City Council - Regular Meeting

you Thank you. you you Thank you. you Thank you.

evening everybody thank you for your patience as we waited for a full council which councilman beer should be showing here for a moment chair i'd like to call this meeting to order clerk would you call the roll miranda miniscalco here her tech here young here viera carlson clendenin here we have a physical corn thank you welcome to tampa city council motion to open the public hearing We have a motion to open the public hearings. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. We have to have public comment.

Oh, we have to approve the agenda.

Yes. Anybody? Second. Okay, and I'm also going to add a presentation on brownfields ahead of it and give Ms. McClain an opportunity to talk about brownfields, so FYI. Okay, we have a motion to approve the agenda from Councilwoman Menescalco, second from Councilwoman Hurtek. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Thank you very much. Anybody in the public wishes to speak to... What's that?

That's not what he was saying.

No, open just general public comment.

Do we take general public comment?

It was published that way. It's on the agenda. It was published that way.

No, it says public comment on public hearings.

Oh, there you go. Never mind. Okay. Disregard all the above. See, you know, everything is discombobulated because Councilman Vieira was not here. Let the record show that Councilman Vieira has arrived on North Tampa time. A new Tampa time. Okay, very good. Public hearings have been open, but we're going to start with the presentation. Go ahead.

Good evening, Council. McLean Evans, Assistant City Attorney. I thought it might be beneficial since tonight's agenda is completely brownfields hearings and at least item one has generated significant public interest. Oftentimes there is some confusion about What a brownfield is why we participate in the program and I thought it might be beneficial to put on record Some answers to those questions. I'll definitely keep it five minutes or less the brownfields redevelopment Act was originally passed by the Florida legislature in 1997 for the purposes of eliminating blight and incentivizing investment in previously developed or utilized primarily industrial and commercial areas that either are contaminated or are suspected to be contaminated. Because prior to that, economic incentives didn't exist to interested potential redevelopers to take on a property like that and deal with the expense of contamination cleanup. So it the legislative intent stated in the act for the purposes of adopting it was primarily to address blight incentivize community redevelopment over further expansion out into existing agriculture and less dense areas So it incentivized increasing density and utilizing underutilized or often completely abandoned properties some of the incentives that exist in the statute are range from a broad range of financial incentives and also Legal liability protection The reason the city requests as both items on the agenda tonight are city-owned properties Generally is the particular financial incentive that benefits the city is tax credits for the amount expended to clean up the as a entity that doesn't pay taxes the city still benefits because they can resell those on the open market and recoup recoup some of the money that they expend for those cleanups when they buy these properties and And then there's also liability protection for any future cleanup or allegations by adjacent property owners and things like that as soon as the property has been designated and then in our case, the city has entered into an agreement called a brownfield site rehabilitation agreement, which in Hillsborough County is administered by the Environmental Protection Commission. The liability protection attaches. And so that is frequently why we bring these city-owned brownfield designations to city council. Private entities benefit and have a lot of other financial incentives built into the statute and actually other statutes referenced. Some of them range from things like if they are also building affordable housing on the Brownfield site, in addition to the tax credits for cleanup, they can get tax exemption on purchasing some or all of their construction materials. All that to say, sometimes I think the public finds it very scary and thinks that a designation is meaning that there is something you have to be afraid of and avoid the site. Rather, it is actually a very beneficial program. I think if you ask anyone on any side of the political spectrum. This is one of the few statutes that everybody agrees is in the public benefit. The developers like it because it provides them financial incentives. The people who want to make the world a better place and combat environmental justice and contribute to urban infill over urban sprawl also find it to be a very beneficial act. And that is it. Just wanted to get that on record.

Thank you so much. And now on to item number one.

Thank you, Council. McLean Evans, Assistant City Attorney. Item number one is the first public hearing on the Brownfield designation for Royal Street. This is the first of two scheduled public hearings before city council for a proposed Brownfield area designation of a city-owned property consisting of four adjoining parcels that are generally located in the vicinity of 1411 North Ashley Street, 103 East Laurel Street, 1200 North Tampa Street, and 1312 Tampa Street. This is also commonly referred to as the Army-Navy store site. The city of Tampa is requesting designation of these properties as a brownfield area to assist in the assessment and remediation of the environmental impacts that may exist on the property. Details of the designation have been outlined in a document entitled Staff Report on Royal Street Brownfield Area Designation, which is available for public review in the city clerk's office. At the conclusion of the second public hearing, which is scheduled for June 18, 2026, at 1030 AM, or as soon thereafter as possible, council will have an opportunity to pass a resolution designating the Royal Street a Brownfield area. Staff and I are available if you have any questions. And we have our entire environment program management team here for you.

Does council have any questions? Hearing none.

Do we have to close the public hearing?

No, because we still have one. Do we have a motion to close on this one?

Yeah.

Did you take a motion to close with Councilman Miranda, second from?

Right, yeah. I was going to ask, were you counting public comment from when you asked earlier? No.

Is there anybody in the public that wishes to speak to this item? Hearing none. Motion to close with Councilman Miranda, second from Councilman Menescalco. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Since she acknowledged that everybody in the public is in her staff, I assume.

But you'd be amazed of the havoc if that weren't in the record.

Yeah, that's true. That's true. Okay, very good. Okay. And we don't need a motion for this one, right? Because we do pass a resolution on the second one.

We can move on to item number two, if that pleases.

Item number two, please.

Good evening, Council McClanahan, Assistant City Attorney. This is the first of two scheduled public hearings for a proposed brownfield area designation of city-owned property consisting of two adjoining properties. They're generally located in the vicinity of 1125 and 1127 East Twigg Street. The City of Tampa is requesting designation of these properties as a brownfield area to assist in the assessment and remediation of environmental impacts that may exist on the property. Details of the designation have been outlined in a document entitled staff report on Madison Street Park expansion proposed brownfield area designation Which is available for public review in the city clerk's office at the conclusion of the second public hearing Which is scheduled for June 18th at 1030 a.m. Or as soon thereafter as possible Council will have the opportunity to pass a resolution declaring Madison Street Park expansion brownfield area a brownfield area Staff and are available if you have any questions

Does council have any questions? Hearing none. Anybody in the public wish to speak to this item? Hearing none. Can I get a motion to close? Move to close. Councilman Miranda, second from Councilman Maniscalco. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Councilwoman Hurtek.

Can she have a moment to introduce her team?

Would you like to introduce your team?

I would love that. Thank you.

Come on up, guys. Get on camera.

Josh Ellis is the head of the team, actually. I'll turn it over to him and let him tell you a little bit about each person.

Hey, Josh, come to the center of the podium. That's where the microphone is. Start with your name.

Josh Ellis, Urban Environmental Coordinator, City of Tampa's Solid Waste Department.

Very good.

I would be happy to introduce my staff.

Come on up. Step to the podium.

Good evening, Council. I'm Alexis Black. I'm an Environmental Specialist III in the Solid Waste Department. Nice to see you.

Welcome to Council.

Good evening, Council. My name is Victor Grusso. I'm an Environmental Specialist III with the Solid Waste and Environmental Program Management Department. Usually I'm just a talking head, no mic.

Good evening, Council. I'm Melanie Fenton. I'm the newest addition to the team, and I'm an Environmental Specialist I. Hi, Melanie.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Go ahead, Melanie. And this is Claire Craven. She is the legal department's legal intern for summer 2026, just started this week, and she'll be with us on Tuesday, Thursdays until August 7th.

Y'all look like you could be related.

We aren't. But thank you very much for allowing us to introduce everyone.

Absolutely. Very good. Welcome to Tampa City Council.

Thank you, counsel. Thank you.

It's always this easy. okay that concludes our regularly scheduled program we are on new business councilman carl no no no the second hearing on that one those are weird ones there's a couple of different items that we do like that we read the first one and then that's it councilman carlson new business yeah just something i mentioned to mr perry this morning i would like to ask um

Hayer is going to help me work on the wording, but I forgot to get it from her. But I would like to make a motion to ask the CFO's office to come back to us with a presentation on the total deferred maintenance in the city.

Do you have a date for that to return?

How about July 30th?

That's a lot of stuff.

I have a motion, Councilman Carlson, for the financial analyst to work with the chief financial officer to bring a report on July 30th for deferred maintenance for the city of Tampa.

If they say they need more time, I'll talk to them later. If they say they need more time, we can just go back and change it.

Okay, I have a motion, Councilman Carlson. Do I have a second? A second Councilman here all those in favor say aye aye opposed.

Councilman here. If I may I have to do some cleanup. I was at a Brennan McKenzie was going to be coming on June 4th it appears for an update on the special needs internship in the end she is unable to come on that this wasn't moving on June 18th if I may.

You know that's a written staff report, right? That was June 4th.

It's a written report. Okay, you know? Okay, then you know what? Maybe she wants the written. That's strange. We'll be able to look further if she has a written report ready. Okay, that's fine. Let's do June 18th written report. She requested a continuance. I'm fine with that. That's okay.

I have a motion from Councilman Vieira, second from Councilman Maniscalco to move the written report to June 18th. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

you very much council also i had requested a discussion for workshopping on june 25th uh for three three six four seven tampa fire response times and it indicated i was going to move a discussion on people with uh disabilities and housing to another time let me go ahead if i may in motion to remove that um because i neglected to do that

Okay, I have a motion from Councilman Vieira, second from Councilman Miranda to remove the staff report to provide housing for people with disabilities. Is that the one? Yes, sir. Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

And then I don't know if I need a motion for this, but for that date, June 25th, I don't know if I said this, I want to make sure that we have both the representative from Tampa Fire Rescue and Local 754 here to have that discussion. So if I may, just an abundance of caution, that's my motion.

Okay, I have a motion from Councilman Vera, second from Councilman Maniscalco to have representatives from 754 and the... TFR. TFR. For June 25th. On the June 25th meeting.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Thank you, Council. And then my next one, I mentioned this briefly, is... And I can have a written report on June 18th on this, which is, well, you know what? Strike that. I was gonna do it on the special needs internship and funding. I'll move that to next week, so I wanna make sure I have the language down. Then my last one, if I may, is, and maybe some of y'all had this discussion on the kiosks and the code and the apparent conflict that exists between the city code and some contracts that we've entered into for sign activation. And so this is my motion. Motion to direct city staff to prepare and return to Tampa City Council next or strike that on June 18th with a proposed text amendment to section 27-289.4 of the City of Tampa Court of Ordinances relating to electronic messaging signs to allow limited activation, movement, innovation, or similar dynamic display features on electronic sign message signs within the prescribed dwell time of 15 seconds under defined circumstances. In addition to considering where such activation could be allowed to occur within the city, the proposed text amendment should focus on sign technology and not focus or seek to regulate the viewpoint or message displayed. So again, the city, if y'all remember back in, for example, in 2020, I believe it was, we had debated some kiosk program here, and it appears that that, as well as other potential sign activations, have conflicts with our code. So I'm trying to bring the code into consistency with these contracts that we have. So that's the motion.

Okay, I have a motion from Councilman Vieira. Is there a second? I'll second. I'll second Councilman Matiscalco.

Councilman Vieira, first of all, a couple of things. Number one is the deadline for June 18th to go through on base is today. That's number one. Can we waive that? You're asking for a text amendment to come back in two weeks.

Well taken, well taken. Okay.

Next one's not until July 16th.

And by the way.

Let's do July 16th then.

Okay, but that'll be fine. If there's a concern by the legal department, they'll bring it to your attention.

Yes.

So July 16th. Yep.

Okay. So we cannot do June 18th presently today.

actually to do a text amendment yeah i mean come in with a text amendment i agree that coming in with the text amendment but by the text amendment that has to go to the planning commission if it's a chapter 27 i'm sorry mr shelby i just want you to know that today is may 28th yeah so it's the june 4th it's the june 4th session that closes on friday but either way Yeah, it is kind of tight for a text.

So how about I do this, counsel? Let's all talk to legal about it. My motion is for June 18th. But if there is one iota of objection or a challenge with the time, I can move it to July 16th. I just say that because that's another month. Right. And it's dealing with activation of these signs and just I agree. So again, June 18th is my proposed date. But if there is any challenge whatsoever with that, you have my word as an attorney. because I know as a professional attorney right that I will gladly send a memo on that.

We have a motion from the Councilman.

Okay now we have a lot of people that want to talk.

I know I gotta do the formal stuff first. I have a motion from Councilman Vieira. I have a second. Is that still good for you? July 18th. I'm sorry June 18th and discussion. Councilman Carlson I saw your microphone first.

um i i think we ought to wait until the conversation we had this morning are completed um uh i i told you that that i've heard that representatives of the lightning have been stirring up trouble behind the scenes and i don't know if this is related to that but um they need the lightning need to get control of their consultants and let them play a level playing field with the rest of the people in the community and so if we're going to discuss allowing moving signs which I think what you said we need to do it in a comprehensive way for everybody and it should be part of the conversation that the downtown partnership is having it shouldn't be separate because the because the consultant for the lightning is upset that they lost I don't think this is I mean well

I don't know. I think that's a fair and fair accusation to reference the Lightning because this is about the kiosk, which the Lightning has nothing to do with.

May I respond? No, it sounds like they're saying, and I haven't talked to them, but I hear whispers in the community, which is really frustrating. Like I said, if they have concerns of Lightning, you should come here. Don't send your consultants out whispering in the community and trash-talking people. But it sounds like what they're doing is saying, well, now that you made us shut down ours because it was being run illegally, and maybe even allowed illegally based on what I've heard from former staff then then now we're mad because some other people get it and so there's going to be this tit-for-tat and we need to stop the childish behavior we need to stop this high school game that's happening out there these are these are serious dollars I don't know if that's But what we're doing is we're jumping ahead with something that is not part of the regular process. No offense to my colleague, but we went through a whole discussion this morning about what the policy should be overall in downtown, and why are we jumping ahead of that? Now we're looking at a comprehensive solution, and then let's just add the motion part of it in it if it makes sense. I showed the example with the cat, so obviously I'm in favor of having motion in some way, but let's handle it systemically instead of a one-off thing.

Councilwoman Hurtado.

um my question is we we've been told that there's a sign that we have an agreement with the sign companies and so that's what i don't understand so that they got up this morning i mean councilman miranda talked about it so this to me impacts that as well so i do not understand how this can come forward with us without us solving that so so that's my concern i i i'm also uncomfortable not just doing it all. But my bigger concern is I need to hear from the lawyers that that's not opening up the can of worms. That is 100% what I'm most concerned about because if we allow it for these folks, we're gonna have to allow it for anyone who comes through. And that is, we aren't gonna have a leg to stand on.

So whenever I can respond.

Okay. So my piece on that is that again we're talking about existing something that's we walk down across the street you see it today but it was approved in 2020 and it shouldn't have been again so but we we're what can we do as a council now to what's the terminology when you try to write a wrong mister with the legal terminology literally what we were doing this morning is how you solve it but i'm saying but we have we can do we can do this little bite of the apple without having to deal with the bigger comprehensive because that's just... You cannot do that. Why not? Mr. Shelby.

You can't just make a law when you want to make a law and then not let other people

be a part of that law.

We're going to have people coming to us saying, well, they got to do it. I think we're opening up a Pandora's box. I don't have a problem having the conversation of doing it, but I want to hear from the lawyers. I would prefer them come to us first and talk about it and reassure us that this doesn't open the legal can of worms. And if that happens, I don't have a problem with it, but I want to hear from the lawyers first.

Mr. Shelby.

Mr. Chairman, Martin Shelby, City Council Attorney. In the time that I've been sitting here, it is very, very, very unusual, but it's happened recently with this council, that during new business, a motion would be made to do a text amendment to the City Code of Ordinances. And particularly with what happened this morning, I was concerned about where the discussion was going, and I'm sorry that I had to interrupt, but I did. But you do have a rule... that I have every good reason to believe that this matter is likely to be in litigation at some point unless the attorneys tell us otherwise. And counsel has a rule to that effect. We had the legal department represented here and they didn't shut down your discussion. You had a very productive discussion. But I would say with that attorney coming on board who's going to be talking with them tomorrow, It would be my strong recommendation that council not rush this and give the attorneys and the legal department an opportunity to best advise this city council because with all due respect, there are unintended consequences in everything that this city council does unless you are apprised of them.

I understand your concern, but it's my understanding, if I heard Councilman Breer correctly, this is apples and oranges. This is not about the large-scale digital signage. This is about... It does, because it's two different things. Yes, because we are...

It's served with all due respect. It's all interrelated. and and i i would i would caution council that and i wish mr and i went upstairs by the way to talk to mr steady and he wasn't there um but i i wish that council especially at the end of a meeting where this was not on the agenda to shoot from the proverbial hip mr veer thank you very much mr chairman uh mr shelby very briefly could you recite what that rule is is it for ongoing litigation that we may not speak on it

Yeah, just a rule. council should avoid any discussion of matters at a public meeting where the city is or is likely to be a party in litigation without concurrence of council so and thank you for that mr shelby so the issue is likely to be um you know then then any discussion we just dedicated an hour this morning to discussion on matters where we it can be argued could be likely to be in litigation therefore i i would suggest i'm operating in that same territory I appreciate you bringing this up, but there were a few issues that I think are very relevant, which is number one, we're not passing this law or this code change. We would be asking for potential consideration of it. I could even have feasibility put in there, number one, I think number two is something that Chairman Clinton said, and I said this is dealing with existing city contracts that people have entered into, relied upon our work, relied upon the decisions the city council have made, and we're trying to remedy that. It's a very, very narrowly tailored issue. So what I could do is this, since folks have some challenges with it, how about I change my motion to this so that we can move this thing forward in one way or another. i could motion for um staff to report on feasibility of this okay on june 18th feasibility of this and then we can bring it back the next meeting if if it passes feasibility i can inquire with city staff with with legal because again we've been advised by council i want to be respectful of that in the meanwhile to see if if those challenges um are are a sticking point so what i can do is to get this thing moving is

to change it to feasibility and then i can look at it again next week once i've talked to council councilman carlson yeah um councilmember hertech mentioned the um the settlement agreement i talked to two or three of the companies that were related to that and they described to me how they thought that those kiosks should have been included in the settlement agreement. I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. And I don't know if a judge is ultimately going to have to figure that out. But if somebody decides that our legal department will give us advice, and then we'll either get sued or not get sued, I guess. And there are multiple parties involved in this. But if somebody decides that it's not included in the settlement agreement, then then if there's nothing wrong with it and by the way the the lawyers to my knowledge vetted that whole thing when we passed it a few years ago but what i would what i would recommend i'm okay with discussing it what i'd recommend is put it next to adjacent to the discussion of whenever the downtown partnership is coming back why not have it all part of the same discussion i think it is important to have moving images as long as they're not distracting drivers councilwoman hertech you said you wanted the text amendment

So you know that text moments can come twice a year. There's a January cycle and a July cycle. So you may you're probably going to have to put that in the July cycle. And land development code people have been very clear that they don't want any changes and any more changes than truly necessary because we're about we're going through the land development code. So you may really want to talk to Abby about that because I have gotten pushback any time I've tried to bring a text amendment because of that. So I'm just I'm warning you on that one. I didn't realize I thought it was an ordinance. And then that's why I wanted to ask again. So I I'm I'm I'm good with you having them come forward and tell us what we can and can't do. I think that's a good place to start.

Okay. So can you restate your, your, yes, sir.

So let me, let me put this properly, which is my aforementioned motion is I would take the motion I made before, which I will restate in its entirety, but this is going to have city staff, city legal come to us on June 18th to report on the feasibility. with the concerns that our attorney mr shelby has raised which i respect and i want to be obviously respectful of um on city staff preparing a proposed tax amendment to section 27-289.4 of the city of tampa cordon ordinances relating to electronic electronic messaging science allow limited activation movement animation or similar dynamic display features on electronic message signs and again i'm not going to restate the whole motion if i just the same thing which is feasibility of that but it would be my intent if it does pass muster to bring this back in july which is then the next meeting if we can and i know councilman hurtak just made some comments on that well taken but to have the next report come back in july if it passes muster that's the big issue so that's my i have a motion i have a motion councilman here i have a second from councilman escalco councilman miranda you wanted to speak i i just wanted to

Today when I saw the three gentlemen sitting in the back, not saying one word for a long period of time, I told myself, we got a problem. Or I have a problem. And then I started winding my head back to 15 or 20 years ago, what happened? I can't iterate that everything that happened was perfect, but I know it took almost two years to get that deal done. And I know it was a lot of give and take, and I don't remember the day they said 1,000 or 10,000 signs, I forget what they said. They gave it up and then I remember them mentioning we gave up a lot of revenue to change what we have now. So what is he telling us? Without telling us. How much revenue did they lose? It's how much revenue we're gonna get sued for. That's what I took out of it when I got home and I didn't realize. Got sent back and said, okay, what happened? What happened is this. So I'm not saying they are or not, that's up to them. But anything can happen in a lawsuit. You can win, you can lose. Well, the court says, I don't want to hear it, I guess. So those are the three things that can only happen in a lawsuit.

But I sat here very calmly and listened to them.

And the voice that they spoke in, very calmly, very not raise their voice so calmly, that means they know what they are doing. And my counselor advisor said, you're right, you don't raise your voice, you don't yell or make people nervous. No, very calmly they laid it down. So that tells me beware of your wallet and maybe going away.

I don't know. I found the Clear Channel guy to be a little bit of a... We'll see what happens. Yeah, he did not come across well for me. He left a sour taste in my mouth.

Ninja confidence. What they're saying is that we gave up 10 billboards for one of these, and I don't think he said what the revenues were on the other nine, but he did say on the one. But I can understand if you have... a hundred billboards and now you have 10 that you might be frustrated. Now other people get to come in and build what they want. And I don't know all the details of it, but I know one of the restrictions that would have applied to the Lightning is that they can't promote anything that's outside that facility. As I understand, again, we have to get the lawyers, but if you have a McDonald's and you have a sign and you promote Coca-Cola and fries and a hamburger, that's fine. But if you start promoting a Snickers bar and you don't sell the Snickers bar inside, you can't talk about it. But then there's a gray area about, well, if you If you do sell Coca-Cola, can you sell images of Coca-Cola in California and in Europe and other places? Or can you just show it inside? So there's some nuances of the settlement agreement we need to think through. But that settlement agreement, Charlie was here then, not us, but I think the settlement agreement was to stop lawsuits. So we don't want to... We don't want to have lawsuits again. We want to be mindful. And my understanding, there's no official request that I got. Maybe you all heard them, but what they're saying is that if you take away anything that we have, you need to make sure that you give us something else in return. You can't just suddenly give everybody else the same right now that we've sacrificed by taking down all these billboards.

And it's not, I don't think it was one for one either. I think it's square footage. So they could replace 10 smaller billboards, square footage per square footage of billboard, I think is what they said. So like they could take 10 small billboards and put up one big one or something to that effect. Okay, I have a motion. I have a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Okay. That's it. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Young.

I have two motions and then just some updates my first motion is I moved to make a motion to present accommodation on July 30 of 2026 to celebrate the high school afro academic cultural technology and scientific Olympics also known as XO national competition winners I think there were 18 that way I think that's it I think that's the number that you said but that's my motion

I have a motion from Councilwoman Young and second from Councilman Maniscalco. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

Okay. And my second motion, hopefully, I think this date works, but if not, I have a second date. I move to make a motion to present accommodation on July 16th, 2026 to the Toba Leadership Institute celebrating seven graduating cohort classes since 2020. Second.

Okay, we have a motion from Councilwoman Young, a second from Councilman Miranda. It looks good to me. We can do three, right? Yeah.

I thought that was the day we were supposed to get the budget.

Yeah, we have to talk about that, but I can't do it during this hearing.

I have a motion, I have a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

And then just some updates, because we've had very long meetings, so I haven't been able to do my little spiel, but I know it's our favorite part. So I attended the G3 Christmas Under the Sun Awards Banquet, which was very nice. It was at the Skills Center, the 7th Annual United Bikers Motorcycle Event. I did not ride a motorcycle, but I did get some very nice pictures. I went to the Blake High School graduation, which was very nice. They have a wonderful chorus. And that was my first time going to a graduation, and it wasn't me graduating. So it was very cool to see all the students. And at the end, when they were able to turn their tassels, and you could just see how excited All of the students were, I almost got emotional because I was just thinking, I remember being in that space. So it was very nice. And I'm going to Middleton's tomorrow. I went to the Memorial Day service at Memorial Park Cemetery. I'm pretty sure we all saw the housing press conference with Mr. Mallard in East Tampa. I saw the before and after pictures of when they renovated his house and it's really nice. I had a North Hyde Park Civic Association meeting last night at Willis Provisions, which was very nice. And also, myself and Darlene have been kind of just talking to youth in District 5, and some of the things that students have been telling us is what they would like to have for the summer, what they would like to see as pool parties. They would love to be able to have access to water because it's hot, so being at a pool party, either like a youth, a teen club, or a youth party. um as well and then also one of the needs that was identified was transportation because sometimes you have children that are either in two parent homes and both um parents are working or single parent homes and that parent is working so they cannot get to the park if it's not walking distance so that's all see that wasn't bad no that was great thank you It's my idea. Nobody else can do it.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay. So we currently have two upcoming staff reports about Station 24. One is scheduled for June 4th, 2026, which is which is a written update to include the date for a groundbreaking. And the other is an in-person report scheduled for July 16th, 2026 to present the GMP for Station 24. Ms. Kapesky has confirmed that Chief Tripp is ready to present all of that information. So I moved to change the written staff report for June 4th to an in-person report. And this has already been cleared. And to combine this staff report with the one scheduled for July 16th, 2026 to present the GMP for Fire Station 24.

So moving it to July, is that what I heard?

No, we are we are moving the GMP presentation, which is July 16th to June 4th. They want to do it early. They have the information got it. So we're moving it So right now I have a written staff report on station status of station 24 from Councilman Vieira. I want to move that to a staff report which will include the GMP Okay, so we're gonna move from the June 4th item under written staff reports item number two.

We're gonna move that to a

to in person on june 4th in person on june 4th okay then that to include the gmp conversation and then after this motion is passed then i will take the 16th one off okay good that was going to say yes i've got two motions got it okay so i got to do one first okay we have a motion and is there a second from councilman miranda all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed eyes have it then you got that one She has it. It's all written. She's going to get it. She's going to get it. Then I move to remove the GMP presentation scheduled for July 16th from the calendar.

Second.

I have a motion from Councilwoman Hurtick, a second from Councilman Maniscalco. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

uh my office received this email from kelly austin the director of human resources which read the atu trustees have advised us that they will not be moving forward with atu employee of the month until further notice they are internally going to evaluate their process and will advise us so please ensure it is not scheduled on the upcoming council meetings i am very disappointed to hear this this is not what i like to hear but this came from from the Director of Human Resources. So I figure we should respect that. This kind of breaks my heart because I really feel like the ATU employees are the ones that really, I think it's really exciting for them to get the commendation. So with a heavy heart, I move to remove all future ATU Employees of the Month award from the calendar until the ATU trustees notify us otherwise.

question on the motion if I may I have a moment hold on second I have a motion councilwoman her is there a second second for councilman Miranda councilman beer can we because I I started this when I was chair in 2019 is there any way that we could ask

think of something to have because councilman her tech how long are they talking about because i have no idea and so after we make this motion if you want to yeah go ahead and and try it's a shame i mean i'm just i'm heartbroken by it but i but there's really no one to talk to because atu doesn't the the right now the atu trustees are in chicago i believe yeah and so they don't really know how the city runs and they have a ton of other unions like i get it i'm disappointed but i but i get it and there's no other single point that covers all of that so how about this if um i'll make a i'll make my fifth motion for tonight at the end if i pay on that because we should continue i agree so if you have a way to do it i'm more than happy to support you on that yeah okay we have a motion from councilman the woman her check a second councilman randall doesn't favor say aye aye regretfully aye yeah I think all of us are regretfully eyes there.

Is that it? Yep. Councilman Metascava. I have nothing, but anybody have any birthdays coming up? You know of anyone? No?

We'll wait until next week. 18?

I'm good. Thank you very much.

Wow.

That's right. Thank you, sir. I would like to make a motion for Mayor Jane Castor to present the fiscal year 2027 budget on July 23rd, 2026. It's a special call session prior to the CRA regular session that begins at 9 0 1 a.m.. I'm second.

So July 20, she wants to do it during the before the CRA.

Yeah, I guess it's time for time.

I'd rather have it on the 30th.

Well,

I think that combining the budget conversation with the CRA with the evening session, which is the rezoning night, is crazy.

Well, let's see what's on the CRA right now. If we lock the CRA down.

But we can't because that's where we're going to be talking about the budget. That's the budget conversation, isn't it? July's budget. And that's going to be a more in-depth conversation this year. it's not scheduled there yet it's not scheduled yet but that's the time we do it every year

Well, this is a presentation of budget.

You have two more and you have the first reading of the budget. Yeah, this is just a presentation.

But it's not quick. We always have questions.

It's a long thing.

But I mean, it's not like it's an all-day thing. I don't think it is. It's probably an hour.

But usually, last year, we limited the number of items on the agenda to three because of it. It's a long period, it takes a long time. I just, I don't, I'm personally, I would rather have a special session than to have it on a CRA day. I think CRA is, we have a lot to discuss in the CRA and I think it gets us started late and then we're gonna be going and I mean, Evening session is going to be crazy. I just think that's a really bad idea for us as a council, because we're going to end up working more than 12 hours. And I, and I hate being at the end of an evening session and not being clear headed. That's not fair.

Mr. Chairman, Martin Shelby, city council attorney, my suggestion, Mr. Miranda, um, with regard to the, uh, two public hearings that has probably no doubt already been vetted with the other jurisdictions. So I would recommend that you go forward with those. With the other, if you could hold it a week, but I should say that if you do a special call meeting, it would have to be noticed as a special call meeting. You'd also have to take a break between it in order to change the clerks and the like.

We know how to do that now, don't we?

So my question is, why can't we do it on the 30th? There's nothing on the 30th.

Because that hasn't been cleared with the administration. Who's going to be doing the presentation?

I mean, if it can't be the 16th, which is fine. I'll take July 30th now and see what happens. We can always change that. May I, Mr. Chair?

Councilman Behr. Yes, sir. Just for the 23rd, in case of council, acting as CRA thinks there's too much. I have an item there. I can move it to the following month just to make room on it. Because, again, if it's on the 30th and the mayor has a conflict, God only knows. But, again, I'm glad to move on something on the 23rd just to cut a little bit of that time.

Whenever you decide, fly with me.

Do you want to hold it until next Thursday? There's still plenty of time to schedule it so we can check with the administration.

Let's check it with the administration.

Well, how about we go with Councilman Miranda's suggestion? We schedule it for the 30th.

If there's a problem, we can come back. I think that's better. The problem is that our first budget workshop is the 3rd of August, but that's kind of what we did last year. We only had a weekend to look at it.

It's my mother's birthday, but she'll understand.

Okay, we have a motion from Council.

Well, it's not like we're not going to be here anyway.

I have a motion from Council Miranda, a second from Council Maniscalco, to schedule the mayor to present the FY27 budget on July 30th at 9 a.m. Is it after accommodations? Yes. After accommodations. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

The next one I would like to make a motion to set the first public hearing on the physically a 2027 budget on Tuesday, September the 8th 2026 at 05.01PM.

I have a motion Councilman Miranda second from Councilman Maniscalco and that was that that's a pretty so we are we had the block right and all those in favor say aye aye opposed I said it.

Thank you the 3rd I would like to make a motion to set the second public hearing in the physical your budget 2027 budget for Tuesday. September 22nd, 2026, at 5.01 p.m. Second.

I have a motion from Councilman Miranda, second from Councilman Maniscalco. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

Now, two separate motions. I would like to make a motion to present a combination to the Florida Courier in celebration of being named one of USA Today's 2026 TAM Best Aquarists in the Country. I would like to make this presentation on July the 16th, regular session.

Second.

I have a motion from Councilman Miranda, second from Councilman Vieira. All those in favor say aye. Well, actually, that was July 16th. We just filled it up, so I would have a motion to waive the rules if we're going to do that.

Are you going to do it on the 30th? That's the budget presentation. I'm going on any day. I don't care about them. They show up, they show up.

I can be that person that comes up and accepts it in their honor. Hey, Roger.

The 30th is the budget presentation. You just said that, right?

Yeah.

And a presentation, I mean, it's 10 minutes max. Okay, we have a motion from Councilman Miranda to provide accommodation for the aquarium on July 30th. The second is from Councilman Vieira.

Yes, sir. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. All right, the last one, I would like to make a motion to present accommodation on July 30th, regular session to Mr. Doug Trent, a city of Tampa resident, former employee of the city of Tampa and U.S. Navy veteran, who just recently celebrated his 99th birthday at Forest Hills.

Yeah, we got to meet him.

Okay, that's that would be he's like driving himself. What's up?

That's three present. That's three. Well, it's a one presentation and two commendations. Okay, so we're good. Okay. I have a motion from Councilman Miranda. Second from Council Maniscalco. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. And that's it.

Mr. Chairman, may I?

Well, I mean, I have a question, Mr. Shelby, about that rule you quoted about litigation. Am I just being out there when I said every dang thing we discuss in council is subject to litigation?

I prefer to have this discussion with you offline, but I could have sworn that I heard several people talk about litigation relative to signage.

We get threatened with litigation on everything we do.

But that's not what the, the rule is you need to have legal presence. And not him, but the city.

Well, actually, it's both council, frankly.

I'll talk about it offline. Okay.

But that's how I understood the rule. Isn't that the rule, Mr. Shelby, that it should be legal, city staff legal?

It says that you should not without the concurrence of council. And if you don't have the concurrence of council, and we've heard this before, that if you act... against the advice of your attorneys, you might find yourself in a situation that you might not want to be in.

Can you tell me what the background on that was? How that rule was implemented?

Yes, but it's approaching an hour into the meeting. So what I would do is rather than have this conversation. I'll do it offline. We'll do it.

I was going to do it for the benefit of everybody, but they don't need to know. Just kidding. Okay. Councilman Vieira.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

So next week, there's going to be an administration update, correct?

I mean, it's always on the schedule.

Okay. Yeah, I would assume. So my motion is this, is to have Chief Bender or whoever comes to discuss with us how we can, until late, things work themselves out at ATU, a mechanism for an employee of the, I guess it is of the quarter, whether it's, I mean, my idea would be to have HR talk about it. Maybe we go department through department.

We do 1 month this department the other month, but just to keep it going because that's unfortunately, because they are still a recognized bargaining unit that would have to go through the unit. The bargaining itself would have to bless that. We could not be an atu. Oh, I know that, yeah. And it can't even include any of the bargaining members without it being negotiated. I'm assuming that, as was read by you, Kelly said that was transmitted from the representatives from the bargaining unit, and that kind of shuts everything down.

So this wouldn't be under 18. This would be a whole different creation.

But it can't even be there. Anybody they recognize, so labor law, Because ATU is the official representative that represents all of those employees,

you have to you can't do things unilaterally management can't do anything unilaterally like that without going through atu so so how about this i'm going to make a motion what i'll just do is i would ask that the administration and i'm glad i'll call up chief bennett on it i will call on something anyway um to talk about to the extent this can be done to address it next week and if it can't yeah turn out the lights the party's over that's all right that's fine i just i'm a little i know i know a little bit about labor law A lot more than I do. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

Can I mention one more thing? Go ahead. Because of stories that have appeared in the afternoon, I just wanted to give you all a heads up since I'm not allowed to talk to you. outside of this. This morning I made the motion to take the raise item off the agenda, and then reporters called me and asked me more about what I said, and I just want to tell you my perspective without the reporter's filter. I think there are three different levels of engagement by city council. There is the briefing, which is passive, one-way directional, and I think the administration offered that to all of us. I was out of the country when they offered it, but I think they offered that's where they tell us what was happening. The point I'm making is that, um, as city council, if this is advocacy, one-on-one as city council, if you know, you have to get four votes, somebody from the administration six months ago should have asked each of us what it would take for us to vote yes for a deal. And. You all can tell me now whether you were offered that or not. I was not. But when the presentation is given to us, we knew what the deal was, but especially six days before we were supposed to vote on it. But the point is that if we had concerns about it, somebody should have had a conversation. I had a lot of questions. I had a lot of discussions with the county and I had a lot of discussions with the Rays. The Rays were very good about going back and forth, but somebody kept saying no to everything I proposed. The administration never reached out to me to ask me, what would you like to see in the deal or what concerns would you have? And so maybe in a second, if you all want, you can say whether that happened or not. But the second thing is the one that concerns me the most. The $100 million, which is the majority of what they wanted us to approve, was from the CRA. The CRA is a separate entity. We are the board of the CRA. I think we should have led the negotiation of it. And I knew that the administration was negotiating, but I never expected that they would negotiate that without getting consent from the board to talk about it. And we can talk about this more next week. But to my recollection, we never voted to say we designate the chief of staff as our person to negotiate. And we never gave him feedback. Nobody ever asked us what the CRA board members would want in a deal. and so anyway think about that or you guys can respond to it but i just want to separate a briefing from active engagement and when you talk about the cra we're in charge the buck stops with us if somebody doesn't like the deal it's a hundred percent our fault not the mayor's even though the mayor's people negotiated we weren't involved as far as i know

were you all involved in negotiations or i mean not a briefing but i negotiate you were involved obviously yes there was a public safety aspect of it that came through everything i suggested to the race was rejected um i i mean what what you said is what happened with me too i we weren't part of the negotiation and i do think that um when we sit down as a cra that has to be part of our discussion um because i would never have agreed to 100 million dollars especially in light of what just happened yesterday. But no, I was called by media today to regarding something similar. But yeah, I really think that it does not make sense. And it's really unfortunate that the administration thought that they could bargain basically or negotiate for the CRA and that's just simply not the case we are responsible for that money we are responsible for any decision that comes out of a CRA and it doesn't sound like they're willing to negotiate anymore but if they are I mean we should be at that table for it

One, I would caution taking one clip from the news media as an official position of an organization, especially on such a consequential deal. I think that one quote from Ken has been greatly exaggerated or taken out of context. I kept myself apprised of everything that was happening because I was making those phone calls. i mean i called the county representatives i called city staff because obviously my i took my position on the tsa seriously as well and of course being chairs you know i felt that there was but the administration never asked you what would you want to be in a deal or not be in a deal no charlie no we don't negotiate that i mean but well you know and this this maybe this is i i mean i think there's you have to bifurcate the thing there's two things one the council position of course part of you know we're part of the city government And then the CRA thing, I think your point is very well taken. I think I would guess that everybody is kind of like, oh, you know, maybe a little bit of regret on that stance.

Because what happened, you all may not watch, Charlie probably doesn't watch social media, but people were making fun of city council and say, how are you all so stupid that you don't know what the deal is? It was publicized. Well, we could read about it in the paper, but we were not part of the negotiations.

Well, again, I think that there's two different things. One, I want to remind people that the non-binding MOU that was reached did say reference the CRA portion of it. It was only the portion that was being developed that was going to be used to pay back the $100 million, not the general Drew Park CRA. So it was going to do no harm to the, in fact it would only do benefit because obviously this development would have bled into the CRA which would have increased the TIF and do that. Nobody outside of that 120 acres was going to be paying for the $100 million. That was only being paid back by the portion that was being developed and that money would not have materialized if it wasn't developed. And they had a backstop. on that of paying rent in lieu of that payment, so that if they say they didn't build on schedule, they were backstopping that amount of money. But again, this is all discussion that doesn't need to happen tonight, because I promised everybody we'd be out in 15 minutes. But I think point taken on the CRA of this, that is not a part of the administration, and there probably should have been discussion. My only question is, I guess we could have had a meeting and anointed somebody to negotiate on our behalf. So I talked to Bonnie. You can't negotiate with seven people.

Yes, you can.

That's the only option. I talked to Bonnie Wise and I talked to five of the county commissioners. And what they do is she talks to each one of them. And then when she thinks she has four votes, she brings something before them. What this administration does is they don't care. They'll put things in front of us to dare us to vote no. Like the mayor said the other day, I can't believe that anybody would be stupid enough to vote against this. And it shouldn't be a political thing. It should be a discussion or a negotiation. But the CRA is more like the county. We're not sitting as city council. The charter allows the mayor to negotiate contracts for the city, but not the CRA.

So how would you see that happening? Again, for tomorrow, let's take the raise out of it. We have another thing that has to be negotiated with CRA. How does that work mechanically?

Educate me. Cedric was not involved either. And so how could you? But is he authorized to negotiate on that? He's the executive director of the CRA. He should have been involved. So what ideally would happen is that whoever is in Cedric's position should be going to each of us. They can't compare notes and share information. But they should go to each of us and talk to us about what we'd want and not want in a deal. And then they take that back. And separately, we can talk to the Rays. And then if the administration wants to appoint the chief of staff to be the negotiator, then they need to come to us and ask our permission to do it.

Cedric does not have the time to negotiate. I don't think that's a good idea.

Well, that's not on the – we don't need to talk about that tonight. This is the final word. Final word.

Well, I'm not going to say the final words. Somebody else may be the final word. I mean your last words. I'm not saying the final words. Leave me alone. But what I'm saying is this. You know, they understand what they were doing. We understood what we were doing. So where's the problem? The problem is that they didn't factually say it exactly how we thought they were going to say it. They leave out the 122 acres that's worth over half a million dollars, I mean half a million dollars, half a billion dollars, 500 million. Like it's not part of the same, giving 55%. They're not because that kind of, that land that they're getting, they didn't count the 50 million that they received from the state government, from Tallahassee. They got that 50 million, I guess, but that's what the paper said. So when you do get all those things, who is factual? Who's right and who's wrong? I don't know, but you're right. When she said 7-0, they should have passed 7-0. I told her a week before that that I was not going to vote for it. So it should have been 6-0.

Unless they were racing horses.

Then it was 7-0.

Okay, motion to receive file from Councilman Maniscalco. Second from Councilman Freer. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Second. Thank you very much.