There’s quite a bit on this week’s agenda to cover and once again I will be curious to see how much attention is given to certain items. There isn’t an evening session so there will be less pressure to wrap up before 5. Ironically, there’s a meeting in the morning about agenda management as well as agenda item related to meeting lengths.

This will be my first attempt at a look ahead for a regular agenda so the format might change but for now I’ll just list the items I think deserve attention or what I think will get the attention.

Item 4 was to be an update on the Jackson House however there’s a request to continue until February 15, 2024. There were a lot of moving parts with the land swap so it’s not surprising to see this push past the holidays.

Item 5 is an interesting “cleanup” of the code that clarifies:

• you can’t “substantially” benefit from any contract with the city, not just your department (How many times has this been abused?)
• you can’t disclose confidential information even after your employment ends with the city (How many times has this been abused?)
• and a clause about ethics complaint disclosures is unconstitutional (how many times will this be abused?)

Consent Agenda

These are items that are not scheduled for discussion but relevant to broader budget discussions and I think worth noting.

Number 6 isn’t necessarily controversial and is a done deal. The contract with the union stipulates we supply a second set of gear, we supply a second set of gear. At the cost of $2.2 million.

Item 7 is the $3.75 million grant to hire 30 new police officers that the admin was coy about during the budget process. Turns out we did get it and all of the hand wringing was unnecessary.

Item 28 is something I really think relates to the discussion last week about contract administration and the RFQ/RFP process. This is a $2.5 million contract for “city wide electrical services” to a single entity. 3 bids were received and the winning bidder was the highest, negotiating down to the $2.5 million figure. City wide electrical services seems pretty broad and I question it awarding it to a single business, especially with all of the talk about equitable distribution of work to the private sector and fostering small businesses.

After reading the budget more closely this year, item 38 looks like one of the cringe items. $900 thousand for “Employee Benefit Consulting Services.” Our HR department needs to spend nearly a million a year for outside consulting for benefits?

Items 39 & 42 is just confusing from a procedural standpoint. They are reappointments of Council controlled seats on the Planning Commission. Like, who originally appointed these people, what are their qualifications and are they still the right people to represent the will of this Council? Do things like that even matter anymore?

Item 46 might be the first consent agenda item that had a Tampa Bay Times article written about it before it appeared on the agenda. Last week Council member Carlson said Mr.Bhide was upset about the budget and $7 million dollars being moved away from the smart parking system into paving but this audit, commissioned by Mr. Bhide clearly points out “Budgetary constraints limited the division’s ability to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and upgrade curb ramps in a timely manner.” Budgetary constraints you say? Did I mention this is currently under the consent agenda and not slated for discussion by Council.

Items 54, 56 & 57 are examples of items that I think deserve a little celebration at least. 54 is approving $2.5 million for owner occupied rehab programs for the CRA. 56 and 57 are agreements to provide interest free loans ($500K and $150K respectively) in exchange for rehabbing affordable housing. I don’t begin to understand the details of federal/state/local funding for housing, but 66 units not exceed 80% AMI and 30 units not to exceed 60% AMI locked in for 20 years sounds like a pretty good ROI to me. 57 is 18 units also keyed to affordability metrics. The larger project is slated to be operational in September of next year.

Item 58 is $400,000 for sod. Almost half a million dollars to buy some dirt and grass. We talk about tree canopy, but we need to talk about bio-diversity and native landscaping more. When we talk about environmental stewardship and resilience, “sod” shouldn’t be the solution.

Public Hearings

Second readings for land use items with only Item 73 having garnered any no votes at first reading. It’s for an air-conditioned storage facility and one of those “it goes with the land regardless of how aspirational your business plan and drawings may be” (which are not to be considered by Council). They are asking for a special use. Council must consider if this is an acceptable special use for this property downtown indefinitely. Personally, I don’t think it is.

Staff Reports

This is where I suspect the majority of the day is spent.

Item 88 is a follow up from TPD on Ybor post mass shooting. TPD will present all of the stats from their crackdown over Thanksgiving and increased presence. More discussion about “entertainment district” will happen. No one will talk about the guns.

Items 89-93 all revolve around Tampa Fire Rescue.

• Capital Facilities Master Plan
• A plan for the plan (Administration to return with a plan putting forth the proposed fire station projects for City Council’s consideration; that the Administration states its position on the projects, in response to City Council’s position; and that the Administration present additional potential funding sources to help offset costs of the improvements.)
• Update on Station 24
• Update on Fleet & Supply (I believe that’s the relocation plan)

This will be a theme for the coming fiscal year as we start to balance inequities in the budget for the fire department.

Item 95 will be the first step in another theme for the next fiscal year—bonding. This topic could cause sparks. Keep away from flammable agenda items.

Item 97 is a citizen led initiative. “Aisle style” development is becoming a scourge with neighborhoods around the city and a neighborhood activist looked into it. Some municipalities have banned them and this is a report on staff’s finding after direction from Council to look into it. You can make a difference.

Item 98 is about Council workload and having Council and CRA meetings and evening zoning/land use hearings on the same day. I have a lot to say and will have a dedicated post on the topic before Thursday.

Finally, item 99 addresses the role of the Chief Diversity Officer, racism and recent allegations within Tampa Fire Rescue. A continuance has been requested.