In case you missed it Council voted to approve the South Howard Flood Relief project. (5-2 with Carlson and Maniscalco voting no). What comes next? Expect a public kickoff sometime after the New Year. I would expect the first update to Council in late spring. A final vote to approve what ever design and cost they come up with won’t happen for another year. I will do my best to keep up with the details in between.

Before we get into the agenda this week, I wanted to point out something I’ve noticed with the agendas the last month or so. The use of the Summary Sheet. I had stopped even looking at these as they were generally blank placeholders submitted with the agenda item. No details, no information. Literally a blank document template. You’d have to dig through any other attached documents to get a better understanding of the agenda item. However lately I’ve discovered each item comes with a sheet that expands on the agenda wording. I still think these are written for lawyers and not the public but it’s a move in the right direction.

The first item worth noting is item 30. The nomination of Abbye Feeley to be Administrator of Development & Economic Opportunity. If you haven’t been following this, Ms. Feeley has been in the interim role since summer. Prior to that she was one of two Deputy Admins primarily on the development side of that equation. The way the Mayor and Admin have handled this situation is disappointing to say the least. Starting in early summer there was a mass exodus of leaders in this department beginning with the previous Admin. There are at least 5 key position that have gone unfilled in this department. I touched on the issue back in July. Nothing has changed, albeit we did experience 2 hurricanes that have put additional strain on city resources. But that’s all the more reason why this issue should have been dealt with sooner and in a more transparent manner rather than be used as an excuse now. The previous person to hold this position was one of the highest paid positions in the city (the Chief of Police recently got a raise to $240,000/yr, I believe the last Admin for Development & Economic Opportunity was in the $220,000/yr range). Questioning if the proper processes were followed to find the most qualified candidate shouldn’t be controversial. The Chief of Staff represents in his memo to Council that “over 50 candidates” were vetted for the role. What does vetted mean? You read their resume? Were any formally interviewed? None of this is to take away from Ms. Feeley’s commitment to the city or to question her qualifications on land use matters. But the title includes “Economic Opportunity” and at this point I’m questioning what that means to this city.

Speaking of, item 34 is a re-apportioning $1 million dollars of which $750,000 is for the Land Development Code Update which Ms. Feeley is currently overseeing. Council had already approved $1 million for this task. Why now another $750,000? There’s an update to that process on the agenda for item 77, perhaps some answers will be provided then. Probably after the money is approved.

Item 61 is confusing. 2 years ago the city through the CRA sent out an RFP for adding parking for the Tampa Park Plaza Playground. Tampa Park Plaza is just north of Cass & Nuccio Parkway along Nebraska Ave. “The feasibility of providing additional parking to enhance the redevelopment potential of private property within the CRA such as the commercial/retail shopping center owned by Lessee adjacent to the Park.” Setting aside how that meets the CRA standards, the proposal is for the city to lease the land for $1 a year so a private company can build 200 parking spaces some of which the public will be able to use with no indication of whether that use will come with a cost. Is it really in the city’s best interest to give away this land for primarily private business parking? The other question is why did it take 18 months for an RFP to come before Council?

Items 65 and 66 are both proposals for the city to loan $5 million dollars interest free to projects that are building affordable housing. In this case the first project, The Adderley II at 820 E Busch Blvd will have 100 units designated affordable. 15 set for folks at 30% AMI, 67 units at 60% AMI and the remaining 18 units leased to individuals or families at 80%. Additionally 15 of the units will designated “City-Assisted Units” reserved for folks 62 or over and at or below 60% AMI. The second project is in Seminole Heights at Florida Ave and Henry Ave. 26 units (half the project) at 80% AMI with 5 of those set aside for the city’s Housing & Community Development Dept. While ultimately these are interest free loans so the city isn’t out a lot in the long run when comparing the two, 100 units with a large majority for folks making 60% or less AMI vs 26 units at 80% AMI should give pause. Would that $5 million be better served on a different project that provides more units?

Item 70 is an amendment to the contract between TPD and Axon, the vendor that provides hardware and technology behind body-worn cameras. Their suite of services has grown to include all kinds of digital evidence storage as well as drones and video. It seems the City of Tampa has purchased the full package and locked in prices for 10 years at a cost of $50 million dollars (avg $5 million/yr). I’ll reserve comment beyond suggesting you watch the video of a TPD officer who was terminated last month for excessive use of force . I guess that’s what we are paying for.

Items 71 and 72 are approvals of contracts and short term debate issuance related to the relocation of the solid waste facilities. These are items that have previously been presented to Council and discussed prior to budget adoption. Still $130 million is a lot to borrow and $106 million for a project that has seemed to drag on (the design criteria package was issued in September of 2021).

The remaining items do not require action by Council and are meant to inform future decisions. However, several are worth keeping an eye on.

Item 73 is a request for an update on the status of TFR Station 24 and the maintenance & supply relocation. Station 24 was supposed to have already broken ground by now and the relocation is still a mystery. Allegedly the city was on the verge of having more to say about land purchase for the relocation however the accompanying memo makes no mention of it. These were items that have been in the budget every year since 2022.

Items 74 and 80 are related in that they discuss costs related to space for staff. 74 is an update on relocation to Hanna Ave and 80 is about the costs and people still at the GTE building on Henderson.

Folks in Ybor will have a close eye on item 76, an update on the parking situation in Ybor as it relates to compliance with the latest code changes. Again a reminder that this relates to lots where parking is the primary use, not businesses that have parking. They are two distinct things in the code and should not be conflated.

Finally, there are a couple of items related to how FEMA can help the city and or individuals and how the city can help folks still displaced. I would just like to ask where is the state in these discussions? The governor and legislature seem to get a free pass when it comes to discussing recovery from hurricanes. He flys in on his private jet, does a couple of press conferences and then disappears. Tallahassee sits on their hands waiting to take orders from developers with their hand out for federal dollars.