AND THEY IDENTIFIED THAT IN RELATION TO CHILDREN ATTENDING ROLAND PARK, JEFFERSON STUDENTS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THAT. THAT WAS REALLY INTERESTING THAT CARVER CITY COULD NO LONGER ATTEND ROLAND PARK AND THE TEACHERS WHO WORKED AT JEFFERSON, THEIR CHILDREN COULD NOT GO TO WORK -- COULD NOT ATTEND ROLAND PARK. SO NOW THE WORD JUST WESTSHORE ALLIANCE DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME AS IT RELATES TO THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THAT MEANS THEY HAVE JUMPED OVER CARVER CITY FOR A 19-ACRE PROPERTY OF LAND THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN IN TERMS OF ROUNDING OUT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS THE TIME TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE SAME THING WILL HAPPEN JUST LIKE WITH THE YELLOW JACKETS. HAD TO HAVE THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND REC COME AND SAY, NO, THIS LAND NOW BELONGS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF WEST RIVER. SO THAT'S AFTER THE FACT. THE COMMUNITY IS UPSET BECAUSE THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY SOMETHING IS HAPPENING. SO THIS IS THE EARLY ONSET OF IT BECAUSE THE LAND BELONGS TO THE CITY OF TAMPA. THAT'S WHAT IS SO GOOD ABOUT THIS. THE LAND BELONGS TO THE C CITY F TAMPA AND RACIAL RECONCILIATION IS AT THE FOREFRONT OF THIS COMMUNITY AND IT'S GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO FACE IT WITH LAND BECAUSE LAND IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ASSET THAT EXISTS IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO THAT'S WHY I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT, EVEN AS A SPIN-OFF TO WHATEVER WE'RE DISCUSSING, EVEN IF IT'S SOLID WASTE. BECAUSE THE WESTSHORE ALLIANCE IS A VERY POWERFUL AND NON-DIVERSE ENTITY, AND WHEN THEY MET WITH ME, WHAT WAS SO INTERESTING, THEY NEVER MENTIONED CARVER CITY. THEY TALKED ABOUT THE RESIDENTS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF WESTSHORE. THEY JUST DIDN'T KNOW THAT THE COUNCILWOMAN GREW UP IN THAT AREA. I HAD TO SAY TO THEM, HAVE YOU REACHED OUT TO THE CARVER CITY COMMUNITY? THAT BEING -- THAT TYPE OF EXCLUSION PUTS US IN A POSITION WHERE IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SAY SOMETHING AND SHED LIGHT ON THESE ISSUES BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE IN MAKING DECISIONS AS TO WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY. BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, AND THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. WASHINGTON. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU FOR THE SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT AND THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT AS A WHOLE. TRULY APPRECIATE IT. I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO THE PARKS AND REC DIRECTOR, MR. TONY MULKEY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. IT'S 12:00. DOES COUNCIL WISH TO STOP FOR LUNCH OR CONTINUE THROUGH THE AGENDA? FINE WITH ME. LET'S KEEP IT GOING. >>TONY MULKEY: TONY MULKEY, PARKS AND RECREATION. PLEASED TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON A PROJECT THAT HAS A LOT OF ATTENTION AND WE HAVEN'T PROVIDED ONE FOR A LITTLE WHILE. I DO HAVE SOME NEWS ON THE RIVERCREST WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENTS IN SEMINOLE HEIGHTS. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WAS FUNDED IN FISCAL YEAR 2022 THROUGH CIT AND OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BUDGET. RFQ FOR DESIGN-BUILD WENT OUT IN EARLY 2022 WITH THE AWARD COMING BEFORE AND APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER OF 2022. WE HAVE STRIVED TO KEEP IT IN BUDGET AND WORK WITH THE CONTRACTORS ON THAT DYNAMIC. THIS IS NOT ONLY AN IMPORTANT NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IMPROVEMENT, BUT IT'S GOING TO ADD TO THE CONNECTIVITY THROUGH OUR TRAILS PROGRAM. WE OFTEN THINK OF TRAILS BEING LIKE PADS AND THINGS ON LAND BUT ALSO THE BLUE WAYS WHERE WE CONNECT DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH PADDLE SPORTS AND BOATING. THIS PARK PROJECT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO PROVIDE FOR A 40-FOOT PIER THAT GOES OUT INTO THE RIVER AND APPROXIMATELY 300-FOOT OF SEAWALL IMPROVEMENTS. CURRENTLY, THERE IS A FAILING SEAWALL OUT ON THE SITE THAT IS GOING TO BE NATURALIZED AND SOFTENED TO HELP BETTER ACCOMMODATE STORM SURGES AND THINGS LIKE THAT ALONG THE RIVER. IT'S ALSO GOING TO HAVE A BOAT LAUNCH, A PADDLE BOAT TYPE OF DOCK SYSTEM, ADA COMPLIANT, AS WELL AS A PLATFORM OF DOCK SPACE THAT CAN BE USED FOR GATHERINGS AND FISHING AND THINGS LIKE THAT WITH A COVERING. SO WE'RE INCORPORATING SOME SHADE CONNECTING TO THE EXISTING TRAIL SYSTEM OUT THERE AND MAKING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH SOLAR LIGHTING AS WE HAVE DONE IN SEVERAL OTHER PARKS. CURRENT STATUS, THE PROJECT HAS TAKEN A LONG TIME TO GET OFF THE GROUND AND WE UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION OF THE COMMUNITY. RECENTLY, THE COMMUNITY HOPEFULLY HAS NOTICED THAT WE'VE TAKEN DOWN THE FENCING THAT WAS OUT THERE ALONG THE RIVER. IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, THEY ARE GOING TO SEE SOME IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE OVERGROWTH AND SOME OF THE CONDITIONS ALONG THE WATER LINE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ACTUAL PROJECT. SO WE'RE DOING SOME OF THAT IN-HOUSE RIGHT NOW. THE PROJECT IS ACTUALLY COMING IN FOR A LANDING WITH THE DESIGN PHASE. WE HAD TO CLEAR SOME DETAILS WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS BEING ON THE WATER, NEW CONSTRUCTION, SOME SURVEYS, BUT ALL THAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO BRINGING A GMP BEFORE COUNCIL VERY SOON TO INITIATE THE CONSTRUCTION PORTION OF THIS PROJECT. AGAIN, TOTAL COST, STILL AT $1.1 MILLION AS BUDGETED, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE SO WE CAN SEE THAT? SO A COUPLE OF THINGS. THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN WAITING YEARS FOR THIS PROJECT. YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. WILL THIS TRAIL ACCESS CONNECT TO THE PARK THAT IS NORTH OF THAT SOMEHOW? >> IN THE SCOPE OF THIS CURRENT IMPROVEMENT, IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT CONNECTION, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ALWAYS PROVIDE IN CONSIDERATION. I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THE MASTER TRAIL WAY PLAN IS. >>LYNN HURTAK: YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S EMILY THAT YOU CAN GO GET INTO.H BOULEVARD TO EMILY T- I WANT TO CALL IT RING PARK AND THAT'S NOT CORRECT. IT ESCAPES ME THE NAME OF THAT. BUT IT IS A HUGE PARK THAT HAS A LOT OF RIVERFRONT ACCESS. SO IT'S REALLY, WOULD BE A NICE THING IF TALKING ABOUT A TRAIL ADDITION. MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET BACK THERE. IT IS HIDDEN. IT'S RIGHT WHERE KEEPING TAMPA BAY BEAUTIFUL IS. IT'S GOT THIS REALLY TINY LITTLE CORRIDOR THAT YOU CAN GO DOWN TO GET INTO THE PARK, ANYWAY. AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION OR MY OTHER THING THAT I'M DISAPPOINTED ABOUT THIS PROJECT BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THE COMMUNITY HAS TALKED ABOUT OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS THAT THEY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY IN THE FUTURE FOR THIS TO BE A PLACE FOR THE PIRATE TAX TOW STOP. FOR YOU TO NOT HAVE BUILT IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO HAVE THAT AS A POSSIBILITY GOING FORWARD IS A REAL DISAPPOINTMENT. I KNOW THAT THE ARGUMENT IS THERE IS NO PARKING FOR IT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE POINT. THE POINT WAS TO BE AN ACCESS FOR THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO WALK TO GET TO THE PIRATE -- THERE IS A HUGE GAP BETWEEN WHERE THAT PIRATE TAXI IS PLANNING TO GO WITH THE EXPANSION OF ZOO TAMPA AND THERE IS A HUGE GAP THERE. I THINK THE NEXT PLACE WOULD BE RICKS ON THE RIVER. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT PUBLIC SPACES WHERE WE CAN HAVE -- WHEN WE'RE THINKING WHAT THAT WATER TAXI CAN BE, TEN YEARS FROM NOW, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE HERE TO MAKE THAT DOABLE, WE'RE JUST -- I MEAN, THE COSTS ARE GOING TO DO NOTHING BUT RISE. I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING THAT AND BUILDING THAT IN, EVEN IF WE CAN'T HAVE IT NOW, BUT FOR THE GOAL OF HAVING IT IN THE FUTURE. >> TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE POINTS, THE PIRATE WATER TAXI IS A PRIVATE ENTITY, AND WE'VE WORKED WELL WITH THE OWNERSHIP OVER THERE AND HE'S ACTUALLY BUILT SOME OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU SEE THAT THEY SERVICE, AND THAT WILL BE A CONVERSATION ON THAT TO DO THAT. I KNOW ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH THEM COMING UP THE RIVER WAS THE HEIGHT OF THE BOATS AND SOME OF THE BRIDGES, BUT I KNOW THEY HAVE VESSELS NOW THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PLANNING FOR LOWRY PARK AND SUCH. IT WILL BE A CONTINUING CONVERSATION ON THIS. IT'S ON OUR RADAR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK SAID, BECAUSE IN THAT PARK, IF IT IS A PARKING ISSUE, I'VE BEEN TO SO MANY EVENTS AND PEOPLE WALK THERE, WITH THE EXCEPTION I HAVE TO DRIVE THERE WHETHER PICNIC, EASTER EVENT, AND IT'S FULL OF PEOPLE. THE RIDERSHIP THAT YOU EXPECT, WHERE IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE A PIRATE WATER TAXI STOP. IT'S ANOTHER CONNECTOR TO DOWNTOWN AND THE RIVERWALK AND EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN A BIGGER VISION. ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. >> THANK YOU. I WILL HAND IT OFF TO ERIC WEISS WITH WASTEWATER. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I BELIEVE YOU ARE THE LAST SECTION, CORRECT? >> ONE MORE AFTER ME. I'LL BE QUICK. >>ERIC WEISS: ERIC WEISS, WASTE WATER DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, HERE TO UPDATE THE MASTER PLAN AT THE HOWARD F. CURREN ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. 18 PROJECTS AWARDED AT THE FACILITY, $278 MILLION. WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ONE OF THOSE ONGOING. IT'S CALLED THE PUMPING STATION. REACTOR MODIFICATION PROJECT. BIG NAME. HPO. WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS IS PART OF OUR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN THAT TAKES OUT THE ORGANICS FROM THE WASTEWATER, WHICH WE CALL CARBON IS DONE. THIS PROJECT REALLY, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT TWO THINGS. ONE, SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCY ASPECT TO IT. WHEN THIS FACILITY WAS BUILT IN THE 1970s, IT WAS STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE TO PUT ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT IN BASEMENTS ONE OR TWO STORIES BELOW GRADE WITH INCREASED ACTIVITY OF HURRICANES AND CLIMATE CHANGE, IF WE FLOOD THERE, IT WOULD DAMAGE ALL THE EQUIPMENT AT THAT FACILITY. SO THE EQUIPMENT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. PART OF THIS FACILITY, PUTTING IT TWO OR THREE FEET ABOVEGROUND. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ABOUT THE PROJECT, WE'RE ABOUT SIX MONTHS EARLY. WE'RE GOING TO FINISH ABOUT SIX MONTHS EARLY. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS EARLY IN THE DESIGN PROCESS, YOU GUYS APPROVED AN EQUIPMENT PURCHASE DURING THE DESIGN PHASE OF ALL THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT BECAUSE THAT CAN TAKE TWO YEARS TO GET HERE. IT ACTUALLY CAME IN EARLY RIGHT WHEN WE WERE STARTING CONSTRUCTION, SO OUR CONTRACTOR WAS ABLE TO REDO THE SCHEDULE TO DO A BUNCH OF CONCURRENT ACTIVITIES. SO WE'RE LOOKING TO BE COMPLETE WITH THAT PROJECT A YEAR FROM NOW. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. AHEAD OF SCHEDULE AND AHEAD OF EVERYBODY ELSE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, RORY JONES WITH THE WATER DEPARTMENT. GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE ON A PROJECT YOU APPROVED BACK IN DECEMBER. THIS WAS THE DAVID L. TIPPIN WATER TREATMENT FACILITY FILTER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. I'M NOT SEEING OUR PRESENTATION. THIS WAS A HIGH PRIORITY PROJECT THAT WAS FUNDED BY OUR PIPES PROGRAM. IT'S PART OF THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN. IT REALLY ADDS REDUNDANCY AND EFFICIENCY BY ADDING ADDITIONAL FILTERS. IT ADDS SURGE TANKS. GIVES US THE ABILITY TO TAKE DOWN EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS WILL INCREASE OUR CAPACITY BY 20 MGD. AND IT WAS A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT. $115 MILLION THAT WE DID VALUE ENGINEER TO KEEP COSTS LOW THAT RESULTED IN $13 MILLION SAVINGS. MODEL ERIC DID, PULL OUT EARLY PROCUREMENT ITEMS, PURCHASE THOSE TO KEEP US AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. THAT WAS A DIRECT OWNER PURCHASE AS WELL SO WE WERE ABLE TO SAVE ON THE TAXES ON THAT. RIGHT NOW WE ARE EXPECTED TO BE A LITTLE SHORT OF A MILLION DOLLARS IN SAVINGS AND JUST US PURCHASING THOSE ITEMS AS WELL. ANOTHER SUCCESS TO THIS IS THE EBO GOAL WAS SHATTERED HERE. WE HAD A SIGNIFICANT GOAL. I BELIEVE IT WAS 8. LET ME MAKE SURE I'VE GOT THIS RIGHT. BBE GOAL OF 11% WHICH CAME IN AT 17%. 8% GOAL ON WBE, AND THAT RESULTED IN A 10%. OF THIS $115 MILLION, 31 MILLION OF THAT IS GOING TO CERTIFIED FIRMS AT LEAST, AT MINIMUM. SO WHERE ARE WE TODAY? WE FINISHED THE DESIGN. WE MOVED TO THE CONSTRUCTION. AND A COUPLE OF YOU MAY HAVE VIRTUALLY WALKED THROUGH THESE 3D DESIGNS AS WELL. WE'RE ABLE TO PUT ON THESE VIRTUAL GOGGLES AND WALK THROUGH THE DESIGN ITSELF. WE ARE CURRENTLY OUT ON-SITE. IT'S REALLY JUST EARTH WORK, MOVING EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE CONFLICTS AND REALLY CLEARING THE SITE TO BEGIN TO GO VERTICAL. WE'LL HAVE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DONE IN 2027. SO WE'LL GET SOME BENEFICIAL USE IN A COUPLE OF YEARS. ULTIMATELY FINAL PUNCH LIST CLOSEOUT IS EARLY 2028. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: NO, NO QUESTION. I FIND IT VERY, VERY INTELLIGENT. DOING FANTASTIC JOB JUST LIKE YOURSELF AND BRAD AND OTHERS THAT LED THE WATER DEPARTMENT IN THE PAST. WHEN I LOOKED AT YOUR PROJECTIONS OF WHAT YOU CAN PRODUCE, 120 TO 140 MILLION GALLONS A DAY ONCE IT'S COMPLETE AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS ONLY ONE LITTLE FACTOR THAT'S MISSING. THAT BY LAW WE CAN ONLY PRODUCE 82 MILLION GALLONS A DAY AVERAGE. SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS, WHEN DID THAT -- I KNOW I'M NOT TRYING TO GET YOU BLINDSIDED. WE HAVE NEVER TALKED ABOUT THIS. WHAT WAS THE 82 MILLION GALLONS ESTABLISHED AND WHAT WAS THE POPULATION THEN AND WHAT'S THE POPULATION NOW AND WHAT'S IT GOING TO BE IN 2050? THE WAY I LOOK AT IT, WE'LL BE DRINKING SAND BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT GOING TO LET US DO THAT. IT IS A SHAME THAT WE'LL LOSE MORE THAN LIKELY OUR ABILITY TO GOVERN OURSELVES, ONE OF THE FINEST WATER DISTRIBUTION AND MANUFACTURERS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA OR IN THE NATION. I'M LOOKING AT MYSELF, LOOKING AT 2038, THE CONTRACT THAT NEVER ENDS BECAUSE, YOU OWE MONEY, YOU CAN'T LEAVE. ALL THESE THINGS COME INTO MY MIND. HOW MUCH MONEY WE PUT IN TO SEND UP NORTH THROUGH S.W.F.W.M.D. AND HOW MUCH MONEY GET BACK IN RETURN ON WATER. USED TO BE WATER AND SEWER, NOW ONLY WATER. ALL THOSE THINGS CALCULATING IN MY MIND. SPEAKING ABOUT WHAT WE SPOKE ABOUT, I THINK THE NUMBER COMES OUT 628 MILLION, THE NEED WE NEED FOR THE CITY. I KNOW PART OF THAT IS FROM THE PIPES PROGRAM. YOURS AND THE SPEAKER BEFORE YOU. I'M THINKING TO MYSELF, HOW DO WE SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS? >> IT'S DIFFICULT. RIGHT NOW IT'S CONSERVATION. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THIS IS A NEW TECHNOLOGY. THE SYSTEM WORKS BETTER, NOT ONLY IN DISTRIBUTION AND PIPES, EVERYTHING WILL BE NEW. REFUSE TO ENERGY IS GOING TO BE FINE AND HOWARD CURREN PLANT AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN TOUCHED IN MANY YEARS. NO UPGRADE TO THIS, IT NEVER HAPPENED. THAT'S WHAT THE CITIZENS SAY, WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH THE TAX DOLLARS, THIS IS THE REASON WHY DOING WITH THE TAX DOLLARS. >> THIS GIVES US THE ABILITY TO SERVICE BECAUSE WE HIT THE PEAK LIMIT OF DRAW OFF THE RIVER. THIS GIVES US SOME CAPACITY IN ORDER TO SERVICE THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I UNDERSTAND. >> THIS KIND OF DIVERTS FLOW AROUND SO WE CAN GET TO SOME OF THE OLD 1920s STUFF AS WELL. CONSERVATION IS THE FUTURE. WE'VE GOT TO CONTINUE TO AMP UP OUR CONSERVATION EFFORTS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY GET MORE OFF THE RIVER. I DO BELIEVE WE'LL LOOK BACK IN TIME AT WATERING OUR LAWNS WITH POTABLE WATER, THE SAME WAY WE DO INDOOR SMOKING AND GOING TO A RESTAURANT. THEY ASK YOU, DO YOU WANT SMOKING OR NONSMOKING? WE'RE SMILING ABOUT THAT NOW. I THINK WE'LL LOOK BACK IN TIME WITH THAT SAME ASPECT OF WATERING WITH POTABLE WATER. WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CONSERVATION EFFORTS. LOOK AT OUR REGIONAL PARTNERSHIPS WITH A DIFFERENT LENS AND WORK TOGETHER NOT ONLY WITH TAMPA BAY WATER, BUT LOOK ACROSS THE AISLES IN OUR OWN CITY, HOW WE USE STORMWATER, HOW WE USE WASTEWATER. REALLY AMP UP OUR RECLAIMED INFRASTRUCTURE AND MAXIMIZE THAT RESOURCE. I DON'T HAVE A GREAT ANSWER. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO HAVE AN ANSWER. THERE IS NO ANSWER RIGHT NOW. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. MS. DUNCAN, DOES THAT CONCLUDE? >>JEAN DUNCAN: YES, SIR. THANK YOU, COUNCIL, FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE ANY FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS YOU'D LIKE TO PROVIDE, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE. WE TOOK NOTES OF YOUR QUESTIONS TODAY. AND WE WILL BE COMING BACK WITH THESE PROJECTS IN DIFFERENT FORMS IN TERMS OF CONTRACTS AND SO FORTH. ALWAYS REACH OUT FOR ONE-ON-ONE BRIEFINGS TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION. WE'RE REALLY PUTTING AN EFFORT ON BEING AS FORTHCOMING AS WE CAN EARLIER ON, IF POSSIBLE. NO ONE LIKES SURPRISES. SO THAT'S OUR GOAL. IF THERE ARE ANY SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE ANY OF THIS, WE WELCOME THOSE BECAUSE WE'RE HERE TO SERVE YOU AND THE CITIZENS AND WANT TO DO THE BEST WE CAN FOR THE PUBLIC IN TERMS OF SPENDING THEIR DOLLARS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE IN-DEPTH REPORT OF THIS. THIS WAS WONDERFUL. AND THIS IS THE GREAT 8. BUT THE ISSUE IS ALSO THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN UPDATE FOR THE ENTIRE CIT. MAYBE NOT WITH IT BUT SOMEHOW A WRITTEN FORM A REPORT THAT SHOWS US WHERE WE ARE WITH THE OTHERS. >>JEAN DUNCAN: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: I KNOW THAT I'VE ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOR OUR CIP BUDGET UPDATE. SO SOMETHING SIMILAR. THEY FOUND A WAY TO SHOW WHAT THE CHANGES HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE FOR THE NEXT UPCOMING YEAR, SO MAYBE WE CAN DO THAT FOR THESE CIP UPDATES. AGAIN, NOT TO BE PRESENTED NECESSARILY IN FRONT OF EVERYONE, BUT JUST TO LET US SEE WHERE WE ARE ON SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS. >>JEAN DUNCAN: THAT IS AN EXCELLENT SUGGESTION. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT, RICHARD MUTTERBACK AND I, BRAD BAIRD, GET THE QUARTERLY STORMWATER REPORTS, BIANNUAL REPORT BUT WE WANT TO SEE WHAT ELSE WE CAN DO TO FILL THE GAP OF INFORMATION SO YOU HAVE A REGULAR HANDY REFERENCE TO THESE THINGS. >>LYNN HURTAK: I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. YES MA'AM. COME ON UP. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, STEPHANIE POYNOR E LIKE $671 MILLION FOR ALL OF THEM. ABOUT 400 ARE NOT COMING OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND WHICH DOESN'T HURT QUITE AS BAD. THIS IS HOW I FEEL. I FEEL LIKE THE HOUSEWIFE WHO IS BUSTING HER HUMP TO SAVE SOME MONEY. AND HER HUSBAND IS DOING DRUGS AND RUNNING AROUND SPENDING IT LIKE IT'S -- KNOWING GOOD AND FULL WELL THE FIRST WEEK IN NOVEMBER WE DON'T KNOW IF WE STILL HAVE A JOB. I'M SORRY, WE'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THAT. WE CANNOT IGNORE IT. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE LITTLE BABY PROJECT THAT'S STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS THAT NOBODY EVEN BROUGHT UP TODAY. $300,000 FOR A VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK THAT IS NOT TWO BLOCKS FROM A CURRENT VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK, THAT IS MAINTAINED BY THE PORT TAMPA LADIES ASSOCIATION AND THE DRUG DEALERS SIT THERE EVERY DAY, ALL STINKIN' DAY LONG, DAYLIGHT TO DARK THEY SIT UNDERNEATH THE AWNINGS THERE. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHEN WE HAVE A NEED AT GADSDEN PARK, WE HAVE DUGOUTS THAT AREN'T THERE FOR OUR BASEBALL KIDS. COUNCILMAN VIERA AND COUNCILMAN CARLSON HAVE BOTH BEEN TALKING TO THE INTERBAY LITTLE LEAGUE. I'M SORRY. I'M MARRIED TO A VETERAN. 34 YEARS ACTIVE DUTY. AND HE WOULD RATHER HAVE KIDS IN AN APPROPRIATE PLACE AND KIDS WHO ARE IN WHEELCHAIRS BE ABLE TO USE SOMETHING BESIDES A PORT-O-LET TO GO TO THE BATHROOM WHEN THEY ARE OUT DOING ACTIVITIES IN THE PARK. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD ABOUT THIS VETERANS MEMORIAL PROJECT FOR $300,000. FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN IT. I THINK IF ANYBODY IN SOUTH TAMPA WOULD HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ME. I MEAN, I READ EVERY AGENDA. I'M JUST A LITTLE SCARED THAT ON JULY THE 18 WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BUDGET THAT WILL HAVE A BUNCH OF THE STUFF IN HERE. WE DON'T HAVE A PAYCHECK THAT'S GUARANTEED AFTER THE FIRST TUESDAY IN NOVEMBER. WE'VE GOT TO STOP SPENDING LIKE WE'RE 15 YEARS OLD. I'VE GOT A -- 15, BUT THAT GIRL CAN SPEND MONEY LIKE NOBODY'S BUSINESS. SHE DOESN'T THINK TWICE ABOUT ORDERING A BOBA FOR $16. SHE'S GROUNDED FOR THAT. BUT I CAN'T EVER IMAGINE SPENDING $16 TO ORDER A STUPID ICED TEA WITH BOVA IN IT. THIS IS THE KIND OF STUFF I KEEP SEEING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. WE HAVE NEEDS ON HERE. WE REALLY DO. WE HAVE SOME NEEDS. BUT THERE IS A WHOLE LOT OF WANTS THAT KEEP GETTING IN THE WAY. AND CAN IT WAIT ONE MORE YEAR? UNTIL WE KNOW WE HAVE SOMETHING. YOU HAVE TO TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN IT'S TIME TO VOTE ON THIS BUDGET. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES MA'AM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> HI. CARROLL ANN BENNETT. I'M NOT GOING TO SIT UP HERE AND TELL YOU THAT I KNOW WHERE EVERY DOLLAR SHOULD GO BECAUSE I'M NOT THAT SMART. BUT I KNOW THAT WHEN EACH ONE OF MY THREE CHILDREN GOT MARRIED, MY HUSBAND AND I SAT THEM DOWN AND HAD THE FINANCE TALK. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TOLD THEM WAS DO NOT CHARGE ANYTHING ON YOUR CREDIT CARD THAT YOU CAN'T PAY OFF THAT MONTH. BECAUSE NOTHING, EVERY EXPERT IN THE COUNTRY WILL TELL YOU THE WORST THING YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR PERSONAL FINANCES IS TO PAY INTEREST ON CREDIT CARD BILLS. THAT IS THE SINGLE WORSE THING YOU CAN DO. I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD NEVER BOND ANYTHING. I'M JUST SAYING WE NEED TO REMEMBER THAT WHEN WE BOND THINGS, IT'S JUST LIKE CHARGING IT ON A CREDIT CARD AND WE'LL HAVE TO PAY THAT INTEREST, AND THAT'S NOT A FINANCIALLY GOOD WAY TO DO THINGS. AGAIN, DO I KNOW HOW EVERY DOLLAR SHOULD BE SPENT? NO, I DO NOT. BUT I DO KNOW THAT I'VE SEEN WHAT HAPPENS WHERE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE, HOW DID THIS MUCH MONEY GET SPENT? OH, YOU VOTED ON IT. YOU APPROVED IT. WELL, THE PROBLEM IS YOU GET A BUDGET AND YOU GUYS WORKED SO HARD ON THAT BUDGET, BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON THINGS INDIVIDUALLY AND YOU DON'T ALWAYS KNOW WAS THIS AMOUNT THAT I'M VOTING ON, WAS THAT IN THE BUDGET THAT I THOUGHT WAS A GOOD BUDGET OR HAS IT CREPT UP? YOU DON'T ALWAYS KNOW. SO YOU END UP APPROVING THINGS WITHOUT REALLY KNOWING FOR SURE THAT IT'S BEEN BUDGETED FOR. AND ALL I GOT TO SAY IS FROM WHERE I SIT, WHAT I'VE SEEN, IT LOOKS TO ME, AND I'M NOT ALONE IN THIS, LIKE THE CITY IS SPENDING MONEY LIKE A DRUNKEN SAILOR. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES MA'AM. >> HI. VALERIE BULLOCK. I GUESS THE CITY GOT A LITTLE HANDBOOK THAT SHOW YOU HOW TO BEAT MONEY OUT OF THE CITY. COME UP HERE AND SAY ONE THING AND THEN TURN IN PAPERWORK THAT SAY SOMETHING ELSE AND YOU ALL APPROVE THAT, THEN THEY ALREADY FIGURE OUT A WAY TO INCREASE THAT PRICE. THIS IS RIDICULOUS. WHEN I GO DOWN MY STREET, I SEE FOUR AND FIVE GENERATIONS LIVING TOGETHER. WHEN I COME HERE, I HAVE TO PASS OVER HOMELESS PEOPLE. WHEN I GO 29th AND LAKE, GENERATIONS, GENERATIONS OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE A JOB. WHEN I GO AT LIQUOR STORE, TALKING TO THE YOUNG GUYS THERE, THEY ARE TELLING ME ABOUT HOW THEY CAN'T GET NO JOB. I'M TRYING TO GIVE THEM IDEAS ON HOW SOMEBODY WILL HIRE THEM. I HEARD ABOUT THIS PLACE. WE GOT THINGS GOING ON THAT'S WAY MORE IMPORTANT THAN A LOT OF THIS STUFF THAT THE SPEAKERS HAVE CAME UP HERE TALKING TO YOU-ALL ABOUT. YEAH, THE RIVERWALK IS NICE. I TAKE MY GRANDCHILDREN ICE SKATING EVERY YEAR RIGHT THERE AT CURTIS HIXON. BUT DO WE NEED ANOTHER RIVERWALK ADDITION THAT'S GOING TO COST OVER $40 MILLION AND THE ONLY THING THE SPEAKER CAN SAY IS THE SAFETY ISSUE. WHERE ON MY STREET, HALF HAS SIDEWALKS, HALF DON'T. BEEN LIKE THAT FOR 30 YEARS. I PUT IN A REQUEST WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA. THEY GAVE ME A TICKET NUMBER. I MIGHT NOT EVEN BE ALIVE WHEN WE GET SIDEWALKS. AND HE SAY THEY GOT A BIKING LANE THERE. THAT'S REALLY GOOD. I REMEMBER THE CITY OF TAMPA PASSED THE BIKING WHILE BLACK LAW. IF ANYBODY THAT NEED A BIKE LANE, IT'S US OVER THERE IN EAST TAMPA. WE THE ONES WHO NEED IT. THE STAFF THAT'S BEING PRESENTED, I UNDERSTAND HOW A MUNICIPALITY WORK. THE STUFF THAT'S BEING PRESENTED, A LOT OF IT IS COSMETIC. IT'S NOT COST EFFECTIVE. WHY CAN'T YOU GO WITH A BASIC BUILDING? WHY DOES THIS ONE HAVE TO HAVE SO MUCH COSMETICS ADDED TO IT THAT IT KEEPS UPPING THE PRICE AND YOU THINK YOU GOT AN OPEN CHECKBOOK. THAT'S NOT HOW THE CITY SHOULD BE RAN. IT SHOULD BE A CHECK AND BALANCE SYSTEM. AND ME, I THINK AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHOULD BE NUMBER ONE. NOBODY SHOULD BE SLEEPING OUTSIDE ON THE -- UNDER THE INTERSTATE. AND ANOTHER THING WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA, THE WASTEWATER AND THE WATER DEPARTMENT, WE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT CONSERVATION. ALL OF THE MILLIONS OUT OF THE PIPE MONEY, HOW MUCH WAS UTILIZED TO BRING THE RECLAIMED WATER TO OUR HOUSE SO WE CAN STOP WATERING OUR GRASS WITH POTABLE WATER. IS THAT IN THE MAKING ANY TIME SOON? THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN GOOD TO USE THE MONEY FOR THAT PURPOSE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES SIR. >> MENTESNOT, TAMPA, FLORIDA. ONE THING YOU HAVE TO GET STRAIGHT AND THE AFRICAN PEOPLE HAVE TO KNOW, WHEN THAT AVALANCHE STARTS TO ROLL AND YOU CAN'T STOP IT, YOU CAN'T STOP BIG BUSINESS. YOU CAN'T STOP THE RULING CLASS. YOU CAN'T STOP GOVERNMENT IN A CERTAIN WAY. SO WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION OR OVER TAXATION, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POOR AND WORKING CLASS PEOPLE. ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY NOTHING. WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT RELOCATE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, IT'S NOT RELOCATION. THE WHITE DEVELOPERS RAN THEM FROM DOWNTOWN. WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT RELOCATING THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, IT'S NOT RELOCATION. THE WHITE DEVELOPERS IS RUNNING THEM FROM YBOR CITY. WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT RELOCATING SOMETHING FROM CARVER CITY, THEY GOT A BUFFOON COMING IN HERE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THEY GONNA SAVE ON TRANSPORTATION AND OVERTIME HOURS AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF. NO, IT IS THE WHITE DEVELOPERS RUNNING THEM FROM CARVER CITY, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THE COUNCILWOMAN SAID SOMETHING VERY INTERESTING, WHICH WAS RECONCILIATION AND LAND RECONCILIATION. WELL, WE HAVE TO TIE THAT TO REPARATIONS ALSO. BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WHEN A PERSON CAN COME IN HERE BECAUSE THEY ASSAULT THE PEOPLE OF ALL COMMUNITIES, NOT JUST DISTRICT 5. THEY INSULT THE PEOPLE OF ALL COMMUNITIES. WHEN THEY COME IN HERE AND THEY TALK ABOUT A PROJECT GOING FROM 8 MILLION TO 40 MILLION AND THE PERSON DON'T EVEN KNOW THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO PUT ON IT, THAT TELLS YOU HOW DISRESPECTFUL THEY ARE, NOT ONLY TO THE ITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES HOW DISRESPECTFUL THEY ARE TO THE CONSTITUENTS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T CONSTITUENTS BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE DON'T VOTE. HOW DISRESPECTFUL THEY ARE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. THEY JUST HAVE A BIG BUILDING THAT STARTED OUT, THEY CLAIM AT 100 MILLION THAT NOBODY KNEW ABOUT, THE HANNA STREET PROJECT THAT WENT TO TWO OR THREE HUNDRED MILLION, STILL DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. AND IN THAT, THEY DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THEY NEEDED A PROPERTY ROOM THAT WAS ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING. NO, IT'S THAT THE CITY, LIKE THE PEOPLE SAY, LIKE THE LADY SAID, HEY, LIKE, YOU HAVE LIKE -- LET'S REVERSE ROLES. YOU HAVE A GOOD WORKING HUSBAND AND YOU GOT A WIFE THAT'S ON DRUGS. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THAT'S HOW THE CITY IS OPERATING, AND IT'S DISRESPECTFUL, AND WE NEED ACCOUNTABILITY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. NO, GO AHEAD, SIR. I'M SORRY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 5, OUR LAST ITEM FOR THE WORKSHOP, COUNCIL MEMBER HENDERSON, DO YOU WANT TO START IT OFF? >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. SEVEN-DIGIT PRESENTED FOR 2024 THAT THE MAYOR HAS PLACED IN THE BUDGET FISCAL YEAR $73,000 AS THE STARTING SALARY OR THE SALARY FOR FOR CITY COUNCIL. I KNOW WE HAD THE CONVERSATION BEFORE. THIS IS THE OPEN DIALOGUE AGAIN TO SEE IF IT WILL BE FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR OR IF WE'RE GOING TO PLACE IT IN THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE. I KNOW WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE, SO WE CAN JUST HAVE IT AGAIN PUBLICLY AND SEE WHERE WE LAND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I CAN ONLY SAY THIS, IF THAT'S WHAT THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL WANTS, IT WOULD BE FOR THIS YEAR. DON'T PASS IT ON TO SOMEBODY ELSE AND SAY I DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE RAISE. I JUST GOT IT BECAUSE IT WAS HERE WHEN I RAN FOR OFFICE. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO RAISING IT. I AM OPPOSED TO $25,000 A YEAR RAISE. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO 6%, 4%, WHATEVER THE GENERAL PUBLIC GETS. WE KNEW WHAT WE GET WHEN YOU WERE GOING TO RUN FOR OFFICE. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO A RAISE. THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: I'VE SAID MY THOUGHTS ON THIS BEFORE. I THINK WE OUGHT TO PUT SOME KIND OF STRUCTURE IN PLACE SO NO CITY COUNCIL HAS TO VOTE ON THIS AGAIN. I PROPOSED THAT IT WOULD BE -- IT COULD BE ANY FORMULA, BUT MAYBE A PERCENTAGE OF THE MAYOR. I THINK IT'S CRAZY THAT CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T MAKE AT LEAST 50% OF WHAT A MAYOR MAKES. I THINK CONSIDERING THAT, THIS IS TOO LOW AND IT DOESN'T FIX THE ONGOING PROBLEM. SO IF WE'RE VOTING ON THIS TODAY, I WOULD JUST VOTE NO. IF IT'S A LONGER TERM FIX, I WOULD SUPPORT IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER CLENDENIN. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MY GOODNESS, I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON AND MIRANDA. IF RAISING THE SALARY IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO, THEN THE RIGHT THING TO DO TODAY. BY DEFERRING IT ALONG, I HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM WITH IT. IF I'M RUNNING A COMPANY, YOU DO A SALARY ASSESSMENT BASED ON THE JOB PERFORMED. SET THE SALARY. WHATEVER THAT SHOULD BE, IT'S AS GOOD TODAY AS IT'S GOING TO BE IN THREE YEARS. I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CARLSON. IT TOOK ME A FEW MINUTES TO GET THERE BECAUSE I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW I WAS THERE THE FIRST TIME HE PROPOSED THAT. BUT I DO SEE THE WISDOM. BY THE WAY, FOR ANYBODY LISTENING, EVERYBODY KEEPS REFERRING THIS IS A PART-TIME JOB. THIS IS NOT A PART-TIME JOB. DOESN'T SAY ANYWHERE THAT IT IS A PART-TIME JOB, BY THE WAY. WHEN RUNNING FOR OFFICE, DOESN'T SAY RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL AS A PART-TIME JOB. DOESN'T SAY THAT. THROW THAT OUT THE WINDOW. MISNOMER REPEATED A THOUSAND TIMES. IT'S NOT TRUE. THERE ARE WEEKS THAT IT IS NOT AS INTENSIVE AS OTHERS AND AS WEEKS SO INTENSIVE THAT IT IS THREE JOBS. I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN CARLSON. IF THIS WAS THE PROPOSAL, I WOULD VOTE AGAINST IT BECAUSE I THINK YOU DO AN ASSESSMENT OF WHAT THE SALARY BASED ON THE WORKLOAD AND WHAT YOU DO. I THINK PROBABLY THE MODEL THAT HE HAD PROPOSED, AGAIN, I PROBABLY WASN'T THERE WHEN HE FIRST PROPOSED IT. AFTER CHEWING ON IT A BIT, I THINK TYING IT TO THE MAYOR'S SALARY IS PROBABLY A GOOD WAY OF GOING ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE CLEARLY MADE A DETERMINATION THAT THAT JOB IS SET AT A CERTAIN LEVEL AND PROBABLY, THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE WE SHOULD BE. IT WOULD BE AN EASY CALCULATION. IT WOULD BE ALSO EASY FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF CITY COUNCIL FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND AND TO EVALUATE THEIR PERFORMANCE BY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WHAT IS THE MAYOR'S SALARY? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ABOUT 190. LET'S SAY 185. >>GWEN HENDERSON: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WILL SAY IS THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF FUTURE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THIS ROLE. YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF THIS PRIMARY QUESTION, WHO CAN RUN FOR OFFICE? WHO CAN RUN FOR OFFICE? IS IT TIED TO THE TYPE OF PERSON? THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO LOOK OVERALL HOLISTICALLY AT THIS COUNCIL AND SAY, WELL, WHAT DO THEY DO? COUNCILMAN CARLSON OWNS HIS OWN COMPANY. WHAT DO YOU DO? YOU'RE A WRITER. >>LYNN HURTAK: I RUN MY OWN CONSULTING AND EDITING FIRM, WHICH I'VE PUT ON PAUSE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: EXACTLY. I WAS GOING TO ADD THAT PART BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT BEFORE. COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN IS RETIRED. WHAT DO YOU DO? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I DO A LITTLE -- WATCHES, ON THE SIDE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I AM AN EDUCATOR AT THE END OF MY CAREER. A LAWYER. VIERA, YOU ARE RETIRED NOW, RIGHT? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I NEVER RETIRE. ONLY DEAD PEOPLE RETIRE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. SERIOUSLY, WHO CAN, IF A PERSON GETS THIS JOB -- I THOUGHT IT WAS A PART-TIME JOB WHEN I TOOK OFFICE AND TO AN EXTENT, IT IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY AND SOME WEEKS ARE AT A PEAK AND VALLEY THAN OTHERS. A PERSON THAT DOESN'T HAVE FLEXIBILITY THAT DOES WORK, WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THIS JOB UNLESS THEY HAVE FLEXIBILITY. THE SALARY REALLY SHOULD BE COMPARABLE TO SOMEONE WHO CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN TAMPA. IF THIS WAS A FULL-TIME JOB, CAN A PERSON AFFORD TO LIVE IN THE CITY THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY GOVERNING? AND THAT WOULD BE NO BASED ON THE CURRENT SALARY LEVEL. IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COUNCILMAN MIRANDA SAYING GIVING A RAISE OF $20,000, I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE IT THAT WAY. PUTTING IT IN LINE WITH THE AVERAGE MEDIAN INCOME OR SALARY FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA, THEN THIS IS A LITTLE BIT ABOVE THAT. I THINK THAT WOULD BE REASONABLE. BUT FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, YOU WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AND SEE WHO WOULD BE ABLE TO SIT IN THIS SEAT AND WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH THIS SALARY? I BELIEVE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THE DIVERSITY THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I BROUGHT IT UP. I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NOT BE AFRAID TO ADDRESS IT IN THAT WAY BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE JUST ABOUT -- IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT US. IT'S ABOUT THE FUTURE OF TAMPA AND WHO GETS TO LEAD OUR CITY AND WHO GETS TO HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I'LL TAKE A LITTLE ISSUE WITH THE FACT THAT YOU SAY WE'RE DIVERSE BECAUSE HERE IS THE THING, WOMEN, 51% OF THE POPULATION, WE HAVE NEVER BEEN 50% OF THIS COUNCIL. AND YOU KNOW WHY, IT'S BECAUSE, THERE ARE A LOT OF SINGLE MOMS OUT THERE. SINGLE MOMS CANNOT DO THIS JOB. CANNOT DO THIS JOB. IF YOU'RE A SINGLE MOM, YOU DON'T HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I'M A SINGLE MOM. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT YOUR DAUGHTER IS GROWN. WHEN SHE WAS LITTLE, YOU COULDN'T HAVE DONE THIS. >>GWEN HENDERSON: CORRECT. >>LYNN HURTAK: FOR THE COST AND FOR EVERYTHING ELSE. I AGREE WITH ACTUALLY PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY. I THINK THAT, YES, WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW WE SHOULD INCREASE, BUT I ALSO DO AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO MOVE THIS FORWARD PAST US SO THAT IT'S NOT AND TARGETED TO THE MAYOR'S SALARY OR TARGETED TO SOMETHING. >>GWEN HENDERSON: LET ME SAY THIS, TOO, TO CIRCLE BACK, IT WAS ACTUALLY PUT INTO THE BUDGET AND YOU ALL VOTED IT DOWN I GUESS BECAUSE IT WAS A POLITICAL SEASON. >>LYNN HURTAK: YEAH, PRIOR COUNCIL. >>GWEN HENDERSON: NOW THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL SEASON. WE'RE NOT UP FOR ELECTION. I DON'T KNOW HOW WOULD YOU HAVE VOTED -- I KNOW HOW YOU VOTED BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T DO IT BECAUSE OF POLITICS, I GUESS. AND SO NOW THAT OPPORTUNITY IS PRESENTING ITSELF AGAIN WITHOUT THAT BEING THE ISSUE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER VIERA AND THEN CARLSON. >>LUIS VIERA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, AND I'VE ALWAYS HAD MY POSITION ON THIS, WHICH IS I DO AGREE THAT IT'S NOT ABOUT US. IT'S ABOUT FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBERS. I MOTIONED SOME TIME AGO THAT WE HAVE A TAMPA CITY COUNCIL SALARY I BELIEVE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN AROUND 75, 80 THOUSAND DOLLARS, BUT BEGINNING FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL. I ALWAYS HAD A PRINCIPLE THAT I ABIDED BY ON THIS WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS, NUMBER ONE, WE SHOULD VOTE ON IT. NUMBER TWO, WE HAVE AN ELECTION AND IT TAKES EFFECT AFTER THE ELECTION. JUST LIKE THE 27th AMENDMENT DOES FOR THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS. I AGREE 100%, WHICH IS THIS BODY, THIS POSITION REQUIRES A HIGHER SALARY SO THAT WE CAN ATTRACT MORE PEOPLE. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT. BUT THERE IS THAT PRINCIPLE FOR ME THAT WE SHOULD NOT GET THE BENEFIT OF A NON-INFLATION ADJUSTMENT PAY INCREASE WITHOUT FIRST HAVING AN ELECTION. ALL OF THE OPTIONS, EXCEPT FOR THE ONE I PROPOSED LAST TIME, DO NOT DO THAT. THAT'S WHERE I HAVE ALWAYS STOOD ON THIS. AGAIN, IT IS NOT ABOUT US. IT IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY, AND I DO THINK IT IS GOOD TO TAKE THAT STEP, BUT I DON'T THINK ON PRINCIPLE THAT WE SHOULD GET THE BENEFIT OF IT, NUMBER ONE, WE PASSED IT, THEN WE HAVE AN ELECTION, THEN WE GET THE BENEFIT OF IT. THAT'S WHAT I MOTIONED FOR LAST TIME. THAT'S MY PRINCIPLE. I MAY BE IN THE MINORITY, BUT THAT'S MY PRINCIPLE. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN CARLSON AND MIRANDA. RECORD ON THIS, I VOTED FOR IT I THINK MULTIPLE TIMES AND THAT WAS JUST BEFORE THE ELECTION, DURING THE ELECTION, THE MAYOR'S PEOPLE SENT THREE OR FOUR WAVES OF DIRECT MAIL AGAINST ME, PROBABLY HUNDRED THOUSAND OR MORE AGAINST US, I STILL WON 60%. IT HAD NO POLITICAL IMPACT AND MY VOTE TODAY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN GOOD GOVERNMENT AND I THINK YOU HAVE TO PAY A FAIR WAGE. MY ISSUE WITH IT IS THAT I THINK FOR WHATEVER REASON IT'S BEEN ARTIFICIALLY LOW FOR A LONG TIME. JUST LIKE IT DOESN'T SAY PART TIME. IT DOESN'T SAY, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT -- ANYWAY, AND SO THE IDEA HERE IS WE NEED TO DO A ONE-TIME ADJUSTMENT TO MAKE IT A FAIR WAGE. IT IS ARTIFICIALLY BELOW ANY OF THE SALARIES IN THE CITY AND IT'S BELOW WHAT PEOPLE GET PAID OUTSIDE. ONCE IT'S SET. ONCE IT HAS A ONE-TIME ADJUSTMENT, THIS WAS POSITION IN MAILERS AGAINST ME AND I THINK AGAINST LYNN, AS 42% INCREASE OR WHATEVER. BY THE WAY, WE DIDN'T EVEN GET THE INCREASE BECAUSE IT FAILED, BUT WE WERE ACCUSED OF GETTING IT ANYWAY. I SAID I WOULD TURN IT DOWN IF IT WAS PASSED. BUT IT'S GOT -- THERE'S GOT TO BE A ONE-TIME ADJUSTMENT. AND THEN AFTER THAT, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A FORMULA SO THAT NO CITY COUNCIL EVER HAS TO WORK ON IT AGAIN. IF I VOTE AGAINST IT TODAY, IT'S BECAUSE IT'S NOT A FORMULA. THE LAST THING IS THAT I THINK, WHAT IS 80% AMI RIGHT NOW? >>LYNN HURTAK: AMI IS ABOUT 74,500. >>BILL CARLSON: WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME -- TO HELP PEOPLE SUBSIDIZE THEIR HOUSING BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE ON THE SAME SALARY WE'RE PROPOSING CITY COUNCIL. I'M LOOKING FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCILS, NOT THIS ONE, BUT IT JUST IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL AND IT PUSHES NOT ANY OF US, BUT IT'S PUSHED PEOPLE IN THE PAST TO DEMAND FREE TICKETS AND FREE ADMISSION TO PLACES AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS THEY SHOULDN'T DO. >>GWEN HENDERSON: PARKING, PARKING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD TIE ANY SALARY TO SOMEBODY ELSE'S SALARY. IT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN ANY CITY THAT I KNOW OF WHERE A SALARY OF THE ELECTED OFFICIAL AND THE COUNCIL, ALDERMEN, WHATEVER THEY WANT TO CALL THEM, IS TIED ON TO THE PERSONNEL. THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PRESIDENT, DOES THE LEGISLATURE, THE HOUSE, OR THE SENATE GET A PERCENTAGE OF THE PRESIDENT'S SALARY? NO. DOES IT HAPPEN IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE? NO. HAPPEN AT THE COUNTY COMMISSION OFFICE? NO. HAPPEN AT CITY COUNCIL? NOT THAT I KNOW OF. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WHEN YOU RUN FOR OFFICE, YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING INTO. IT'S CUT AND DRY. THEY TELL YOU WHEN YOU SIGN WHAT THE SALARY IS. NOT THAT DIFFICULT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO RACES. FOUR, FIVE, SIX PERCENT TWO YEARS AGO, ONE YEAR AGO, ONE THIS YEAR, BUT DIDN'T TAKE IT. THAT'S 12% THERE OR 8% AT LEAST. WE DIDN'T TAKE IT. NOW YOU WANT TO GO TO THE MAYOR'S SALARY PERCENT BASE, HUH? THE MAYOR'S SALARY IS THERE BECAUSE IT'S A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT JOB. WHOEVER THE MAYOR IS. YOU'RE UNDER SCRUTINY 24 HOURS JUST LIKE WE ARE. BUT THE RESPONSIBILITY IS TEN TIMES WHAT OURS ARE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT ITEMS TODAY, TAKING THE MONEY OUT OF THE CIT IF IT PASSES, STILL HALF A BILLION DOLLARS, BUT WE'RE GIVING THE CIT MONEY AWAY, AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT, WHAT? YOU WANT TO RAISE 25% OR 20%, WHATEVER IT IS, TAKE YOUR RAISES AS IT COMES LIKE ANYONE ELSE. WHEN YOU APPLY FOR A JOB, THAT'S WHAT YOU DO WHEN RUNNING FOR OFFICE, APPLYING FOR A JOB. >>GWEN HENDERSON: RESPECTFULLY, COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, YOU KNOW WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THAT IS THAT EVEN -- YOU KNOW WHAT THE SALARY IS WHEN YOU TAKE THE JOB, THAT MAY BE TRUE, BUT THAT'S WHY IN THE FLORIDA STATE REPRESENTATIVE WHERE I THINK WHY PEOPLE WHO RUN FOR OFFICE ARE RICH AND THEY ARE WHITE AT THE STATE LEVEL. NOBODY CAN LIVE OFF THAT SALARY. YEAH, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING INTO. WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE KEEPING PEOPLE OUT. ANYTHING DONE. CAN'T GET- THAT IS WHY IT'S NOT DIVERSIFIED AT THE STATE LEVEL BECAUSE THE SALARY IS BELOW $30,000. THEY CAN'T LIVE OFF OF THAT. THE LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN UP THERE, THEY MAY DO -- WHAT DO YOU CALL IT. OF COUNCIL AND GET PAID BASED ON THE TIME THEY PUT INTO A PARTICULAR CASE OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING INTO, IT IS RICH WHITE MEN WHO ARE RUNNING THE STATE AND MAKING THE DECISIONS THAT THEY ARE MAKING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THAT SALARY IS SO LOW. NO ONE CAN LIVE OFF OF $30,000 A YEAR AND GO BACK AND FORTH TO TALLAHASSEE AND PAY THEIR BILLS. THEY VOTED DOWN EVERY SINGLE TIME, JUST LIKE HOW WE'RE DOING THIS, THEY DON'T WANT TO INCREASE THE SALARIES BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT WILL CREATE DIVERSITY WITHIN GOVERNMENT IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. SO THAT'S MY DEBATE ON THAT. I JUST WANTED TO PUSH BACK ON THAT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT -- CHECK THIS OUT. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW -- I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE GOT PAID WHEN I TOOK THE JOB. IT WASN'T ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT IS AN UNFAIR STATEMENT BECAUSE WE CAN'T DIVERSIFY. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YOU INTERRUPTED ME -- I DON'T NEED AN APOLOGY. THAT'S WHAT POLITICS IS ALL ABOUT. I DON'T GET MAD AT NO ONE. LET ME SAY THIS, IN 1972, I THINK IT WAS OR '70, THE FIRST FEMALE GOT ELECTED TO CITY COUNCIL. KATHY. IN 1974, TWO OTHER FEMALES GOT ELECTED. THAT WAS JAN PLATT AND SANDY FREEDMAN. SO I HAD THE HONOR AND PRIVILEGE OF WORKING WITH THREE FEMALES WHO WERE FANTASTIC. THEN I HAD THE PLEASURE IN THE PAST TO WORK WITH OTHER FEMALES. UP TO THREE IN THE COUNCIL THAT I WORKED. I SAW NO PROBLEM ABOUT THAT. EVERYBODY RICH IN THE LEGISLATURE? I DON'T THINK SUSAN VALDEZ IS RICH. I DON'T THINK DRISCOLL IS RICH. I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE IN ST. PETE ARE RICH WORKING THERE. IT MIGHT BE A MINORITY, BUT IT'S NOT ALL OF THEM. ANYONE CAN GET ELECTED IF YOU START IN THE GROUND LEVEL AND KEEP KNOCKING ON DOORS. THE PROBLEM IS, THAT THE OLD WAY IS GONE. THE FISH FRIES ARE GONE BECAUSE THE FISH WOULDN'T SHOW UP IF YOU HAD A FISH FRY. NOT AGAINST RACES. DOING AN INCREASE SO FAST -- WHEN I KNOW PEOPLE ARE HAVING A REALLY, REALLY HARD TIME. I DON'T WANT THEM TO THINK THAT WE'RE JUST ABOVE THEM. I'M NOT. I'M NOT AGAINST RAISES. I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, SAY IT A THOUSAND TIMES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK AND CLENDENIN. >>LYNN HURTAK: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS CLENDENIN AND CARLSON. TO DO ANY MOVEMENT ON THIS TODAY, IS WHAT WOULD IT TAKE? SO IF WE'RE SAYING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO A PERCENTAGE OF THE MAYOR'S SALARY, WHAT IS SOMETHING MOVING FORWARD THAT WE COULD AGREE ON TODAY? I'M ASKING FROM THE TWO OF YOU. WHETHER IT BE THIS AND THIS SALARY THAT SHE'S PUT ON THE SHEET FOR US AND THEN MOVING FORWARD IT WOULD BE WHAT? OR WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. I JUST WANT TO KNOW. LET'S GET IT OUT THERE AND WE CAN VOTE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: BEFORE THEY ANSWER, MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I WANT TO BRING TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION AND PUBLIC'S ATTENTION WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS WITH REGARD TO THIS AT THE PRESENT TIME. SECTION 6.06, SALARIES: THE SALARY OR SALARIES OF THE OFFICERS OF THE CITY MAY BE INCREASED OR DECREASED AT ANY TIME BY THE CONCURRENCE OF THE MAYOR AND A MAJORITY OF NO FEWER THAN FOUR VOTES OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL WHICH CONCURRENCE SHALL BE DOCUMENTED BY RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL, RECOMMENDED OR APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE MAYOR. >>LYNN HURTAK: DOES THAT MEAN THAT IF THIS IS WHAT'S APPROVED IN THE BUDGET THAT'S COMING IN '25, THAT THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO UNLESS THE MAYOR APPROVES IT? >>MARTIN SHELBY: WELL, I DON'T WANT TO CALL UPON JUSTIN VASKE, BUT IF HE KNOWS -- BECAUSE I KNOW THIS WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY. THE RAISE OF CITY COUNCIL HISTORICALLY, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS THE MAYOR, IF I RECALL, HAS BEEN DONE BY RESOLUTION. >> JUSTIN VASKE, LEGAL DEPARTMENT, YES, THAT'S TRUE. I HAVE COPIES OF ONE OF THE RESOLUTIONS IF YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE IT. I CAN PASS IT OUT TO GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. >>LYNN HURTAK: SURE. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU, MR. SHELBY, FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD. DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT POSSIBILITIES BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MAYOR THINKS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK WE DO KNOW THE ADMINISTRATION AND SPECIFICALLY JOHN BENNETT WHO DID THE SALARY ANALYSIS LAST CYCLE, SO WE DO KNOW KIND OF WHERE THE ADMINISTRATION STANDS ON THIS, AND WE DID NOT CONCUR. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, ONE THING I WOULD ASK YOU TO CONSIDER AS YOU DELIBERATE THIS, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT A RAISE. MORE LIKE WHAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON SAID, IT REALLY IS AN ADJUSTMENT BECAUSE THE SALARY HAD BEEN STAGNANT AND SET AND REALLY HAD FALLEN SO FAR WOEFULLY BEHIND FOR SO MANY DECADES. THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY LIKE A MERIT RAISE, YOU TRADITIONALLY THINK OF A RAISE. IT REALLY IS A ONE-TIME ADJUSTMENT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. THAT'S WHERE MY HEAD IS AT ON THIS AS WELL. AND I THINK THAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON'S POINT ON THAT IS WELL TAKEN. COUNCILMAN HUR TANK, YOU ASKED -- COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK, YOU ASKED ABOUT IT. AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT YOU SET THESE THINGS BASED ON SOMETHING MORE CONCRETE AND NOT JUST WHIM. SO I WANT TO SEE SOMETHING MORE CONCRETE. THAT'S WHY I LIKE -- I WOULD GO WITH WHAT THE MAYOR DETERMINED, THE ADMINISTRATION DETERMINED BASED ON -- I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THAT'S -- >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS. I BELIEVE THAT'S WHERE SHE GOT IT FROM. YOU GOT THIS FROM THE '25 BUDGET FROM CHIEF BEN SUNSET. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: YOU DID NOT -- I GUESS I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: [INAUDIBLE] >>MARTIN SHELBY: WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO, IF I MAY? AND A COPY SO THE PUBLIC SEES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: EITHER SOMETHING LIKE -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: [INAUDIBLE] >>ALAN CLENDENIN: EITHER SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AGAIN, ANALYTICAL. NOT SOMETHING PULLING OUT OF OUR BEHIND. THE ONE YOU HAD IN THERE WAS '24 BASED ON AN ANALYSIS DONE BY THE CHIEF OF THE STAFF, IF THIS IS THE FIGURE YOU ARE USING THAT WAS BUDGETED IN THE PREVIOUS CYCLE. SO THAT I GET IT, BECAUSE IT'S DONE BASED ON AN ANALYSIS OF DATA THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY AN INDEPENDENT -- NOT US, BY SOMEBODY ELSE. I'M ALSO FINE WITH WHAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON PROPOSED BECAUSE AGAIN IT TIES IT SOMETHING, BECAUSE THE MAYOR'S SALARY IS SET BY ANALYTICS. HOPEFULLY NOBODY JUST PULLED IT OUT OF THEIR REAR END TO MAKE A DETERMINATION OF WHAT THE MAYOR IS WORTH AS FAR AS A SALARY. IF WE TIED IT TO A PERCENTAGE OF THAT AS FAR AS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, X PERCENTAGE, I'M OKAY WITH THAT, TOO. THAT KIND OF ALSO IN SOME WAYS SIMPLIFIES THINGS A GREAT DEAL. I'M GOOD WITH SOMETHING THAT IS CONCRETE. I JUST DON'T WANT ARBITRARY NUMBERS. I THINK THAT'S WRONG. >>LYNN HURTAK: I'M STILL IN MY QUESTIONING OF THESE TWO, IF YOU DON'T MIND. MY QUESTION IS, IF THIS IS WHAT CHIEF BENNETT DID, 73,000 IS WHAT CHIEF BENNETT SAID, BUT MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, THIS IS THE MOVEMENT BUT THEN YOU WANTED IT TO BE TIED TO SOMETHING GOING FORWARD.% WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING LIKE THE COST -- NOT A COST OF LIVING, BUT THE RAISE THAT SAY THE ATU GETS BECAUSE THEY GOT A 9% RAISE A WHILE BACK. WE DIDN'T. DO WE WANT TO TIE IT TO LIKE ATU? WHAT WOULD YOU WANT TO TIE IT TO IF YOU WANTED TO SEE AN INCREASE FROM THERE. THAT'S MY QUESTION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: HONESTLY, I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION ON IT AS LONG AS IT'S TIED TO SOMETHING. SOMETHING CONCRETE AND FIRM. MY ISSUE WITH THIS, AGAIN, KIND OF THE SAME WAY THAT VIERA STANDS ON THAT ONE PRINCIPLE. I STAND ON THAT PRINCIPLE IS THAT I'M ELECTED TO REPRESENT AND MAKE THESE HARD DECISIONS AND REALLY BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE DECISION THAT I MADE, I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SAYING, OKAY, IF THIS IS WHAT THE SALARY IS, THEN THIS IS WHAT THE SALARY IS. LET'S GET ON WITH IT, DO IT, DON'T DEFER IT, AND JUST SAY THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SET THE SALARY AT. I USE WORDS LAST TIME THAT WAS OFFENSIVE -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: LAST TIME YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T CARE ABOUT THE SALARY. THAT KIND OF SURPRISED ME. DOESN'T MATTER TO ME. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: LET ME ANSWER THAT QUESTION. WHAT I MEANT BY THAT, LIKE YOU JUST DESCRIBED, I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF NOT HAVING TO WORK FOR A SALARY AND STILL I UNDERSTAND WHERE MY NEXT MEAL IS COMING FROM. I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE BIGGER PICTURE, ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT. IT'S NOT ABOUT MYSELF. I'M MORE WORRIED ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE AND DON'T HAVE THAT ABILITY. NOT JUST FOLKS SITTING TO MY RIGHT AND LEFT BUT PEOPLE COMING AFTER US. THAT WAS MY CONCERN. WHEN I SAID THAT IN MORE OF A TACKY WAY, THAT IS WHAT I WAS INTENDING. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I CAN, I'VE BEEN INFORMED BY CTTV THAT IF YOU CAN GO TO THE OVERHEAD SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN SEE WHAT IT IS YOU'RE DISCUSSING BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT WHILE YOU'RE DISCUSSING IT. I'M ASKING THEM TO PUT THAT UP SO AT LEAST THE PUBLIC CAN MAKE REFERENCE TO WHAT IT IS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY HAVE A MINUTE TO TELL YOU, BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PROCESS, IF YOU LOOK AT, WE HANDED OUT TWO RESOLUTIONS. ONE FROM 1998 AND ONE FROM 2005. THAT IS THE ONE I'M FAMILIAR WITH, ALTHOUGH WHEN I LOOK BACK HOW LONG AGO IT WAS, IT WAS A DISCUSSION THEY HAD. IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT SECTION 1, IN 2005, THE ANNUAL SALARY WAS INCREASED FROM WHATEVER THE CURRENT AMOUNT WAS TO -- EFFECTIVE APRIL 1st, 2007. LOOK AT SECTION 3, A PROVISION THERE. WHEN YOU SAY IT'S BEEN FIXED SINCE THEN, THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY COMPLETELY ACCURATE BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED WAS, IT WAS INCREASED TO 40,250. AS YOU CAN SEE, PRESENTLY IT'S NOT. BECAUSE THAT COUNCIL IN 2005 PUT IN A PROVISION THAT AFFORDED A 3% SALARY INCREASE PROVIDED TO THE SAME 3% PROVIDED TO MANAGERIAL, CITY EMPLOYEES, PROVIDED HOWEVER THAT THE CITY INCREASE FOR CITY COUNCIL NOT EXCEED 3% ANNUALLY. SO JUST SO YOU TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS, THAT WAS THE PROCESS CREATED BY PREVIOUS CITY COUNCILS AND WHATEVER PROCESS YOU DECIDE COULD BE INCORPORATED. BUT YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. AND IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE MAYOR ULTIMATELY. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. I WANT TO FINISH MY LINE OF QUESTIONING AND JUST ASK COUNCILMAN CARLSON WHAT HIS CONNECTION WOULD BE IF WE WERE TO FOLLOW CHIEF OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHAT WOULD YOU WANT THE FUTURE TIE-IN TO GO WITH? >>BILL CARLSON: MY TWO ISSUES, ONE, IT'S TOO LOW AND, TWO, THAT I WANT A FORMULA SO NO CITY COUNCIL HAS TO LOOK AT THIS AGAIN. THIS IS A FORMULA THEY HAD BEFORE, BUT WHAT IT DID BY CAPPING IT AT 3%, IT DIDN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT INFLATION. WE'VE EXPERIENCED 9% INFLATION FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, AND WE GAVE CITY STAFF RAISES BASED ON THAT INFLATION, AND MANY PEOPLE IN THE CITY ARE STILL WAY BEHIND BASED ON INFLATION. BUT CITY COUNCIL DID NOT CATCH UP WITH THAT. I WANT TO MENTION SOMETHING, A WEEK OR TWO AGO, YOU ALL, I VOTED AGAINST IT, PROPOSED A CHARTER AMENDMNT THAT WOULD TAKE AWAY THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR SENIOR STAFF, BUT NOT FOR CITY COUNCIL. SENIOR STAFF NOW ARE EARNING 200,000 PLUS OR 180,000 OR SO. AND WHAT YOU WERE SAYING THERE IS THAT MAKING $200,000 A YEAR, THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA ANYMORE, BUT AT $53,000 A YEAR, WE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF TAMPA. I THINK PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THIS POSITION SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ANOTHER JOB. THEY SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE INDEPENDENTLY WEALTHY. AND WE SHOULD PROMOTE DIVERSITY OF ALL KINDS. THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE CHIEF OF STAFF, WHEN HE DID HIS ANALYSIS, HE WAS LOOKING AT SOME OTHER CITY COUNCILS. THE OTHER CITY COUNCILS ARE ARTIFICIALLY LOW AS WELL. IF YOU'RE NOT -- IF YOU'RE LIVING AT OR BELOW THE POVERTY LINE, THAT'S NOT A GOOD SITUATION FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT. I THINK OVERALL WE HAVE TO PROMOTE GOOD GOVERNMENT AND YOU HAVE TO PAY A LIVING WAGE. IF YOU ALL DON'T WANT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO USE THE MAYOR AS A MAYOR'S SALARY AS A GUIDE, ANOTHER CHOICE. RIGHT NOW IF WE PASS THIS, WE WILL BE AT 80% AMI AND WILL QUALIFY FOR SUBSIDIES FOR HOUSING BASED ON THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT. SO HOW ABOUT IF WE BENCHMARK IT AT 100% AMI OR 110% AMI. A STANDARD MEASURE AND IT IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND. I DON'T KNOW -- IT -- AMI IS -- IS SOMETHING THAT IS -- THAT IS WIDELY DISCUSSED. IT JUST -- IT -- BUT INSTEAD OF TRACKING IT TO THE MAYOR'S SALARY, IT SHOWS HOW ARTIFICIALLY LOW THE SALARIES ARE -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MR. SHELBY, WE HAVE A DROP DEAD 1:00 FOR WORKSHOPS. A MOTION TO CONTINUE. >>LYNN HURTAK: A MOTION TO CONTINUE FOR 20 MINUTES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION TO CONTINUE FOR 20 MORE MINUTES. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: FOR THE RECORD THAT WILL MAKE IT 1:20. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES, 1:20. OKAY, SO MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT -- THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH TIEING IT TO AMI, BECAUSE AMI CAN GO UP OR DOWN. YOU COULD SAY -- YOU KNOW -- AND SO -- SO YOU WOULD BE ADDING A COUPLE MORE CAVEATS THERE, BUT THAT IS DOABLE. BUT YOU CAN ALSO -- THAT -- AND THAT WILL BE A WAY TO SAY IT. AND TIE IT TO AMI. AND YOU CAN TIE IT TO AMI FOR THIS WHICH IS ABOUT 73. 73.5 OR 75.4. WHATEVER THE NUMBERS GO -- YEAH, BUT THAT 100%. 100% AMI. IF YOU WANTED TO, YOU CAN TARGET IT TO 120% AMI. >>BILL CARLSON: SORRY I CALCULATED THAT WRONG. >>LYNN HURTAK: 120 AMI IF SOMEONE HERE WANTS TO DO THAT MATH. 120% AMI. >> OR IF SOMEBODY HAS A BETTER FORMULA. IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE FORMULA I PROPOSE RECONVENE WITH A BETTER FORMULA. >>LYNN HURTAK: I HATE TO RECONVENE BECAUSE WE ARE HAVING A REALLY GOOD CONVERSATION AND APPRECIATE COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. BUT WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK ABOUT -- FOR THE FOLKS WILLING. BECAUSE A COUPLE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT FOLLOWING DO THIS, AND I ■GT THAT. BUT FOR COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN OR MAYBE COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO IF HE IS WILLING TO CONSIDER AGAIN. WOULD 120% AMI AND KEEP IT TIED TO THAT GOING FORWARD WORK? COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON? >>GWEN HENDERSON: WELL, FOR -- FOR ME, WHAT IS PRESENTED ON THE PAPER RIGHT NOW IS AT LEAST A STARTING POINT. THAT DOES GIVE THAT ONE-TIME SIGNIFICANT -- YOU KNOW IT DOES GIVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF AN INCREASE, YOU KNOW, TO THIS CURRENT COUNCIL IF WE WERE TO GO AND GET FOUR VOTES FOR THAT. THAT AND IN ITSELF IS A STARTING POINT. BASED ON WHAT WE DO RIGHT NOW WITH THE HR AS FAR AS THE ANNUAL RAISE. THEY GET THE COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT, RIGHT -- 3%. SO AT LEAST THAT IS SOMETHING. WHERE WE AT LEAST GIVE THE ONE-TIME INCREASE RIGHT NOW TO PUT US IN LINE WITH -- WITH THE -- WHAT IS RECOMMENDED AT 73,000. AND IF WE NEED TO WORKSHOP IT AFTER ANOTHER FISCAL YEAR OR SPEND MORE TIME ON IT AND GET MORE EXPERTISE IN, TO HELP US WITH IT, BUT THIS IS AT LEAST THE STARTING POINT TO GIVE US -- THE STARTING SALARY OF $73,000 OR TO GIVE COUNCIL -- $7 ,000 WITH % COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT. AND THEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO POSSIBLY BRING IN, YOU KNOW, SOME PROFESSIONALS THAT CAN HELP US MAKE A BETTER DECISION ON HOW WE LOOK AT IT GOING FORWARD. >>LYNN HURTAK: HOW ABOUT THIS. IF -- IF YOU MAKE A MOTION FOR THAT, AND THEN INSTEAD OF KEEPING A 3%, TIE IT TO THE RAISES OF ATU. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I CAN DO THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: PERCENTAGE. FROM THERE -- BECAUSE WE SOLVED IT FROM RIGHT THIS MOMENT AND MAKE A SECOND MOTION TO -- TO ASK ABOUT THE ACTUAL OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT AMI AND -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: AT LEAST FOR THIS TERM. FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE ACTUAL TERM. >>LYNN HURTAK: AT LEAST JUST FOR THIS YEAR. >>GWEN HENDERSON: ITS TERM IS EASIER. >>LYNN HURTAK: YOU ARE RIGHT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THAT'S TWO YEARS AND THEN MAKE A DECISION -- >>LYNN HURTAK: WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER THAT, COUNCILMAN CARLSON, AND COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I HAVE COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN VIERA WAITING TO SPEAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I WILL WAIT. >>LUIS VIERA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING BECAUSE -- NUMBER ONE, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE CIVIL DISCUSSION. WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE SOME CORE DISAGREEMENTS ON SOME ISSUES AND EVERYBODY IS WONDERFUL AND EVERYBODY APPRECIATES THAT. I DO WANT TO SAY THOUGH, I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY DISCUSSION OR ANY DISAGREEMENT, I SHOULD SAY, OF THE IDEA THAT WE SHOULD RAISE COUNCIL SALARY AS A BODY TO GET MORE DIVERSITY ON HERE. THAT -- THAT IS -- THAT IS, IN FACT -- WHEN I FIRST HEARD OF THE PAY RAISE, MY FIRST REACTION WAS NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. LOOKED AT THIS CLOSER AND I SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT AGAIN. I HAVE MY PRINCIPLES HOW IT IS DONE TO GET A MORE DIVERSE BODY HERE. WE DO GET MORE PEOPLE FROM DIFFERENT AREAS, ETC., WHO ARE ABLE TO RUN DIFFERENT PROFESSIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A REASON WHY -- NOT AS MUCH COUNCIL, BUT IN THE LEGISLATURE, YOU HAVE A TON OF LAWYERS IN THE LEGISLATURE BECAUSE OF LAW FIRMS TEND TO BE THE WAY IT IS VERY FLEXIBLE -- I AM LUCKY TO HAVE THAT IN MY OWN LIFE AS AN ATTORNEY AND EVERYTHING. I WILL SAY, THOUGH, RUNNING FOR OFFICE FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IS A SACRIFICE. BUT IT IS A SACRIFICE, THOUGH, THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN'T MAKE WHICH IS WHY WE SHOULD RAISE THE SALARY. AGAIN I HAVE MY PRINCIPLE WHEN IT WILL TAKE EFFECT, BUT IN OTHER WORDS, THAT ISSUE IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE IDEA THAT THIS WILL BRING ALONG MORE PLURALISTIC, DIVERSE CITY COUNCIL. THAT ISSUE IS NOT TO SPEAK OF AND BENEFIT NOT IN DISPUTE. I DON'T THINK A SUPERMAJORITY OF CITY COUNCIL WILL DISAGREE WITH THAT. BECAUSE I THINK MOST OF US ARE IN SUPPORT OF A RAISE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I AM GOING TO START TALKING BECAUSE WE HAVE 12 MINUTES I THINK IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I WANT TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE OVERHEAD. AND I KNOW THIS -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: HE HAS BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. MIRANDA VIERA FROM 1974 -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SORRY -- I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THIS -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE TO HEAR YOU. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: FROM 1974 TO 2022. AND THERE ARE FOUR YEARS THERE WHERE THERE WAS NO SALARY INCREASE WHEN MAYOR IORIO HAD TO BITE THE BULLET AND SHE DID A FANTASTIC JOB. HOWEVER, WE LOST OVER 700 EMPLOYEES BECAUSE NO MONEY LEFT TO DO ANYTHING ELSE. THAT IS WHEN -- WE HAD THE RECESSION AND THINGS WERE -- INTEREST RATES WERE 16%, 17% OR WHATEVER. THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT I AM LOOKING AT. EVERY TIME YOU SEE AN INCREASE, THERE WAS AN INCREASE ON EVERY COUNCIL; HOWEVER, WE DIDN'T TAKE IT LAST YEAR OR THE YEAR BEFORE, DON'T BLAME ANYBODY BUT OURSELVES. I AM NOT AGAINST A RAISE. I JUST DON'T -- YOU TALK OF DIVERSITY HELPING SOMEONE RUNNING FOR OFFICE WHO DOESN'T HAVE IT, I AM THE ONE THAT FILED THE LAWSUIT IN 1972 TO LET INDIVIDUALS WHO DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY TO GET ON THE BALLOT WITHOUT WHAT -- WHITE PAYING FOR ANY FEES AT ALL. DON'T TELL ME ABOUT DIVERSITY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, CAN YOU E-MAIL THAT TO US? I WOULD LOVE A COPY. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT RESE RESEARCH. >>BILL CARLSON: HOLD ON A SECOND. I WANTED TO SAY -- YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS -- IS TO INTERPRET THE CHARTER TO FIGURE OUT WHICH OF THE MAYOR'S DIRECT REPORTS HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. BUT LET'S SAY WE FULLY DEFINE THAT. AND ANOTHER WAY OF MEASURING WOULD BE TO TAKE THE AVERAGE -- SORRY, A PERCENTAGE OF THE AVERAGE OF THE MAYOR'S DIRECT REPORTS. THE PEOPLE WE HAVE TO APPROVE. RIGHT NOW MOST OF THEM ARE MAKING $180,000, $200,000 A YEAR. LET'S SAY IF WE DID AN AVERAGE OF THAT, AND THEN WE TOOK 50% OF IT. I -- I DON'T SEE HOW ANYBODY COULD JUSTIFY THAT AS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER IS NOT WORTH GETTING PAID 50% OF THE MAYOR'S DIRECT REPORTS. AND PROBABLY THEY ARE AWORTH A LOT MORE. BUT ANOTHER WAY OF DOING IT CREATING A BASKET. SO WHAT YOU WOULD DO IS SAY THAT THE -- THAT THE FLOOR WOULD BE -- THE -- THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOT GET PAID LESS THAN 50% OF THE AVERAGE OF THE MAYOR'S DIRECT REPORTS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU. BEFORE WE MAKE ANY MOTION, LET'S GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. YES, MA'AM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> HI, CARROLL ANN BENNETT, LIFE-LONG TAMPA RESIDENT. Y'ALL COULDN'T PAY ME ENOUGH TO DO YOUR JOB. WELL, ACTUALLY, IF YOU PAID OFF MY SON'S STUDENT LOANS, I WILL DO YOUR JOB, BUT THE CITY DOESN'T THAT KIND OF MONEY. SO I WOULD RATHER HAVE HOT POKERS STUCK IN MY EYES THAN TO DO YOUR JOB. I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, THAT, YOU KNOW, KNEW WHAT YOU WERE DOING, BUT NOBODY KNEW WHAT THIS JOB WAS UNTIL YOU DO IT. NO JOB -- NO JOB YOU KNOW WHAT THAT JOB IS UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY DO IT. YOU MIGHT THINK YOU KNOW, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW. THIS IS A FULL-TIME JOB. IT IS AN IMPORTANT JOB. THE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY HAVE MORE ACCESS TO YOU THAN ANYONE ELSE. YOU ALL MAKE YOURSELVES AVAILABLE IN PERSON, ON THE PHONE, VIA E-MAIL. YOU LISTEN TO US. YOU WON'T ALWAYS AGREE WITH US. YOU WON'T ALWAYS DO WHAT WE WANT, BUT YOU LISTEN TO TO US. YOU ARE A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THIS CITY. YOUR JOB IS A FULL-TIME JOB. YOU SHOULD BE DOING IT FULL-TIME. I DON'T WANT YOU DISTRACTED DOING YOUR SECOND OR THIRD JOB BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO MAKE ENDS MEET. I CAN -- OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I CAN NAME SIX PEOPLE, GOOD, SMART, WELL-MEANING, YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN DOING THIS JOB. AND YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ALL SAID? I CAN'T AFFORD IT. I CANNOT AFFORD TO DO IT. PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO COULD DO YOUR JOB AND DO IT WELL, A INCLUDING Y'ALL, ■BUT THEY CAN' AFFORD TO DO IT. SO I -- I UNDERSTAND, COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. I UNDERSTAND DOING IT TO THE NEXT ELECTION. AND THAT IS -- THAT IS A POSITION OF INTEGRITY. A POSITION EVERYBODY CAN UNDERSTAND. A POSITION I CAN EVEN AGREE WITH; HOWEVER, THIS ONE-TIME ADJUSTMENT, BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN ARTIFICIALLY LOW MAKES SENSE ALSO. I WANT TO SAY DURING THE ELECTION SO MUCH BACK AND FORTH THEY GAVE THEMSELVES A 42% RAISE. I STALKED TO PEOPLE ABOUT IT ENDLESSLY ON SOCIAL MEDIA, E-MAIL, PHONE, MY NIGHTLY WALKS. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WHO -- HOW CAN THEY -- WHEN I EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT IT IS A FULL-TIME JOB AND YOU WANT GOOD PEOPLE AND GOOD PEOPLE CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE OF THE SALARY IS PROHIBITIVE, THEY ALL GOT IT. THEY ALL GOT IT. EVERY ONE OF THEM. THEY JUST NEEDED TO UNDERSTAND IT. SO NOW MIGHT BE THE TIME. THE ELECTION IS A LITTLE BIT AWAY. I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION. AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH IT, BUT IT IS JUST ARTIFICIALLY LOW FOR TOO LONG. DO SOMETHING NOW. TIE IT TO SOMETHING. GET IT DONE. WE NEED GOOD PEOPLE IN YOUR JOBS. WE NEED FOR YOU GUYS TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO CONTINUE IN YOUR JOBS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, MA'AM. >>LUIS VIERA: NOTION 1:30. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION TO 1:30 FROM COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> HI, I AM VALLEY BULLITT. I THINK YOU ALL DESERVE A RAISE. NOBODY SHOULD BE LIVING AND DOING THE JOB THAT YOU ALL ARE YOU DOING AND GETTING PAID BELOW POVERTY LEVEL. IF YOU DON'T MAKE -- IF THEY ARE GOING TO PAY YOU HOURLY, THEY NEED TO PAY YOU AT LEAST $40 AN HOUR. IF THEY GIVE YOU SALARY, NEED TO GIVE YOU ABOUT $75,000 BE A YEAR. AND I AGREE -- Y'ALL MAKE THE SAME -- Y'ALL DON'T HAVE THE SAME RESPONSIBILITIES THAT THE MAY I DON'T REMEMBER HAVE, BUT Y'ALL DO HAVE SOME HEAVY RESPONSIBILITIES. AND I THINK Y'ALL SHOULD BE MAKING AT LEAST $80 THOUSAND IN IF NOT $100,000 A YEAR. AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SO MUCH TO SAY ABOUT Y'ALL, HOW MUCH Y'ALL MAKE AND ABOUT GETTING A RAISE LIKE THIS. THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE MAKING $200,000 A YEAR. AND FOR ME, I KNOW HOW MUCH I AM GOING TO MAKE WHEN I GO ON THE JOB, BUT I ALSO GO ON THAT JOB TO DO MY BEST TO GET A PROMOTION. I WANT TO BE THE BOSS LADY. SOME THAT YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO GET. YEAH, I KNEW WHAT I WAS GOING TO GET. BUT I KNOW WHAT I WANT TO. AND I BELIEVE THE IF YOU PAY PEOPLE THE RIGHT WAYS, THEY ARE DEDICATE AND MORE COMMITTED TO THEIR JOB. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, SIR. >> MENTESNOT. I WANT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TO USE CITY COUNCILMAN KEVIN WHITE AS AN EXAMPLE. WE HAVE TO. WE HAVE TO SEE WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO DO IN THIS POSITION, SERVING IN THIS CAPACITY, NOT ONLY HERE AND NOT ONLY NOW. IT IS NOT A CONTEMPORARY ISSUE. IT IS A HISTORICAL ISSUE WHERE PEOPLE WORKING IN GOVERNMENT AS ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE TO DO ALTERNATIVE THINGS THAT GOVERNMENT THEMSELVES, LAW ENFORCEMENT SAY IS ILLEGAL. AND WE SEE WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAID YESTERDAY. YEAH, WHAT KEVIN WHITE WENT TO PRISON FOR, THE SUPREME COURT SAID, HEY, WELL, THAT IS KIND OF COOL. RIGHT? I THINK IT IS AN INSULT TO ANY CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE THAT WHEREAS THE POLICE CHIEF IS MAKING $241,000 A YEAR. AND OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ISN'T MANAGING THAT. I THINK THAT EACH AND EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL HERE SHOULD BE MAKING EQUIVALENT TO WHAT THE POLICE CHIEF IS MAKING. VERY EQUIVALENT. NOT $42,000 A YEAR, NOT $52,000 A YEAR. NOT $75,000 A YEAR. NOT AMI. NONE OF THOSE THINGS. AND THE COUNCILWOMAN MADE A VERY INTERESTING POINT, ALTHOUGH IT WAS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT AND BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION. THE COUNCILWOMAN SAID THAT HOME RUN HEY, LOOK, LIKE, SHE DIDN'T SAY IT WAS RACIST WHAT WAS GOING ON. SHE SAID IT STOPS POTENTIAL DIVERSITY BECAUSE CERTAIN PEOPLE AREN'T ATTRACTED TO THE JOB. WHO IS GOING TO BE ATTRACTED TO A JOB THAT PAYS $4 ,000 OR $52,000 A YEAR? AND DOING THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT CITY COUNCIL HELP TIFFS HAVE TO DO. I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES SHOULD MAKE EQUIVALENT TO WHAT THE POLICE CHIEF MAKE. OR BETTER. IT IS A GREAT DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY. IT'S -- ONE PERSON SAID A LOT OF ACCESSIBILITY. YOU DO HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES. MANY INSTANCES YOU CAN CALL THEIR OFFICE AND YOU GET A RESPONSE, UNLIKE OTHER OFFICES WHERE YOU DON'T GET A RESPONSE. UNLIKE PEOPLE IN CODE ENFORCEMENT MAKING $100,000, $150,000 A YEAR AND CALL DOWN THERE AND NEVER GET SOMETHING SOLVED. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, SAME THING. DIFFERENT PLACES, SAME THING. THEY ARE MAKING BIG SALARIES. EVEN PEOPLE IN WASTE MANAGEMENT. PEOPLE IN THE SANITATION -- IN THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT THAT IS MAKING TWICE AS MUCH AS CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES. I THINK THIS SHOULDN'T BE ANY SHAME IN YOUR GAME IN GIVING YOURSELF A RAISE. PERIOD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WHAT ARE YOUR NAMES TO THE TWO GENTLEMEN WITH YOU. >> THIS IS EMMANUEL. I AM JAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU FOR BEING MERE TODAY. YES, MA'AM. BE. >> I FORGOT MY PAPERWORK. STEPHANIE POYNOR. I DON'T HAVE ALL OF MY FANCY NUMBERS. BUT I WANT TO REMIND YOU OF THIS LITTLE JOKER HERE THE CPI AND HOW MUCH YOU GUYS ARE BELOW CPI FROM THAT 2005 THING. I THINK LAST TIME WE GOT PRETTY CLOSE. AND I APPRECIATE THE LADIES BUSTING A HUMP ON THIS TODAY, BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE REALLY CARRYING THE TORCH FOR THIS AND I APPRECIATE IT. 73,000 IS 38% OF THE MAYOR'S SALARY. YOU GOT THIS CLOSE LAST TIME. I WAS STUCK BACK MERE AND I COULDN'T SAY ANYTHING. IT WAS MAKING ME EXPLODE, BECAUSE IF YOU GUYS COULD AGREE ON 38% OR 40% OF THE MAYOR'S SALARY, $50,000 IS 50% IS A LITTLE BIT MUCH. BUT 38% IS BACK WHEN YOU ARE MAKING A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY AND YOU ARE RIGHT AT THE -- YOU ARE RIGHT BELOW -- RIGHT AT THE AMI WHICH I HAVE A PROBLEM TIEING IT TOO. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO REMEMBER, YOU GAVE, YOU GAVE TPD, YOU GAVE FIRE, YOU GAVE THE ATU A 18% INCREASE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. AND IT IS NOT -- IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU. IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU. IT IS ABOUT THOSE BIG BLACK CHAIRS YOU SIT IN. IT IS ABOUT WHOSE NAME TAG IS UP THERE. IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU. AND YOU KNOW THIS MAKES ME INSANE AND YOU KNOW I STIRRED THE POT ON THIS 100 TIMES. HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE EVER WRITTEN YOU AND SAID THIS IS A BAD IDEA? CHARLIE, I KNOW YOU HATE THIS IDEA. BUT CHARLIE, YOU OWNED YOUR HOUSE BEFORE I WAS BORN. YOU BOUGHT THIS HOUSE BEFORE I WAS BORN. AND MAKE ANY CONSIDERATION THAT NOT EVERYBODY CAN AFFORD TO BE HERE -- I WAS LOOKING AT MORTGAGE DOCUMENTS THE OTHER DAY. PEOPLE THAT OWN A HOUSE I AM GETTING READY TO SELL, THEY BOUGHT THEIR HOUSE IN 1980. THEIR HOUSE PAYMENT WAS $259 A MONTH. YEAH. YES. SALARY HAVE INCREASED A LITTLE BIT. BUT WE HAVE TO TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE -- AND LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING RIGHT NOW, SOMEBODY IMPLIED THAT I HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS. THAT THERE WAS SOME KIND OF PERSONAL ISSUE WITH THIS FOR ME? I CAN GUARANTEE YOU RIGHT NOW -- THIS WILL MAKE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAPPY. I WILL NEVER RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL IF YOU GIVE YOURSELF THIS DAMN RAISE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT IS WHY I WILL VOTE. >> I WANT TO YOU BE BRAVE. BECAUSE THIS REQUIRES YOU TO BE BRAVE AND DO THE RIGHT THING. AND BEING BRAVE SOMETIMES IS A LITTLE BIT SCARY, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. I WATCHED THIS CONVERSATION FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES NOW. BE BRAVE. DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THOSE SEATS YOU SIT IN. I WANT TO SEE MY FABULOUS NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS RUNNING FOR THESE CITY COUNCIL SEATS EVENTUALLY. WE SEE THEM IN HERE WEEK AFTER WEEK. THOSE PEOPLE WHO COME. BOBBY CREIGHTON. MIMI MARTINEZ, IAN RIVERA. THOSE ARE THE LEADERS OF THE FUTURE OF THE CITY AND WE HAVE TO DO IT FOR THEM, NOT FOR YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. YOU ARE THE ORIGINATOR OF THE MOTION AND START YOU WITH FIRST AND THEN COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. THANK YOU, PUBLIC. LIKE, REGULAR PUBLIC. THIS VERY NICE PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM PEOPLE WE DO AGREE AND DISAGREE WITH. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU SPEAKING YOUR MIND TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE TAKE THE SALARY THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TODAY. AND ONLY FOR THE REST OF OUR -- FOR THIS ELECTED TERM COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS THAT ARE MADE JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE FOR NOW. AND THEN DIVE INTO A BETTER SITUATION THAT WE CAN VOTE UPON FOR THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE. YOU KNOW -- GO AHEAD. >>LYNN HURTAK: CAN I SECOND WITH AN AMENDMENT? >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: TO TIE IT -- TO BE MORE SPECIFIC. TO TIE IT TO THE RAISES OF ATU. >>GWEN HENDERSON: ATU. >>LYNN HURTAK: PERCENTAGE OF ATU. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES, I DID WRITE THIS DOWN. THIS -- REMANDS DERR OF THE ELECTION CYCLE TIED TO THE ATU UNION NEGOTIATED INCREASE. >>LYNN HURTAK: THEN FROM THERE ON -- THEN DO A SECOND MOTION TO BRING THIS BACK TO DISCUSS FUTURE -- WOULD YOU BE FOLLOWING DO THAT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: FOR THE NEXT ELECTION? P>>LYNN HURTAK: NEXT E CYCLE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SEPARATE MOTION? >>LYNN HURTAK: AND -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: CAN I GET A SECOND. >>LYNN HURTAK: I SECOND IT WITH THAT CONDITION. MR. SHELBY, THIS WILL GO FOR ITS NEXT CALENDAR YEAR. NOT STARTING RIGHT NOW, BUT FISCAL YEAR '25. >>MARTIN SHELBY: FISCAL YEAR '25. >>LYNN HURTAK: OCTOBER 1. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WHAT YOU WILL NEED IN YOUR RESOLUTION JUST AS YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, NOT ONLY THE REQUEST BUT THE PROCESS. CAN YOU WRAP THE TWO TOGETHER? >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY PROCESS? >>MARTIN SHELBY: IN OTHER WORDS -- LET ME SEE IF I CAN UNDEUNDER UNDERSTAND THE MOTION IF I CAN AS AMEND. WHAT AMOUNT ARE YOU REQUESTING. >>GWEN HENDERSON: $37,000. >>MARTIN SHELBY: NUMBER ONE, THE ONE THAT SAID -- >>LYNN HURTAK: $75,190. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WHICHEVER NEXT ONE FOR '25. >>MARTIN SHELBY: LOOKING AT NUMBER 4 ON THE SHEET PUT UP ON THE SCREEN. >>GWEN HENDERSON: 75 NOW, 190. >>MARTIN SHELBY: EFFECTIVE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OCTOBER 1. >>MARTIN SHELBY: FISCAL YEAR OF FY 2025. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT WAS PART OF THE MOTION. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THE AMENDMENT OF THE ATU NEGOTIATED INCREASE. >>LYNN HURTAK: GOING FORWARD. >>GWEN HENDERSON: GOING FORWARD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WHATEVER THE ATU GETS, WE WOULD MATCH IT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AN AN ANNUAL BASIS? >>LYNN HURTAK: CORRECT. THAT IS JUST FOR THIS COUNCIL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: FUTURE COUNCIL IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION. >>MARTIN SHELBY: ASKING FOR A SUNSET PROVISION NEWT THIS. >>GWEN HENDERSON: NOT ABOUT SUNSET BUT NOR THIS TERM. >>MARTIN SHELBY: YOU WANT A RESOLUTION JUST FOR THE FY 2025. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THE COUNCIL'S TERM. >>LYNN HURTAK: THIS GOES UNTIL MAY 1, 2027. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. >> SHORERY, THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR FOR 2027 -- IS THAT DOABLE? WE ARE NOT DONE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CAN I INTERJECT ON THAT. YOU WANT TO EXPRESS THAT AS AN INTENT BUT AS MARTIN SHELBY SAID, YOU DON'T WANT TO THAT TO SUNSET. MAKE SURE THAT IS THE INTENT BUT CONTINUE DISCUSSION FOR A MORE PERMANENT SOLUTION. RIGHT NOW THE RESOLUTION -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: FOR THE FUTURE, CORRECT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I DON'T THINK YOU WANT TO BUILD IN A SUNSET. >>LYNN HURTAK: CORRECT. SO HOW ABOUT THIS. WE JUST -- CAN WE JUST MAKE THAT MOTION AND THEN JUST, PERIOD. 75,190 WITH AN INCREASE TIED TO ATU. THAT WAY IF SOMETHING ELSE DOESN'T PASS, WE AT LEAST HAVE SOMETHING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: FAIR ENOUGH. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THAT WAS THE SECOND. >>LYNN HURTAK: I WILL SECOND THAT TO START FISCAL YEAR '25. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES, MR. SHILL BEE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WHAT DO WE HAVE HERE? THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO CLEAR THIS UP. THERE IS A DISCUSSION HERE THAT THE CLERK IS WANTING TO CONFIRM THAT WE ARE -- YOU ARE TAKING OFFICIAL ACTION ON A WORKSHOP SESSION. YOU ARE GIVING DIRECTION TO STAFF TO COME BACK WITH MYSELF OR WORKING WITH THE CITY BUDGET ANALYST, MR. VASKE IN THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO COME WITH A RESOLUTION. I WILL ASK FOR SUFFICIENT TIME. COUNCIL IS NOW GOING ON A TWO-WEEK RECESS. NOT TO TAKE FINAL ACTION ON A SUBJECT -- >>LYNN HURTAK: WE COULDN'T ANYWAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: BRING IT BACK TO THEREST LOUIS, YEAH. >>LYNN HURTAK: BRICK IT BACK. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WITH SUFFICIENT TIME. THE EFFECTIVE -- THE EFFECTIVE DATE. >>LYNN HURTAK: SEPTEMBER 5. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SEPTEMBER 5. IS IT NOT FULL YET? >>LYNN HURTAK: IT IS CLOSE TO FULL. WE HAVE SIX. WE HAVE ONE MORE -- >>BILL CARLSON: HOPEFULLY NOT A DISCUSSION. >>MARTIN SHELBY: ALSO A REMINDER THAT THE BUDGET WILL BE PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR -- THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET THAT WILL NOT TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT AND OBJECT I COULDN'T SAYLY WE WILL HAVE TO AMENDS. >>GWEN HENDERSON: IT WILL TAKE IT INTO ACCOUNT. >>LYNN HURTAK: MISS HENDERSON SAID GOT GOT IT FROM THE CHIEF OF STAFF. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES, THIS IS WHERE WE GOT IT FROM. WE KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I DON'T. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SHE IS GOOD. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I COMMUNICATED. I DID MY HOMEWORK. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION ON THE FLOOR WITH A SECOND AND AN AMENDMENT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ROLL CALL. >>CLERK: MOTION PASS WHERE IS MIRANDA AND VIERA VOTING NO. >>BILL CARLSON: AND ME. >>CLERK: MOTION PASSES WITH VIERA, MIRANDA, AND CARSON VOTING NO. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WE HAVE SOMETHING. >>LYNN HURTAK: NOW A SECOND MOTION TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHERE WE WANT TO TAKE THIS FOR FUTURE COUNCIL S COUNCILS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: DO IN '25. AFTER JANUARY. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS A GOOD IDEA. WE HAVE A WORKSHOP SESSION ON THE 30th. HOW ABOUT A WORKSHOP SESSION BE IN -- IN FEBRUARY. MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT THAT IS BECAUSE -- OH, THAT IS THE BONDING CAPACITY PRESENTATION. THAT ACTUALLY WORKS. BECAUSE THEN WE COULD JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THAT WORKSHOP ALL SURROUNDING MONEY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WHICH ONE -- >>LYNN HURTAK: FEBRUARY 27. AN ANNUAL PRESENTATION ON BONDING SO WE CAN HAVE IT TIED TO THAT. AND THAT WILL -- THAT WILL KEEP THAT WORKSHOP FOR BUDGET ITEMS ONLY. OR FINANCIAL ITEMS. OPI OPINION. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SECOND. >>BILL CARLSON: CAN YOU RESTATE THE MOTION. >>LYNN HURTAK: RESTATING THE MOTION THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT -- AND I AM -- I'M GOING TO THIS VERY CLEAR. I WANT -- WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A MOTION TO DISCUSS FUTURE COUNCIL'S SALARY AND WHAT WE SHOULD TIE IT TOO WITH COUNCILMEMBERS BRINGING THEIR IDEAS AND SENDING THEM TO THE -- TO THE -- ON BASE IN TIME FOR IT TO MAKE IT TO -- TO THE WHATEVER -- ON BASE SESSION. SO MAKING SURE -- THE MOTION IS TO BRING FORWARD YOUR IDEAS WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE GOING FORWARD AND MAKING SURE OFF THIS THAT PREPARED IN ENOUGH TIME SO THAT THE PUBLIC IS ABLE TO SEE IT AS WELL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DISCUSSION WITH COUNCILMAN VIERA. >>LUIS VIERA: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK, YOU MEAN FUTURE COUNCILS, AFTER US. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT IS IDEA FOR AFTER US. IF WE HAVE THAT BASE SALARY, WHERE DO YOU WANT IT TO GO. >>BILL CARLSON: CLARIFY TAKE PLACE AFTER MAY 1. >>LYNN HURTAK: IN EFFECT AFTER MAY THE NEXT ELECTION CYCLE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WE HAVE TWO MINUTES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, THAT SUGGESTION TO SENDS EVERYTHING ON BASE WILL VIOLATE THE SUNSHINE LAW. >>LYNN HURTAK: I APOLOGIZE THEN. >>MARTIN SHELBY: SOMEBODY WOULD SUBMIT SOMETHING, SEE WHAT THE RESPONSES ALREADY ON BASE AND THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND. >>LYNN HURTAK: I APOLOGIZE. BE READY, BE PREPARED EVERYONE TO HAVE AN IDEA OR TO HAVE NOT NOTHING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THE TAXTU -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: FOR THIS TERM MIRANDA VIERA COUNCIL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? WE WILL GO TO NEW BUSINESS. I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS HERE. FIRST, BY REQUEST OF MISS JOHNSON-VELEZ, I WOULD LIKE TO -- WAIT, DO YOU HAVE TO READ IT OR DO I SAY IT? I WOULD LIKE TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR AUGUST 1, 2024 AT 1:30 P.M. TO SUSPEND THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ THE -- ANYTHING FURTHER? THE ADDRESS, THE -- >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ. LEGAL DEPARTMENT. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SUSPENSION OF THE LOCATION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION TO CONSIDER -- >>BILL CARLSON: AT LEAST TELL US WHERE IT IS. >>MARTIN SHELBY: A MOTION TO SUSPENDS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: TO CONSIDER THE SUSPENSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES. IT IS ON THE CAUSEWAY. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: CORRECT. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER -- >>MARTIN SHELBY: THERE IS A REQUEST TO DO IT BEEN YOU MIGHT AS WELL JUST ANNOUNCE IT. WE ARE HAVING COUNCILMEMBERS REQUEST THE DATE. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ, LEGAL DEPARTMENT. A NOTICE TO SUSPEND THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE PERMIT AT LOCATION 7700 CAUSEWAY BOULEVARD THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA ISSUED ON MAY 31 OF THIS YEAR. AND IN ORDER FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT, THERE MUST BE A PUBLIC HEARING. AND WE ARE ASKING FOR THAT TO BE SCHEDULED AUGUST 1, 2024 IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 315 E. KENNEDY AT 1:30. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: AS EVERYTHING STATED BY MISS JOHNSON-VELEZ. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: A MOTION -- A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO. SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. ANY DISCUSSION? MR. SHELBY? >>MARTIN SHELBY: MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. AN ALCOHOLIC SUSPENSION THAT WILL BE SCHEDULED SOME TIME AFTER 1:30 P.M. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: IT WAS AT 1:30. >>MARTIN SHELBY: JUST TO REMIND YOU TWO PRIOR REVIEW HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR 1:0 AND THE THIRD ITEM AFTER THE TWO SUSPENSION HEARINGS. JUST SO COUNCIL IS AWARE THREE HEARINGS ON THAT DAY AUGUST 1. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE KNOW. >>MARTIN SHELBY: OKAY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK THINGS. APPEAR WEEK OVERDUE. IVAN BENSON WITH CCTV AFTER 22 YEARS OF SERVICE. I WANT TO THANK HIM FOR HIS YEARS OF SERVICE AND ASSISTANCE WITH CITY COUNCIL EVERY THURSDAY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. WELCOME CHRIS PHILLIPS TAKEN IVAN'S PLACE AND CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE GREAT TEAM AT CCTV. BRIAN SULLIVAN AND COMPANY. ALL THE GOOD PEOPLE BACK THERE. CARLOS RIOS IS CODE ENFORCEMENT RETIRES TOMORROW AFTER 24 YEARS WITH THE CITY. WANT TO THANK HIM FOR THE YEARS OF SERVICE AND ASSISTANCE HE ALWAYS PROVIDED TO MY OFFICE AND THIS COMMUNITY OPINION HE HAS BEEN WONDERFUL EVERY TIME WE CALL, HE IS THERE AND HE GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND AND I WISH HIM WELL IN HIS RETIREMENT. CONGRATULATIONS. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I HAVE TWO MOTIONS TO MAKE. LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR SPECIAL CALLED BUDGET WORKSHOP FISCAL YEAR 2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ON MONDAY AUGUST 5, 2024 AT 9 A.M. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN. >>LUIS VIERA: WE HAVE A HART BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING THAT DAY. SO I WAS LOOKING AT MY CALENDAR. >>LYNN HURTAK: CAN WE DO IT IN THE AFTERNOON? >>LUIS VIERA: YEAH, I AM GOOD. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT TIME ARE YOU ALL FINISHED? >>LUIS VIERA: WE ARE TYPICALLY DONE BY 11 -- >>LYNN HURTAK: 1:30. 1:00. 1 P.M. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: CHANGE THAT TO AUGUST 5 AT -- THE YEAR 2024 AT 1 P.M. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION FROM COUNCILMEMBER -- A MOTION AND A SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. YES, SIR. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 1 P.M. I WOULD LIKE TO SET A SPECIAL CALLED BUDGET WORKSHOP FISCAL 2025 ON MONDAY . >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I AM NOT GOING TO BE THERE THAT DAY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WHEN IS IT? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: MONDAY, AUGUST 19. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: FOR FULL DISCLOSURE, I AM OUT THE ENTIRE WEEK FOR THE DNC CONVENTION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYTHING GOING ON? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: YOU HAVE FUN WITHOUT ME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION AND A SECOND. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. I WANT TO SEE IF I WOKE YOU UP. >>LYNN HURTAK: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? >>GWEN HENDERSON: WHAT DATE. MANISCALCO AUGUST 19. COUNCILMAN VIERA. >>LUIS VIERA: TWO QUICK ONES. I SENT YOU A MEMO ON THE BUDGET AMENDMENT RESOLUTION. WE TALKED OF THE FACILITATOR THAT WAS REQUESTED DOING UP TO $50,000 AND MR. SHELTER BEE AND BRANDON JORDAN AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING A GREAT DEAL. WE FOUND SOMEONE. WE SENT HIS INFORMATION. AND SO I WANTED TO MOTION FOR A BUDGET AMENDMENT RESOLUTION FOR THE RACIAL RECONCILIATION COMMITTEE FACILITATORS IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-'25 ON JULY 19. >>LYNN HURTAK: QUICK QUESTION. DO YOU NEED -- ADD ANY BUFFER SO WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK. >>LUIS VIERA: WE GOT IT UNDER $50. >>LYNN HURTAK: 50,000 IS T THE BUFFER? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL IN FAVOR. CLENDENIN CLENDENIN OPPOSED. /* NAN. >>LUIS VIERA: CONFIRMING JOE GRECO TO THE CITIZEN ADVISORY BUDGET ADVISORY BOARD ON JULY 19. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GREAT CHOICE. I LOVE JOE GRECO. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? YES, MA'AM. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY WEEKEND, I GUESS. HAPPY VACATION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO -- WE HAVE -- ON OUR WORKSHOP FOR MANY TIMES. BUT WE KEPT GETTING PUSHED BACK BECAUSE OF THE WORKLOAD ON THE DISCUSSION OF PDs. BY THE WAY IS THIS IS FOR THE SEPTEMBER 26 DATE. ALL OF THE ITEMS INCLUDES TO MAY GO SURE IT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ADDRESS AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT PDs ON THE SEPTEMBER 26 WORKSHOP. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? ANYTHING ELSE? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: FORGOT TO MENTION YESTERDAY WAS MY WIFE'S BIRTHDAY AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO HER. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YOU ARE STILL MARRIED? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I TOOK HER OUT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: DID YOU FORGET? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I TOOK HER OUT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: MENTIONING IT PUBLICLY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YOUR BIRTHDAY IS MONDAY. >>LYNN HURTAK: YOUR BIRTHDAY IS BEFORE WE COME BACK. HAPPY BIRTHDAY ON I BELIEVE THE SATURDAY BEFORE WE COME BACK. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: 40 YEARS OLDS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: YOU LOOK PRETTY BAD FOR 40. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I KNOW, I DO. I AGREE. I SECOND THAT MOTION. COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: NOTHING. HAPPY BIRTHDAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NOTION RECEIVE AND FILE -- ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION FROM COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. SECOND FROM. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IF I CAN, TWO MORE THINGS. >>GWEN HENDERSON: TWO MORE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: YES, VERY QUICKLY. NUMBER ONE, I SENT OUT A MEMO REQUESTING COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AS A FORMALITY BEFORE THE RECESS TO MOVE THE RESOLUTION US THAT MADE, YOUR APPOINTMENTS PREVIOUSLY. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SECONDS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. SECONDED FROM COUNCILMWOMAN HENDERSON. >>MARTIN SHELBY: CITY COUNCIL WILL BE GOING INTO THE SUMMER RECESS. THE NEXT TIME THEY RETURN WILL BE ON THURSDAY JULY 18 AT 9 A.M. HAVE A GOOD RECESS. OH -- OH, WE DO HAVE -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: LAST TIME I WORKED THE ENTIRE TIME. DARLENE AND I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT VACATION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ITS MOTION WAS MADE TO RECEIVE AND FILE BY COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I JUMPED THE GUN. ONE MORE MEETING TONIGHT AT 5:01. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE FROM COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLENDENIN. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. YES, WE ARE ADJOURNED.