Agenda

The agenda reads long, but a lot of what I cover is on the consent agenda and it’s doubtful will garner as much as comment from Council. That said, running behind schedule so jumping right in.

Items 1-4 are Commendations-police officer of the month, firefighter of quarter, recognizing 10 year anniversary of Tampa Pride and recognition of city employee Dan Foglia for 38 years of service.

Items 5 and 6 are public hearings. Item 5 is a second reading of a land use change that passed on first reading 4-2. Item 6 is an appeal of a Variance Review Board (VRB) decision. Owner is asking for more of the window to be allowed to be a sign. The last vote was 3-3 with Henderson absent. I support upholding the VRB decision.

Consent Agenda

Items 8-10 $1,836,704.40 for vehicles for Tampa Police Department. Including, 2 F-350 crew cab diesel 4x4s, 30 F-150 4x4s and 5 Chevy Malibu “cool cars”. Why does city needs 30 F-150 4x4s is beyond me.

Items 11-12 Drone replacement. This is another controversial subject that gets funded through the Florida Department of Law Enforcement that allows Council from taking a hard stance. Yes, drones can be useful tools. But their use by law enforcement needs to be tightly checked.

item 29 is one of those big dollar infrastructure projects. This one for $6.5 million. I will never understand the bid process and this item does no better in helping.

Items 30-35 $3,912,076.58 in vehicles and equipment for solid waste and wastewater departments.

Item 45 $2 million dollar contract to a large HVAC company for city wide services.

item 48 this item was pulled from a previous agenda and is now back under the consent agenda. Approving a list of Engineering/Architectural firms the city can contract with.

Item 49 approving moving funds around for the waste to energy plant work. I think the use of the generic legal phrase “The transfer, reallocation, and/or appropriation” is problematic. Which is it? Just spell it out.

Item 50 Esri renewal. I use our open data portal a lot. It’s what I’ve used to build the land use map as well as several other projects that are half-baked.

Item 52 I really enjoy watching the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). For one, it’s often a first look at a project that will be coming before Council. And I love Tampa history. But what I’ve really come to like is the discussions regarding the architecture. It’s a design language I’m still learning. Dan Myers is up for re-appointment. He’s a thoughtful architect and his service is appreciated.

Item 53 resolution declaring March “purchasing month.”

Item 54 confirming the appointment of former Council candidate and fierce advocate Robin Lockett to the Affordable Housing Advisory Council.

Item 60 I’m just going to say this is a terrible contract and the terms keep getting worse for the city and I don’t understand how we give that spot away. This being the little cafe space at Ballast Point park. I covet it. I would sell a kidney for it. To discover they are only paying $600 a month for it will haunt me.

For items 61 and 62 we only have to think back a couple of weeks about discussion of code enforcement and here are two items related to costs incurred for property owners who failed to comply with code, including demolition costs.

Item 63 There should be an explanation for what the “Neighborhood Infrastructure Project” is for this reallocation of Channel district CRA funds. Especially $2.9 million dollars.

Item 66 seems related to item 63. This is moving $150,000 to “Channel District – Twiggs Street Phase C1b – GMP5” which sure, what ever that is and its relation to “removing slum and blight”.

Item 68 seems like a bad faith move. Council should vote against this.

Items 73-75 Sidewalks. 3.8 million dollars worth. El Prado from Lois Ave to Bayshore. FDOT is providing $987,000 of the funding.

Public Hearings

Items 77-84 Are second readings with all passing first reading with little to no votes against.

Item 85 is the development agreement regarding the University Park redevelopment. Changes that were requested by USF and agreed to by the developer required this to return to first reading.

Item 86 is a review hearing of a Zoning Master decision. The city denied an application for 3 townhomes as they are not on an arterial or collector road as well as failing to meet code standards for setbacks.

Item 88 The East Tampa Rec Center. First discussion of resolution prior to approval – Scheduled approval date will be March 28, 2024. This is an opportunity for the Admin to go over the project and ask questions before a vote. A quick refresher—Tampa City Council approved this project in the FY23 budget in the fall of 2022. A reimbursement resolution was passed in October of 2022 to cover the bonding approved for this project. This is the actual contract for the design and building of project that has been in the planning stages for a year.

Item 91 is Channelside project that was continued from earlier this year. If I recall there were Harbor Island residents who raised concerns with the design of the intersection near the main entrance to the Island.

Item 94 is a request from Council for ways to regulate “garage sizes”. Minimum sizes. If anything needs to be cut from the agenda, I nominate this one.

Item 95 is a request for draft language to prohibits “Aisle style” development. This was the subject of a previous agenda item and the backup materials only reflect the previously submitted presentation. I do not see any new proposed language.

item 97 is the kind of procedural discussion I like. I suspect this could be cut if time is short, but the essence of the recommendation for City Attorney Zelman is to amend procedures, not a new ordinance. I concur. Council members needs to be clear in their motions they want accompanying written data to any presentations.

Items 98 and 99 are more procedural discussions between Council and Council Attorney Shelby. Chances are these get punted if the agenda runs long.

Finally, item 100 is Council discussion about appointment to Hillsborough River Board Technical Advisory Council. My first instinct would be Sid Flannery, considering all of his work on the Advisory Council regarding “PIPES”. At least I thought he was a city resident.