A few items I think warrant some pubic attention prior to Council taking a vote this week—the appeal for a grand tree removal (item 52), the appeal of the BLC for a large development in Ybor (item 53) or a look at the big contracts before Council this week. $16 million isn’t a $57 million dollar West Riverwalk project but it’s more than half of what is being bonded. Understanding where the work the contracts cover is happening would go a long way in understanding why we are bonding so much work though.

There are several written reports and in person updates that are not relate to a vote that will be covered in the weekly update but I do want to note (item 63) the Italian Club is on the agenda to report on their findings regarding the pending cemetery issues that exist on 30th and Sligh, Italian Club, and College Hill. This has been continued before but I know there are folks for who this is an issue they are passionate about and have the date circled on the calendar already. Finally, a topic I’ve been bothered by recently, residency requirements, led to its own post. Also, my first look at the budget is less diving into the numbers and more setting the table. Next week I’ll take a closer look at CIP.

Consent Agenda

Recently there was an issue brought up during public comment regarding vacant, unsecured homes. I’ve seen a motion regarding vacant homes and what we can do about them to address housing shortage. Items 19 & 31 are approvals for the demolition homes in Sulphur Springs and East Tampa. It would be nice if we offered incentives for these property owners to convert this land to affordable housing. Ideally before they require demolition.

Item 27 is probably benign but when it comes to folk’s paychecks, it would be nice to know those that receive them are on board with this. Replacing paper checks with a “payroll card” or a convoluted “electronic check” that requires a lot of manual effort on staff to get paid. I caution anyone making assumptions about automatic deposit and why everyone isn’t using it.

Items 42 & 43 are to set hearings for brownfield designation. One is for the development already under way at the old Fun-land drive-in location on Hillsborough. These are basically procedural steps to ensure work has been done which ultimately lead to tax credits.

Item 45 is interesting. The Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses are having a convention the weekend of 8-30-24 to 9-1-24. They want to provide parking to the visitors so the City is providing “spaces to be reserved for attendees of their convention at Amalie Arena in the amount of $73,600”. Garages include Pam Iorio Parking Garage, the Tampa Convention Center Garage, the Fort Brooke Parking Garage, and the Whiting Street Parking Garage. No idea what else is going on that weekend and what the capacity is for those garages but if you hear about nightmare traffic that weekend because no one can find parking, you’ll know why.

Public Hearings

After a continuation, item 48 is back for second reading. This makes permanent the one week lawn watering restrictions put in place regionally.

The public hearing for item 50 is a request by a church to vacate an alley just north of MLK. They recently purchased the property on the other side of the alley. Staff objects on the grounds that if the parcels are ever split again, with possible growth on MLK it would prevent those lots from having street access. My gut tells me if the alley were vacated all the land would flip and someone would come back with a development plan for both lots.

Item 51 is a situation that needs to be fixed. Folks want to convert an existing exterior building into a mother-in-law suite. They are .1, yes one tenth of a foot short of the rear set back. Everyone’s time is being wasted here. The Zoning Administrator seems to have certain latitude in decisions but they can’t round up 2.9 to 3?

For item 52 this is an appeal of the Variance Review Board for the removal of 2 grand trees in the Palmetto Beach area for storage. The VRB voted 5-0 to deny the variance for one tree and 3-2 on the other tree. Staff report notes there are currently no buildings on the property and nothing prevents them from reconfiguring any designs to protect the trees.

Item 53 is an appeal of a Bario Latino Commission decision on a proposed development in Ybor. From what I can tell the issue is size and scale of the proposed development for its location.

Item 54 is a public hearing regarding the intent to suspend the sale of alcohol at 7700 Courtney Campbell Causeway. The applicant’s lawyer is requesting a continuance.

Item 55 is a formal action to rescind the ordinance that created and governed the Citizen Review Board. This is a result of the State Legislature usurping local government and the will the citizens.

Staff Reports/Large Purchases

Council made a rule a while back that any contracts over I think $1 million cannot go on consent, they require separate votes and often come with additional back up material or presentations. Over something like $20 million it is required to be on the agenda twice. Sometimes these are contracts for PIPES and pass without any discussion. Sometimes they are like item 58. Prior to Council going on break there was a presentation on the status of Solid Waste and the anticipated rate increase proposal. Within that, there were short term operational costs that were approved to be paid for with short term debt that will eventually roll into a long term bond to be paid for once the rate increase is fully in effect. We are learning this week that there are delays in getting the waste to energy plant back operational after its retrofit and repairs. As a result, we have to pay to have our garbage to be sent to the landfill. This $17 million contract would cover those unexpected costs through September. Where the reserve funds are coming from is another question, my assumption is they will be rolled into the current operational expenses that are funded by short term debt. The fact the waste to energy plant was supposed to be back up in May and they are planning it being out through September should require some public explanations.

Likewise, item 60 is $4 million dollars (1% set aside from contract 24-C-00026) earmarked for pubic art but it was determined work does not involve the construction of a municipal building project. So no public art.

Item 61 is another paving contract under the term “full depth reclamation” this one paid out of a gas tax capital funds account. I’ve given up on understanding how these contracts work.

I expect a lot of discussion around item 62 and these standing contracts authorizing up to $16 million dollars of work. Personally I don’t question the efficiency of the way these contracts are done. What I questions is where is the money being spent? $16 million is nearly half of Fair Oaks. It’s roughly the cost of a fire station. Where are we doing that level of work in the city? That’s on top of the multitude of 1-2 million dollar contracts authorized routinely for Logistics and Asset management. What are the projects associated with these contracts? It shouldn’t be difficult to show.

.