IS MICHAEL RANDOLPH ONLINE? >>THE CLERK: [INAUDIBLE] >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MR. ROGERO. >>DENNIS ROGERO: GOOD MORNING CHAIR, GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. DENNIS ROGERO, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. OF COURSE, THIS IS COUNCIL'S WORKSHOP, AND WE CAN PROCEED AS YOU'D LIKE. COUNCIL HAD ASKED FOR A NUMBER OF INFORMATION CLARIFICATIONS AND INFORMATION EXPANSIONS THAT WE ARE PREPARED TO ANSWER TODAY AS PART OF A PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT IS A PERFECT PLAN. THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT INVOLVES A PRESENTATION ON MY PART AND INCORPORATING THOSE PORTFOLIOS THAT YOU JUST REFERENCED, IF THAT'S YOUR PLEASURE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I LOVE THAT. THANK YOU. PROCEED. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION UP PLEASE. AND THERE IT IS. THANK YOU AGAIN, COUNCIL, FOR HAVING US HERE ONCE AGAIN TO DISCUSS THE FISCAL YEAR 26 BUDGET. AS THE CHAIR SAYS, WE ANTICIPATE DISCUSSING THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS THAT YOU REFERENCED, MR. CHAIR, INCLUDING THEIR CIPs AND POTENTIAL DEBT FINANCING. COUNCIL HAD ASKED US TO RETURN WITH SOME MORE DETAIL ON THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT TAX RENEWAL ALSO. WE ARE PREPARED TO DISCUSS THAT. AND THEN COUNCIL HAD ALSO ASKED US TO COME BACK WITH AN OVERALL CITY DEBT FINANCING DISCUSSION, AND WE ARE PREPARED FOR THAT ALSO. AND HERE IS THE AGENDA THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED. AGAIN, CONCENTRATING ON THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, BOTH IN THE C.I.P. AND IN THE DEBT FINANCING ARENA, AND THEN THE CIT. A QUICK REFRESH. WE'VE SEEN THIS MANY TIMES AND I'M SURE WE'LL SEE IT AGAIN. ENTERPRISE FUNDS, AGAIN, THOSE AT HOME OR THOSE WATCHING WHO MAY NOT KNOW, ARE THOSE AGENCIES THAT WE MANDATE OPERATE SIMILAR TO A BUSINESS. EVERYTHING THEY CHARGE MUST BE SPENT ON THEIR SERVICES. YOU CAN'T CHARGE WATER RATES FOR THE POLICE, THINGS LIKE THAT. AND YOU SEE THEM HERE. YOU'VE GOT THE WATER DEPARTMENT, JUST ABOUT HALF. WASTEWATER, JUST ABOUT A THIRD. SOLID WASTE, PARKING, AND THEN A LITTLE TINY BIT UP THERE AT THE VERY TOP FOR THE GOLF COURSES. AND HERE IS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS CONFINED TO THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS. YOU SEE ALMOST $300 MILLION IN THE ANTICIPATED FISCAL YEAR '26 C.I.P. AND THEN OVER THE COURSE OF FIVE YEARS, ABOUT $1.3 BILLION. SO A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT WE ANTICIPATE BEING MADE NEXT YEAR AND OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. FIRST UP, THE PARKING DEPARTMENT. I CAN GO OVER IT. OF COURSE, WE HAVE PLENTY OF AUTHORITIES AND SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS HERE TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. YOU SEE REVENUES CONTINUE TO INCREASE. THAT'S AS ANTICIPATED. AND VERY GOOD NEWS, BUT ALSO, YOU SEE EXPENDITURES CONTINUE TO INCREASE. CONTINUE THIS YEAR AND ANTICIPATED TO CONTINUE NEXT YEAR, SPENDING DOWN THEIR FUND BALANCE. THAT'S PART OF THE PLAN. INCREASING THE REVENUES, BUILDING UP THIS FUND BALANCE TO SPEND ON THEIR CAPITAL PROJECTS. AND YOU SEE THAT $10.3 MILLION IN THE CURRENT YEAR AND NOT QUITE $11 MILLION NEXT YEAR. I CAN CONTINUE WITH THE PRESENTATION AND COUNCIL CAN COME BACK AND ASK QUESTIONS OR WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS. ENTIRELY YOUR PLEASURE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, COUNCILMAN CARLSON? >>BILL CARLSON: COULD I ASK TWO QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? THE CHANGE IN THAT FUND BALANCE FOR THE ENTERPRISE FUND, DOES THAT AFFECT THE 23% -- >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT DOES NOT, SIR. >>BILL CARLSON: AND THEN IN DEBT SERVICE, DO OTHER CITIES OR COUNTIES EVER SPLIT OUT INTEREST VERSUS PRINCIPAL? >>DENNIS ROGERO: CERTAINLY. >>BILL CARLSON: IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND THE COST OF THE MONEY SO WE WOULD UNDERSTAND PAYING BACK THE PRINCIPAL IS EASY, BUT AS INTEREST GETS LARGER, THEN WE CAN LOOK AT THAT. THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, SIR. THAT WAS ONE OF COUNCIL'S REQUEST THE LAST WORKSHOP, AND YOU'LL FIND THAT WE HAVE THAT FURTHER ON IN THIS PRESENTATION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. ANOTHER QUESTION. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IS THERE STILL IN EXISTENCE SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED WAY BACK, NOT IN THIS ADMINISTRATION, NOT WHEN I WAS IN OFFICE, THAT A CERTAIN TIME AND CERTAIN DAY FOR AFTER 6 P.M. I THINK THAT THE PARKING SOUTH OF KENNEDY WENT TO THEM. IS THAT STILL IN EFFECT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M NOT THE PARKING EXPERT. CAN SOMEBODY HERE? THERE YOU ARE. >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR. FED, MOBILITY DEPARTMENT. THE QUESTION, IS THAT THE ARENA AGREEMENT? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I DON'T WANT TO NAME ANYBODY. I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHY I SPOKE IN GENERAL TERMS. ANYTHING SOUTH OF KENNEDY, THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT, SOME ADMINISTRATION, NOT THIS ONE, I'M NOT SAYING IT BECAUSE I WASN'T IN OFFICE. I WANT TO SEE IF THAT HAS EXPIRED YET. >> IT'S STILL IN EXISTENCE. IT'S ON ITS LAST YEAR RIGHT NOW. IT WILL EXPIRE NEXT YEAR, SEPTEMBER. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HOW MUCH IS THAT IN REVENUE? THAT WAY WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT'S COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE FOR THIS PARKING DIVISION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IT'S BEING RENEGOTIATED CORRECT? >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. THERE IS A 1.5 MILLION GUARANTEED, BUT THERE'S ALSO WHERE THEY GET A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE REVENUE IN THE GARAGE. I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER IN FRONT OF ME. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WHEN YOU HAVE TIME, NOT SAYING TODAY OR TOMORROW, CAN YOU BRING US UP TO DATE? I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MR. ROGERO, IS THERE A REASON THERE'S NO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT IN THE ENTERPRISE FUND FOR GOLF COURSES? >>DENNIS ROGERO: WE TYPICALLY CONFINE THE DISCUSSION TO WHAT THE CITY CONTROLS DIRECTLY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. OKAY. PROCEED. THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU. IF I CAN HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. THANK YOU. AND HERE ARE THE MAJOR PARKING CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. YOU SEE A LOT OF GREAT DEAL OF MODERNIZATION AND THE FIXED LICENSE PLATE READER INITIATIVE. SOLID WASTE. SOLID WASTE STILL CONTINUING TO DO VERY WELL. AGAIN, SPENDING FROM THEIR FUND BALANCE AS PLANNED, BUT ACTUALLY, IF OUR PROJECTIONS ARE -- IF OUR PROJECTIONS COME TO PASS, THEY ACTUALLY ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE YOU SEE IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT TO THEIR YEAR-END FUND BALANCE IN FISCAL YEAR '26. EVERYTHING GOING ALONG AS PLANNED. WE'LL GET A LITTLE MORE INTO THE SOLID WASTE DEBT LATER ON IN THE PRESENTATION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: QUICK QUESTION. SO YOU JUST TOLD COUNCILMAN CARLSON THAT THE FUND BALANCE ISN'T PART OF THE 23%, CORRECT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, MA'AM. >>LYNN HURTAK: SO THESE ARE BIG NUMBERS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: IS THERE A REASON WE AREN'T PAYING DOWN THE DEBT OR, LIKE, WHAT IS THE RATIONALE FOR KEEPING PROJECTIONS $44.9 MILLION IN THE END SINCE THE YEAR BEFORE? YOU CAN PUT THE SLIDE BACK UP IF THAT HELPS THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND. BUT THE 43.6 AT THE END OF THIS YEAR AND 44.9 AT THE END OF NEXT YEAR, IN THEORY, IF ALL GOES WELL. SO WHY AREN'T WE SPENDING THAT DOWN? >>DENNIS ROGERO: GREAT QUESTION. SOLID WASTE, AND LET ME BACK UP AND START WITH THE 23%, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING PRIMARILY ABOUT THE ENTERPRISE AGENCIES TODAY, EACH OF THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS HAVE THEIR OWN FUND BALANCE SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE GENERAL FUND, UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE OF 23%. AGAIN, THAT'S PROBABLY NOT READILY APPARENT TO THE LAY PERSON. THANK YOU FOR SURFACING THAT. AND I WANT TO CONTINUE TO POINT THAT OUT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION. SOLID WASTE AS AN ENTERPRISE FUND, AND YOU'LL SEE THIS IN WATER AND WASTEWATER, NOT ONLY DO WE NEED TO PLAN ON FUTURE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, BUT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN SUBFUND BALANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR RENOVATIONS AND REPAIR. I THINK IT IS A 90-DAY OPERATING RESERVE THAT THEY HAVE TO HOLD, ESPECIALLY NOW, AND YOU'LL FIND THAT THIS IS THE CASE WITH SOLID WASTE NOW, AND HAS BEEN THE CASE WITH WATER AND WASTEWATER, WITH THE FINANCING, WITH THE DEBT COVENANTS. THEY NEED TO HOLD A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FUNDING IN RESERVE FOR UNANTICIPATED CIRCUMSTANCES. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. SO THIS IS THEIR FUND BALANCE. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THIS IS THEIR FUND BALANCE, MA'AM, YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT IS THAT PERCENTAGE FOR SOLID WASTE? >>DENNIS ROGERO: NOW, THAT I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU. WE TYPICALLY DON'T TRACK THE PERCENTAGES. IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WE TRACK THOSE SUBRESERVES REQUIREMENTS, THE REPAIR AND RENOVATION, THE 90-DAY RESERVE. BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY CALCULATE THAT AND GET BACK TO YOU ON THEIR PERCENTAGES. THEY ARE HELD TO -- I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, THEY ARE HELD TO A SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT STANDARD THAN THE GENERAL FUND. >>LYNN HURTAK: YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT THE STANDARD IS FOR EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS. THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, MA'AM. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATS TO SOLID WASTE FOR HAVING A POSITIVE BALANCE. IS LARRY BACK THERE? CONGRATS BEING 40 UNDER 40. HE JUST GOT 40 UNDER 40 IN THE BUSINESS JOURNAL. CONSIDERING THAT THE TOTAL DEBT FOR SOLID WASTE, WOULD IT BE PRUDENT TO TAKE PART OR ALL OF THAT 45 MILLION AND APPLY IT TO DEBT, REDUCE THE DEBT AND INTEREST WE HAVE TO PAY? >>DENNIS ROGERO: WE'RE UNABLE TO DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE SUBRESERVES. THEY HAVE A 90 DAY OPERATING RESERVE THAT AT A MINIMUM HAS TO BE 21 MILLION. THAT'S PART OF THAT FUND BALANCE. THEN THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SUBRESERVES, REPAIR AND RENOVATION, MCKAY BAY REPAIR AND RENOVATION, NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH NON-MCKAY BAY REPAIR AND RENOVATION. SO THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF REQUIREMENTS THAT MAKE UP THAT 44ISH MILLION DOLLARS. IF I CAN EXPAND ON THAT AND THIS MAY BE MORE INFORMATION THAN YOU WANT, AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT TWO SHORT-TERM DEBT INSTRUMENTS RIGHT NOW FUNDING SOLID WASTE. AND IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, WE'LL ROLL THOSE UP INTO A 30-YEAR BOND JUST FOR SOLID WASTE. IT'S AT THAT TIME I THINK YOU'LL SEE A RECALCULATION OF WHAT THESE SUBRESERVES REQUIRE AND WHAT THEY'LL REQUIRE TO MEET THE DEBT COVENANTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BOND. SO THERE IS A LOT GOING ON IN THE SOLID WASTE FUND RIGHT NOW. >>BILL CARLSON: HOW MUCH IS THE TOTAL DEBT RIGHT NOW, INCLUDING THE SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM JUST FOR SOLID WASTE? >>DENNIS ROGERO: GOT THAT COMING LATER ON IN THE PRESENTATION. >>BILL CARLSON: I WAS TRYING TO FLIP AHEAD AND COULDN'T FIND IT. LAST QUESTION, AS TO THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, IT SEEMS TO ME -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE IT IS A CHIEF OF STAFF QUESTION, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT SOME -- IT SEEMS THAT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS ARE GOVERNED BY THE BOND COVENANTS. MAYBE JUSTIN KNOWS THE ANSWER. IS THERE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SOMEWHERE IN THE STATE LEVEL? I COULDN'T FIND ANY THE OTHER DAY? HOW DO YOU DEFINE AN ENTERPRISE FUND? PARKING -- PROBABLY THE WRONG TERM -- SEEMED LIKE A VIRTUAL ENTERPRISE FUND. SO AS THERE IS REVENUE COMING OFF, I DON'T KNOW IF BECAUSE OF LAW OR BOND COVENANTS, I THINK WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE MONEY FROM PARKING AND USE FOR SOMETHING ELSE, WHERE WATER, WASTEWATER, ARE FULLY DETERMINED. WHAT WE CALL AN ENTERPRISE FUND IS IT GOVERNED BY LAW OR GOVERNED BY THE BOND COVENANTS OR SOMETHING ELSE? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I'LL GIVE THE LAYPERSON'S RESPONSE. FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, YOU ARE QUITE RIGHT, THERE HAS BEEN A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE PARKING FUND AND THE OTHER ENTERPRISE FUNDS BECAUSE OF, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, SOMEWHAT RECENT INTERPRETATION OF WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH THE FUNDING, AS OPPOSED TO THE EXAMPLE I GAVE EARLIER, YOU CAN'T TAKE WATER FUNDING AND SPEND IT ON THE POLICE. NOW IT APPEARS PARKING MONEY, YOU CAN SPEND ON THINGS THAT ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY PARKING, BUT TANGENTIALLY RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE USED PARKING FUND BALANCE FOR RESURFACING. SO THEY ARE A LITTLE BIT FROM THE BUDGET OFFICE'S PERSPECTIVE, THEY ARE A LITTLE BIT SPECIAL COMPARED TO THE OTHER FUNDS. AGAIN, FROM A REVENUE AND FINANCE PERSPECTIVE, WE DEFINE AN ENTERPRISE FUND AS, AGAIN, PROVIDING A SERVICE THAT IN MANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES A PRIVATE BUSINESS WOULD PROVIDE AND YOU'RE CHARGING FEES FOR THOSE SERVICES ONLY. ANYTHING OTHER THAN THOSE SERVICES WE CANNOT USE THE FUNDING FOR. IF THAT'S NOT ADEQUATE OR DETAILED ENOUGH, AGAIN, I'M SURE MR. VASKE CAN EXPAND. >> JUSTIN VASKE, LEGAL DEPARTMENT. KIND OF ALL OF THE ABOVE. YOU'D HAVE TO LOOK AT OUR CITY CODE FOR SOLID WASTE AND HOW THE MONEY IS APPORTIONED THERE. ALSO BOND COVENANTS THAT AFFECT IT. MIKE CAN SPEAK TO IT. ALSO ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES OR POLICIES THAT WOULD AFFECT THAT AS WELL. IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF ALL OF THE ABOVE. >>BILL CARLSON: IT LAYS THE FRAMEWORK FOR A FUTURE DISCUSSION. LASTLY, I WANT TO THANK YOU, MR. ROGERO AND THE TEAM, THIS FORMAT IS EXCELLENT. IT'S LIKE A SUMMARY INCOME STATEMENT, SO IT HAS ALL THE INFORMATION IN ONE PLACE, WHICH IS VERY HELPFUL. THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CAN I ASSUME -- I TOOK A BITE OF A CRACKER -- CAN I ASSUME THAT THE FUND BALANCES IN THESE ENTERPRISE FUNDS ARE BEST ACCOUNTING PRACTICES? AND IS IT SIMILAR TO MY CHECKING ACCOUNT WHERE EVERY TWO WEEKS I GET PAID, I HAVE A LOT OF MONEY IN MY ACCOUNT BUT I'M USING THAT MONEY SO THAT'S WHY YOU KEEP THE FUND BECAUSE YOU'RE USING MONEY EXPENSES COMING IN AND OUT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT'S BOTH OF THOSE THINGS. IT WILL BE BEST PRACTICES, OF COURSE, AND YOU'LL SEE THIS VERY CLEARLY WHEN WE GET TO THE WATER DEPARTMENT. DEPENDING UPON THE ANTICIPATED EXPENSES OVER TIME, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO BIG TICKET ITEMS SUCH AS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, YES, BUILDING UP, BUILDING UP, BUILDING UP, SO YOU CAN SPEND DOWN. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, SIR. IF I CAN HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP, PLEASE. INTO WASTEWATER. WASTEWATER, BOY, I TELL YOU, SMOOTH AS SILK REALLY FROM A REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE PERSPECTIVE AND FUND BALANCE PERSPECTIVE. AND FURTHER TO YOUR QUESTION, MR. CHAIR, AGAIN, YOU'LL REALLY SEE IT IN THE WATER DEPARTMENT, $38 MILLION ANTICIPATED DECREASE THIS YEAR IN THEIR FUND BALANCE. AGAIN, YOU ALSO SEE NEARLY $70 MILLION OF EXPENSES IN THEIR CAPITAL PROJECTS. SO IT'S BUILDING UP THAT FUNDING ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE RATES AND FEES AND SPENDING IT AS THE NEED ARISES. SO FAR SPENDING IT PRETTY MUCH ACCORDING TO PLAN. AND MAJOR PROJECTS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. AND INTO THE WATER DEPARTMENT. IF I COULD DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FAR RIGHT. QUITE A SIGNIFICANT DECREASE IN THEIR FUND BALANCE ANTICIPATED FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. YOU SEE A LITTLE OVER $77 MILLION AND JUST ABOVE THAT, OVER $132 MILLION IN CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENSES. SO THEY ARE CONTINUING TO ACCELERATE THEIR RATE OF SPEND ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR PROJECTS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT IN THIS CASE, THE INCREASE OF THE FUND BALANCE YOU'VE BEEN DOING. SO 169 MILLION THAT'S AVAILABLE AT THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: YOU HAVE BEEN SAVING IN PREPARATION TO SPEND. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: SO SOME OF IT IS HELD BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, MA'AM. >>LYNN HURTAK: AND SOME OF IT IT BASICALLY YOU'VE BEEN SAVING TO PUT THAT ROOF ON YOUR HOUSE OR WHATEVER, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LAYMAN'S TERMS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: WELL SAID, YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: -- THEN YOU SPEND IT, BUT YOU STILL HAVE THE RESERVES. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, MA'AM. WELL SAID. THEY STILL HAVE THEIR 90 DAY OPERATING RESERVE REQUIREMENT, ET CETERA. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU, MR. ROGERO. IN FACT, THESE BALANCES, ENTERPRISE FUNDS, WATER, WASTEWATER, REFUSE TO ENERGY, I BELIEVE THE TAXPAYERS HAVE FUNDED AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY TO BRING THEM UP TO PAR, AM I CORRECT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, SIR. PIPES PROGRAM. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID. I AGREE WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S QUESTIONS. ALL THIS SHOWS AN INCREASE OR DECREASE, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT. IT DOES NOT REALLY SHOW HOW MUCH MONEY WE PUT INTO IT TO MAKE IT WHAT IT IS TO FUND THE BALANCES. AND THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED SOMEWHERE THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHY WE DID IT AND HOW WE DID IT BECAUSE WE HAD TO DO IT. I REMEMBER ONE TURBINE SUPPOSED TO LAST 20 YEARS. IT WAS ON THERE ABOUT 32 YEARS. I REMEMBER THE DIFFERENCES IN WATER, WASTEWATER, ALL THE NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT'S BEEN PUT INTO IT TO MAKE THE WATER STANDARDIZED, THE BEST IN THE COUNTRY, MORE THAN LIKELY, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. I APPRECIATE IF POSSIBLE THESE THINGS ARE INCORPORATED THAT WE PUT IN AND WHY WE'RE SPENDING. >>DENNIS ROGERO: UNDERSTOOD. WE CAN DO THAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: I'M BRAINSTORMING BECAUSE WE CAN'T TALK OUTSIDE. WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IS WHEN YOU LIST THE DEBT FOR EACH OF THESE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, TO LIST THE MAJOR PROJECTS IT PAID FOR. THEN IT WOULD EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC, NOT JUST DEBT. IT PAID FOR THE PLANT, THE UPKEEP, THE NEW TURBINES AND ALL THAT STUFF. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WE DID SOMETHING WITH THAT MONEY. THESE THINGS ARE ONGOING. THEY ARE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE UPGRADES. BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, WHAT I SEE IS AN ANOMALY. IT SEEMS LIKE THE OPERATING EXPENSES IN A COUPLE OF THE FUNDS HAVE INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. BETWEEN WATER AND WASTEWATER EXPLAIN WHY WE HAVE SUCH AN INCREASE IN OPERATING EXPENSES? >> RORY JONES WITH THE WATER DEPARTMENT. ONE OF THE MAJOR COST INCREASES HAS BEEN OUR CHEMICAL COST. I THINK THAT IS THE SAME WITH WASTEWATER AS WELL. WE HAVE SEEN A DRASTIC INCREASE IN THAT. AS WELL AS JUST GENERAL ELECTRIC COSTS AS WELL. SO THE CHEMICALS AND ELECTRIC SEEM TO BE THE BIGGER TICKET ITEMS THAT ARE HELPING TO INCREASE OUR OPERATING COSTS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT JUMPED OFF THE PAGE. I FIGURED THERE WAS A GOOD EXPLANATION. >>LYNN HURTAK: ON THAT SAME NOTE, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN GENERATE OUR OWN ELECTRICITY? >>RORY JONES: WE ARE LOOKING AT THE POSSIBILITY OF HYDROELECTRIC AT THE DAM. IT WOULDN'T BE A MAJOR OFFSET FOR US. WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW THE PAY-BACK PERIOD ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS 20, 25 YEARS. IT'S RELATIVELY LOW POWER GENERATION. BUT WE ARE STILL EXPLORING EVERY OPTION WE HAVE, INCLUDING SOLAR. >>LYNN HURTAK: OF COURSE, OF COURSE. IT MADE ME THINK OF IT THE LAST TIME WE WERE UP THERE. >>RORY JONES: WE'RE HOPING. EVENTUALLY ONE DAY. >>BILL CARLSON: RORY, THIS IS ANOTHER THING WHERE WE CAN MEASURE BY THE NUMBERS OR THE PUBLIC GOOD. YOU ALL ALSO HAVE GOALS FOR CONSISTENCY OF SUPPLY AND INTEGRITY OF THE SYSTEM AND WATER QUALITY, CORRECT? >>RORY JONES: CORRECT. WE'RE BUILDING REDUNDANCY AND RESILIENCY INTO EVERYTHING WE'RE DOING. >>BILL CARLSON: I ASSUME ALL THOSE ARE GETTING BETTER. >>RORY JONES: EVERYTHING IS GETTING BETTER. INCLUDING WEATHERING THE STORMS WE POTENTIALLY SEE AND THE PITFALLS THAT COME OUR WAY. WE'RE HOPING TO BUILD A SYSTEM VERY RESILIENT. >>BILL CARLSON: PEOPLE WATCHING AT HOME, IF THERE'S SUDDENLY A PIPE BURST IN THE STREET, THEN THERE IS A LOT OF DISRUPTION BECAUSE OF THAT. IF YOU DON'T HAVE WATER IN YOUR HOUSE, THERE'S DISRUPTION WITH THAT. SO THESE INVESTMENTS THAT YOU ALL ARE MAKING ALSO, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT OPERATING NECESSARILY, BUT A LOT OF THE INVESTMENTS YOU'RE MAKING ARE TO TRY TO INCREASE THE RELIABILITY OF THE SYSTEM SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE -- >>RORY JONES: SPEND MONEY ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS RATHER THAN REACTIONARY DOLLARS. EMERGENCY DOLLARS ARE THROUGH THE ROOF AS COMPARED TO THE R & R SIDE OF THE HOUSE. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT'S ACTUALLY, TO GO TO AN EARLIER QUESTION FROM I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN CARLSON, ON THE NEXT PAGE IT TALKS ABOUT THE PROJECTS. I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT SEEING THE FY '25 PROJECTS, THE COST OF THEM AND THEN THE PROJECTED COST FOR FY '26. I THINK THAT'S WHAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON WAS SAYING. >>RORY JONES: WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING, I THINK BIANNUALLY WE GIVE YOU THE C.I.P. UPDATE. WE'RE SEEING COST INCREASES AND KIND OF DOING THAT COMPARISON TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ESTIMATED FOR THE PROJECT, WHAT WE'VE AWARDED AND WHAT'S REMAINDER. THERE ARE PRIORITY DECISIONS THAT WE'RE MAKING AT THIS MOMENT. BUT THAT REPORT DOES SHOW THAT. WE CAN PROVIDE MORE CLARITY ON THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES. IF YOU COULD PUT IT BACK ON THE SCREEN. I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE -- THIS ONE, THAT IS JUST, YOU KNOW, IF WE COULD HAVE AMOUNTS MAYBE EVEN AND WHAT WE SPENT LAST YEAR, JUST TO GIVE PEOPLE THAT IDEA. >>RORY JONES: THESE ARE SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS. HAVING A DOLLAR NEXT TO THAT WOULD SHOWCASE THE IMPROVEMENTS WE'RE MAKING TO THE SYSTEM. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT DURING OUR BUDGET OR DURING OUR MIDTERMS, WE ARE TALKING, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY, I DON'T THINK THAT'S ONE THING WE'RE GETTING. DO YOU HAVE ANY TYPE OF RATIO OF WE'RE DOING THESE BIG PROJECTS, THEREFORE, WE'RE NOT HAVING THE EMERGENCY AS MUCH. DO WE SEE A BALANCE YET OR ARE WE NOT AT THE TIPPING POINT? >> WE GAVE A PRESENTATION YESTERDAY KIND OF RECAPPING AT A CONFERENCE IN TAMPA THAT SHOWED WE'RE SPENDING $22 MILLION. THE SHORT ANSWER IS, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER BUT I'M ALREADY LOOKING INTO THAT TO COMPARE WHAT OUR EMERGENCY DOLLARS WERE BEFORE PIPES AND WHAT THEY ARE NOW. I DON'T HAVE IT. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHENEVER YOU HAVE IT TOGETHER, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD FIVE-MINUTE PRESENTATION. IF YOU'RE DOING IT ANYWAY, YOU MIGHT AS WELL SHOW IT TO US BECAUSE THAT IS THE KIND OF THING THE PUBLIC WANTS TO SEE. THEY SEE THE GIANT NUMBERS. QUITE FRANKLY, WE WANT TO, TOO, BUT SHOW OFF WHAT YOU'RE DOING. >>RORY JONES: AND IT'S PAYING OFF. >>LYNN HURTAK: EXACTLY. I THINK BEING ABLE TO SEE IT PAY OFF AND SEE WHAT THE OFFSETS ARE, BECAUSE ALSO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INCLUDE -- YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE INCREASE IN CHEMICALS AND ELECTRICITY, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE INCREASE FOR EVERYTHING WE'RE NOT HAVING TO DO FOR THE EMERGENCIES. AND THAT WOULD BE DRAMATIC. I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THOSE GREAT BALANCE ACTS. AGAIN, THAT'S WHY I SAID IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT TO DO. IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE PLANNING ON DOING ANYWAY, ALL ON BOARD. >>RORY JONES: I'VE GOT TO LOOK INTO THAT. IT WOULD BE A NICE METRIC TO SHOW. >>LYNN HURTAK: GLAD WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE. IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING REALLY BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. THE FINANCE FOLKS SEE IT, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE GREAT RATES. BUT BEING ABLE TO TOUCH AND FEEL TO SOME DEGREE. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST FOLLOWING ON THAT, I KNOW BRAD HAS THOSE KINDS OF PROJECTIONS FROM SIX YEARS AGO WHEN PIPES WAS APPROVED, THAT THE FINANCIAL RATIONALE WAS, IT'S BETTER TO INVEST NOW THAN LET THE STREETS FALL APART. THERE'S ALSO AN ECONOMIC COST BECAUSE IF PEOPLE CAN'T GET TO WORK, CAN'T PICK UP THEIR KIDS, AT LEAST FROM A COST POINT OF VIEW IT WAS PRESENTED TO US BACK THEN THAT IT WAS MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE TO AD HOC RESPOND AND PULL IN AN EMERGENCY TEAM. IF YOU HAVE THE NUMBERS AND CAN PROVE THAT SIX YEARS LATER IT WAS A GOOD IDEA, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. THE OTHER THING IS, I DON'T HEAR -- NOW THAT TOILET TO TAP IS TEMPORARILY DEAD, I DON'T HEAR ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT WATER AND I DON'T HEAR COMPLAINTS ABOUT WASTEWATER. EVERY NOW AND THEN SOMEBODY COMPLAINS ABOUT THEIR WATER BILL. USUALLY IT IS A TEMPORARY ISSUE THAT THEY ARE FACING AND YOU GUYS JUMP ON THOSE RIGHT AWAY. WITH THE PRESUMPTION THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT WE'RE INVESTING IN WATER AND WASTEWATER, IF YOU ALL SOMEHOW IN PRESENTING TO THE PUBLIC OR TO THE PUBLIC THROUGH US DESCRIBE THE BENEFITS OF SOME OF THESE THINGS, LIKE OZONE, I THINK HELPS TO TAKE OUT SOME OF THE ORGANICS WHICH SHOULD IMPROVE THE FLAVOR. SIXTH PROJECT, MEANT TO TAKE OUT PFAS AND SOME OF THE OTHER IMPURITIES. IF YOU ALL COULD TALK ABOUT, IT'S NOT JUST THE FINANCIALS, BUT HERE IS THE BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY OF WHAT WE'VE DONE. WATER TASTES BETTER, QUALITY IS BETTER. TAKING PLASTICS OUT. ANY OF THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO EXPLAIN. I THINK PEOPLE ALREADY SUPPORT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THESE TWO AREAS. WE JUST NEED TO -- IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO FURTHER EXPLAIN AS WE GO FORWARD. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK OUR ONLINE PRESENCE FOR THAT IS PRETTY WELL DONE. THERE IS A LOT OF INFORMATION ONLINE IF PEOPLE WANT TO CLICK AND GO TO THE WATER DEPARTMENT AND SOCIAL MEDIA. >>RORY JONES: -- PROVIDE MORE CLARITY AS WELL. WE WOULD WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOWCASE WHAT THESE DO FOR US. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. NEXT. GO AHEAD, DENNIS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ABOUT SOLID WASTE THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD? SORRY WASTEWATER. >> NOTHING ADDITIONAL WITH SOLID WASTE -- [INAUDIBLE] >>ALAN CLENDENIN: ERIC, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING? I DIDN'T WANT TO RUDELY STOP YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: THE PROJECT IN FRONT OF MONTE CARLO WHICH IS TAKING A LOT OF TIME, IT IS GOING TO SIGNIFICANTLY HELP PREVENT WASTEWATER FLOODING IN SOUTH TAMPA, ESPECIALLY IN MY BROADER NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU FOR BEING ON THAT AND PROACTIVE ABOUT IT. WHEN WE WENT TO MEET WITH THE COMMUNITIES THAT GOT FLOODED AND ERIC WAS ABLE TO SAY WE GOT THIS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL A FEW MONTHS AGO BECAUSE WE ANTICIPATED THAT, THAT MADE ALL OF US LOOK SMART, BUT ESPECIALLY YOUR DEPARTMENT. >> ERIC WEISS, WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT. GETTING TOWARD THE END OF THE PROJECT ON WESTSHORE. LATER THIS FALL SHOULD BE DONE, OCTOBER NOVEMBER. YOU'LL SEE ALL THE FENCING GO AWAY AND ALL THE LANDSCAPING GO IN. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. ROGERO. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: PAUSE THERE FOR A SECOND. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. IN GENERAL TERMS, THE THREE REFUSE TO ENERGY, WATER, AND WASTEWATER, I REALLY BELIEVE WE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT THE PUBLIC, THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND ALL THE CIVIC CLUBS WHO WANT TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON, THEY WOULD BE ENLIGHTENED AND IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT UNREALISTICALLY, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NEVER SEEN IT, TO SEE HOW THE WATER IS PRODUCED. TAKE 15, 20 AT A TIME TO SEE HOW THE WASTE TO ENERGY IS PRODUCED, TO SEE HOW THE WASTEWATER WORKS AND WHAT COMES IN, HOW IT COMES IN, WHAT COLOR IT IS, AND HOW IT COMES OUT, HOW MUCH BACTERIA IS IN IT. AND TO SEE THE WATER, HOW IT'S PRODUCED. WE'VE SEEN IT, BUT THE PUBLIC HASN'T SEEN IT. THESE ARE NOT GLAMOROUS POSITIONS BUT THEY ARE THE ONES THAT MAKE THE CITY RUN AND OPERATE. WITHOUT WATER, WASTEWATER, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE A CITY THAT WE HAVE TODAY. JUST LOOK AT IT 2.9 BILLION IN INFRASTRUCTURE CHANGE JUST ON PIPES ALONE, SOMETHING I DON'T BELIEVE ANY CITY IS GOING AFTER AND TRY TO DO. MAYBE THEY ARE, BUT I'M NOT AWARE OF IT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT SOMEWHERE IN THE FUTURE TO GET WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AND WORK SOMETHING OUT, NAMING OF ALL THE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE MEETINGS ON WEDNESDAYS, THURSDAYS, THAT GET TOGETHER, SERTOMA, ANY HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, AND WE GET AN INDIVIDUAL, 15, 20, A BUS THAT CAN TAKE THEM AROUND THAT I THINK ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS HAS. AND IT WOULD BE AN EYE-BREAKER FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY TO SEE WHAT IT TAKES O RUN A CITY. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, SIR. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. THE CIT RENEWAL FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, IF YOU COUNT WHEN IT STARTS. YOU ASKED US TO BREAK AWAY TIME TO DEVOTE DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AND SPECIFICALLY THE POTENTIAL FOR THIS REVENUE SOURCE TO MITIGATE GENERAL FUND DEBT SERVICE IN THE FUTURE. WE'LL GET INTO DETAIL ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDES REGARDING THIS, NOT ONLY VERY BRIEFLY AT THE COUNTY LEVEL TO GIVE -- TO REFRESH COUNCIL AND GIVE PUBLIC THE BIG-PICTURE VIEW AND THEN WE'LL DIVE INTO THE DETAIL. AND YOU SEE HERE THE RENEWAL SUMMARY. THIS IS RIGHT FROM THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY COMMISSION'S WEBSITE. TOTAL CIT OVER THE NEXT 15 YEARS IS PROJECTED TO BE, AND YOU SEE THAT DEAD CENTER, ABOUT $3.76 BILLION. OBVIOUSLY, A SIGNIFICANT, A VERY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FUNDING. AND TO THE RIGHT, SECOND BULLET DOWN, YOU SEE THE CITY OF TAMPA'S ANTICIPATED PORTION, 782 POINT ABOUT 8 MILLION DOLLARS. AGAIN, VERY, VERY SIGNIFICANT. LITTLE LESS THAN 22% OF THE TOTAL. ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND, AGAIN, THIS IS A DECADE AND A HALF WORTH OF ANTICIPATED COLLECTION. SO THIS FUNDING WILL NOT BECOME AVAILABLE OVERNIGHT, OF COURSE. IN FACT, THROUGH FISCAL YEAR '30, THAT IS THE FIVE-YEAR C.I.P. CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET. CITY ANTICIPATES RECEIVING ABOUT $175 MILLION. SO STILL A VERY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER, BUT NOT ALL OF THIS FUNDING ALL AT ONCE. JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT. COUNCIL HAS SEEN THIS BEFORE. THIS HAS ALSO BEEN ADDED TO THE COUNTY'S WEBSITE. THESE ARE THE VERY BROAD CATEGORIES THAT WE IDENTIFIED FOR THE CITY OF THAT 780 ODD MILLION DOLLARS. AND THEY WERE DELIBERATELY KEPT BROAD SO WE CAN BE FLEXIBLE AS TO HOW WE SPEND THAT FUNDING, NOT ONLY WHEN IT BEGINS DECEMBER 2026, BUT ALSO AS WE GO THROUGH THE NEXT 15 YEARS AND YOU SEE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS. $191 MILLION JUST FOR TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS. PUBLIC SAFETY YOU SEE IS DIVIDED INTO TWO SEPARATE COMPONENTS, ONE FOR VEHICLES AND THE OTHER FOR FACILITIES AT ALMOST $340 MILLION AND PUBLIC FACILITIES AT OVER A QUARTER OF A BILLION DOLLARS. IN THE LOWER RIGHT, YOU'LL SEE THAT TOTAL AGAIN, $783 MILLION. SO A GREAT DEAL OF FUNDING BUT ALSO A GREAT DEAL OF FLEXIBILITY. THAT'S BY DESIGN. WE CAN GET INTO THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IN MORE DETAIL RIGHT NOW. AGAIN, COUNCIL HAS A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TO REVIEW, BUT YOU SEE THERE ARE ONLY FOUR YEARS HERE BECAUSE THIS PROGRAM DOESN'T START FOR ANOTHER YEAR, ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF OR SO. STILL, IT CONTINUES TO BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FUNDING. PARKS PROJECTS, RIGHT BELOW EXPENSES, TOTALING ABOUT $17 MILLION OVER THAT FOUR-YEAR TIME PERIOD. MOBILITY PROJECTS NEARLY $40 MILLION. T & I PROJECTS ABOUT $8 MILLION, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE CONFINED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION PROGRAM. PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES, $61 MILLION. VERY LARGE CHUNK OF CHANGE. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES OF ONLY $4 MILLION IN THAT PARTICULAR FOUR-YEAR PERIOD. OF COURSE, THE FUNDING FOR RAYMOND JAMES STADIUM AND THE AMALIE ARENA OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THROUGH 30, AT $35 MILLION. WHAT I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT AND WHAT COUNCIL WAS SPECIFICALLY CONCENTRATING ON THE LAST TIME THIS CAME UP FOR DISCUSSION WAS THAT LAST ROW, THE ENDING BALANCE. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT EVEN IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO MAKE NO CHANGES TO THE C.I.P. AS PRESENTED TO YOU, OVER THE COURSE OF THAT PERIOD, THERE'S STILL ABOUT $24 MILLION IN PLAY. NO NO. ABOUT $11 MILLION. EXCUSE ME. TO MITIGATE THAT POTENTIAL GENERAL FUND DEBT SERVICE WE TALKED ABOUT. IT DOESN'T MEAN, OF COURSE, THAT COUNCIL IS CONFINED TO DO THIS PLAN. IT'S PART OF YOUR C.I.P. THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING RIGHT NOW. BUT THERE WILL BE A GIVE AND TAKE IF YOU USE A PORTION OF THIS FUNDING FOR DEBT SERVICE MITIGATION VERSUS A PORTION OF THIS FUNDING JUST FOR PAY GO AS DESCRIBED HERE IN THIS SLIDE. WE HAVE MORE DETAILED SLIDES AVAILABLE. TRYING TO STRIKE THAT BALANCE BETWEEN TOO DETAILED A DISCUSSION BUT ANSWERING COUNCIL'S QUESTION AND GIVING INSIGHT INTO THE FLEXIBILITY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: LET'S PAUSE FOR QUESTIONS. COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO, FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA AND COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR THE SUMMARY SLIDE. IN REGARDS TO SIDEWALK REPAIRS, COUNCIL VOTED TO INCREASE THE SIDEWALK IN LIEU OF FEE, RAISE IT BY ABOUT 900%. CAN WE USE THAT TO MITIGATE -- WOULD THAT FEE HELP WITH SIDEWALK REPAIRS? I KNOW IT IS FOR NEW SIDEWALKS, BUT COULD THAT HELP BALANCE THIS OR ADD TO IT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT ABSOLUTELY COULD. IN FACT, ONCE THIS REVENUE SOURCE STARTS TAKING EFFECT AND GETS ROLLING, AGAIN, I CONTINUE TO SAY THE WORD FLEXIBILITY, THERE WILL BE A GREAT DEAL OF FLEXIBILITY AS TO HOW WE SPEND ON SIDEWALK REPAIR, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM PARTICULAR REVENUE SOURCES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT'S GOOD. WE HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITIES THERE FOR SIDEWALKS AND REPAIRS. THEN IN PUBLIC SAFETY, VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES. I KNOW THAT VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT, IT WILL BE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF POLICE AND FIRE VEHICLES. I KNOW WITH POLICE, IT'S A LARGE NUMBER OVER SEVERAL YEARS. AND THEN IN REGARDS TO FACILITIES. THE OTHER DAY WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE HOWARD AVENUE POLICE STATION FACILITY AT $40 MILLION AND I DISCUSSED NOT BONDING THAT TOTAL AMOUNT OF MONEY, CAN WE LOOK AT FACILITIES -- I KNOW THIS IS OVER THE LIFETIME, YOU SHOW $148 MILLION OVER THE 15-YEAR PERIOD. CAN MONEY BE TAKEN FROM THIS CHUNK IN ORDER TO AVOID BONDING THAT WHOLE 40 MILLION? YOU SAID $11 MILLION IN PLAY IS THE NUMBER BEFORE I STARTED TALKING, IN REGARDS TO THIS, BEING THAT THIS IS CIT, IT CAN GO TOWARDS THIS FACILITY, RIGHT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT CAN. IT CAN. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT'S GOOD. WE'LL LOOK AT THAT WHEN THAT COMES UP IN REGARDS TO AVOIDING PAYING SO MUCH IN INTEREST. IF WE CAN -- IF WE HAVE TO PONDD IT, DO IT OVER A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME, MORE INTEREST WE SAVE. PARKS, $88 MILLION OVER THE LIFETIME OF THE CIT RENEWAL 15 YEARS. I'VE HEARD AND GOTTEN E-MAILS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF OUR PARKS, SPECIFICALLY E-MAILS FROM THE QUALITY OF OUR PARKS IN SOUTH TAMPA. I'VE EVEN HEARD RUMORS OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE MOVED HERE ARE NOW MOVING AWAY OR WANT TO MOVE OUT BECAUSE OF THE QUALITY OF OUR PARKS. WHICH I'M BORN AND RAISED HERE AND EDUCATED HERE, NEVER LEFT HERE UNLESS TO GO ON VACATION. IT'S LIKE I WAKE UP AND I LOVE THIS CITY. I LOVE WHERE THE CITY IS GOING. I'VE SEEN SO MANY CHANGES IN 41 YEARS. TO SAY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LEAVE BECAUSE THE QUALITY OF OUR PARKS, THAT'S SAD IF IT'S TRUE. BUT I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT $88 MILLION, GIVE OR TAKE, CAN BE INVESTED IN PARKS AND CONSERVATION. WE DON'T HAVE TO REBUILD JULIAN B. LANE LIKE WE'RE DOING WITH FAIR OAKS, MASSIVE PARK PROJECTS, BASIC MAINTENANCE AND UPGRADING EQUIPMENT. THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT ADA AND PLAYGROUND ACCESSIBILITY AND THAT, YOU KNOW, STUFF ON SOCIAL MEDIA. PEOPLE HAVE COME HERE TO TALK ABOUT IT. ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER HAD MENTIONED IT. SOME PARKS ARE JUST COMPLETELY OUTDATED. THE BERMS ARE FALLING APART. PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IS OLD. IN MY LIFETIME, I REMEMBER AT AL LOPEZ BECAUSE I WAS ONE OF THE KIDS 30 YEARS AGO, THEY HAD A BIG WOODEN PLAYGROUND THING. IT WAS ON TV, AND IT WAS ALL THESE KIDS RUNNING TOWARD THIS BRAND-NEW PLAYGROUND WHEN THEY DID THE RIBBON CUTTING. THAT'S BEEN TORN DOWN AND REPLACED. THAT'S JUST WITHIN THE LAST 30 YEARS. THAT'S AL LOPEZ. I CONSIDER THAT LIKE THE CENTRAL PARK OF TAMPA BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. ANYWAYS, WE NEED TO INVEST IN OUR PARKS. A LOT ARE FALLING APART. WE PUT A LOT OF EMPHASIS ON THE NEW PARKS, WHICH IS GREAT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE'VE BEEN GETTING E-MAILS. I SEE ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND I HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC ALL OVER THE CITY THAT WE NEED TO INVEST IN UPGRADING SOME OF OUR PARKS BECAUSE OF THE EQUIPMENT. IN SUMMARY, I DON'T KNOW WHO THE NEXT MAYOR IS GOING TO BE, THE NEXT COUPLE OF MAYORS ARE GOING TO BE, BUT I HOPE THAT THEY FOCUS ON NOT HAVING TO BORROW, NOT HAVING TO BOND. BECAUSE WE HAVE THE BONDING CAPABILITY -- I GET IT -- INTEREST RATES ARE LOW. WE HAVE AAA CREDIT RATINGS. THERE IS A LOT TO BE PROUD OF. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE TO BE VERY PRUDENT AND CONSERVATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO SPENDING TAXPAYER DOLLARS. THIS CIT RENEWAL, ONLY 15 YEARS AND NOT THE STANDARD 30 YEARS LIKE WE DID BACK IN THE '90s, THERE'S SO MUCH OPPORTUNITY HERE TO DO GOOD. I KNOW THIS IS OUR BUDGET, BUT I HOPE THE NEXT MAYOR FOCUSES ON JUST DOING THE RIGHT THING. FORGET LEGACY PROJECTS, FORGET KEEPING YOUR NAME GOING LONG AFTER YOU'RE GONE. JUST DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE PEOPLE COME HERE EVERY WEEK. WE'RE ALL STOPPED. AT THE GROCERY STORE, GAS STATION WHEREVER. WE HAVE A LOT OF NEEDS AND THE CIT RENEWALS OFFERS US SO MANY OPPORTUNITIES INVESTING IN THOSE NEEDS. I'LL STOP TALKING NOW. AGAIN, $783 MILLION IS A LOT OF MONEY TO DO A LOT OF GOOD. AND INVEST IN THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN LONG OVERDUE AND FORGOTTEN. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES 1.3, 1.3, AND 1.5 WHICH EQUALS THE $4.1 MILLION. THEN I GO DOWN TO THE NEXT ONE, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TSA, I GUESS THAT IS A TAMPA SPORTS AUTHORITY. 7.297, 9.19, 9.29, TOTAL OF 9.568 MILLION. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PUBLIC FACILITY AND A FACILITY WITH TSA? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I THINK THAT IS A LEGAL ANSWER. UNDER THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT TAX RENEWAL UMBRELLA, THEY HAVE BEEN DEFINED AS PUBLIC FACILITIES. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WE'RE BOTH SMILING. WE BOTH KNOW WHY. I DON'T LIKE TO BE NEGATIVE AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE NEGATIVE. WHEN I SEE THE CIT TAX -- GREAT, WONDERFUL TO DO THINGS. WHEN THEY SPLIT IT UP, THE COUNTY BASED IT ON POPULATION. IN MY ESTIMATION, WE'RE LOSING $20 MILLION A YEAR JUST ON THE HALF PENNY SALES TAX. AM I CLOSE TO THAT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: AGAIN, DEPENDS ON WHAT FORMULA YOU USE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: MULTIPLY THAT BY -- IF IT WAS STANDARD, FIRST 30 YEARS WOULD HAVE BEEN 10 MILLION TIMES 30 YEARS. IT'S MONEY THAT WE LOST EITHER BY NEGOTIATION OR SOMETHING. I'M NOT BLAMING ANYONE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FACTS ARE BUT I WILL FIND OUT, WHEN THIS STARTED AND HOW IT WAS CUT UP. JUST THE OTHER DAY, YOU HAD THE CHIEF OF POLICE HERE DISCUSSING THINGS. HE DIDN'T MENTION NONE OF THIS STUFF. PUBLIC SAFETY, FIRE, POLICE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE PROTECTED TO THE UTMOST THAT THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK AT THOSE PUBLIC FACILITIES JUST LIKE ANY OTHER ENTITY HAS. BUT I'M TIRED OF LOOKING AT THESE THINGS AND KNOWING THE INSIDE OF ME, THAT THERE'S VERY LITTLE THAT I CAN DO AT ALL. I'M NOT BLAMING THIS ADMINISTRATION OR ANY ADMINISTRATION. THIS HAD TO HAPPEN, START IN THE BEGINNING WHEN THE CONTRACTS WERE WRITTEN AND VERY FEW PEOPLE SAW THEM. I WANT THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE NOT GETTING A FAIR CUT OUT OF OUR CIT TAX, EVEN THOUGH I VOTED AGAINST IT, MAYBE I KNEW WHAT WAS COMING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I NOTICED THE LINE FOR DEBT SERVICE IS EMPTY BECAUSE IT'S SO -- BECAUSE SO FAR NO DEBT TAKEN ON BY THIS. HISTORICALLY, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF DEBT TAKEN ON BY THE LAST CIT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: CERTAINLY. THE LAST CIT, THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL FINANCED FROM IT DIRECTLY AS A PLEDGED REVENUE, BOTH AT THE CITY AND AT THE COUNTY. IF MEMORY SERVES, THE COUNTY DID A -- BONDED THE MAJORITY OF THEIR FUNDING OVER THAT 30-YEAR CIT PERIOD FOR DEBT. COUPLE OF DIFFERENCES HERE, THIS IS A 15-YEAR RENEWAL, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT AND PROBABLY ONLY IN LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD WE RECOMMEND THAT YOU PLEDGE THIS AS A PARTICULAR DEBT. DOESN'T MEAN THIS FUNDING CAN'T PAY FOR DEBT. JUST WON'T SECURE ADVERTISE IT WITH THIS FUNDING SOURCE. WHICH IS WHY I THINK THE DISCUSSION SO FAR AND HASN'T BEEN IMPLEMENTED YET AND WE'VE GOT A VERY, VERY BROAD OPPORTUNITY, AS MANY OF YOU HAVE SAID, AS TO WHAT TO DO WITH THIS FUNDING. WHILE I DON'T FORESEE US DIRECTLY BONDING THIS, IT CAN CERTAINLY GO TO PAY OFF DEBT, NON-AD VALOREM, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. BACK TO YOUR POINT, IN THE PAST, THERE WAS A VERY HEAVY DEBT COMPONENT TO THIS REVENUE SOURCE YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: FROM MY RECOLLECTION, IT REALLY PRECLUDED FROM US USING IT TOWARD THE END BECAUSE SO MUCH WENT TO DEBT SERVICE. I BELIEVE THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT WE ONLY SPEND A CERTAIN AMOUNT ON DEBT IN THIS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: I THINK NO MORE THAN 70%. >>LYNN HURTAK: NO MORE THAN 70. BUT DOES THAT MEAN -- DOES THAT MEAN USING THIS TO PAY OFF DEBT OR DOES THAT MEAN JUST BONDING IT ITSELF? >>DENNIS ROGERO: THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. I'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO DEFER TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO ANSWER THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY KNOW IT AT THIS TIME, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT IS A GOOD QUESTION WE SHOULD FIND THE ANSWER ON. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS A CRITICAL QUESTION TO ANSWER BECAUSE I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO ABOUT PARKS. I HAVE BEEN TO OTHER PLACES WITH PARKS, AND WE ARE BEHIND. WE ARE QUITE BEHIND. 88 MILLION SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY, BUT IT REALLY ISN'T OVER 15 YEARS. IT'S A MATTER IF WE CAN IMPROVE PARKS TO SOME DEGREE, IF WE CAN USE THE 88 MILLION TO HELP PAY OFF DEBT IF WE NEEDED TO. AGAIN, NOT CREATING -- I AGREE NOT CREATING GIANT PARKS BUT MAKING THE PARKS THE PLACE THAT PEOPLE GO, WHICH I DO NOT SEE THE WAY I SEE IN OTHER CITIES. OKAY. THANK YOU. >>BILL CARLSON: JUST REITERATE WHAT MY COLLEAGUE SAID. THERE IS A HUGE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PARKS, AS YOU KNOW PEOPLE UPGRADE THEIR HOMES, OTHER HOMES, WILL MOVE IN. I'VE HEARD MANY CASES ANECDOTALLY ABOUT PEOPLE THAT PACKED UP AND MOVED OR PEOPLE THREATENING TO PACK UP AND MOVE AND THE COST OF THAT IS ENORMOUS IN OUR COMMUNITY. PEOPLE THINK THERE IS A HIDDEN TAX THAT YOU THEN HAVE TO PAY YOUR OWN MONEY FOR ALL KINDS OF THINGS, INCLUDING UPGRADING PARKS BECAUSE THE TAXES MIGHT BE LOW BUT THEN THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT DOING IT. IN THIS CASE, I THINK THERE'S BEEN CHOICES MADE TO SPEND MONEY ON THINGS THAT WERE NICE TO HAVE. EXAMPLE WAS $43 MILLION PARK. IF YOUR BUDGET IS 5 MILLION A YEAR AND SPEND 43 MILLION ON A PARK, THE PUBLIC WAS SHOCKED BY THAT. PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WERE HAPPY BUT PEOPLE IN SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS WERE NOT HAPPY. IT'S NOT JUST 43 MILLION. JUST WITH THE INTEREST GOING TO BE LIKE 30 MILLION OR SOMETHING, SO PROBABLY 75, $80 MILLION PARK NOT INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL O-AND-M. WHAT HAPPENED IN SOUTH TAMPA IS PEOPLE WERE PATIENT. THEY SAID, OKAY, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. WE DON'T LIKE -- IT'S NOT THAT EAST TAMPA OR SOMEWHERE ELSE DIDN'T DESERVE A PARK, IT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WAS SPENT ON ONE PARK, 5 OR $10 MILLION WOULD HAVE BEEN WAY MORE THAN ANYPLACE IN SOUTH TAMPA HAS GOTTEN IN DECADES. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY SPENT ON IT. SAME THING IN LAST ADMINISTRATION FOR $12 MILLION BOATHOUSE, WHICH IS A HUGE BOONDOGGLE. SO AS SOUTH TAMPA HAS BEEN PATIENT AND THE EXPECTATION WAS THAT, WELL, EVENTUALLY WE'LL GET OUR SHARE. WE'LL COME AROUND AND INVEST OUR PARKS. LAST YEAR IN THE SUMMARY WE HAD, AT LEAST TWO PARKS MENTIONED IN THE SUMMARY, NOTHING HAPPENED ON EITHER ONE OF THEM. ONE OF THOSE PARKS IS ADJACENT TO MacDILL. SO WE HAVE OFFICERS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND WORKING PEOPLE FROM MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE WHO GO TO PARKS THAT ARE FALLING APART. IT'S EMBARRASSING THAT THAT HAPPENS. SO I THINK GOING FORWARD WE NEED TO NOT SPEND ON PET PROJECTS. WE NEED TO SPEND ON THE BASIC MAINTENANCE. SOMEBODY SAID TO ME THIS MORNING, 100, 150 THOUSAND PER PARK, COULD CLEAN THEM UP A LOT. BUT WHEN TRASH IS ALL OVER THE PLACE, SWINGS FALLING APART, EVERYTHING IS FALLING APART, THEN PEOPLE THINK THE CITY DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THEM. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, MAYBE YOU COULD PUT THIS ON THE BUDGET WEBSITE LATER, BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A LIST OF THE SPECIFIC PROJECTS. BUT WE'VE SEEN AS IN THE LAST YEAR THAT THERE WERE AT LEAST TWO PARKS IN SOUTH TAMPA LISTED BUT CAN'T SEE ANY MOVEMENT ON EITHER OF THEM. THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE UPDATED ON WHAT'S HAPPENING BECAUSE THERE IS A LIMIT TO HOW LONG THEY ARE GOING TO BE PATIENT ON IT. I KNOW THAT IS NOT A BUDGET ISSUE, BUT FROM OVERALL CITY POINT OF VIEW AND WHEN THE PARK IS NOT GETTING DONE, FOLKS DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND CITY COUNCIL. THEY JUST WANT THEIR PARK FIXED. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MR. ROGERO, THE CIT. DID WE GET A DEFINITIVE FIGURE ESTIMATE FROM THE TAX COLLECTOR'S OFFICE OF HOW MUCH MONEY IS PROJECTED COMING, GENERATED FROM THE CITY OF TAMPA? >>DENNIS ROGERO: THAT IS A TRICKY QUESTION BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON WHAT SOURCE YOU GO TO, AND THIS MAY BE WHERE YOU'RE GOING. WHEN WE WERE HAVING THE INITIAL DISCUSSIONS AS TO HOW THIS FUNDING WAS GOING TO BE SPLIT, IN CONTRAST PERHAPS TO THE ORIGINAL CIT. WE LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AS TO WHAT WAS THE CITY'S FAIR PORTION AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE CRITERIA. HOW MUCH DO WE BRING IN. THE DIFFICULTY IS A SET FORMULA IN STATE STATUTES ASSOCIATED WITH POPULATION, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. THE DEFINITIVE ANSWER OF WHAT WE BRING IS DIFFICULT TO DEFINE. BECAUSE THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS ARE NOT IDENTICAL IS THE BROAD AND SIMPLEST WAY TO PUT IT. MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF TAMPA DOES NOT DIRECTLY DUPLICATE THE WAY THEY TRACK THE COLLECTIONS OF SALES TAX AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. >>JOHN BENNETT: CHIEF OF STAFF. I WANTED COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC TO KNOW ON THE RECORD THAT THE CFO, MYSELF AND THE MAYOR WENT AND MET WITH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION. WE UNDERSTOOD THE SHOT CLOCK TO GET IT ACROSS THE GOAL. WE DID DO TWO LEVELS OF ANALYSES TO BASICALLY COUNTER WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. GOT DIFFERENT PERCENTAGES, BUT KNOWING WHERE WE WERE ON THE ELECTRIC CYCLE AND THE CHALLENGE TO MAKE SURE WE GOT IT BACK, IT WAS A DIFFICULT NEGOTIATION. WHAT WE ASKED THE COUNTY TO DO WAS LOOK AT THE ASSETS THE COUNTY CONTROLLED AND THE CITY AND USE THAT DELTA THAT WE DISCOVERED TO TRY AND PAVE ROADS AND DO THINGS LIKE THAT AND ASKED FOR A REVIEW AND MOU TO THAT LEVEL. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE DISCUSSED IN THE PAVING SPACE WITH INFRASTRUCTURE AND MOBILITY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CLARIFICATION. DID THEY SIGN AN MOU? >>JOHN BENNETT: THE ANALYSIS WAS BEING DONE ON WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE BASED ON WHAT THEIR PROJECTIONS WERE AGAINST WHAT OUR GAPS WERE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT'S PART OF MY FRUSTRATION IS THAT YOU LOOK AT THE CIT AND 74.4% GOES TO THE COUNTY. ONLY 21.9 TO THE CITY. WE KNOW THERE ARE SO MANY COUNTY ASSETS WITHIN THE CITY BOUNDARIES THAT ARE JUST LIKE SO MANY OTHER THINGS, NOT BEEN INVESTED IN. NOT BEEN UPKEPT. IT'S DEFINITELY A FRUSTRATION. IF YOU'RE HEARING ME COUNTY, FIX YOUR STUFF IN THE CITY. >>JOHN BENNETT: ALSO A PLACEHOLDER FOR COUNCIL IS NOTE THAT WHEN THIS CIT EXPIRES, THAT THERE WAS A DEAL FOR TWO-THIRDS AND ONE-THIRD FOR THE TSA PROPERTIES WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN THE 21 POINT SOMETHING PERCENT AS WELL. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: FASCINATING. JUST A STATEMENT, EVERYBODY IS RIGHT ABOUT PARKS. GENERALLY IT'S NOT JUST THE CITY OF TAMPA. IT'S NOT FLORIDA. IT IS THE WHOLE COUNTRY. LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT IN OUR COUNTRY HAS BEEN PITIFUL OVER THE LAST FEW DECADES AND WE'RE SUFFERING THE SAME THING. NOT JUST PARKS. WE SEE IT WITH BRIDGES, ROADS. THANKFULLY I THINK THIS COUNCIL AND THIS ADMINISTRATION WE'VE DONE A FAIRLY GOOD JOB OF CATCHING UP. DOING A LOT OF INVESTMENT AS WE SAW IN WASTEWATER, FRESHWATER, INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE'RE DOING OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. STORMWATER IN THE CITY, I THINK MOST CITIES WOULD BE ENVIOUS OF US BECAUSE WE'RE PLAYING THAT CATCH-UP. THINGS HAD WE NOT DONE, WOULD HAVE KICKED THE BALLS DOWN THE STREET AND PLAYING WITH A LOT MORE MONEY. WE DID THE RESPONSIBLE THING AND INVESTING IN THE CITY OF TAMPA. WE JUST HAVE A LOT MORE TO DO. A LOT, LOT MORE TO DO. WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. I THINK THAT'S EVERYBODY'S FRUSTRATION. WE SEE THESE THINGS THAT ARE SUFFERING FROM MAINTENANCE, OUR PARKS THAT YOU TALK ABOUT THAT ARE SUFFERING AND SOME OF THE OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE THINGS. SOMETIMES YOU THINK IT IS AN INSURMOUNTABLE TASK. ONE BITE AT A TIME. THANK YOU, DENNIS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, SIR. THE NEXT SLIDE INTO OUR DEBT FINANCING PROGRAM. AGAIN, AT COUNCIL'S REQUEST, WE'VE EXPANDED THE DEBT INFORMATION. AS THE AGENDA STATED, WE'LL CONCENTRATE ON THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS AND THEIR DEBT AND EXPAND IT INTO THE CITYWIDE DEBT FINANCING AGAIN AT COUNCIL'S REQUEST. MUCH OF THIS INFORMATION WILL PROBABLY BE SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR TO YOU. IT IS A REFRESH FROM THE EXTENSIVE BONDING CAPACITY AND FINANCING OVERVIEW WE GAVE COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO. FIRST, WATER AND WASTEWATER AND WHAT WE ANTICIPATE IS FORTHCOMING OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS, POTENTIAL DEBT ISSUANCES OF ABOUT $760 MILLION. AS WE DO WITH ALL OF THESE PROJECTS, THE TIMING OF THE DEBT ISSUANCE WILL BE BASED ON THE PROJECT SCHEDULES AND WHEN WE NEED THE MONEY, TECHNICALLY THE SPEND DOWN REQUIREMENTS. AGAIN, WE DON'T WANT TO BORROW AND START PAYING INTEREST ON ANY MONEY THAT WE'RE NOT PUTTING TO USE. THAT'S SIMPLY PAYING MONEY FOR INACTIVE MONEY AND WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. THAT $764 MILLION. THERE IS A LOT GOING ON IN THIS SLIDE COUNCIL. BUT AT YOUR REQUEST, WE HAVE COMBINED THE CURRENT FINANCING, THE POTENTIAL FUTURE FINANCING AND BROKEN IT DOWN INTO BOTH PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. IF I COULD SPEAK AT THE 50,000-FOOT VIEW AND BRING IT DOWN, YOU SEE WHEN IT GETS UP AND RUNNING IN ABOUT 2030, IF COUNCIL APPROVES, YOU'LL SEE A NICE EVEN SCHEDULE. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL SEE CONSISTENTLY THROUGHOUT THESE DEBT CHARTS I'M SHOWING YOU. NO SURPRISES, NO UNANTICIPATED EXPENSES FOR THE NEXT MAYOR, FOR THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL, FOR THE PUBLIC. THE LIGHT GREEN IS THE CURRENT PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST AND THE DARK GREEN IS WHAT WE ANTICIPATE WE'LL DO IN THE FUTURE FOR POTENTIAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. WHAT DOES THIS SHOW YOU? GRAPHICALLY THE 964 MILLION IN PRINCIPAL AND POTENTIAL $760 MILLION IN PRINCIPAL THAT IS STILL NEEDED. YOU SEE IN THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER WE TOTALED THAT FOR YOU. ANTICIPATED PRINCIPAL OF 1.7 BILLION WITH INTEREST OF 1.8 BILLION. YOU'LL NOTICE THE INTEREST IS SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN THE PRINCIPAL. THIS IS A GOOD TIME FOR ME TO TELL YOU THESE ARE VERY, VERY CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATES. YOU SEE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM THIS ASSUMES A 5% INTEREST RATE, 30-YEAR TERM. 5% IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE FIGURE. I DON'T ANTICIPATE IT WILL END UP BEING FIVE PERCENT, BUT WE JUST DON'T KNOW, OF COURSE, BECAUSE IT IS FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCE. I DO ANTICIPATE OUR CREDIT RATINGS WILL REMAIN SPECTACULAR BUT, OF COURSE, WE CAN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE LARGER ECONOMY. AND AS IS TYPICAL, YOU'LL SEE THE INTEREST OUTWEIGHS THE PRINCIPAL IN THE EARLY YEARS, WORKING ITS WAY UP TO WHERE YOU ARE SPENDING OFF MORE OF THE PRINCIPAL LATER IN THE DEBT SERVICE LIFE SPAN. TOTAL OF $3.5 BILLION THROUGH TO THE FAR RIGHT, FISCAL YEAR 2060. THIS DIFFERS PRIMARILY FROM WHAT WE SHOWED IN FEBRUARY. WE SIMPLY HAD IT BROKEN OUT BY CURRENT AND FUTURE AND NOW YOU SEE THE INTEREST AND PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS OF EACH OF THOSE LARGER COMPONENTS. A GREAT DEAL OF FUNDING. I THINK WHAT WE EMBARKED ON THE PIPES PROGRAM AND 20-YEAR, $3 BILLION PROGRAM, WE KNEW IT WOULD BE A GREAT DEAL OF FUNDING. I BELIEVE IT IS PRETTY UNIVERSAL -- UNIVERSAL OPINION THAT THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. I SEE NO REASON WHY IT WON'T REMAIN SUCCESSFUL. BUT STILL A SIGNIFICANT WAY TO GO. ANY QUESTIONS? >>LYNN HURTAK: SO LOOKING AT THIS GRAPH, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE GRAPH, THIS IS NOT SAYING WE'RE TAKING ALL THIS DEBT OUT IN '27. >>DENNIS ROGERO: NO, NO, NO. >>LYNN HURTAK: CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT? JUST BECAUSE THIS IS SCARY LOOKING IN TERMS OF OH, MY GOSH, IF WE TAKE OUT THIS DEBT TO FIX WATER AND WASTEWATER, THEN IN 2060, TURN AROUND AND DO IT ALL AGAIN, WHICH IS PROBABLY NOT UNSURPRISING, BUT CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW MUCH DEBT ISSUANCES THAT YOU SEE ON THIS? >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. WE'VE DONE THREE ALREADY FOR THE PIPES PROGRAM. WHAT WE ANTICIPATE, AGAIN, IT'S DIFFICULT TO TELL. WE ANTICIPATE TWO OR THREE MORE BEFORE WE GET TO THAT TOTAL FIGURE OVER FILL IN THE BLANK YEARS. AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO BE BASED ON WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO NEED THE FUNDING. I DON'T THINK WE ANTICIPATE COMING TO YOU IN FISCAL YEAR '26 BUT WE MIGHT. THEY MIGHT BE MOVING FAST ENOUGH. MAYBE FISCAL YEAR '27 WITH THE NEXT ISSUANCE. AGAIN, I DON'T ARGUE THAT IT'S NOT INTIMIDATING. THIS TCTS FOR WHAT WE THINK ENTIRE DEBT UNIVERSE FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER PROGRAM FOR THE 30 ODD YEAR PROGRAM. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS HOPING -- >>DENNIS ROGERO: I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THE QUESTION AS OPPOSED TO BAM. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THIS DEBT AS TAKING IT ON RIGHT NOW, BUT TAKING IT ON AS NEEDED AS WE MOVE FORWARD, AS WE CONTINUE THE LIFE OF THE PIPES PROGRAM. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, MA'AM. WELL SAID. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: SO, DOES THE WATER DEPARTMENT HAVE THE CASH FLOW TO PAY THE 110 MILLION, WHATEVER IT IS, PLUS THE OPERATING EXPENSE WITHOUT RAISING RATES? >>DENNIS ROGERO: AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A RATE STRUCTURE IN PLACE. AT SOME POINT, MAYBE YOU KNOW, MR. PERRY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO READDRESS THAT RATE STRUCTURE. >>BILL CARLSON: AT THE MAXIMUM LEVEL -- YOU REMIND US OF THE PIPE THING WHERE IT STEPS UP OVER TIME. MAXIMUM LEVEL, HITS AROUND US 10 YEARS, I THINK. ARE WE ABLE TO COVER WHATEVER IT IS 110 MILLION PLUS OPERATING EXPENSE? OR WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE RATES AT THAT POINT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: IF I COULD DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE GRAPH, YOU SEE ABOUT HALFWAY UP, YOU SEE THE LIGHT SECTION, THAT IS THE EXISTING DEBT, PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. AND WE'RE GOOD TO GO ON THAT. AS WE GO INTO THE FUTURE, SO FAR WE'VE GOT THE RATE STRUCTURE YOU MENTIONED AND THE ANNUAL INCREASES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS. BUT AT SOME POINT WE'LL HAVE TO REASSESS WHAT THOSE ARE. DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANY DETAIL TO THAT MIKE? AGAIN, TELL ME IF I'M GETTING TOO WONKISH OR TOO DETAILED. >>BILL CARLSON: NO. THIS IS HELPFUL. >>MICHAEL PERRY: MICK PERRY, REVENUE AND FINANCE. I'LL GET REALLY WONKISH. EVERY TIME BOND DEAL FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER, WE HAVE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY REPORT DONE BY OUR RATE CONSULTANT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS TO THE POTENTIAL BUYERS OF OUR BONDS THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH REVENUES COMING IN, RATE SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT THOSE FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCES. SO RIGHT NOW, WE DO HAVE SUFFICIENT RATES IN PLACE UNDER THE CURRENT OPERATING EXPENSES. NOW, IF OPERATING EXPENSES INCREASE, THEN WE MAY HAVE TO GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT. BASED ON THE LAST FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY REPORT AND AAA RATING BY THREE RATING AGENCIES, THE RATES AS THEY CURRENTLY ARE SUPPORT THE NEXT BOND ISSUES. >>BILL CARLSON: THE ONLY THING I WOULD REQUEST, IF IT HAPPENS IN THE NEXT YEAR AND A HALF WHEN I'M HERE, I WOULD APPRECIATE A COMPREHENSIVE PRESENTATION LIKE THE PIPES PRESENTATION, LOOK OUT OVER 10, 20 YEARS, HERE'S WHAT WE NEED AND WHY, AND MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC IS INVOLVED IN IT INSTEAD OF LIKE A HAPHAZARD, NOW THAT WE'VE ADDED THESE THREE THINGS, WE'LL HAVE TO RAISE THE RATES. IT WOULD BE BETTER TO GET THE PUBLIC'S BUY-IN OR FEEDBACK ON WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO SPEND MONEY ON AND WHAT THE COST WOULD BE AND HOW THAT AFFECTS RATES. >>RORY JONES: RORY JONES WITH THE WATER DEPARTMENT. YES, I AGREE. THIS YEAR, INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET IS A REFRESH OF OUR MASTER PLAN TO MAYBE LOOK AT THOSE OVERALL COSTS, WHERE THINGS HAVE GONE. IN OUR LAST PIPES UPDATE, WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO KEEP COSTS DOWN BUT WE'RE HAVING TO DEFER PROJECTS. THE PIPES FUND WAS REALLY A MECHANISM TO DIG US OUT OF A HOLE, HELP US WITH THE SITUATION WE WERE IN. WE'VE ONLY SEEN OUR RATES, OUR RATES HAVE GONE UP, BUT WE'VE ONLY SEEN OUR COSTS CONTINUE TO INCREASE. AT SOME POINT WE'LL HAVE TO READDRESS THAT BECAUSE WE ARE PUSHING AND DEFERRING OUT PROJECTS AND MAKING PRIORITY DECISIONS AT THIS MOMENT. HAVING A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF WHAT WE'RE GETTING FOR OUR MONEY IS IN THE WORKS. WE'RE GETTING GOOD VALUE WHERE WE'RE SPENDING IT, BUT THERE ARE SOME PROJECTS WE'RE HAVING TO DELAY. AMI WAS ONE OF THOSE. SOME OF THE PIPELINE AS WELL. IF WE DON'T ADDRESS THE RATES, EVENTUALLY CATCH UP WITH US IN THE FUTURE JUST LIKE DEALING WITH IN 2018. >>ERIC WEISS: ERIC WEISS, WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT. WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN, IRONICALLY THE UPDATE ADVERTISED TODAY FOR THE CONSULTANT TO COME IN AND LOOK AT THE MASTER PLAN, THAT'S ALMOST TEN YEARS OLD NOW, LOOK AT FUTURE GROWTH, NEW REGULATORY RULES AND TECHNOLOGY TO SEE WHERE WE'LL GO WITH THE REST OF THE PIPES PROGRAM. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AGAIN, I LOOK AT THIS. WHAT IS A BOND AND WHAT IS AN INTEREST. WHEN YOU BUY A HOUSE, YOU DON'T SAY I'LL BOND. PAY THE INTEREST RATE TO A BANK OR MORTGAGE HOLDER. THOSE THINGS ARE SET WHEN YOU SIGN THE CONTRACT TO BUY AT WHAT RATE. THESE BONDS I WOULD IMAGINE IF YOU HAVE A 5% BOND, THAT IT IS 5% ALL THE WAY THROUGH, AM I CORRECT OR DOES IT CHANGED BASED ON THE ECONOMICS OF THE COUNTRY? >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT WILL CHANGE BASED ON THE TERM OF THE SUBBONDS. IN ESSENCE, WHEN YOU BOND, IS IT LIKE BUYING A HOUSE OR SOMETHING DIFFERENT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: IT'S SIMILAR TO BUYING A HOUSE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: TRYING TO GET TO WHERE WE UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE AT. WHEN YOU BUY A HOUSE, I'LL USE MYSELF AS AN EXAMPLE. I COULDN'T AFFORD A HOUSE TODAY IF I WENT TO BUY A HOUSE THAT I LIVE IN THAT I BOUGHT IN 1968. THE PAYMENTS $69 A MONTH WITH A $7 SECOND MORTGAGE. I BONDED MYSELF FOR $12,600, WHATEVER IT WAS. THAT'S BEEN PAID OFF, JUST LIKE THE CITY PAYS OFF ITS DEBT. WHAT HAPPENS IF I DIDN'T -- I UNDERSTAND THE VALUE OF NOT GOING SO HIGH ON THE BOND RATING YOU CAN'T PAY. I UNDERSTAND THAT. JUST LIKE IF I WAS BACK IN '68 BUYING HOUSES. I COULDN'T BUY TWO, I COULD BARELY AFFORD ONE. THERE ARE NEGATIVES ON BONDING AND NEGATIVES ON GETTING A LOAN BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THEM. HOWEVER WHAT DOES IT DO FOR THE TIME YOU NEED. WHAT IS IT YOU ARE LOOKING AT WHEN YOU BOND, GO TO THE BANK AND SIGN A NOTE FOR 30 YEARS THAT YOU GET. THAT HOUSE IS WORTH $12,600 WHEN I BOUGHT IT. I GUESS IF I WANT TO PUT IT ON THE MARKET, I COULD GET 450,000. ONLY ONE PROBLEM, I CAN'T FIND ANOTHER HOUSE FOR 450,000. WHEN YOU BOND SOMETHING OUT, IT HAS SOME BENEFIT IF THE HOUSE INCREASES IN VALUE. ONLY THING THAT APPRECIATES IN VALUE AT -- DEPRECIATES IN VALUE AT TIMES IS YOUR AUTOMOBILE. BUT THE LAND GOES UP IN VALUE BECAUSE WE HAVE LESS AVAILABLE, NOT US. ANYBODY YOU ASK, BECAUSE OF GROWTH. IS BONDING THAT BAD THAT TERRIBLE THAT NOBODY WANTS TO BOND? WELL, I DON'T KNOW. WHATEVER YOU BOND TODAY, 20 YEARS FROM NOW, YOU WOULD PAY DOUBLE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, DOUBLE FOR THE LAND AND MORE THAN LIKELY MORE FOR THE INTEREST. YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND GIVE AND TAKE IN BOTH AREAS. BOND OR NOT BOND. GET WHAT I NEED TODAY AT A CERTAIN RATE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RATES WILL BE IN 10 OR 15 YEARS. WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, MEANING THIS CITY COUNCIL AND THIS ADMINISTRATION. SO THERE IS A LIMIT WHAT YOU CAN BOND TO, WHICH I NEVER WANT TO GET TO. BUT THERE IS A LIMIT THAT TELLS YOU IF YOU DON'T BUY TODAY, IN TEN YEARS, WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE SPENT ON INTEREST, YOU LOST IN VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. BUT THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, SIR. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THIS IS PART OF THAT, WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION EACH TIME WE TALK ABOUT THIS, GENERATIONAL FINANCING. POLITICAL CHOICE OF WHETHER WE NEED THE INFRASTRUCTURE, DON'T NEED THE INFRASTRUCTURE. IF WE NEED THE INFRASTRUCTURE, WHO WILL BE USING IT AND FOR HOW LONG. ISSUES LIKE WASTEWATER, WATER, FIRE DEPARTMENT, THOSE ISSUES THAT ARE LONGER TERM INVESTMENTS, I WOULD NOT WANT TO GO TO A RESIDENT IN THE CITY OF TAMPA WHO IS A SENIOR CITIZEN AND ASK THEM TO PAY FOR THE FULL AMOUNT OF THAT PROJECT KNOWING THAT THEIR GRANDKIDS ARE STILL GOING TO BE USING THAT, SO WHY NOT AMORTIZE THE COST OF THE PROJECT OVER THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT SO THEIR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS WILL PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF IT. THE CURRENT GENERATION DOESN'T NEED TO ABSORB THE ENTIRE BURDEN OF INVESTING INTO THE PROJECT AT THIS TIME. THAT IS MY BIGGEST THING ABOUT WHETHER A PROJECT IS WORTHY OF BORROWING FOR. THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT. BASIC BUSINESS PRACTICE OF AMORTIZING THE COST OVER THE LIFE OF THAT PARTICULAR GOODS AND SERVICES. EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM HEARD ME STOOD AGAINST BONDING OF THINGS NOT GENERATIONAL. USABLE OR DISPOSABLE, SOMETHING, NEED THAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND NOT AROUND IN FIVE OR SIX YEARS, I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR SOMETHING NOT AROUND IN FIVE OR SIX YEARS, 30 YEARS. I THINK IT IS WORTHY AND EXACTLY WHAT COUNCILMAN MIRANDA SAID. IF WE DON'T DO IT NOW, WHO IS GOING TO DO IT AND WE'LL PAY MORE IN THE END. A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO DO. WE'RE MAKING UP FOR SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT MAY BE BAD DECISIONS FROM YEARS GONE BY THAT THEY DID NOT INVEST. I THINK WE'VE ALL BEEN UP TO WASTEWATER AND WATER DEPARTMENT, ESPECIALLY THE WATER DEPARTMENT, HUNDRED-YEAR-OLD PUMPS AND THE EQUIPMENT THEY HAD UP THERE AND WHAT BAD STATE OF REPAIR IT WAS. THAT WAS NOT A WANT. THAT WAS AN ABSOLUTE NEED AND NEED 20 YEARS AGO, KEEPING IT RUNNING WITH BAND-AIDS AND GLUE AND GOOD WISHES, I GUESS. I DON'T KNOW. KNOCKING ON WOOD THREE TIMES. IT'S A GOOD THING WE'RE DOING THAT. THESE ISSUES, WATER, WASTEWATER, FIRE STATIONS, THOSE THINGS ARE GOING TO LAST US FOR GENERATIONS. IT'S OKAY TO BOND. IF YOU DO IT IN A JUDICIAL KIND OF WAY, AS MR. ROGERO SAID, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND THEY TIMED THE ISSUANCE SO IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE NEED AT THE TIME AND HOPEFULLY SHOPPING THE MARKETS AS WELL. THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: IF I COULD POSTSCRIPT. I'M GLAD COUNCILMAN CARLSON ASK THAT THAT QUESTION. GLAD HE BROUGHT UP THE FEASIBILITY STUDY. AS TALENTED AS MY TEAM IS, NOBODY IS TAKING OUR WORD FOR THE FACT THAT WE CAN PAY THESE BONDS OVER TIME FROM THE REVENUES WE ARE RECEIVING. WE HAVE ANY NUMBER OF OUTSIDE EXPERTS AND CONSULTANTS AFFIRMING THAT WE CAN, WHICH MAKES SENSE. IF YOU ARE AN INVESTOR OR INVESTORS, GETTING READY TO INVEST IN THE CITY OF TAMPA AND THAT'S WHAT A BOND IS. THEY ARE INVESTING IN US. INVESTING HUNDRED MILLION, 200 MILLION, 300 MILLION. YOU WANT AN ASSURANCE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PAY THEM BACK OVER THAT PARTICULAR PERIOD OF TIME. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP, PLEASE. MOVING INTO SOLID WASTE, POTENTIAL FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCES, OF COURSE, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, I WON'T GET INTO IT IN GREAT DETAIL. TWO SHORT-TERM ISSUANCES OUT THERE THAT WE INTEND AS DISCUSSED TO ROLL INTO A 30-YEAR BOND, ONE BOND PLEDGING THE SOLID WASTE DEBT REVENUE. HERE IS A GRAPHIC DEPICTION OF THAT OVER TIME. AGAIN, ABOUT $270 MILLION IN PRINCIPAL, SLIGHTLY LESS IN INTEREST WITH, OF COURSE, A VERY AGGRESSIVE INTEREST RATE PROJECTED. WE WANT TO GIVE YOU WHAT WE THINK IS THE MOST EXPENSIVE SCENARIO AND PERHAPS WE CAN COME DOWN FROM THAT DEPENDING ON WHAT THE MARKET IS DOING. THIS ACCOMPLISHES A COUPLE OF THINGS. OF COURSE, IT PLEDGES THE DEBT WHERE IT BELONGS, IN MY OPINION, AS OPPOSED TO BEING A BURDEN ON THE NON-AD VALOREM DEBT. AND BECAUSE WE'VE REVAMPED THE SOLID WASTE RATES AND INDEXED THEM AS IT IS OUR HABIT TO DO NOW, HASN'T ALWAYS BEEN OUR HABIT, BUT INDEXED THEM FOR THE FUTURE, WE THINK WE'VE SET THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT UP VERY, VERY WELL TO ADDRESS THIS DEBT BURDEN OVER TIME. >>LYNN HURTAK: QUICK QUESTION. IS THIS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DISCUSSED OR IS THIS THEIR PULLING ALL THIS? >>DENNIS ROGERO: THIS WE ANTICIPATE WE'LL DO ALL AT ONCE. THANK YOU FOR ASKING THE QUESTION. THIS WE ANTICIPATE WILL BE ONE BOND IN JUST A FEW YEARS. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES. ONCE EVERYTHING IS FINISHED. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS BEFORE WE MOVE ON? COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: DO WE HAVE ANY BONDING OUT THERE NOW THAT WILL TERM OUT OR BE PAID OUT WITHIN THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR YEARS? I'M JUST ASKING THAT. >>DENNIS ROGERO: WE HAVE SUBCOMPONENTS OF NON-AD VALOREM THAT WILL BE TERMED OUT. I'M GLAD YOU SURFACED THAT. AS YOU SEE THIS, TIME DOESN'T STOP. AS WE ACQUIRE NEW DEBT, WE'LL BE PAYING DOWN AND PAYING OUT AND PAYING DOWN EXISTING DEBT. THIS IS AGAIN WHAT WE WOULD ENVISION TO BE THE MOST EXPENSIVE SCENARIO. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I IMAGINE YOU UNDERSTAND WHY I'M ASKING. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THE DEBT FOR THE AQUARIUM SUNSETS IN JUST A FEW YEARS. I FORGET IF IT IS -- >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THEY HAVE DONE EXCELLENT JOB. ONE MILLION PEOPLE GOING THERE A YEAR. >>DENNIS ROGERO: JUST AN OUTSTANDING SUCCESS. FIVE, SIX MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY. SO THAT WILL SUNSET. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP, PLEASE. SPEAKING OF NON-AD VALOREM FINANCING, HERE IS SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN SOME OF THE NUMBERS YOU'VE BEEN SEEING, BUT BROKEN OUT, AGAIN, CURRENT AND FUTURE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. AGAIN, THAT LARGE INCREASE IN '29, WE ANTICIPATE THAT WILL GO AWAY WHEN WE ISSUE THAT SOLID WASTE BOND. IT CONTINUES TO BE AN ANOMALY IN OUR CHARTS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T ISSUED THAT BOND YET. OF COURSE, THAT NICE EVEN TAIL THROUGH THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. ABOUT 500 MILLION IN PRINCIPAL RIGHT NOW IN ANTICIPATED 250ISH MILLION STILL NEEDED IN FINANCING BASED ON THE PLAN THAT WE'VE PRESENTED. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: IN FACT, ON PAGE 23 YOU'RE ON, RIGHT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, SIR. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: MY MATH IS MAYBE INCORRECT. THE BOTTOM LINE, 769 MILLION, 356, 1,125 MILLION, NOT -- >>DENNIS ROGERO: AGREED. I HAVE A LITTLE PROBLEM WITH THAT FORMAT, TOO, GOING FROM A THOUSAND MILLION. I APPRECIATE THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS ONE AS WELL. AGAIN, JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S SAKE. WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE GIANT BLUE PORTION OF 2029 WILL SIMPLY BE ROLLED INTO THE SMALLER LIGHT BLUE PORTIONS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU FOR ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION. THAT GIANT BLUE IS GOING TO BE ROLLED INTO, BUT GOING TO BE ROLLED INTO WHAT WE JUST SAW FOR SOLID WASTE. >>LYNN HURTAK: RIGHT NOW HOLDING IT FOR AD VALOREM AND THEN SOLID WASTE. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, EXACTLY. >>LYNN HURTAK: POTENTIAL PRINCIPAL AND POTENTIAL INTEREST IS FOCUSED ON WHAT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: POTENTIAL PRINCIPAL AND POTENTIAL INTEREST ARE FOCUSED ON WHAT WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN OUT ABSENT SOLID WASTE PLUS THE 250 ODD MILLION DOLLAR PLAN THAT WE SHARED WITH YOU THAT INCLUDE ALL OF THE FIRE STATIONS, THAT INCLUDE THE TPD FORENSICS, FOR INSTANCE. THINGS LIKE THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: THIS MATCHES THE C.I.P. WHAT I'M NOT SEEING IN THE C.I.P. IS REALLY A TON OF THE PROJECTIONS FOR, SAY, THE FIRE STATIONS. THERE'S LITTLE BITS FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, BUT NOT MORE OF A TREMENDOUS FOCUS ON, SAY, YOU KNOW, IF IT IS COSTING 20 MILLION, THEN I'M NOT SEEING THAT BEARING OUT IN THE C.I.P. IS THERE A REASON FOR THAT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE MAYBE? >>LYNN HURTAK: I'LL HAVE TO PULL IT OUT. OF COURSE, I JUST CLOSED THE BOOK. THAT'S ALWAYS THE WAY, RIGHT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: THAT'S HOW IT GOES YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: LOOKING AT -- SORRY. IT IS A BIG BINDER, YOU-ALL. SO FIRE -- FIRE STATION NUMBER 9, OKAY, I SEE THAT AS GOING OUT. ALL I SEE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IS 9, 6, 24, AND 10 AND FLEET AND MAINTENANCE. I'M SEEING THOSE. I THINK I ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTION. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THOSE ARE THE BEST QUESTIONS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: ANYBODY ELSE? >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WHILE WE ARE -- IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. WHILE WE ARE STILL TALKING ABOUT NON-AD VALOREM FINANCING, COUNCIL HAD ASKED US TO BREAK OUT THE VARIOUS SOURCES THAT PAY FOR THAT NON-AD VALOREM FINANCING. IN FACT, I THINK THIS STEMS FROM A DISCREPANCY THAT YOU SAW, COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK, IN TERMS OF WHAT WE IDENTIFIED AS THE GENERAL FUND DEBT SERVICE AND WHAT WE ALSO IDENTIFIED IN ANOTHER PLACE, GENERAL FUND. I'LL TRY NOT TO GET TOO WONKISH. YOU SEE THE NON-AD VALOREM FINANCING AND YOU SEE THE VERY VARIED REVENUE SOURCES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THAT. DARK BLUE IS GENERAL FUND BUT ALSO SOLID WASTE IN THERE THAT WE ALREADY DISCUSSED. TOURISM DEVELOPMENT TAX, CRA, TAMPA SPORTS AUTHORITY, LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX, ET CETERA. WE CAN PROVIDE THIS IN SPREADSHEET FORMAT, TOO. IT DIDN'T WORK FROM A PRESENTATION SPRING BREAK. THE TAKEAWAY IS, EVEN THOUGH IT IS NON-AD VALOREM FINANCING, IT IS KIND OF SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE CIT. WE PLEDGED NON-AD VALOREM BUT OTHER REVENUE SOURCES CAN CONTRIBUTE TO PAYING THAT DEBT. DEPENDING ON HOW YOU ACCOUNT FOR THAT, IT CAN BE JUST THE GENERAL FUND, WHICH I'LL GET INTO IN JUST A MOMENT BECAUSE WE BROKE IT DOWN EVEN FURTHER AT YOUR REQUEST. FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, THE BROADER TERM GENERAL FUND. I'LL GET INTO THAT IN MORE DETAIL. I THINK THE TAKEAWAY FROM THIS IS WE HAVE A NUMBER OF REVENUE SOURCES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THAT NON-AD VALOREM FINANCING. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MR. ROGERO, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. THAT DECISION, HOW MUCH OF THAT IS POLITICAL VERSUS FINANCIAL ADVICE ABOUT WHERE THE MONEY IS COMING FROM AND HOW WE PAY IT OFF? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I THINK IT VARIES. WE WILL BE FINANCING A PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT NATURALLY LENDS ITSELF TO THE LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX BECAUSE IT IS A TRANSPORTATION RELATED PROJECT. WE COULD BE FINANCING A PROJECT THAT LENDS ITSELF ONLY TO THE GENERAL FUND AND THAT WOULD BE A FIRE STATION, FOR INSTANCE. SO WE TRY TO TIE WHEN FUNDING IS AVAILABLE, WE TRY TO TIE THE EXPENSE TO AN APPLICABLE REVENUE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: HERE IS, AS COUNCIL REQUESTED, TOTAL CITYWIDE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. THIS WILL AGAIN RESEMBLE CLOSELY WHAT WE SHARED WITH YOU ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO. YOU SEE IT DIVIDED INTO PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST BUT ALSO GOVERNMENTAL AND ENTERPRISE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: PAUSE THERE. COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I'M ASSUMING -- OKAY. THAT IS A BAD WORD TO USE. ARE TELL ME ABOUT THE ENTERPRISE INTEREST IS SO HIGH BECAUSE WE ARE JUST SETTING OUT ON OUR JOURNEY OF MANY OF THESE PROJECTS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. I TELL YOU, IT DOESN'T LOOK LOW BUT MOST OF THIS WAS DONE AT RECENT INTEREST VERY LOW INTEREST RATES. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES, BASICALLY WE ARE JUST STARTING FOR SOLID WASTE AND WE ARE JUST STARTING FOR THE WASTE TO ENERGY FACILITY. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. GOOD WAY TO PUT IT. AS YOU SAW IN THOSE OTHER CHARTS, OVERWHELMING PAYMENTS IN DEBT ARE GOING TO BE INTEREST UNTIL YOU START GETTING TOWARDS THE TAIL OF THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? GO AHEAD. >>DENNIS ROGERO: IF WE HADN'T THROWN ENOUGH COMPLEX CHARTS AT YOU BEFORE, THIS IS WHAT YOU SAW ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE, AGAIN IN THAT CHART FORMAT, BREAKING DOWN EACH COMPONENT INTO CURRENT AND FUTURE AND PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. FROM 50,000-FOOT VIEW LEVEL, AGAIN, YOU SEE THE TOTAL, A NICE EVEN PLAN ACROSS THE BOARD WITH A SLIGHT DECLINE IN THE OUT YEARS. HAVING LIVED THROUGH SOME DEBT SURPRISES IN MY CAREER, THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AND FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE THAT WE'RE NOT AMBUSHING ANY FUTURE MAYOR OR ADMINISTRATION WITH UNFORESEEN DEBT EXPENSES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: YOU DIDN'T ENJOY THAT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I DID NOT AT ALL SIR. LIVE AND LEARN. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: THIS IS GETTING INTO OLD NEWS. FORGIVE ME FOR THOSE OF YOU STILL HERE. THE COUNCIL MEMBERS I KNEW WHO WERE HERE AT THE TIME THAT LEFT, THEY SAID THE FORMER CFO, NOT YOU, AND THE MAYOR AT THE TIME MET WITH THEM AND SAID WE NEED TO FUND THIS JULIAN LANE PARK AND $12 MILLION BOATHOUSE. AND THEN A MONTH LATER, THEY CAME BACK AND SAID, OH, NOW WE HAVE THIS BALLOON PAYMENT. THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT ALL ALONG. SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AT THE TIME BELIEVED THEY WERE DUPED. THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TRANSPARENCY INTO THAT. I THINK THAT DENNIS, SINCE HE'S BEEN HERE, THIS IS -- THIS CHART IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE. AS WE ASK QUESTIONS, HE PROVIDES MORE AND MORE DETAIL AND TRIED TO PROVIDE TRANSPARENCY. NOT THAT THE CFO AT THE TIME DIDN'T. CFOs ULTIMATELY REPORT TO A MAYOR. BETWEEN DENNIS AND WHOEVER HE'S REPORTING TO, MAYOR AND OTHERS, THEY ARE ALLOWING FULL TRANSPARENCY AS WE ASK QUESTIONS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT'S WHY I KEEP BRINGING UP THE USE OF CIT AND NOT HAVING TO BOND, ESPECIALLY THE HOWARD AVENUE PROJECT, BECAUSE OF THE NO INTEREST, NO PAYMENT, THE AMOUNTS THAT WERE DUE FOR PROJECTS THAT WERE FROM THE 1990s. I THINK THAT'S WHAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON IS REFERRING TO, TO AVOID THAT. IT IS A HUGE AMOUNT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CITYWIDE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST FOR CURRENT POTENTIAL DEBT. THIS IS ALL THE C.I.P. THAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING? IS THIS AN ACCURATE PROJECTION? IF WE GOT OUR WISH LIST OF EVERYTHING WE'RE PROJECTING, THIS WOULD BE IT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES, SIR. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: LAST WEEK THE POLICE CHIEF MENTIONED THE $40 MILLION EVIDENCE BUILDING AND THINK YOU SAID $400 MILLION HEADQUARTERS FOR POLICE. ARE THOSE TWO PROJECTS IN HERE? >>DENNIS ROGERO: THE FORENSICS AND IMPOUND, GOES BY MANY NAMES, THAT IS HERE. NO HEADQUARTERS. >>BILL CARLSON: NO BUDGET FOR HEADQUARTERS. >>LYNN HURTAK: NOT THAT I HAVE SEEN, I BELIEVE CHIEF BENNETT CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IN SUBSEQUENT CONVERSATIONS, THAT 400 MILLION WAS BASED ON WHAT ST. PETE SPENT ON THEIRS, BUT WE WOULDN'T BE HAVING THE SAME TYPE OF -- >>BILL CARLSON: I THINK THEY ONLY SPENT 120. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT IF YOU BUILT IT TODAY AND I BELIEVE THEIR HEADQUARTERS INCLUDES THINGS THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE IN OURS. WE HAD A NICE CONVERSATION ABOUT IT, SO THIS WOULD BE A NICE TIME. >>JOHN BENNETT: JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF. AGAIN, THIS IS FRAMING, NO EXACT NUMBERS. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE 400 MILLION CAME FROM. WHAT I DID, I DEDUCED IT FROM MODERN STATE OF WHAT ST. PETE MAY HAVE DONE TO REBUILD THEIRS. I WAS OVER THERE WITH THE LAUNCH FOR THE PENNY FOR PINELLAS PLUS THEIR OWN INTERNAL FUNDS. YOU'RE CORRECT, IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE A FULL-THROATED HEADQUARTERS BECAUSE WE HAVE THREE DISTRIBUTED DISTRICTS. AGAIN, DOING VALUE ENGINEERING AND STAFF ENGINEERING, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING A LOT SMALLER. I THINK THE REAL VISION FOR THE CITY IS LOOKING AT POLICE COMMAND, FIRE COMMAND AND EOC WORKING TOGETHER WITH HAVING SOME OF THE REDUNDANCY AND THE 911 COMMUNICATION SYSTEM WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE NOW IN PART. AGAIN, IT IS TRYING TO LOOK TOWARDS EFFICIENCY AND ALSO OFFER SOME OF THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR EITHER BETTER OPERATIONS WITH THE ASSETS WE HAVE OR BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS CITY AND COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC TO USE LAND AT ITS BEST VALUE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IT'S AN INTERESTING CHART. IT'S FUNNY, IF WE TALK ABOUT THE HOWARD AVENUE PROJECT AND BONDING, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT IS AN ASSET THAT WILL BE USED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN I THOUGHT, THAN I ANTICIPATED WHEN I SEE IT ROLLED UP TOGETHER. THIS IS A GOOD CHART. AT LEAST FOR ME IT PROVIDES ME A LITTLE MORE ASSURANCE, ESPECIALLY AFTER 2030 AND FOR A PROJECT LIKE HOWARD, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN BE LOOKING AT BONDING FOR THAT PROBABLY UNTIL '29. WHEN WOULD YOU BOND THAT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: WE WOULD BOND IT, AGAIN, AS SOON AS WE HAD REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT THE FUNDING WAS GOING TO BE NEEDED VERY SOON. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THEY HAVEN'T STUCK A SHOVEL IN THE GROUND. COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT, AGAIN, AND I I DON'T DISAGREE, BUT THERE'S DEFINITELY -- I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO CONSIDER WHEN LOOKING AT A GRAPH LIKE THIS WHAT IS UNKNOWN. WE STILL HAVE TO THINK ABOUT A NEW HEADQUARTERS. AGAIN, I THINK I'LL GO BACK TO THE PARKS WHERE A LOT OF THAT -- WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO, PARKS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I AGREE. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT IT IS. IT IS A GOOD THING OF LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW. YEAH, HOW WE GO FURTHER IS DEFINITELY INTERESTING. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THE CHART IS A LITTLE MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN I ANTICIPATED. COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: NOT TO GO DOWN A RABBIT HOLE. THE ARGUMENT AGAINST THE HOWARD AVENUE PROJECT IS NOT BONDING. THAT'S PART OF IT. THE BIGGEST THING IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. IT'S NOT GOING TO PROTECT ANYONE BEYOND 5.7 INCHES AND NOT GOING TO PROTECT IN A MILTON SITUATION. VERY LITTLE STRUCTURE THAT'S BEEN PUT IN PALMA CEIA PINES OR TO THE NORTH WHERE THE WATER IS COMING FROM. I THINK WE OUGHT TO AT LEAST WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE A NEW STORMWATER MANAGER AND/OR WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION SO WE HAVE AN OBJECTIVE LOOK. THE THING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT, IF WE HAVE BONDING CAPACITY, WHAT IS THE BEST USE OF THAT BONDING CAPACITY? WE KNOW THAT IS A BOONDOGGLE PROJECT WE SHOULD KILL OR DELAY BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. I WAS TALKING TO A DOCTOR THE OTHER DAY. I SAID WHICH DOCTOR IS BETTER, THE ONE THAT SAYS, OH, EVERYTHING IS OKAY, I SEE THAT SPOT, BUT WHY DON'T YOU COME BACK IN A YEAR OR THE DOCTOR THAT SAYS WE NEED TO BE AGGRESSIVE ABOUT THAT SPOT BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE CANCER. EVEN THOUGH SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT IS A BOONDOGGLE PROJECT, WE NEED TO STOP AND EVALUATE IN AN OBJECTIVE WAY SO WE USE THE PUBLIC'S MONEY IN THE CORRECT WAY. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. MR. ROGERO. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. SPEAKING OF DEBT CAPACITY OR FINANCING CAPACITY, AS COUNCIL ASKED, WE GOT A FEW SLIDES AND SOME INFORMATION FOR YOU ON THAT ALSO. YOU SEE UP HERE RIGHT NOW OR I SHOULD SAY AS OF FEBRUARY OF EARLIER THIS YEAR, DEBT SERVICE TIME IS STILL VERY, VERY RECENT. OUR FINANCING CAPACITY IN THE GOVERNMENTAL AREA -- ARENA, EXCUSE ME IS 1.8 BILLION. IN THE WATER, WASTEWATER, 1.7 BILLION. AND YOU SEE ANY NUMBER OF CAVEATS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE NUMBERS ON THE REST OF THE SLIDE BECAUSE IT TRULY IS DIFFICULT TO PROJECT OVER TIME WHAT YOUR EXACT CAPACITY IS. YOU SEE THESE VARIOUS X FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. 1.8 BILLION. 1.7 BILLION. AND IF I COULD TURN TO THE NEXT SLIDE, AGAIN, COUNCIL SHOULD BE VERY, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS FORMAT. THIS IS WHAT WE SHARED. A SIMILAR FORMAT, WHAT WE SHARED IN FEBRUARY BUT IT'S UP TO DATE NOW. HERE IS OUR CAPACITY. FOR THE PROPORTIONALITY ASSOCIATED WITH WHAT WE'VE ALREADY ISSUED IN DEBT. TAKING THE TOP LINE THERE IN GOVERNMENTAL, OUR FINANCING CAPACITY, AGAIN, AS YOU SAW IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDES, $1.8 BILLION. IN OUR CURRENT CAPACITY JUST A LITTLE OVER 1.1 BILLION BECAUSE ON THE NEXT LINE, WE HAVE 675 MILLION OUTSTANDING OR LESS THAN 40%. THE SAME FORMATTING OCCURS FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT AT JUST UNDER 60% OF CAPACITY AT THIS TIME. THIS IS PROBABLY A GOOD TIME FOR ME TO REITERATE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CAPACITY AND AFFORDABILITY AND TO REITERATE THAT I'M NOT ADVOCATING THAT WE FINANCE TO THE CITY'S CAPACITY. I THINK WE'RE VERY, VERY FORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE SO MUCH CAPACITY, BUT WHAT IT REALLY WILL ALWAYS COME DOWN TO IS WHAT CAN THE CITY AFFORD. ULTIMATELY WHAT THAT WILL COME DOWN TO IS WHAT DOES THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDE THE CITY CAN AFFORD? WE COULD BOND -- WE HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO BOND, AS YOU SEE HERE, ANOTHER BILLION DOLLARS. CAN THE CITY AFFORD TO BOND ANOTHER BILLION DOLLARS IN THE GOVERNMENTAL ARENA? I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU WE DO NOT. IT IS NICE TO HAVE THE CAPACITY, AGAIN ULTIMATELY THE AFFORDABILITY IS A POLICY DECISION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WHAT FORMULA DO YOU USE FOR GROWTH OF REVENUES, GROWTH OF POPULATION? IS THAT BAKED INTO THESE EQUATIONS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: YES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: NOT A STATIC NUMBER. POTENTIAL GROWTH. >>DENNIS ROGERO: BASED ON OUTSTANDING DEBT AS OF SEPTEMBER 30. WHAT WE SHOWED YOU IN FEBRUARY I THINK WAS BASED ON JANUARY 31st. NOT ONLY THE DEBT, BUT THOSE OTHER TANGENTIAL FACTORS WHICH WILL CHANGE OVER TIME DEPENDING ON THE SNAPSHOT YOU TAKE AT THE TIME. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: BUT YOUR FINANCIAL CAPACITY. OBVIOUSLY THE REVENUES IN FIVE YEARS ARE GOING TO BE X NUMBER. IS THAT -- DOES THAT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT IN FIVE YEARS THE REVENUES WILL BE THAT MUCH GREATER? >>DENNIS ROGERO: TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY AT THIS TIME. WE DON'T GO NEARLY INTO AS MUCH DETAIL AS A FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT MR. PERRY REFERENCED EARLIER, FOR INSTANCE, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ENTERTAINING BONDING TO THIS CAPACITY. WE DO WORK WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISORS, ET CETERA. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. I THINK COUNCILMAN CARLSON WAS FIRST AND THEN COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>BILL CARLSON: THIS WAS SOMETHING I WAS GOING TO ASK LATER BUT SINCE HE ASKED IT. YOUR ADVISOR MUST HAVE CONDUCTED SOME KIND OF SENSITIVITY TEST ON THE PROJECTIONS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD, THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN AROUND THE WORLD THAT THE FREE MARKETS SYSTEM IS COLLAPSING, AND THAT IT'S GOING TO CHANGE GLOBAL COMMERCE COMPLETELY, COSTS WILL GO UP. I'M SEEING REPORTS OF PUBLIC AND OTHER COMPANIES THAT ARE SEEING BIG DROP-OFFS IN REVENUES. IS THERE A SCENARIO WHERE -- AND THE PROJECTIONS I'M HEARING FROM OTHER COUNTRIES IS IT COULD BE FIVE YEARS OR MORE BEFORE THE GLOBAL ECONOMY RESETS. IS THERE A SENSITIVITY TEST ON ALL THAT? THE SECOND QUESTION, GO AHEAD AND ASK IT, DOES THIS MODEL PRESUME THAT WE CAN BOND UP TO -- SET ASIDE THE CASH FLOW BUT BOND UP TO HUNDRED PERCENT WITHOUT OUR CREDIT RATING OR WHERE IS THE POINT WHERE CREDIT RATINGS DROP? THANK YOU. >>DENNIS ROGERO: THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I'LL ANSWER THE SECOND ONE, FIRST. NO, THIS DOES NOT PRESUME WE MAINTAIN THE STELLAR CREDIT RATING WE HAVE IF WE BOND TO COMPLETE CAPACITY. NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. >>BILL CARLSON: DO WE KNOW WITH THE CUTOFF SON ANY OF THESE? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I DON'T THINK WE KNOW BECAUSE IT IS SO MUCH OF AN ART AND SCIENCE. TO SOMEWHAT ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, IT WILL ALSO DEPEND ON WHAT THE LARGER ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT IS AT THE TIME. NOBODY LOOKS AT ANY CREDIT RATINGS IN A VACUUM. WE'RE DOING VERY WELL. THE ECONOMY IS DOING VERY WELL. BUT YOU HAVE SO MANY OTHER FACTORS THAT CAN INFLUENCE, WHETHER IT IS THE GLOBAL ECONOMY, AS YOU MENTIONED, THE NATIONAL ECONOMY, STATE ECONOMY, REGIONAL ECONOMY. IF I COULD, AGAIN, CONTINUE ON THAT THREAD FROM YOUR FIRST QUESTION, THERE IS CERTAINLY NO SHORTAGE OF ITEMS THAT WILL BRING YOU GREAT CONCERN REGARDING THE ECONOMY. ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS LOOK AT ALMOST ANY WEBSITE HEARD ME SAY IT BEFORE, SAY AGAIN, UNCERTAINTY UNCERTAINTY. THE LEVEL OF UNCERTAINTY OUT THERE AND DISRUPTION IN THE GLOBAL AND NATIONAL ECONOMY AND MAYBE STARTING TO GET IN THE STATE ECONOMY, MANY INSTANCES UNPRECEDENTED. YOU HAVE BUT TO LOOK IF YOU WANT TO FIND THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT IN THE ECONOMY. IT IS AN UNCERTAIN TIME. WE TRY AS ANY GOVERNMENT -- AND FRANKLY PRIVATE SECTOR. WE TRY TO TAKE ALL THE X FACTORS INTO ACCOUNT BUT A LOT OF THEM RIGHT NOW. >>BILL CARLSON: THE SENSITIVITY TEST, YOU HAVE LIKE A PLAN B AS TO WHERE THE, HOW YOU'LL COVER THE NUMBERS. THE OVERALL FUND BALANCE IS AT 23 PERCENT. THE WAY WE LOOKED AT THAT IN THE PAST IS THE BOND MARKETS EXPECT 20% NOW AS A FLOOR. SO THE 3 PERCENT IS OUR REAL RAINY DAY FUND. SINCE WE'VE HAD 23 PERCENT FOR SO MANY YEARS, IS THAT OUR NEW FLOOR OR DO WE HAVE THAT 3 PERCENT IN CASE WE RUN INTO A DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I THINK THE FLOOR IS APPROXIMATELY THAT 23 PERCENT. WHEN THE CREDIT RATING AGENCIES ARE RATING OUR CREDITWORTHINESS, IT IS A LITTLE BIT OF AN ART AND A LITTLE BIT OF A SCIENCE. FURTHER TO YOUR PREVIOUS POINT, FOR SOME TIME WE HAD THAT 20% POLICY AND STILL HAVE THAT 20% POLICY, BUT IT HAS BEEN YEARS SINCE WE APPROACHED THE 20%. I WOULD SUBMIT FROM A CREDIT RATING PERSPECTIVE, OUR FLOOR IS NOW IN THE 23ISH, 22 PERCENT RANGE. I'M SORRY. YOU HAD ASKED ONE OTHER THING. YES, WE DO, FROM A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS PERSPECTIVE, THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS, FOR INSTANCE, THAT THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS HAVE 90 DAY OPERATING RESERVE REQUIREMENTS. THEY HAVE THE REPAIR AND REFURBISHMENT REQUIREMENTS. THERE ARE SO MANY COMPONENTS THAT GO INTO IDENTIFYING WHAT THEIR MINIMUMS ARE. AND SOME OF THOSE COMPONENTS ARE WHAT HAPPENS IF THINGS GO VERY, VERY BADLY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION, WHAT DO WE DO KNOWING IT'S SORT OF LIKE -- MY IN-LAWS JUST GOT BACK FROM A 50th WEDDING ANNIVERSARY TRIP TO HAWAII. OF COURSE, WHILE THEY WERE THERE THERE WAS A TSUNAMI WARNING. SO THE WHOLE THING OF THEY WATCHED EVERYONE PREPARE, THEY HAD THIS THEORY OF ALL THE WATER COMING TOWARD THEM AND THERE ENDED UP BEING NOTHING BUT A FLOODED PARKING GARAGE ON ANOTHER ISLAND IS WHAT THEY SAID. BASICALLY, IT'S THE SAME VISUAL. WE'RE WATCHING AND WAITING FOR THIS WATER TO COME BECAUSE OF EVERYTHING WE'RE HEARING. I THINK HISTORICALLY I WOULD BE INTERESTED, HOW LONG DID IT TAKE THE CITY TO RECOVER FROM THE 2007 CRASH MONETARILY? IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT, THAT'S JUST A QUESTION FOR -- >>DENNIS ROGERO: I DON'T KNOW IT. A WHILE. WE CAN CIRCLE BACK. THAT WAS A GREAT HIT, THE FINANCIAL CRISIS. >>LYNN HURTAK: I THINK AS WE'RE LOOKING TOWARD THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENING AGAIN, IT WOULDN'T HURT TO TAKE A LOOK BACK TO HISTORY TO SEE WHAT KIND OF WE WERE ABLE TO -- YOU KNOW, WHAT OUR -- I THINK WHAT I'M MOST INTERESTED IN IS WHAT WAS OUR DEBT PERSPECTIVE? WHAT DID IT LOOK LIKE IN 2007 WHEN IT HIT? AND ARE WE IN THE SAME BASIC VEIN? ARE WE LESS? JUST AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO PREPARE FOR WHATEVER COMES, JUST HAVING THAT HISTORICAL DATA I THINK WOULD BE USEFUL. >>JOHN BENNETT: JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF. JUST A COMMENT. I THINK ONE OF THE BAROMETRICS, WE ARE BELOW THE FTE NUMBER WE WERE RIGHT BEFORE THAT. I THINK IT WAS A NEEDED LEVEL OF EFFICIENCY THAT WE WENT THROUGH THAT WE STILL CAN GO THROUGH. IF THE POPULATION WAS DOING THIS, AND THE STAFF STAYED FAIRLY FLAT. I KNOW IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT PART, WE REDUCED FROM 3.2 PER THOUSAND TO 2.49 PER THOUSAND AND STILL REDUCED CRIME THROUGH EFFICIENCY TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICES. SO I THINK WE ALL HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO GO THROUGH THAT. BUT I DO THINK TO LOOK BACK TO GO FORWARD IS A HEALTHY EXERCISE. >>LYNN HURTAK: I THINK IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS AS WE HEAR THE RUMBLINGS AND PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED IN THEIR OWN HOUSEHOLDS, I THINK IT'S A GREAT TIME FOR US TO LOOK AS A CITY, SEE WHAT HAPPENED IN 2007. I'LL WORK WITH YOU AND HAGAR -- I'M SORRY, MS. KOPESKY TO MAKE A MOTION GOING FORWARD. MAYBE THAT'S JUST INFORMATION FOR US IN A WRITTEN REPORT. MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT NOW THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT EVERYONE IS HANDLING WITHIN THEIR OWN PERSONAL FINANCES AND AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO WHAT HAPPENS. >>DENNIS ROGERO: PRUDENT QUESTIONS. I THINK THE CHIEF FRAMED IT WELL. LOOK BACK TO LOOK FORWARD. I'M SORRY I TURNED AWAY WHILE YOU WERE TALKING. I THOUGHT PERHAPS I COINCIDENTALLY HAD THE ANSWER ON ME, BUT I DIDN'T. >>LYNN HURTAK: NO WORRIES. WE STILL, I DON'T BELIEVE HAVE -- WE KIND OF TOUCHED ON THIS A LITTLE BIT. WE STILL HAVEN'T SEEN -- WE HAVEN'T REALLY FELT THE IMPACT STILL OF WHAT HAPPENED DURING HELENE AND MILTON IN TERMS OF HOUSING, PROPERTY TAXES, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT FOLKS ARE STILL FIGHTING INSURANCE COMPANIES ABOUT AND THE LIKE. I STILL THINK THERE IS A LITTLE BIT -- FEELS LIKE IN THIS BUDGET WE NEED TO BE A LITTLE MORE CONSERVATIVE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I DON'T MEAN TO INHIBIT CONVERSATION, JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY IT IS 10:45. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF, BOTH YOURSELF AND MR. PERRY FOR PUTTING THIS THING IN A REASONABLE UNDERSTANDING, ALL OF US CAN UNDERSTAND IT TO MOST DEGREE. UNCERTAINTY IS CAUSED BY MANY LITTLE THINGS THAT ADD UP TO ONE BIG THING, FROM MENTAL, THINKING OF WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THIS GOVERNMENT, HAPPENING TO COUNTRIES ALL OVER THE WORLD THAT CAN'T MEET THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO I'M GOING TO MEET WITH THIS INDIVIDUAL ABOUT THE WAR IN UKRAINE. I'M SPEAKING IN GENERAL TERMS. THERE ARE WARS GOING ON. MAY ERUPT TO SOMETHING BIGGER. I HOPE NOT POSSIBILITY OF IT HAPPENING. UNCERTAINTY BETWEEN THIS GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT IN FARAWAY LANDS. CHINA, NORTH KOREA. PEOPLE ARE NERVOUS ABOUT MANY, MANY THINGS. COST OF GOODS GOING UP. I MENTIONED THE OTHER DAY -- EGGS 31 CENTS A DOZEN WHEN FIRST HIRED IN 1962. NOW I DON'T KNOW THE PRICE. I STOPPED BUYING THEM. AMAZING THING THAT HAPPENED TO THE ECONOMY. WHEN THE ECONOMY STARTS TO GO, NERVOUSNESS -- EVEN THOUGH DON'T INVEST IN THE BIG ECONOMY -- EMPLOYEES OF THIS CITY ALTOGETHER IN THE STOCK MARKET. SO WHEN THE MARKET GOES DOWN, THEN IT GOES UP. UP AND DOWN LIKE A YO-YO, PEOPLE GET NERVOUS. THEY DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL STAY DOWN OR COME BACK TO WHERE IT WAS. THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT START WORKING ON YOU WITHOUT YOU REALIZING IT'S GOING ON. HOUSING, MAY COME TO A FLOOR AREA. MAY HAVE MORE HOUSES AVAILABLE THAN CUSTOMERS. I'M NOT SAYING IN THIS CITY, BUT IN ANY PLACE. ALL KINDS OF THINGS GOING ON. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FIRES ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES, YOU LOOK AT THE FLOODING, PLACES THAT NEVER FLOODED BEFORE IN THE COUNTRY, WE HAVE A PROBLEM. AND THE PROBLEM IS US. WE'RE ABUSING WHAT NATURE GAVE US. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I HAVE TWO FINAL SLIDES AND I THINK WE'VE PRETTY MUCH COVERED. IF I COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION BACK UP. THIS IS SIMPLY OUR FINANCING CAPACITY IN GRAPHIC TERMS. AND THEN A REMINDER TO THE PUBLIC OF RIGHT NOW WE'VE SCHEDULED GOING FORWARD ADDITIONAL WORKSHOPS IN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON FISCAL YEAR 2026 AND THE SPECIAL CALL WORKSHOP TONIGHT IS ABOUT STORMWATER. THAT IS ALL I HAVE, MR. CHAIR. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCIL, WE HAVE ALL THE PLAYERS IN THE AUDIENCE. PARKING WATER WASTEWATER FLEET MAINTENANCE, SOCIAL ACTIONS AND ARTS FUND. SAVE THAT FOR THE LAST ITEM OF BUSINESS. SINCE WE'VE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT WATER, WASTEWATER, SOLID WASTE, WHY DON'T WE START WITH WATER. COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BUDGET FOR WATER? >>BILL CARLSON: I THINK WE'VE BEEN ASKING AS WE WENT ALONG. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. WASTEWATER. ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WASTEWATER? HEARING NONE, OKAY. SOLID WASTE? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY JUST IN CASE. PARKING. ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR PARKING? COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: FED, I KNOW WHAT SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES ARE GOING TO SAY, SINCE WE DON'T HAVE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES AND DON'T HAVE A ROBUST MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM, WE THOUGHT BOTH WOULD BE IN EFFECT BY NOW, SOME DEVELOPERS AND OTHERS ARE CALLING FOR THE CITY TO PUT PARKING -- NEW PARKING GARAGES. ARE THERE PLANS FOR NEW PARKING GARAGES ON THE HORIZON THAT ARE MAYBE NOT INCLUDED IN THE NUMBERS? >> FED, MOBILITY. NOT RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANNED PARKING GARAGES. >>BILL CARLSON: I THINK THE PROBLEM PREVIOUSLY WAS THAT -- THE WAY THE CITY LOOKED AT PARKING GARAGES, THEY WERE UPSIDE DOWN REVENUE-WISE, SO WHY INVEST IN ANOTHER ONE. NOW WITH THE RATE INCREASES, THEY ARE FUNDING THEMSELVES. THEY ARE SPINNING OFF CASH. ARE YOU ALL DOING SOME KIND OF PARKING ANALYSIS TO SEE IF THE CITY SHOULD HAVE MORE GARAGES SOMEWHERE? >> WE DO. WE'RE WORKING WITH A CONSULTANT RIGHT NOW. THAT'S ONE OF THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. >>BILL CARLSON: I'LL TALK TO YOU OFF-LINE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I HAD THE SAME QUESTION. SEEMS LIKE THEY ARE ALMOST LIKE SLOT MACHINES. PUT IT UP AND PEOPLE PAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON PARKING? COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES, TO SOME DEGREE. BUT REMEMBER, COSTS BETWEEN 30 AND 50 THOUSAND DOLLARS A SPACE TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE AND WE ARE OVER-PARKED DOWNTOWN. THERE ARE ALWAYS -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: NOT NECESSARILY DOWNTOWN. >>LYNN HURTAK: I KNOW. I'M JUST SAYING. >>BILL CARLSON: THE ISSUE ESPECIALLY HAS COME UP IN YBOR. A LOT OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT DON'T HAVE PARKING. NOW AS ALL THE NEW DEVELOPMENT HAS COME ONLINE, THE CITY PARKING GARAGES ARE FULL MORE OFTEN. SAME THING, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THIS, BUT THE SAME THING IN AND AROUND HYDE PARK VILLAGE, THERE WAS A CITY PUBLIC MEETING, THE ONE YOU AND I WENT TOGETHER THE OTHER DAY THAT YOU PUT TOGETHER, AND EVEN YOU COULDN'T FIND PARKING. THOSE ARE NOT CITY GARAGES. BUT THE PARKING IS FULL ALL THE TIME EVERYWHERE. AS THE CITY HAS GROWN, AS WE'RE HAVING MORE AND MORE EVENTS, THERE SEEMS TO BE A NEED FOR PARKING. THE QUESTION, IS THERE A WAY THAT THE CITY COULD BUILD A PARKING GARAGE THAT COULD BE SHARED BY MULTIPLE USES, FOR EXAMPLE, TALKING ABOUT THE INVENTORY NEED, IF THERE WAS A CONDO ON ONE SIDE AND OFFICE ON THE OTHER, ONE WOULD USE AT NIGHT, ONE DURING THE DAY. THAT IS A DISCUSSION TO HAVE OFF-LINE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: TWO THINGS ON THAT SAME THOUGHT. THERE WAS WAY BACK TWO, THREE ADMINISTRATIONS BACK, A CONVERSATION HELD ABOUT BUILDING ANOTHER PARKING GARAGE ON THE EASTERN PART BETWEEN 8th AVENUE BACK IN THERE AT THAT TIME. THAT HAS DIED DOWN. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THAT ANYMORE. NOWADAYS IF WE REDUCE PARKING, WE'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE DONE IT. NO ONE ELSE. IT IS OUR THING TO MAKE SURE WE STICK BY WHAT WE SAY AND DO WHAT WE SAY AND DO EXACTLY HOW WE SAY IT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING, YOU NEED PARKING. DON'T HAVE THE PARKING, NOT GOING TO GET IT. UNLESS THEY WANT TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THEMSELVES, PARKING IS THE THING THAT MAKES IT GO AROUND. I DON'T CARE WHAT ECONOMY YOU HAVE. IF YOU CAN'T PARK, YOU CAN'T SELL. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DISAGREE BECAUSE THAT IS AN ANTIQUATED LOOKING WAY. WE'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE THE CITY FORWARD IF WE BUILD MORE PARKING. THAT'S JUST THE REALITY OF IT. WE HAVE TO FIND THAT BALANCE, BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DOING MORE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING. SO AS WE DO, I THINK THE CITY WILL GROW. BUT I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING. I'M GOING TO TAKE THOSE QUESTIONS OFF-LINE WITH THE FINANCE STAFF. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A NEED. I'D LOVE TO SEE STRATEGIC PROPERTY ACQUISITION ALONG EASTERN YBOR, ESPECIALLY AS WE SEE SOME OF THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND MAYBE SOMETHING ELSE INTERESTING MIGHT HAPPEN SOMEWHERE IN THE YBOR AREA -- >>LYNN HURTAK: OR MAYBE THEY CAN BUILD THEIR OWN GARAGE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THERE ARE CITY NEEDS FOR IT. PEOPLE COME FROM OTHER COUNTIES TO VISIT. THE NEXT 30 YEARS WE'LL HAVE NEED FOR PARKING IN CERTAIN AREAS. I THINK DEFINITELY AN OPPORTUNITY TO AT LEAST BE EXPLORING SOME OF THESE THINGS, AT LEAST KEEP IT FRONT OF MIND. >> ONE THING I WOULD ADD IS WE ARE LOSING SOME PARKING ASSETS. ROYAL REGION LOT AND ARMY NAVY LOT ON NORTH END OF DOWNTOWN AND ALL THE THEA LOTS. NOT SURE IF YOU SAW THE THEA MASTER PLAN, ALL THE SURFACE LOTS WILL BE TAKEN OFF LINE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THOUGH, FOR THE ROYAL LOT, ONE OF THE PARTS OF THAT DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE PUBLIC PARKING. IS THAT NO LONGER THE CASE? >> IT'S MORE OF A COMPONENT TO HAVE PUBLIC PARKING AVAILABLE, NOT THAT IT WOULD BE UNDER THE CITY OF TAMPA PARKING DIVISION. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT'S WHAT I MEANT. THANK YOU. ALTHOUGH WOULDN'T THAT -- SINCE WE OWN THAT LAND, WOULDN'T IT TECHNICALLY BE OURS? >> IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW THE AGREEMENT IS STRUCTURED. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, ANYTHING ELSE? THE ONLY OTHER THING ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS PORTION IS FLEET MAINTENANCE. ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT FLEET MAINTENANCE? SEEMS LIKE CIT WILL COVER A LOT OF THAT. MR. ROGERO, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM -- >>DENNIS ROGERO: I HAVE A SIMILAR -- I'D HAVE TO PUT IT ON THE WOLF, BUT I HAVE A SIMILAR FORMAT FOR THAT FLEET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, IF COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT. I DIDN'T WANT TO DELAY THE MEETING ANY FURTHER, IF NO ONE HAS GOT QUESTIONS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN E-MAIL? >>DENNIS ROGERO: WE CAN E-MAIL IT. >>LYNN HURTAK: IF YOU HAVE THE PHYSICAL SLIDES, I'D LOVE TO SEE THEM. >>DENNIS ROGERO: WE'LL GIVE THEM TO YOU. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THOSE ARE THE ITEMS COVERED PARKING, WATER, WASTEWATER, SOLID WASTE, FLEET MAINTENANCE AND BONDING. I'M GETTING TO YOU ALL. THAT CLOSES THE FIRST ITEM FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION. LIKE TO OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THOSE ITEMS, PARKING, WATER, WASTEWATER, SOLID WASTE, FLEET MAINTENANCE AND BONDING. IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THOSE ITEMS, PLEASE GO TO THE WALL. WE'LL START WITH MICHAEL RANDOLPH ONLINE FIRST. GOOD MORNING, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING. I'M NOT SPEAKING ON ANY OF THOSE TOPICS. I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ON THE SOCIAL. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT WILL BE THE THIRD ITEM ON THE AGENDA. HANG TIGHT, WE'LL GET TO YOU. >> THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IN PERSON. >> ALISON HEWITT, BUSINESS OWNER, RESIDENT OF EAST TAMPA. A QUESTION ABOUT THE PARKING. AS I'VE BEEN TALKING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WORK IN YBOR, THEY HAVE ONE PASS THAT ALLOWS THEM TO PARK IN THE PARKING GARAGE. THE PARKING GARAGE IS OFTEN FULL, SO THEY HAVE FOLKS WHO ARE OFTEN VERY LATE TO WORK TRYING TO FIND PARKING. WE ALSO HAVE THEM THAT ARE IN MORE SERVICE AREAS. SO THEY ARE MAKING NOT A LOT OF MONEY TO HAVE HALF THEIR PAY FOR THAT HOUR OR TWO HOURS THAT THEY WORK GOOD FOR PARKING. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO CREATIVE ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES A SECTION FOR EMPLOYEE PARKING? BECAUSE WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS THEY ARE PENALIZING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING TO WORK IN YBOR TO SAY THAT NOW THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR PARKING BUT WE HAVE TO WALK ALL THE WAY TO THE PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE AND THE PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE IS FULL AND THEREFORE THEY ARE LATE TO WORK. SO WE'RE HAVING A NEGATIVE CYCLICAL RESPONSE TO TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR SMALL BUSINESSES ARE GROWING AND BE SUPPORTED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION ON HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO OUR WORKERS WHO ARE WORKING IN YBOR CITY. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? >> GOOD MORNING. STEPHANIE POYNOR. THIS SLIDE HERE, THIS FINANCING SLIDE, DOES THIS INCLUDE THE $105 MILLION THAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR IN THE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION? THAT'S MY BIG QUESTION? I WAS VERY EXCITED. I EVEN SENT AN E-MAIL ABOUT IT. WASTEWATER WATER WATER AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ALL HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET. WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT MY STUFF FROM LAST YEAR, THEY DID THAT LAST YEAR, TOO, WHICH I THINK IS IMPRESSIVE. I DON'T THINK THAT HAPPENS NATURALLY. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE POINTED THAT OUT, THAT THEY ARE BEING RATHER FRUGAL WITH OUR MONEY. I THINK WE NEED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO PARKS. I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH MORE THIS IS. WHEN I SEE IT, I ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT THIS SLIDE RIGHT HERE, WHERE IS IT? I'M USED TO LOOKING AT AMORTIZATION TABLES. I'M KIND OF A JUNKIE ABOUT IT. WHEN I PAY OFF MY HOUSES, I PAY MONEY EVERY MONTH UNTIL IT IS PAID FOR. THIS CHART, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT IN THREE OR FOUR CHARTS INSTEAD OF CRAMMED TOGETHER BECAUSE IT'S VERY, VERY CONFUSING. IF IT'S CONFUSING FOR ME, SOMEBODY WHO LIKES THIS STUFF, IT HAS TO BE CONFUSING FOR A NORMAL PERSON SITTING DOWN LOOKING AT IT. THOSE ARE MY TWO BIG COMMENTS FROM THIS MORNING. SURE I HAVE SOMETHING ELSE TO SAY BUT I'VE FORGOTTEN. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I DON'T THINK THAT NORMAL PEOPLE LOOK AT THAT. >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. FRAN TATE JACKSON HEIGHTS, EAST TAMPA ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER. I WANT TO GO ON RECORD SAYING THAT PARKING IS AN ISSUE DOWNTOWN AND DOES NEED TO BE A STUDY FOR MORE PARKING GARAGES. THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING. KELLA McCASKILL. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT PARKING. NOT ONLY IS PARKING EXPENSIVE, WE ARE TAXPAYERS, PAYING THE GARAGES. THE FEE TO PARK, YBOR HAS A TWO HOUR WINDOW WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY. IT'S A ALWAYS FULL. ADDITIONAL FEES, PEOPLE MAKING LESS MONEY THAN THEY SHOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE FORGIVENESS AS IT RELATES TO BOOT ON THE CARS, MORE TIME. THEN THEY CAN'T RENEW THE TAG. IT IS A CYCLE. ALL GOING BACK TO YOU ALL. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING DONE ABOUT THE PARKING AS IT RELATES TO INDIVIDUALS, PARTICULARLY THE EMPLOYEES SHE MENTIONED AND ALSO PEOPLE COMING AND SUPPORT YBOR. I'M THERE THREE TIMES A WEEK AND ALWAYS STRUGGLING SOMEWHERE TO PARK BEHIND THE ESTABLISHMENT. SECONDLY -- I DON'T MEAN A GARAGE. I MEAN BEHIND THE ESTABLISHMENTS I'M GOING TO SUPPORT AND THEN ALSO THE FEES AS IT RELATES TO PARKING. CAN WE DO THREE HOURS, FOUR HOURS, SOMETHING TO SUPPORT THE PEOPLE TRYING TO SUPPORT THE BUSINESSES IN THE AREA. PARKS, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS A PART OF THIS, IN THE PARKS, I SEE THE MONEY THERE. SAW THE FAIR OAKS PARK, BUT YOU HAVE OTHER PARKS IN THE AREA THAT NEED TO BE IMPROVED AS WELL. ONE IS AL BARNES. IT SHOULDN'T TAKE THE POLICE OFFICER TO POINT OUT THE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE AT AL BARNES AND THEN DO AN UPDATE ON PARKS, STILL DON'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THE PA, THAT POSES A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE AND IT LOOKS A MESS. THE CITY IS BIGGEST VIOLATOR OF CODE ENFORCEMENT, OVERGROWTH, DEBRIS, THE PARKS, SOMETHING WE PAY FOR, CAN'T BE MAINTENANCE. STILL WAITING FOR AN UPDATE ON AL BARNES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AL BARNES SHOW UP TO BE A SAFE PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO PLAY. THE LAST THING IS SOLID WASTE. I WANT TO SEE SOME MONEY SPENT ON OUTREACH. THEY GET A LOT OF MONEY. A LOT OF MONEY IN THAT BUDGET. I WANT TO SEE THE PROGRAMS THAT THEY HAVE AVAILABLE FOR SOME OF THE SENIORS, CODE ENFORCEMENT FINES, I WANT TO SEE SOME EFFORT TO USE THE SERVICES OR GRANTS OR PROCESSES THAT THEY HAVE AT NO COST TO HELP THEM ELIMINATE SOME OF THE BLIGHT. WHEN I CALL THEM, I CAN'T GET ANYTHING FROM THEM. THEY SEND ME BACK TO EAST TAMPA SAYING THEY HAVE A PROGRAM. I WANT TO SEE THE DOLLARS THEY SPEND, I WANT TO SEE THEM DO SOME EFFORTS TO DO OUTREACH AND WORK WITH THE INDIVIDUALS. WHETHER YOU SPEND A LOT OF TIME SHARING INFORMATION. SPEND TIME DOING OUTREACH, DOOR TO DOOR, WHATEVER IT IS, SHOW PEOPLE THAT YOU CARE AND THAT THEY ARE PAYING BUT ALSO CAN REAP FROM SOLID WASTE. THEY GET A LOT OF MONEY. I WANT TO SEE THE EFFORT FOR THESE TAX-PAYING CITIZENS AND HOMEOWNERS, THAT YOU SUPPORT THEM IN THIS CITY. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. SOMEBODY ELSE? DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? >> I WASN'T SURE WHETHER OR NOT I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ON PARKS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT WAS ADDRESSED EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION. >> YES. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. QUITE A FEW MENTIONS IN REGARDS TO PARKS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: START WITH YOUR NAME FIRST, PLEASE. >> CHARLIE ADAMS. REPRESENTING SULPHUR SPRINGS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, SULPHUR SPRINGS COMMUNITY. EARLIER I HEARD LAST WEEK COUNCILMAN BILL CARLSON MENTION OUR PARKS AND I WOULD LOVE TO INDIVIDUALLY INVITE ALL OF YOU ALL DOWN TO SEE OUR PARK AND JUST WITNESS WHAT COUNCILMAN BILL CARLSON SEEING FOR HIMSELF. IT IS UNDERSERVED AREA. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY THERE, AS HE MENTIONED. I BELIEVE TIME TO ALLOW THE REST OF THE WORLD TO SEE WHAT A WONDERFUL ASSET WE HAVE IN THE TAMPA AREA WITH THE NATURAL SPRING, WITH THE BOARDWALK, AND I HOPE IN THIS BUDGET WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP THAT IN MIND, THAT THERE IS A HUGE OPPORTUNITY THERE. ONE OF THE THINGS I DON'T LIKE SEEING, I USED TO GO TO THIS PARK WHEN I WAS A KID. DON'T WANT MAKE IT ABOUT MYSELF. WHEN YOU SEE HOMELESS SITTING IN THE PARKS AND A LITTLE GIRL THAT WANT TO PLAY ON THE SWING BUT BECAUSE THERE'S NO ATTENTION IN THE AREA -- I THINK IT IS A DISSERVICE. I THINK IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA TO RIGHT, TO MAKE SOMETHING RIGHT, TO MAKE GOOD. I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN SHARE LIGHT AND BRING RESOURCES TO THIS AREA. IT'S BEEN OVER 20 SOMETHING YEARS WE'VE HAD ANY UPDATES. IT'S BEEN MAYBE THE LAST EIGHT YEARS THAT WE HAVE ANY ACTIVITY AT THIS AREA. WE DON'T HAVE A SAFE HAVEN SERVED AS. WE ALL KNOW THE CHAOS THAT GOES ON IN SULPHUR SPRINGS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON DILIGENTLY BUT WE NEED AN OUTLET. I THINK OUR GREENSPACE CAN BE THAT ROUTE. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU, MR. ADAMS. ANYBODY ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEMS? THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS PORTION. THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS NUMBER 2, STAFF TO IDENTIFY ANY LARGE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT NEED CITY FUNDING FOR THEIR GRANT MATCHING. ANYBODY FROM STAFF TO REPORT ON THIS? THANKS GUYS. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. ANYBODY FROM STAFF TO REPORT ON THIS ITEM? JOHN? >>JOHN BENNETT: JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF. I'LL PINCH-HIT WHERE NEEDED. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY STAFF THAT HAS SURFACED ON THIS SECTION THAT I'M AWARE OF. IF SOMEONE PRESENTS SOMETHING TO US, IT USUALLY GETS FED INTO THE SOCIAL ACTIONS AND ARTS FUND OR SOME OTHER SUPPORT WHERE THE GRANTS OFFICE WILL SEND A LETTER FROM THE CITY IN SUPPORT OF A GRANT THAT WE'RE MAYBE SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE TO HELP SUPPORT BUT NOT FINANCIALLY. AGAIN, NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION. CHECK IN WITH THE CFO, IF NOTHING THERE OCEA WYNN WOULD BE THE CLOSEST THINGS TO SOME OF THESE AREAS. I DON'T HAVE ANY RESPONSE FOR NUMBER TWO AT THIS POINT. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. I THOUGHT I WOULD ASK. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION EVEN ONLINE ABOUT SULPHUR SPRINGS. IT'S NOT IN MY DISTRICT. I JUST SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON IT THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS AT THE REQUEST OF NONPROFITS -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IS THAT ABOUT THIS ONE? >>BILL CARLSON: YEAH. MY POINT IS THAT FOLKS IN SULPHUR SPRINGS HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR A CRA, WHICH YOU KNOW I'M AGAINST BECAUSE OF TAXPAYER FUNDED GENTRIFICATION. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IN THE SOCIAL ARTS FUND -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WE'RE NOT THERE YET. WE'RE ON NUMBER 2. THIS WAS ABOUT MATCHING FUNDS. IT HAD BEEN BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF COUNCIL THAT POTENTIALLY SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS REQUIRED TO SHOW CITY MATCHING. SOMEBODY SAID THAT, SOME ORGANIZATION REQUIRED CITY MATCHING FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO GET THEIR GRANTS. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE BEFORE WE MADE A FISCAL DECISION ABOUT THEIR BUDGET WHETHER IT WAS GOING TO BE AN AVERSE REACTION -- >>BILL CARLSON: CAN WE MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MR. BENNETT. >>JOHN BENNETT: CHIEF OF STAFF. AS POSTSCRIPT, USUALLY THE REVERSE FOR US. WE'RE SEEKING A GRANT AND WE HAVE TO HAVE MATCHING FUNDS WHICH COMES TO COUNCIL. BUT THE REVERSE HAS NOT CROSSED OUR THRESHOLD YET. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY. WAS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT PARTICULAR ITEM? >> GOOD MORNING. KELLA McCASKILL. ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE WITH NUMBER TWO IS, THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION, LACK OF THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THERE IS A WHOLE LOT OF PROJECTS, NONPROFITS THAT PROBABLY COULD UTILIZE MATCHING GRANTS. WHAT COMES TO FIND FIRST IS WHEN THE SKILLS CENTER CAME TO THE EAST TAMPA CAC, THEY ALREADY OBTAINED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FUNDS AND FINISHED THE PROJECT THEY NEEDED A MATCHING GRANT. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE REVERSE. I DO KNOW SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS NEED THAT. BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE AVAILABILITY IS THERE. THE FIRST TIME I HEARD YOU MENTION THIS YEAR THE SOCIAL ARTS OR THE ACTION, IT WAS THE SAME DAY THAT IT EXPIRED. TOO OFTEN THE COMMUNICATION IS NOT GETTING TO THE PEOPLE THAT COULD UTILIZE THE RESOURCES. AND IT'S UNACCEPTABLE. YOU HAVE A BUDGET WHEREBY YOU CAN INSTITUTE SOME OUTREACH TO MAKE SURE THE ACTIVE NONPROFITS THAT'S REPRESENTED IN THE CITY HAS ACCESS TO THESE DOLLARS. ABE BROWN MINISTRIES, A STAPLE IN THE CITY, THEY ARE LOSING FUNDING NATIONALLY. THIS TYPE OF PROGRAM OR NUMBER TWO COULD ASSIST THEM IN FULFILLING SOME OF THE OBLIGATIONS THEY HAVE TO THE PEOPLE THEY SERVE IN THE CITY. MOST OF US DON'T WANT TO REPRESENT RETURNING CITIZENS, BUT THEY DO. THEY CAN ADD TO THEIR MISSION OR COMPLETE THEIR MISSION THIS YEAR IF THEY HAVE THIS TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY. WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS THERE IS MORE COMMUNICATION. MORE OUTREACH TO THESE ORGANIZATIONS. IF YOU WANT TO HELP THEM, FIND A WAY. IF YOU DON'T, STUFF LIKE THIS, NOBODY SHOWS UP TO EVEN REPRESENT THE AGENDA ITEM. SHOWS ME IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT THESE NONPROFITS. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. I SAW THAT ITEM 4 IS A WRITTEN REPORT. MS. WYNN IS STILL HERE. CAN I GET UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO RECEIVE AND FILE ITEM 4? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. WE ARE TO OUR LAST ORDER OF BUSINESS. THAT IS SOCIAL ARTS FUNDS? WHO WANTS TO START? >>BILL CARLSON: I KNOW THERE IS PROBABLY CONTENT WE'LL TALK ABOUT, BUT TO FINISH THE THOUGHT I HAD A MINUTE AGO, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS IN SULPHUR SPRINGS, THE BENEFIT OF NOT HAVING A CRA IS THAT THEN WE CAN'T SAY, WELL, THE REASON WHY THINGS ARE NOT HAPPENING IS BECAUSE THERE'S NO MONEY IN THE CRA. INSTEAD, WE CAN MOVE MONEY AROUND THE CITY. DON'T FORGET WE HAVE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE THROUGHOUT THE CITY, INCLUDING SOUTH TAMPA WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT. WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IN THE SHORT TERM, A LOT OF GREAT NONPROFITS IN SULPHUR SPRINGS, I WOULD RECOMMEND SETTING UP LIKE A 500,000 OR SOMETHING SULPHUR SPRINGS FUND TO FUND NONPROFITS AND THEN MAYBE SET UP A COMMITTEE TO ALLOCATE IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THERE ARE NONPROFITS THAT ARE IN SULPHUR SPRINGS THAT KNOW HOW TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE THERE. IF WE JUST HELP THEM BUILD CAPACITY IN THE SHORT RUN, I THINK THEY CAN EXPONENTIALLY MORE. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: REGARDS TO SOCIAL ACTION FUNDING, 3 IS WHAT WE'RE ON, LET ME GET THE NUMBERS RIGHT. I HEAR $1.4 MILLION SHORTFALL. IS IT A LITTLE BIT MORE? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK BASED ON THE MAYOR'S SUBMISSION OF THE BUDGET, THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. THAT IS THE MAYOR'S SUBMISSION OF THE BUDGET. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A MILLION DOLLARS LEFT OVER AND THAT IS BROKEN DOWN BY EACH COUNCIL MEMBER AT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS APIECE AND 300,000 LEFT OVER. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THAT WAS A SUGGESTION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT WAS A SUGGESTION. IN ORDER NOT TO CUT ANYBODY'S FUNDING, I'M JUST TALKING OUT LOUD, IT'S ABOUT FINDING $1.4 MILLION TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT ALLOCATIONS, CORRECT? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MS. KOPESKY? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I SPOKE TO MS. KOPESKY, IT WAS 1.4, THEN MENTIONED 1.9. >>HAGAR KOPESKY: CITY COUNCIL BUDGET ANALYST. I WANT TO PUT UP WHAT I THINK -- HOLD ON. THIS IS JUST REALLY MORE SHOWING THE WALK FROM WHAT WAS TRADITIONALLY THE ANNUAL BUDGET OF 2.9 FROM LAST YEAR, THE SOCIAL ACTIONS AND ARTS FUNDS. THINGS MOVED TO DIFFERENT PLACES STILL BEING COVERED. AGAIN, A LOT OF YOU HAVE SEEN THIS. I WANT TO WALK THROUGH IT FOR THE PUBLIC. FRIENDS OF THE RIVERWALK MOVED AND APPROXIMATELY 500,000 THROUGHOUT A VARIETY OF ORGANIZATIONS WERE MOVED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE MATH THAT COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO IS TALKING ABOUT IS ADJUSTING FOR THOSE THINGS WOULD HAVE LEFT 2.4, AND THEN JUST FOR CLARITY, I KNOW THERE HAD BEEN DIALOGUE AROUND THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A REALLOCATION OR REDEPLOYMENT OF SOME OF THIS INTO PARKS AND REC PROGRAMMING FUNDING. THAT WAS A QUESTION, WHERE DID THAT GO? THAT'S HOW WE ARRIVED AT THE MILLION. BACK TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, TO COVER EVERYTHING THAT WOULD HAVE REMAINED AFTER THOSE ITEMS WERE PULLED OUT, IT WOULD BE ANOTHER 1.4. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LOOKING AT THIS CHART, WHICH I SEE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE IT HERE, IT SHOWS ALL OF OUR ORGANIZATIONS AND WHERE THE MONEY GOES AND THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT THEY RECEIVE FUNDING. WHAT IS THE WILL AND GOAL OF COUNCIL, TO REALLOCATE THE $1.4 MILLION TO MAINTAIN THE NUMBERS OR DO COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE THE GOAL OF TRIMMING THIS DOWN? BECAUSE I KNOW AT THE COUNTY, THEY REDUCED SOCIAL ACTION FUNDING, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF THEY CUT IT COMPLETELY BUT I KNOW CHANGES WERE MADE. WHAT IS OUR GOAL HERE TODAY? >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA, YOUR LIGHT WAS ON. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I TURNED IT OFF. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I'D LIKE TO BACK UP FIRST AND SAY THAT I WOULD PREFER, AND I THINK I KIND OF HEARD OTHERS, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN HAVING A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO JUST SPEND MYSELF. I THINK THE GROUP COALESCING AROUND GOALS LIKE THIS IS PROBABLY WHERE I WOULD STAND. SO I JUST WANT TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY. I WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL ALLOCATION AND SIMPLY DO IT AS A GROUP. HOW DOES EVERYONE FEEL ABOUT THAT? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I AGREE WITH THAT. IF IT PUTS US AT A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS EACH, WE'LL ALL GET LOBBIED, BOMBARDED, YOU GAVE THEM -- THEN IT'S USED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE BAD AND THIS IS POLITICS. IF WE DO IT IN -- IF IT'S THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE'RE WORKING FOR, WE'RE SETTING THAT GOAL AND DO IT AS A COLLECTIVE BODY, THAT'S DIFFERENT. MY THING IS, DO WE LOOK AT REALLOCATING $1.4 MILLION AND KEEPING IT WHOLE OR LOOKING AT STICKING WITH THAT MILLION DOLLARS? >>LYNN HURTAK: YES, BUT I THINK THE CONVERSATION BECOMES DIFFERENT. I THINK THAT IF WE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION FIRST, THEN WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH THE OTHER BECAUSE JUST MAKING SURE -- I GUESS SHOW OF HANDS, DOES ANYBODY WANT THEIR INDIVIDUAL HUNDRED THOUSAND -- >>ALAN CLENDENIN: HOLD ON. CHIEF OF STAFF BENNETT OR MR. ROGERO. >>JOHN BENNETT: JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF. I WANTED TO HELP PUT SOME FRAMEWORK OUT FOR COUNCIL TO DELIBERATE ON A LITTLE FURTHER. FIRST, A SHORT JOURNEY ON WHAT THIS ADMINISTRATION HAD SEEN COLLECTIVELY, COLLABORATING WITH COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC. WHEN I GOT HERE, THERE WAS WHAT WAS CALLED A 200 FUND AND THERE WERE CITY ASSETS THAT WERE COVERED IN THERE AS WELL, AS WELL AS WHAT IT CALLED SOCIAL ACTIONS AND ARTS FUNDS. COVID, WE WERE LOOKING FOR A MUCH MORE FORMIDABLE PROCESS AROUND ALL OF THAT. AS THE JOURNEY WENT ON, THERE WAS CODE DEVELOPED THAT, AGAIN, CARL BRODY IS HERE FROM LEGAL. DENNIS IS HERE AS CFO AND MS. KOPESKY IS HERE AS BUDGET ANALYST. WE CAN ALL WORK TOGETHER TO GET TO A LANDING ZONE. A THRESHOLD BELOW 25,000 AND ABOVE 25,000. THE IMPORTANCE THERE, THERE IS A LOT MORE ADMINISTRATION ABOVE 25,000. GOES INTO AGREEMENTS. IT INVOLVES PUBLIC RECORDS. INVOLVES AUDITS. IT INVOLVES A LOT OF OTHER THINGS. COUNCIL GIVING US FEEDBACK OVER TIME THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT THINGS STRATEGICALLY AS WE TRY AND DO AS WELL, FUNNEL THINGS INTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUT THEM IN THE BUDGET, CITY ASSETS, KIND OF SPLICE THOSE AREAS OUT, WHICH WE HAD DONE. THE OTHER THING, IF YOU REMEMBER LAST YEAR, EVERYBODY GOT NOTIFICATION. AGAIN, LEGAL IS HERE TO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WHATEVER FUNDING THEY HAVE BEEN GETTING OR GOT ENDS ON 9/30 OF 25 FOR FISCAL YEAR '25. SO THAT KIND OF PUTS US TO WHAT STARTED THE CONVERSATION IS THAT THERE WAS A PLACEHOLDER FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN SOCIAL ACTION AND ARTS FUNDS, AGAIN, ALSO SEGMENTED FOR ITEMS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT SEEM TO MATCH OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING WITH COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC. ALSO, THERE'S MONEY PUT INTO CITY ASSETS WHICH AGAIN WAS ALL BUNDLED IN THAT ORIGINAL LIST. NOW I WANTED TO GIVE YOU KIND OF A BROAD UNDERSTANDING. YOU HAVE A SNAPSHOT JUST NOW OF WHAT WE WOULD ARGUE MAKE SURE IS THE DELTA OF WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET AGAINST WHAT THE NEEDS REQUESTS ARE. I CAN TELL YOU THAT JUST SITTING HERE COMBING THROUGH SEVERAL AGGREGATED LISTS, THE NUMBER -- I'M GOING TO USE THE WORD QUEUE, NOT THE BUDGET, BUT THE QUEUE, QUEUE IS MADE UP OF THREE GROUPS. THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN HISTORICALLY ON THERE THAT HAVE NOT APPLIED BASED ON THIS COMING BUDGET WHICH REPRESENTS 24 NONPROFITS, WHICH IS ABOUT 30% OF THE LARGER GROUP. 16 OF THEM HAVE REAPPLIED WHICH REPRESENTS ABOUT 20% OF THE OVERALL GROUP. AND THEN WE'VE HAD 42 NEW REQUESTS. SO THERE'S 82 NONPROFITS ON THAT LIST AFTER YOU MOVE CITY ASSETS AND AFTER YOU MOVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OUT OF THAT LIST. AND THAT EQUALS $5 MILLION. NOW, ONE REQUEST CAME IN FOR 1 MILLION BY ITSELF, WHICH GETS YOU DOWN TO $4 MILLION. SO TO TALK ABOUT A GAP BETWEEN THE MILLION AND WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, IT IS A LOT LARGER THAN THAT. COMBING THROUGH THIS, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, ANYTHING ABOVE 249,999 REQUIRES A LOT OF ADMIN. THE GROUPS I MENTIONED, WHETHER OCEA WYNN'S GROUP OR ANY OTHER DIVISION OR PROGRAM, THERE IS NO OFFICE FOR THIS UNLIKE MAYBE WHAT COUNTY GOVERNMENTS HAVE WITH SOCIAL SERVICES. SO EVERYBODY IS WORKING THESE AS THEY COME THROUGH. IF THEY ARE BELOW 25,000, THEN THEY GO THROUGH THE LOGIC MODEL AND GET A QUARTERLY TRANCHE WHICH IS A GREATER ADVANCEMENT THAN GETTING A CHECK ONCE A YEAR THAT WE HAD NO ACCOUNTABILITY ON. ABOVE 25,000 HAS TO GO INTO A FULL-BLOWN AGREEMENT, SUBJECT TO CANCELLATION BY 9/30 OF THE FOLLOWING YEAR. LABORIOUS PROCESS ON BOTH THE NONPROFIT SIDE AND CITY ADMINISTRATION SIDE. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE SIT NOW. AGAIN, ONE MILLION IS IN THERE AT THIS POINT. IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CLEARLY BORK WITH THE BUDGET ANALYST -- WORK WITH THE BUDGET ANALYST, MS. KOPESKY OFF-LINE AND BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION BASED ON $5 MILLION WORTH OF ASK AND $1 MILLION PLACE HOLDER IN THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET. I'LL PAUSE THERE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THE APPLICATION, THAT IS THE FIRST I HEARD OF THAT. CAN YOU GO THROUGH AND TELL US WHICH ONES ON THE CURRENT LIST HAVE NOT REAPPLIED. >>JOHN BENNETT: AGAIN, 24 FROM WHO'S BEEN ON THE PREVIOUS LIST THAT HAVE NOT REAPPLIED. AGAIN, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE -- WHAT I DID, I'VE BEEN CODING THIS JUST SITTING HERE, DRAWING DOWN THE INFORMATION OVERNIGHT, I'VE BEEN CODING THIS BASED ON THOSE BELOW 25 AND ABOVE 25. YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME OF MY CODING ON HERE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: DID WE HAVE A DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>ALAN CLENDENIN: JUST MAKING SURE. >>JOHN BENNETT: THE PINK HIGHLIGHTS ARE OBVIOUSLY ONES THAT WE NEED AGREEMENTS AND THE ONES OBVIOUSLY THAT HAVE BEEN CHECKED OTHERWISE ARE BELOW THAT THRESHOLD FOR 1.6 MILLION HAVE NOT REAPPLIED. THERE'S BEEN SOME OUTREACH GOING ON TO TRY AND REMIND THEM, HISTORICALLY BEEN ON THE LIST. ONCE AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE STILL WAITING TO HEAR FROM SOME OF THESE GROUPS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IF THEY MISSED THE DEADLINE, THEY CAN STILL APPLY? >>JOHN BENNETT: WELL, I THINK THAT IS A COLLABORATIVE DECISION BETWEEN ALL OF US. AGAIN, I THINK -- AND THIS IS JUST ME SPEAKING, I THINK THE LARGER QUESTION IS HOW TO GIVE EVERYBODY A FAIR SHAKE IF THEY HAVE BEEN DOING WELL. ONE OF THE OTHER VISION POINTS WE HAD WAS KIND OF HAVING A DE MINIMIS PHILOSOPHY THAT WE HELP YOU OUT AND WE KIND OF BRING YOU DOWN. THERE'S NO METHODOLOGY FOR THAT. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WERE CUT 25% OVER FOUR YEARS AND YOU FIND OTHER FUNDING AS OPPOSED TO THE ONES THAT WE PICK UP AS A CITY AND PUT INTO OUR STRATEGIC PLAN OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THE ARTS MAYBE AS WELL AS CITY ASSETS, SO IF YOU MAKE IT ACROSS THAT LINE, YOU MAKE A MORE SUSTAINABLE JOURNEYING BECAUSE IT FITS THE STRATEGIC PLAN. MORE OF A START-UP AND SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 5 AND 25 THOUSAND DOLLARS OR IF BEEN ON HERE FOR HUNDRED OR MORE THOUSAND DOLLARS OVER TIME, THAT IS THE WORK THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE. AGAIN, A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGED BY ADMINISTRATION ABILITY AT THIS POINT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MY OBSERVATION ON A LOT OF THIS, IT'S MISSION CREEP. I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK WE NEED TO WHOLESALE APPROVE A LIST BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN GETTING MONEY IN THE PAST. A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE NOT ACTUALLY APPLIED. HOW TO GET FROM GIVE EVERYBODY MONEY TO CARVE IT DOWN IS A DIFFICULT POLITICAL DILEMMA FOR PEOPLE BECAUSE IT IS POLITICS. YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THE LOBBYING. ONE PERSON'S TRASH IS ANOTHER PERSON'S TRRKS RIGHT? NEED TO HEAR FROM THE COUNCIL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK ASKED WITH A SHOW OF HANDS. MY WORST-CASE SCENARIO, DON'T MOVE ANY MONEY AROUND, THAT IT IS A COLLECTIVE -- YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUAL -- THE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS PER PERSON KIND OF THING. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, REGARDING THE DEADLINE, I KNOW THERE'S ONE PERSON IN THE ROOM THAT SENT AN E-MAIL REGARDING DEADLINES AND BEING ABLE TO APPLY AFTER THE DEADLINE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PERSON WILL BE SPEAKING ABOUT THAT. I THINK I SAW THE E-MAIL THIS MORNING. ANOTHER THING IS -- WHAT WAS I GOING TO SAY? CHIEF BENNETT, IN THAT CHART YOU SHOWED, THOSE WITH THE CHECK MARKS NOT HIGHLIGHTED IN PURPLE DID NOT APPLY, CORRECT? ONES IN PURPLE DID APPLY? >>JOHN BENNETT: NO, THE WHOLE LIST HAD NOT APPLIED. THE ONES I HIGHLIGHTED WERE THE ONES OVER 25,000, JUST TO GIVE YOU A CONCEPT. AGAIN, I THINK WE'RE OPTIMISTIC ON DEADLINES. I'LL TELL YOU, OUT OF THE 82 AND THOSE THREE CATEGORIES I GAVE YOU, NEW APPLIED, REAPPLIED AND NOT APPLIED, IS A LITTLE OVER $2 MILLION, IF EVERYBODY GOT BELOW THE AGREEMENT THRESHOLD OF $25,000. SO THAT IS A MILLION ABOVE WHAT'S IN THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET JUST ON THE NATURE OF GIVING EVERYBODY THAT FLAT NUMBER. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THERE ARE SOME IN THERE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN REQUESTS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE IN A LOT OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS. I SEE SOME BIG NUMBERS. OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND, 200,000. EVERYONE OR MANY WILL SAY, OH, IF YOU CUT US THIS, WE CAN'T. OR YOU DO THIS, WE CAN'T, KIND OF A SITUATION. WE'RE GIVING THIS YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR. AND THERE ARE SOME GREAT GROUPS THAT ARE AT $5,000. MEN OF VISION, RISE UP FOR PEACE. I CAN GO ON AND ON BECAUSE I SEE THE WORK THEY DO IN THE COMMUNITY. OTHERS THAT ARE GETTING 200,000, A HUNDRED THOUSAND. WHAT IS OUR RETURN ON INVESTMENT FOR A LOT OF THIS. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DON'T WANT TO CUT ANYBODY ANYTHING. I WISH I COULD GIVE EVERYBODY ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD. IF IT IS UP TO US TO FIND IT IN THE BUDGET, WE CAN FIND IT IN THE BUDGET. ONE LAST QUESTION, IF THIS EVEN RELATES TO IT. 1.4 MILLION WAS REALLOCATED FOR PARKS AND REC PROGRAMMING. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS ALLOWABLE UNDER THE CIT THAT WE HAVE LEFT, IS EVERY DOLLAR ACCOUNTED FOR BEFORE THIS 30-YEAR EXPIRATION? I GUESS THIS IS A ROGERO QUESTION. IF NOT EVERY DOLLAR HAS BEEN ALLOCATED AND THERE IS SOME MONEY AVAILABLE IN CIT, IS IT ALLOWED TO BE SPENT ON THIS PARKS AND REC PROGRAMMING? CAN WE MOVE THAT MONEY AROUND? I KNOW WE LOOK AT THE CIT IN FIVE-YEAR INCREMENTS AND WHATNOT, ANYTHING LEFT, NOT TALKING ABOUT GOING INTO THE RESERVE, GOING INTO ANYTHING LIKE THAT. LOOKING AT CIT, DO WE HAVE ANY MONEY AVAILABLE THAT WE CAN MOVE AROUND FOR THIS NEXT YEAR TO KIND OF BALANCE THIS OUT? >>DENNIS ROGERO: CAN I CIRCLE BACK ON THAT, NOT ONLY IF THERE IS AN AMOUNT, SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH AMOUNT, BUT ALSO IF IT WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I KNOW CIT IS VERY STRICT. JUST LIKE CRA, CAN ONLY BE USED FOR CERTAIN THINGS. IF YOU COULD FIND OUT. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IT'S NOT JUST ONE MILLION. 1.3. 300 THAT WAS UNALLOCATED? >>HAGAR KOPESKY: THE ONE THING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IS THIS WAS SIMPLY WITH THE EXISTING FOLKS ASSUMING THEY HAD ALL REAPPLIED AND ALSO ADDRESSING THAT WE HAD NOT SEEN THE NEW APPLICATIONS YET. AS HE ELABORATED ON THAT AND THAT IS A LOT, TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION, 1.4 WOULD BE AGAIN TO MAINTAIN THE PRIOR YEAR SPEND AFTER CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS TRANSFERRED. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THE MAYOR'S BUDGET CONSIDERS 1.3 MILLION -- WAS IT JUST ONE MILLION TOTAL? ONE MILLION TOTAL. COUNCILMAN CARLSON AND THEN COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>BILL CARLSON: TO COUNCIL MEMBER HURTAK'S QUESTION -- SUGGESTED PULL THIS MONEY TOGETHER BECAUSE THEN WE COULD ALL FOCUS ON SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. I SAW THAT COUNCILMAN VIERA SENT HIS LIST IN. IF EVERYONE ELSE IS GOING TO USE THE HUNDRED THOUSAND, THEN I WILL TOO. I DON'T WANT IT TO BE AS COUNCIL MEMBER MANISCALCO SAID, I DON'T WANT IT TO LOOK LOOK SOME KIND OF POLITICAL SLUSH FUND. I DON'T NEED A THOUSAND REQUESTS FOR FUNDING. I'D RATHER FOCUS ON SOMETHING WHERE WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND TRACK OUTCOMES. IN LOOKING AT THE LIST, ONE OF THE THINGS, I'VE DONE A LOT PROFESSIONALLY IN THE PAST IS HELP BIG COMPANIES FIGURE OUT HOW TO INVEST THEIR FOUNDATION MONEY. YOU SHOULD PUT IT AROUND OUTCOME MEASURES. IT SHOULDN'T LOOK LIKE A HAPHAZARD LIST. COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, SUGGESTED MOVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ONES INTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. YBOR CHAMBER IS STILL ON THIS LIST. IF THE TAMPA CHAMBER IS ON THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LIST, YBOR CHAMBER SHOULD BE ON IT. IDEALLY, IF WE HAD AN ARTS STRATEGY OTHER THAN LOOKING AT PUBLIC ART, WE WOULD HAVE ALL THE ART STUFF UNDER THERE. THERE SHOULD BE START-UP FUNDING OR A FUNDING TIED TO A GOAL. MY POINT IS THAT THESE REALLY SHOULD BE AROUND BUCKETS TIED TO SOLVING PROBLEMS. OCEA'S DEPARTMENT, SINCE SHE'S HERE, COULD HAVE A STRATEGY AROUND FEEDING, HOMELESS. STAFF HAS MULTI-DEPARTMENT STRATEGY ON THAT. BUT THESE NEED TO BE TIED TO GOALS TO LOOK AT THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE SOLVING. I WISH THERE WASN'T JUST A BLANKET BUDGET THAT LOOKS LIKE A POLITICAL BUDGET. I WISH IT WAS INCLUDED UNDER THE STRATEGIES OF THE DEPARTMENTS OR THE SUBDEPARTMENTS SO WE WOULD KNOW WHY WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY OR WHY THE PUBLIC'S MONEY SHOULD BE USED. THE OTHER THING IS THAT -- I DON'T HAVE TO GET DEEP INTO THIS UNLESS YOU ALL WANT TO, BUT THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND SOME OF THE MAYOR'S STAFF HAVE USED SOME ORGANIZATIONS AS PLACES TO TRASH TALK CITY COUNCIL AND ME IN PARTICULAR. ONE OF THOSE IS TAMPA CHAMBER, WHICH ON THE OTHER LIST PAYING 48,000 TO. OVER THE YEARS I PAID AS MUCH AS $80,000 A YEAR SPONSORING THINGS IN THE TAMPA CHAMBER. NOW I HAVE IT DOWN TO A FEW HUNDRED DOLLARS. THE MAYOR'S PEOPLE HAVE TRASH TALKED ME SO MUCH IN THE ORGANIZATION THAT I CAN'T BE EFFECTIVE IN A BUSINESS ORGANIZATION. REASONS THAT ST. PETE ARE DOING BETTER THAN US ECONOMICALLY ON A PER CAPITA BASIS IS BECAUSE THEY ARE INCLUSIVE AND DON'T EXCLUDE PEOPLE. WHEN WE HAVE THE MAYOR'S COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR REPORTEDLY SAT NEXT IN A CITY PAID EVENT, SAT NEXT TO SOMEONE AND TRASH TALKED CITY COUNCIL AND TRASH TALKED ME. IT HAPPENED TO BE THAT WE KNOW THE PERSON. I REPORT IT TO THE MAYOR AND CHIEF OF STAFF AND NOTHING HAPPENED. IF CITY STAFF, PAYING $48,000 A YEAR FOR ORGANIZATION, CITY STAFF GOING IN AND TRASH TALKING CITY COUNCIL, USING THAT AS A WEAPON TO TRASH TALK ME OR CITY COUNCIL THAT IS A PROBLEM. ONLY TWO TIMES I'VE SEEN TAMPA CHAMBER COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS, ONE, AGAIN, TO ARGUE THE MAYOR'S AGENDA AGAINST AMENDING THE CHARTER, WHICH IT WAS HORRIBLE TO AMEND THE CHARTER. EVEN BROUGHT E.J. SALCINES IN -- THE SECOND TIME AROUND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY. THESE ORGANIZATIONS, I'M NOT JUST PICKING ON THEM, THE ORGANIZATIONS NEED TO REACH OUT TO CITY COUNCIL ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY. EDC, I CRITICIZED SIX, SEVEN YEARS AGO, THEY ARE DOING A LOT TO ENGAGE US INDIVIDUALLY AND ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY THROUGH US. EVEN THOUGH TWO IN THEORY EQUAL POWERS OF BRANCHES IN THIS GOVERNMENT, SOME ORGANIZATIONS TREAT IT LIKE IT IS A KINGDOM IN THAT THEY ONLY HAVE TO TALK TO ONE PERSON. WE'RE ON THE FIELD TALKING TO THE COMMUNITY EVERY DAY. HEAR THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY. WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOMES ARE THAT THE ORGANIZATIONS ARE DOING AND WHETHER THE MONEY IS WORTH IT. I THINK WE OUGHT TO TAKE ANY MONEY WE SPEND BACK TO A STRATEGY THAT MEASURES OUTCOMES AND OUTCOME BASED. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: IN LIGHT OF THE NEW INFORMATION ABOUT THE LACK OF APPLICATIONS AND NUMBER OF NEW APPLICANTS, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS COUNCIL HAS ENOUGH DECISION TO REACH DECISION POINTS BUT I THINK WE CAN REACH CONSENSUS OR AT LEAST LOOK HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE GOING TO ALLOCATE TO THESE FUNDS AND THEN COME BACK AT A FUTURE DATE WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PRESENTED TODAY OF HOW WE ALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS. THAT SEEMS TO BE -- WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION. COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION. DID EVERYONE WHO RECEIVED FUNDS LAST YEAR RECEIVE A LETTER, E-MAIL, SOMETHING TELLING THEM THAT THEY NEEDED TO APPLY AGAIN THIS YEAR? >>JOHN BENNETT: DOESN'T COME OUT OF MY OFFICE. I'D HAVE TO DEFER THAT QUESTION. THE TWO THINGS I DO KNOW, WHEN THEY RECEIVE FUNDING, THEY WERE TOLD THAT IT EXPIRED ON 9/30. I KNOW IT'S BEEN ANNOUNCED TO GET THE APPLICATIONS IN, WHETHER THEY GET A FOLLOW-UP OR NOT, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT EACH PORTFOLIO WOULD ADDRESS. ROAM ROGERO I AGREE WITH THE CHIEF. I KNOW ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT RECEIVED FUNDING AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR RECEIVED NOTICE THAT THE FUNDING WAS GOOD FOR ONE YEAR ONLY. >>LYNN HURTAK: WE DIDN'T GIVE THEM ANY SORT OF KNOWLEDGE AS TO WHEN THE DEADLINE FOR REAPPLYING. >>DENNIS ROGERO: I BELIEVE WE DID. I CAN CIRCLE BACK TO YOU ON THAT. I KNOW WHEN COUNCIL EXTENDED THE DEADLINE FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, WE WERE A WASH WITH NEW APPLICATIONS. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION REALLY BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING IS TO MAKE SURE WE DID SEND THAT INFORMATION OUT. BECAUSE IF WE DIDN'T, WE'D HAVE A LOT OF ANGRY PHONE CALLS. THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THE DIFFICULT THING, I BELIEVE CHIEF BENNETT SAID, UNLIKE THE COUNTY WITH THEIR RESOURCES WHERE THEY HAVE A SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO DEAL WITH THIS THING, WE DON'T HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE, CITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND RELATIVELY SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY, SILLY TO HAVE SEGREGATED INFRASTRUCTURE TO MANAGE THIS PROCESS. THIS PROCESS IS MANAGED BY MANY PEOPLE, IS WHOEVER PORTFOLIO ASSIGNED TO, HOW IT WORKS? >> YES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I WANT TO MAKE CERTAIN OF EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID. THERE IS A PROCESS YOU HAVE TO REAPPLY AND MOST DID NOT REAPPLY? >>DENNIS ROGERO: I WOULDN'T SAY. >>JOHN BENNETT: I WOULDN'T SAY MOST OF THEM. AGAIN, THE THREE BUCKETS THAT I SHARED EARLIER, 30%, WHICH IS 24 NONPROFITS HAVE NOT REAPPLIED. 16 HAVE, WHICH IS 20%, AND 42, THE CRITICAL MASS, ARE NEW ONES THAT HAVE APPLIED THIS YEAR OR AT LEAST WHEN I SAY APPLIED, THEY TELEGRAPHED THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN THIS FISCAL YEAR. THAT REPRESENTS ALMOST HALF OF THE MONEY OF THAT 5 MILLION I JUST PUT OUT THERE, COMPARED TO THE 1 MILLION THAT'S IN THE BUDGET. REAPPLIES REPRESENT ABOUT 14.5% OF THE TOTAL REQUEST IN THE QUEUE. NOT REAPPLIED REPRESENTS ABOUT 38.5% OF THE MONEY THAT'S IN THE QUEUE. AGAIN, IF EVERY SINGLE PERSON OF THE 82 GOT 25,000 OR LESS BASED ON THEIR HARD NUMBER, WE WOULD BE RIGHT AROUND $2 MILLION FOR ALL 82 NONPROFITS. BUT WE DO AGREE THAT AS THESE MATURE, THEY SHOULD LAND IN THEIR RESPECTIVE STRATEGIC SLOTS, EITHER ARTS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, HOUSING ISSUES, WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT. PORTING THOSE OVER, OVER TIME IS PART OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY PROCESS, WHICH IS WHY WE CHANGED IT FROM JUST A CHECK IN THE MAIL SIX YEARS AGO TO A LOGIC MODEL WHICH IS INPUTS, OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES. THOSE AGREEMENTS DO COME TO COUNCIL WITH THE METADATA INSIDE THOSE AGREEMENTS WHEN THEY ARE DEVELOPED. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA AND COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THERE'S GOT TO BE A PROCESS, I HOPE THERE IS A PROCESS, DOES AN AUDIT HAVE TO BE DONE OVER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY. IN OTHER WORDS, TELL US WHAT THE PROCESS IS. I'M AMAZED THAT SOME OF THOSE DID NOT APPLY. WHAT DOES THAT TELL ME ABOUT THAT ORGANIZATION? >>JOHN BENNETT: AGAIN, LET ME TALK BELOW 25. I'LL ASK MR. BRODY TO COME UP AND TALK ABOUT OVER 25. UNDER 25 GETS WHAT IS A COMMON TOOL IN THE SPACE, CALLED A LOGIC MODEL. YOU TALK ABOUT THE RESOURCES YOU HAVE OTHERWISE AND THE RESOURCES YOU'RE ASKING, AND THEN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT KIND OF OUTPUTS YOU WILL DELIVER. OF COURSE, ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, YOU REPORT YOUR OUTCOMES WHICH TRIGGERS YOUR 25% OF THE ANNUAL TRANCHE. $40,000, YOU GET 10,000, 10,000, 10,000 AND 10,000. AGAIN, THAT'S BELOW 25. ABOVE 25, I'LL ASK MR. BRODY TO EXPLAIN HOW THAT WORKS. >>CARL BRODY: CARL BRODY FROM LEGAL. ABOVE 25 WORKS VERY SIMILAR TO THE BELOW WHAT WE REQUIRE, EACH ONE OF THE APPLICANTS HAS TO PROVIDE WHAT WE CALL A SMART FORM, WHICH LAYS OUT EXACTLY THE SERVICES THEY ARE GOING TO PROVIDE AND THE COSTS OF EACH ONE OF THE SERVICES. THE WHOLE THEORY IS WE'LL BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE MONEY. WE'LL GO AHEAD OF TIME. LET US KNOW WHAT THEY'LL DO FOR HOW MUCH FUNDING THEY ARE REQUESTING AND QUARTERLY WE'LL GET A REPORT THAT'S GOING TO EXPLAIN HOW THEY HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS. THAT IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE OVER 25. ALSO OVER 25, UNDER THE ORDINANCE, I THINK 2-282, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO FILL OUT A SPECIFIC ETHICS FORM, WHICH VERIFIES THAT THEY ARE COMPLYING WITH ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE FUNDING OVER THAT AMOUNT. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE SOME STATE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE REQUIRE, AFFIDAVIT HAS TO BE SIGNED OFF THAT ACKNOWLEDGES THEY COMPLY WITH ALL OF OUR DIFFERENT STATE LAWS REGARDING WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH FUNDS YOU RECEIVE FROM A GOVERNMENT ENTITY. THOSE ARE THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IF YOU ARE OVER THAT MONEY. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THIS IS PUBLIC MONEY AND ASKING THE PUBLIC TO DO SOMETHING. SOME OF THESE WE CALL THEM VENDORS, PEOPLE THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE HELPFUL ARE NOT DOING, EVEN ASKING FOR THE MONEY AGAIN. I HAVE DOUBT IN MY MIND WHAT KIND OF SERVICE ARE THEY GIVING. >>CARL BRODY: WELL, THE SERVICE IS GOING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THEY REQUEST. THE CONTRACTS -- THE AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE WITH EACH ONE OF THESE AGENCIES IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT, OBVIOUSLY, BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE SERVICE THEY PROVIDE. BUT WE ARE VERY CLEAR ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THE SERVICES THEY ARE REQUESTING THE FUNDING FOR IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SERVICE THAT WE RECEIVE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HOW DO WE KNOW THAT? >>CARL BRODY: BECAUSE WE HAVE THEM DO A QUARTERLY REPORT TO US THAT LINES UP THE TWO. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WHO VERIFIES THE QUARTERLY REPORT? >>CARL BRODY: IT DEPENDS ON WHICH STAFF PERSON. I KNOW FOR SEVERAL OF THEM IN OCEA'S GROUP, SHE WAS SPECIFIC FOLKS IN WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER AREAS THAT WILL REQUIRE -- THAT IS THEIR JOB. REQUIRE THOSE AGENCIES TO PROVIDE THAT QUARTERLY REPORT. THEY REVIEW IT. MAKE SURE THE SERVICES LINE UP WITH THE FUNDING RECEIVED. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: ANOTHER QUESTION. OUT OF THE QUARTERLY REPORTS THAT WE VERIFY AND CHECK ON, HAS ANYONE BEEN MISLEADING AT ALL? >>CARL BRODY: I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THAT PART OF IT. THAT IS THE OTHER SIDE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILMAN CARLSON, MANISCALCO AND THEN COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>BILL CARLSON: ONE POINT, I HAVE TO LEAVE IN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES. I WILL APOLOGIZE AT THAT POINT. CHIEF OF STAFF, I KNOW YOU ARE GREAT AT COMING UP WITH THESE MODELS AND FRAMEWORKS. I WOULD RECOMMEND USING THE THHI EXAMPLE. IT SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE USED THEM REALLY WELL. PARTNERED WITH THEM REALLY WELL IN THE PAST. I THINK THE QUESTION, THE FIRST QUESTION SHOULD BE WHAT NEED IS THERE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THE CITY OR TAXPAYERS WANT SOLVED? SECOND QUESTION IS, DOES THIS NONPROFIT PROVIDE A SOLUTION TO THAT NEED THAT THE CITY DOES NOT CURRENTLY PROVIDE? EVERYTHING GOES ON FROM THERE. BUT IT HAS TO BE STRATEGIC, AND I THINK THE WAY YOU LEVERAGE THHI IS WITH A LITTLE INVESTMENT, THEY HAVE RESOURCE, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY DO THE INVENTORY OF PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS. THERE IS -- THEY ARE ABLE TO COLLECT INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE FOR THE CITY TO COLLECT IF WE DID IT ON OUR OWN. THAT'S EASY TO JUSTIFY. IF THERE ARE OTHER SERVICES THAT ARE AROUND THAT, LIKE YOU PARTNERED WITH CATHOLIC CHARITIES OR SOMETHING ON THE PROGRAM FOR PEOPLE FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING. HOW IS IT THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO ENHANCE WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE. IF WE COME UP WITH A GENERIC FRAMEWORK NOT ISSUE SPECIFIC, WE CAN APPLY IT TO ANYTHING. FOR EXAMPLE, AS I UNDERSTAND, NAACP IS HELPING PEOPLE WITH SMALL BUSINESSES, TO START SMALL BUSINESSES OR GROW SMALL BUSINESSES, ACCELERATE SMALL BUSINESSES. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE MOVED TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SECOND, IF THAT'S NOT A SERVICE THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY PROVIDES ON A LARGE SCALE WITH PEOPLE, SO IF WE'RE OUTSOURCING THAT TO VARIOUS GROUPS, THEN HOW CAN A NONPROFIT KIND OF BID OR APPLY TO EFFECTIVELY USE LIMITED RESOURCES TO IMPLEMENT THAT SERVICE THAT THEN LEVERAGES THE CITY'S LIMITED RESOURCE TO ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING IN THE COMMUNITY? >>JOHN BENNETT: UNDERSTAND. I ACTUALLY WENT OUT AND SAT WITH THE NAACP FOR A COUPLE OF HOURS RECENTLY AND WENT THROUGH SOME OF THE THINGS IN WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT, GAP CLOSING, AGREE WITH ALL THOSE FRAMEWORKS. I'M NOT GOING TO ASK ON BEHALF OF THE CFO, JUST MYSELF. AGAIN, IF IT'S JUST SOMETHING YOU WANT US TO GO BACK AND KEEP WORKING, WE'LL WORK WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. WITH THE RECOMMENDED CAP AT 1 MILLION, IS THE GOAL TO TRY TO SQUEEZE THE WANTS AND NEEDS INTO THE ONE MILLION? MY UNDERSTANDING, THE ONLY PLACE WE COULD TAKE THIS FROM WOULD BE IN THE GENERAL FUND TO ADD TO THE 1 MILLION, WHICH MEANS AGAIN PUBLIC SAFETY, PARKS, SOME OF THOSE OTHER AREAS, IF THERE WASN'T AN REPLACEMENT REVENUE STREAM FOR THAT MILLION. I'M JUST TRYING TO LOOK FOR BUMPER RAIL GUIDANCE, NOT SO MUCH CASE SPECIFIC RESPONSES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK AND THEN I'LL SPEAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I THINK THAT'S KIND OF MY OVERALL QUESTION, TOO, AS WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THESE REPORTS, SOMEBODY HAS GOT TO BE READING THEM. SO SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO -- I MEAN, THE STRATEGY THAT WAS LAID OUT LAST YEAR WAS TO APPLY AND THEN CREATE THESE REPORTS, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WAS NO THOUGHT TO THE AMOUNT -- OR THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THIS WOULD TAKE FROM EMPLOYEES. I GUESS WHAT WE'RE HEARING OR WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, IF THERE ARE REPORTS BEING MADE AND BEING READ, IT SEEMS LIKE THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT COULD HELP WITH THE TAKING IN OF THE APPLICATIONS AND SO FORTH. I AGREE WITH WHAT I HEARD A LOT HERE ABOUT THE PARTICULAR BUCKETS AND FOCUS ON THAT, BUT MY REAL QUESTION IS, ARE WE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE REPORTS? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENING? IF IT IS, WE KIND OF NEED TO KNOW FROM THE REPORTS, ARE THE PEOPLE DOING THE WORK THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING? THAT'S KIND OF THE THING WE NEED TO SEE ON THESE REPORTS, NOT JUST HOW LONG HAVE THE PEOPLE BEEN GETTING THE MONEY? ARE THEY ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHING WHAT THEY SAY THEY ARE ACCOMPLISHING? IF 100% ARE, FIRST OF ALL, THE CHANCES OF THAT ARE REALLY LOW. SO WHO IS AND WHO ISN'T DOING THE MEASURES THAT WE SET OUT? >>JOHN BENNETT: I THINK THOSE ARE EXCELLENT POINTS. I JUST WANT TO KIND OF FRAME THAT IN A DUAL ACCESS MODE. ONE IS COMPLEXITY. BECAUSE ONCE YOU GET INTO THE AGREEMENT LEVEL, AND I THINK OCEA CAN COTESTIFY TO THIS HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET AN AGREEMENT DOWN FOR THE SCOPE OF SERVICES THAT MATCH WHAT WE'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT. THE SECOND ONE IS, AGAIN, THE SMALLER SCALE OF UNDER 25,000. AGAIN, JUST GOING BACK TO THE METRICS, 24 HAVE NOT REAPPLIED, 16 HAVE. THAT'S HALF OF THE 82, MEANING 42 NEW REQUESTS IN THERE THAT WE HAVEN'T EVEN TOUCHED ABOVE OR BELOW 25,000 THAT HAS NOT EVEN GONE TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR ADMINISTERING READING THE REPORTS. BUT I WILL SAY ANECDOTALLY THAT YOU WOULDN'T GET YOUR SECOND, THIRD, FOURTH TRANCHE IF YOU DID NOT SUBMIT THE REPORTS THAT MATCH YOUR SMART LOGIC MODEL FORM. YOU WOULD NOT GET THAT CHECK WITHOUT SOME SORT OF INTERVENTION. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS AN EXCELLENT QUESTION THEN. HOW MANY GROUPS HAVE NOT RECEIVED ALL OF THEIR FUNDS? >>JOHN BENNETT: I WOULD HAVE TO GO WORK WITH THE OFFICE TO ANALYZE THAT. I'M GOING TO TAKE A STRETCH AND ARGUE AND MAYBE SOME WHO HAS THE MOST, OCEA'S PORTFOLIO HAS A LOT, MOST OF THEM PROBABLY MET OR HAVE NOT SUBMITTED BUT NOT UNDERPERFORMED. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DON'T MEAN UNDERPERFORMED. WHO JUST HASN'T -- IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN KEEPING UP WITH IT, I'M CURIOUS WHAT KIND OF REVENUE WE WILL HAVE LEFT OVER, I SUPPOSE, IS MY QUESTION. ALSO TO THAT, WITH THE AGREEMENT, HOW FAR BACK CAN YOU BACKDATE YOUR REPORT? IS IT DUE? IF YOU HAD A QUARTER TWO REPORT AND DUE THE MONTH AFTER QUARTER TWO, WOULD YOU TAKE IT AT THE END OF QUARTER THREE? CAN PEOPLE GET INTO IT THAT WAY? >>JOHN BENNETT: UNDERSTAND. AGAIN, GOOD QUESTIONS. I WAS TRYING TO GIVE YOU A KIND OF ROUND NUMBER WHEN YOU SAID ABOUT THOSE, IF WE JUST LOOK AT THE NUMBERS OF THOSE THAT HAVE NOT REAPPLIED, THE 24, WE'RE PUSHING ABOUT 1.6 MILLION, JUST IN THOSE CATEGORIES. AGAIN, SOME OF THEM ARE BIG NUMBERS. 100, 200 THOUSAND. 13 OF THEM ARE BELOW THE 25,000 THRESHOLD AND 11 ARE ABOVE THE 25,000 THRESHOLD. THOSE ARE THE 38.5 PERCENT OR 24 THAT HAVE NOT REAPPLIED FOR THIS YEAR. AGAIN, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT, BUT I'LL LET OCEA TALK ABOUT THE QUALITATIVE SIDE OF THIS. >>OCEA WYNN: ADMINISTRATOR OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. HOPEFULLY I CATEGORIZED ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS. FIRST, YES, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE REPORTS. SO ONCE THEY SUBMIT THE REPORTS, WE'LL MAKE SURE AS CHIEF BENNETT HAS SAID, THE WORK ALIGNS WITH WHAT THEY SAID WITH WHAT'S IN THE AGREEMENT. SECOND IS, IN TERMS OF WOULD WE TAKE A REPORT OR -- WILL WE PAY FOR WORK -- LET ME PUT IT LIKE THIS. IF SOMEONE SUBMITS AN INVOICE FOR THE WORK THAT WAS DONE IN QUARTER TWO, AND IF THE SUBMITTAL WAS DONE IN QUARTER THREE, YES, WE WILL PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE THE WORK WAS DONE. FOR WHATEVER REASON THE INVOICE FOR THE WORK DID NOT COME DURING THAT QUARTER, BUT WE CAN VALIDATE AND SHOW THAT THE WORK WAS ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED, THEN, YES. WE DO HAVE A TEAM THAT'S ACTUALLY VETTING THESE REPORTS. ABE BROWN MINISTRIES WAS MENTIONED. SO THAT PARTICULAR NONPROFIT ACTUALLY IS FUNNELED THROUGH OUR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AREA. McKENZIE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOOKING AT THAT AND MAKING SURE THAT THE WORK ALIGNS WITH WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO BEFORE WE SUBMIT PAYMENTS. I THINK THOSE WERE YOUR QUESTIONS. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES. BUT, AGAIN, I THINK ONE OF MY QUESTIONS IS, ARE THERE ANY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE RECEIVING MONEY WHO AREN'T PROVIDING REPORTS? >>OCEA WYNN: NO, MA'AM. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. THEY ARE NOT PROVIDING REPORTS, BUT WERE PAYING THE MONEY? >>LYNN HURTAK: NO, JUST PERIOD. PEOPLE WHO JUST HAVE GOTTEN THE AGREEMENT. THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT, SO THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE -- IF YOU GO BY QUARTERS, QUARTER ONE, SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE REPORT IN AND INVOICE AT THE SAME TIME, I WOULD ASSUME, BUT THEN THEY JUST AREN'T -- THEY JUST DECIDED NOT TO TURN A REPORT IN. THEY ARE EFFECTIVELY NOT GETTING PAID. DO WE HAVE ANY FOLKS -- WEN WYNN I HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT BUT I'M COMFORTABLE IN SAYING NO. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT'S GREAT THEN. >>OCEA WYNN: ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO ON THE ON SET, WHEN WE REACH OUT TO THEM, WE LET THEM KNOW WHAT THE NEW PROCESS IS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SMART FORM. LINE THE WORK UP. IF THE WORK DOES NOT ALIGN WITH WHAT YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO DO, THEN I'LL GET INVOLVED TO SAY, HEY, LOOK, YOU NEED TO TALK TO ME AND TELL ME WHAT'S GOING ON HERE BECAUSE YOU ARE IN RISK OF NOT GETTING ANY FUNDING. BUT I'LL LOOK INTO THAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: JUST A COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS. ONE, THERE ARE A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS ON OUR LIST THAT WE FUNDED FOR MANY, MANY, MANY YEARS THAT ARE -- I WOULD HAVE TO ASSUME THAT THE CITY OF TAMPA -- DOLLARS ARE IMPORTANT TO EVERYBODY, BUT AS FAR AS PROBABLY A PERCENTAGE OF THEIR BUDGET IS PROBABLY NEGLIGIBLE BECAUSE THEY ARE WELL FUNDED, LARGE OPERATIONS, AND NOT TO MINIMIZE WHAT THEY DO FOR THE COMMUNITY, BUT HOW LONG CAN THE CITY OF TAMPA, IF WE'RE CONTRIBUTING TO ONE ORGANIZATION RAISING MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON ITS OWN, IS OUR X NUMBER OF DOLLARS, IS IT REALLY WHERE IT COULD BE USED FOR SOMETHING MUCH MORE STRATEGIC AND IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY IN A DIFFERENT ORGANIZATION. SO I SEE, ESPECIALLY DIDN'T APPLY, I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE WANTED TO BOOT THEM OFF ANYWAY BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE THAT IS THE NATURE OF THE BEAST HERE. I AGREE, I THINK WE MENTIONED AT PREVIOUS MEETINGS WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST CYCLE AND THEN THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, WHAT COUNCILMAN CARLSON REITERATED, THE VALUE ADDED TO THE CITY GOALS, I KNOW CHIEF BENNETT AGREES WITH THAT AS WELL, I THINK WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE, AS WE CALL THIS BUDGET, WE HAVE TO REALLY CLOSELY IDENTIFY. I LOOK AT THIS LIST OF FOLKS, ALL THE ORGANIZATIONS DO GOOD WORK, BUT IS THAT CITY WORK? WHAT I DON'T WANT FROM MY OWN PERSONAL VALUES, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE TAXPAYER MONEY, SOMEBODY ELSE'S MONEY AND THEN USE THAT AS CHARITY DONATIONS FOR AN ORGANIZATION. THAT WOULD BE UP TO ME. I COULD WRITE A CHECK MYSELF AND GIVE MONEY TO THE CHARITY. IT IS A WORTHY ORGANIZATION BUT WHO AM I TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION? BUT IF AN ORGANIZATION IS PERFORMING A STRATEGIC FUNCTION THAT THE CITY WOULD NORMALLY HAVE PERFORMED, I LOOK AT, WE DON'T HAVE A CITY DOGCATCHER. HUMANE SOCIETY PERFORMS A FUNCTION FOR US. I GET THAT. REALLY SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY. WE TALKED ABOUT -- WHAT IS THE ONE IN SULPHUR SPRINGS? STEPPING-STONES. BECAUSE THE POOL IS OUT. THAT IS A FUNCTION -- SUPPLEMENTS A CITY FUNCTION. THOSE KIND OF THINGS. I CAN MAKE SENSE OF THAT. SOME OF THIS OTHER STUFF I CAN'T MAKE MUCH SENSE OF. I DO GET THE IDEA OF SOME THINGS BEING A CATALYST, SET THEM UP, GET THEM GOING AND LET THEM FLY FREE. PERPETUAL FUNDING OF ORGANIZATIONS, MAYBE NOT SO MUCH. PROBABLY A LOT OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE PET PROJECTS OF MANY COUNCIL MEMBERS. BUT I THINK THE TIME HAS PROBABLY COME. MY SUGGESTION IS, AGAIN, BASED ON THE INFORMATION JUST BROUGHT TO LIGHT TODAY, IS THAT I THINK -- I WOULD SUGGEST WE TRY TO STICK TO THAT $1 MILLION ALLOCATED UNLESS SOMEBODY CAN FIND MAGIC MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE. TAKE MONEY FROM STORMWATER OR TAKE MONEY FROM PAVING. STICK WITH THAT $1 MILLION. HAVE OUR BUDGET ANALYST WORK WITH STAFF TO FIGURE OUT A WAY IN LIGHT OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT APPLIED, NEW APPLICANTS, FIGURE OUT A WAY TO COME BACK AND GIVE US ANOTHER PRESENTATION AT A FUTURE WORKSHOP MEETING. IS THERE A FUTURE WORKSHOP MEETING THIS FITS IN? MS. KOPESKY, WOULD YOU KNOW THAT? >>HAGAR KOPESKY: CITY COUNCIL BUDGET ANALYST. TONIGHT FOR STORMWATER IS THE LAST OF THE THREE SERIES AND THEN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. THERE IS A GENERAL COUNCIL MEETING ON THE 28th. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: MAYBE ASK THE ADMINISTRATION TO SET A DEADLINE FOR THEM TO REALLY -- I DON'T KNOW IF THEY FORGOT. SHOWS A LITTLE LACK OF UNDERSTANDING, WHAT THEIR DUE DILIGENCE WAS TO DO. I DON'T MIND WAITING ANOTHER WEEK AND A HALF OR SO BEFORE WE VOTE YEA OR NAY ON THE BUDGETS. IF THEY DON'T DO IT, BYE-BYE. I CAN'T HELP THEM. >>JOHN BENNETT: JOHN BENNETT, CHIEF OF STAFF. IF I COULD SUGGEST SOMETHING, HOPEFULLY ALL THE HEADS WILL NOD. ONE TO COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK'S POINT, LET'S ENSURE AGAIN THE SMALL BUT MIGHTY GROUP THAT HAS NOT REAPPLIED GETS SOME FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION. NUMBER TWO, AGAIN, WE'LL TRY AND STAY IN THE FRAMEWORK OF WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED WITH THE BUDGET AND MAYBE REPORT TO COUNCIL OFF-LINE IN TIME FOR THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING SO YOU HAVE MUCH INFORMATION BY THE TIME WE GET THERE. IF COUNCIL FEELS A NEED TO MAKE A MOTION DURING A REGULAR MEETING AHEAD OF THAT PUBLIC HEARING, OBVIOUSLY WE'LL INDULGE. WE'LL NEED A LITTLE TIME TO TAKE ALL THE 82 EITHER PREVIOUS NON-REAPPLIED OR NEWLY APPLYING AND VET THROUGH EVERYTHING WE'VE DISCUSSED TODAY. SO WE'LL NEED A LITTLE BREATHING ROOM FOR THAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: AGAIN, THE IRONY IS A LOT OF THE ONES THAT HAVEN'T APPLIED ARE ONES I JUST TALKED ABOUT PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE ON THE LIST. WE PROVIDE A SMALL AMOUNT TO THEIR MUCH LARGER SCALE OPERATION. A LITTLE BIT FOR US IS A LOT. WHAT IS THE SUGGESTION? WHAT DO YOU GUYS WANT TO DO? ASK FOR THE INFORMATION, ASK FOR THE BUDGET ANALYST TO WORK WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AND BRING IT TO THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING? CONSENSUS? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THAT WOULD BE A GOOD ONE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: CONSENSUS OF COUNCIL IS FOR YOU ALL TO WORK TOGETHER AND BRING US A PERFECT, UNFALLABLE PRODUCT AT THE FIRST BUDGET HEARING. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WHATEVER THEY SAY THEY WERE GOING TO DO, WE WANT EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE DONE THAT. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I THINK THEY ALREADY DO THAT. ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS ITEM? IF NOT, WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? MS. TATE? >> GOOD MORNING. ALMOST GOOD AFTERNOON. FRAN TATE, JACKSON HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE EAST TAMPA COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION ASSOCIATION, COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER. ON THIS ITEM, I'M LOOKING AT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. I WOULD EVEN SUGGEST THAT THE NONPROFITS THAT ARE ASKING FOR THE FUNDING COME BEFORE YOU ALL AND PRESENT, SINCE YOU ALL HAVE TO APPROVE THE FUNDING, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE NOT QUITE UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S GOING ON AND NO DISRESPECT TO MS. WYNN, SHE IS AWESOME. THAT DIRECT IS ON IT. SHE'S AWESOME. NO DISRESPECT TO HER, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE YOU ALL ARE NOT UNDERSTANDING WHO THE NONPROFITS ARE. WHY DID THEY LEAVE, WHY DID THEY NOT GET REFUNDED, WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THEIR WORK. I WOULD EVEN SUGGEST THAT. AND I HEAR 82. THAT IS A LOT OF PEOPLE COMING BEFORE YOU, BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT. SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THESE NONPROFITS THAT NEED THE FUNDING MISSED THE APPLICATION PROCESS. I'M NOT SURE I'M LOOKING -- ON THE OUTSIDE LOOKING IN, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT FEELS LIKE TO ME. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. NEXT. >> CHARLIE ADAMS, DIRECTOR OF KIDS ON THE RIVER AND ALSO PART OF KIDS ON THE RIVER, FOCUS ON FOOD INITIATIVE, WHICH IS THE SPRINGS MARKET THAT CITY OF TAMPA HAS GIVEN AUTHORIZATION TO USE NATURAL GREENSPACE, SMALL PENINSULA. I BELIEVE I MENTIONED IT BEFORE. I WILL APPRECIATE YOU ALL CONSIDERING DIFFERENT METHODS OF HOW TO ALLOCATE THESE FUNDS BECAUSE A FARMERS MARKET I BELIEVE COULD ADDRESS MULTIPLE ISSUES IN OUR COMMUNITY, CREATE JOBS, ENTREPRENEURSHIP, A SENSE OF CULTURE AS WELL AS ALSO ADDRESSING OUR FOOD DESERT ISSUE, PARTNERING WITH LOCAL FARMERS TO BRING FRESH PRODUCE TO OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK THIS WILL BE A VITAL RESOURCE TO THE CITY OF TAMPA AND HOW WE CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY. AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOU ALL FOR CONSIDERING TAKING DIFFERENT AVENUES ON HOW TO ALLOCATE THE RESOURCES. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU, MR. ADAMS. NEXT SPEAKER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON OR GOOD MORNING. KELLA McCASKILL. I TOO THINK, KIND OF ECHO WHAT MS. TATE SAID, I DON'T THINK THE NONPROFITS THAT COULD UTILIZE THE SERVICES KNOW ABOUT THE PROCESS. AND IF YOU E-MAILED THEM, THEY MAY OR MAY NOT RESPOND TO YOUR E-MAIL. MAY OR MAY NOT. I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU HAVE THAT LUXURY. SO ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE TO SHARE IS I HAVE A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION, ALTHOUGH I COME AND ADVOCATE. ONE OF THE THINGS I DO AND I NEVER ASKED YOU ALL FOR A DIME, I PERSONALLY PAY FOR CLEANUPS IN MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES. NEIGHBORHOOD BY NEIGHBORHOOD. NOW, YES, YOU HAVE A CLEAN TEAM, YES, YOU HAVE CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUT THEY DON'T DO THAT. I LIKE TO SEE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BE ADDED BUT I WOULDN'T WANT TO APPLY AND YOU RESPOND AND SAY WE ALREADY PROVIDE THAT. DON'T PROVIDE TO THE MAGNITUDE YOU'RE ASSISTING INDIVIDUALS REMOVING THE DEBRIS. TRIMMING THE TREE, HELPING THEM AVOID CODE ENFORCEMENT TO FIND AT THE SAME TIME. THE ONLY THING I WOULDN'T WANT TO LOSE IS KEITH O'CONNOR AND DETECTIVE WASHINGTON BECAUSE THEY ARE A BIG PART IN HELPING US FACILITATE THAT. WE FIND OUT WHO HAS THE FINES. FIND OUT WHO CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE FINES. FIND OUT WHO CAN'T REMOVE THE DEBRIS. AND ASSIST THE ORGANIZATIONS. S.T.E.M. EXPOSURE. CHILDREN IN MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPLORE OTHER CAREER CHOICES, MAYBE NOT GOING TO COLLEGE. SCIENCE AND BEAUTY ACADEMY. G 3 LIFE APPS. SKILL CENTER MAY NOT BE DOWN HERE BUT TRYING TO DO AN ARTICLE MURAL. DOESN'T FIT. CAN'T FIND THE MONEY FROM ANYWHERE ELSE BECAUSE I GUESS THERE IS NOT A BUCKET FOR THAT. ON THE LIST, SEEING SKILLS CENTER BUT NOT SEEING THE FUNDING FOR ART CENTER. THEY MAY NOT NEED THE MONEY FOR BUILDING BUT LOOKING FOR MONEY FOR MURAL ON A WALL. SO MANY ORGANIZATIONS MENTIONED. TAMPA BAY BLACK BUSINESS. BLACK BUSINESS INVESTMENT FUND, HELP SMALL BUSINESSES START SCALE GROWTH. EVEN OFFER THEM FUNDING. THEY ARE NOT ON THIS LIST ANYWHERE. THEY INVESTED OVER $43 MILLION IN THIS CITY. MOST OF YOU DON'T KNOW THEIR NAME. I FEEL LIKE THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY. I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU IN A POSITION WHERE PEOPLE START COMING TO YOU, SAY, HEY, GIVE ME THE MONEY. YOU NEED TO KNOW THE PEOPLE THAT REPRESENT THE CITY AND THEY DO AN OUTSTANDING JOB IN DOING SO. NOT SURE HOW YOU FIT THAT IN BY AUGUST 28, BUT I THINK AN OPPORTUNITY FOR, ONE, EXTEND THE DATE FOR THE AMAZING ORGANIZATIONS TO APPLY AND, TWO, FOR YOU ALL TO MEET THE PEOPLE IN A WAY THAT IS NOT SO, LIKE THEY ARE BEGGING FOR MONEY. THANK YOU. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU, MS. McCASKILL. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, MICHAEL RANDOLPH. HE'S BEEN VERY PATIENT. THANK YOU FOR BEING SO PATIENT, MR. RANDOLPH. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I WAS GOING ASLEEP BUT I'M UP NOW. I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT WEST TAMPA BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE OUR REPRESENTATIVES IN WEST TAMPA -- OF THE BUDGET IS NOT IN THE MIX. AS ALWAYS, WE STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND FIGHT FOR OURSELVES. OUR ASK IS FOR THE WEST TAMPA TECHNOLOGY WORK BUILD JOB CREATION CENTER, BUDGET OF 280,000 WHICH WE'LL BE ASKING 20,000 FROM THE CITY. THAT INCLUDES 30 NEW HOME-BASED BUSINESSES THAT WILL BE CREATED AND CREATE A TAX BASE FOR THE CITY. THE OTHER THING IT DOES, IN ADDITION TO INCREASING THE TAX BASE, IT REDUCES CRIME BY AT-RISK YOUTH TO START THEIR OWN BUSINESS. EVERYTHING IS COMING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AND REDUCE GENTRIFICATION. AS YOU KNOW, SINCE 1990, THE WEST TAMPA AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 50%. WE NOT ONLY PROPOSE A LOGIC MODEL BUT ON HOW THE CITY WILL GET THE RETURN ON ITS INVESTMENT. THANK YOU FOR WEST TAMPA. >> THANK YOU AGAIN, MR. RANDOLPH, FOR YOUR PATIENCE. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOVE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: YOU HAVE ON THE AGENDA, NEW BUSINESS FOR WHATEVER REASON. INAPPROPRIATE EXCEPT I DO HAVE ONE REQUEST AND WE CAN TAKE IT UP ANOTHER TIME. OTHERWISE WE DO IT DIFFERENTLY. BUT ON AUGUST 28, THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS REQUESTED FIVE MINUTES TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF FEES. THEY CAN DO IT DURING PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU GIVE THEM EXTRA MINUTES PERHAPS. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: I SAW THAT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTION? CONSENSUS TO ALLOW THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE TO PRESENT ON AUGUST 28. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT WOULD BE VERY GOOD. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: HEARING NO OBJECTION. >>MARTIN SHELBY: KEEP IN MIND, THE CONSENSUS WOULD ALSO BE MOST LIKELY THEY WOULD WANT TO DO A PRESENTATION AT THE FIRST BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. >>LYNN HURTAK: ONE MORE THING, JUST FOR THE VIEWING PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT THERE IS A SPECIAL STORMWATER OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL MEETING TONIGHT HERE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 5:01. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THANK YOU. THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. WE WILL SEE YOU ALL AT -- OH, I'M SORRY. >>THE CLERK: PRESENTATION -- [INAUDIBLE] >>ALAN CLENDENIN: YEAH, THAT'S GOOD. THERE'S NO MOTION. JUST ADDING IT. >>LYNN HURTAK: WE JUST HAVE A FEELING WE'LL GIVE THEM TWO MORE MINUTES. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: WE ARE ADJOURNED UNTIL -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE. >>ALAN CLENDENIN: THERE IS NOTHING TO RECEIVE AND FILE. WE ARE ADJOURNED UNTIL 5:01 P.M., SAME PLACE, SAME TIME, SAME BAT CHANNEL.