►
From YouTube: TCC 11/3/22 Pt.2
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
B
Okay,
then,
let's
go
with
agenda
item
number
11
to
be
heard.
With
agenda
item
number
12.
We
will
be
hearing
them
together,
but
voting
on
them
separately.
D
All
right
we're
here
because
back
several
months
several
months
ago,
we
I
brought
forward
a
agenda
item
to
amend
23.5
that
is
dealing
with
civil
citations
and
we
wanted
to
designate
skateboarding
as
a
lesser
offense,
making
it
a
75
lowest
category
punishment
offense,
so
that
if
there
were
ever
any
violations
of
skateboarding
that
it
would
be
as
a
civil
citation
when
I
brought
this
to
city
council
city
council
asked
that
I
had
a
motion
that
would
come
back
to
also
look
at
25172.
D
It
had
not
been
revised
since
1995
and
so
city
council
asked
that
we
come
back.
Look
at
it.
We've
met
with
Mobility
Brandon
Campbell
with
Mobility
is
here
today
also
so,
we've
been
working
with
Mobility
for
the
last
couple
of
months
to
review
what
other
cities
are
doing
and
what
we
could
do
to
update
our
ordinance
So
based
on
that
I
will
try
to
go
through
this
really
fast.
D
So
we
recommendations
are
going
to
be
that
we
designate
penalty
as
a
civil
citation.
We
add
a
definition
for
skateboards,
skateboarding
and
transportation
purposes.
We
remove
the
prohibition
from
downtown
and
Ybor,
except
for
Seventh
Avenue.
We
consider
remove
our
roller
skates
and
inline
skates
and
we
remove
any
authorization
preempted
by
state
laws.
D
And
then
there's
presently
also
it
states
for
roller
skates
and
inline
skates.
Those
are
prohibited
to
operate
a
ride
on
likewise
streets,
roadways,
sidewalks
and
then
areas
between
six,
seventh
and
eight
private
property
and
public
property,
where
it's
posted,
so
23.5
as
I
was
mentioned,
establishes
fine
amounts
from
classes.
One
to
four.
We
were
asking
this
to
be
a
class
one,
the
lowest
amount
for
75
dollars.
D
Presently,
if
I
hadn't
already
said
so
or
I
certainly
have
said
so
in
the
past.
It's
presently
punished
was
a
notice
to
appear
at
a
county
court
and
that's
what
we
are
now
trying
to
make
it
go
instead
of
going
to
County
Criminal
Court.
This
would
just
be
a
civil
citation,
so
we're
reducing
it
pretty
dramatically.
So
here's
23.5
schedule
1.
As
you
see
the
underlying
section
in
the
right
column,
25172
was
added
chapter
316
is
our
uniform
traffic
laws.
D
316-0085
covers
governmental
liability
specifically
to
understand.
Skate
parks
were
added
here,
to
encourage
cities
to
allow
skaters,
inline
skaters,
even
bikes,
to
have
a
place
to
go
because
oftentimes,
a
lot
of
cities
prohibit
them
from
sidewalks,
and
things
like
that,
because
sidewalks
are
meant
for
pedestrians,
and
a
lot
of
cities
have
determined
not
to
allow
skates
skateboards
on
sidewalks.
D
The
legislature
made
it
so
that
to
encourage
a
place
for
skaters
to
be
for
cities
to
have
a
place
for
skaters
designated
and
the
city
would
not
be
liable
for
injuries
that
happened
at
skate
parks.
Basically,
so
the
city
currently
has
three
such
parks,
there's
also
private
skateboard
parks
for
people
to
go
who
want
to
escape.
D
We
looked
at
other
cities,
we've
looked
at
Orlando
Miami
every
surrounding
City
I
mean
we.
We
looked
at
at
least
10
cities.
In
the
end
we
found
Orlando
had
a
definition
of
skateboard,
skateboarding
and
transportation
purposes.
We
heard
city
council
to
say
that
they
wanted
us
to
consider
whether
or
not
by
us
staff
to
consider
whether
or
not
skateboards
could
be
used
on
sidewalk
for
transportation
purposes
so
that
they
could
be
allowed
even
downtown
to
go
to
work
so
Orlando
recently
had
amended
theirs.
D
What
city
council
was
asking
us
to
consider,
so
the
definitions
that
we're
recommending
is
skateboard
and
it's
defined
there
skateboarding
and
then,
as
I,
say
Transportation
purposes,
so
it
would
allow
Transportation
purposes
basically
would
allow
somebody
to
take
their
skateboard
now
downtown,
whereas
currently
it's
prohibited,
you
would
allow
it
to
be
on
the
sidewalks
for
transportation
purposes.
So,
if
you're
going
to
work,
you
could
skateboard.
If
you're
going
just
from
point
A
to
point
B,
you
could
skateboard
downtown
on
the
sidewalk,
but
it
could
only
be
done
if
you're
doing
it
for
transportation
purposes.
D
So
if
somebody
is
deciding
to
do
tricks
on
on
you
know
public
property,
doing
the
you
know
grinding
on
public
property
or
whatever,
that
is,
that
would
not
be
allowed
that
wouldn't
fall
within
the
definition
of
a
transportation
purpose.
D
D
All
right,
so
the
recommended
language
skateboarding
would
be
prohibited
on
all
public
property
owned
or
controlled
by
the
city
and
on
all
public
property,
owned
and
controlled
by
other
governmental
entities,
except
for
transportation
purposes.
If
the
person
is
skateboarding,
yields
right
away
to
pedestrians
gives
an
audible
signal
before
overtaking
and
passing
a
pedestrian
or,
as
maybe
specifically
authorized
by
appropriate
governmental
entity
notwithstanding
the
above
skateboarding
would
be
prohibited
still
on
just
7th
Avenue
and
on
private
property
in
the
city
and
also
property
controlled
by
the
City
specified.
There.
D
All
right
and
it
would
require
a
helmet
for
those
under
16-
that's
consistent
with
state
law
under
chapter
316
bikes
are
currently
that
that
language
actually
came
straight
out
of
chapter
316
talking
about
when
bikes
are
required
to
have
helmets
and
again
it
would
make
it
a
class
one
violation.
So
this
is
what
we're
asking
city
council
to
consider.
It's
the
need
to
allow
different
forms
of
transportation
to
safely
use
sidewalks
to
modernize
the
ornaments
parts
of
the
current
ordinance
state
that
you
can
State
skate
on
the
streets
between
certain
hours.
D
We
would
need
to
remove
that
there's
a
preemption
in
State
Statute
that
states
cannot
be
on
streets
so
that
has
to
be
removed
anyways.
We
need
to
promote
transportation
and
not
damaged
property
present
facilities
allow
public
and
private
locations
for
skating,
and
we
still
want
to
prohibit
on
7th
Avenue,
because
there
is
still
a
high
pedestrian
area
there
and
there's
still
very
many
Avenues
to
get
around
Ybor
without
being
on
Seventh.
D
So
that
is.
That
is
what
we
would
like
city
council
to
consider.
We
are
prepared
to
bring
back
for.
First
read
the
ordinance.
If
city
council
agrees
with
those
recommendations
and
we
would
bring
back
an
ordinance
changing
it
from
the
class
one
that
we
previously
proposed
and
also
all
these
changes
to
25172.
E
I
I
want
to
say,
I
appreciate
you
really
focusing
on
letting
skateboarding
be
a
method
of
transportation
and
that
we're
taking
rollerblading
and
roller
skates
out,
which
is
really
funny.
I
can
only
imagine
what
it
was
like
when
we
actually
had
to
have
that
ordinance,
but
people
still
use
those
for
Transit
as
well.
My
my
my
only
concern
is
the
75.
Fine
I
think
I
still
think
that's
difficult
for
kids
I'm.
E
So
that's
an
area
that
I
would
like
to
hear
from
other
council
members
on,
but
I
appreciate
you
working
diligently
to
make
skateboarding
more
of
a
transportation
issue
while
keeping
it
away
from
places
that
legally,
it's
not
supposed
to
be.
F
Yes,
thanks
for
reviewing
this,
as
I
said
when
we
first
brought
this
up,
I
don't
think
we
should
have
fines
for
skateboarding.
I
was
not
a
big
skateboarder,
I
think
chair,
citro
was,
and
so
he
can
probably
weigh
in
better
than
any
of
us.
But
I
had
lots
of
friends
who
are
skateboarders
and
I.
Think
it
it
hurt,
can
hurt
our
City's
reputation
for
handing
out
lots
of
tickets
to
skateboarders.
F
It
seems
to
me
that,
instead
of
looking
at
whether
they're,
using
it
for
transportation
or
not,
which
would
be
hard
for
a
kid
to
understand,
I'm
trying
to
think
of
my
13
year
old
or
12
year
old,
trying
to
figure
out
what's
Transportation
versus
something
else
it
seems
like
we
should
we
if
there
was
some
kind
of
fine,
that
it
would
be
around
destruction
of
property
or
intimidation
of
other
people
like
if
you're
riding
fast
and
you
you
run
into
somebody
who's,
disabled
or
something
like
that.
F
That
would
that
that
would
be
more
what
the
fine
would
be,
instead
of
just
if
someone
is
riding
along
and
then
they
they
spin
around
in
the
other
direction.
Does
that
mean
that
they're
not
using
a
transportation
method
anymore?
Do
they
change
direction
when
you
looked
at
other
cities,
did
other
cities
just
look
at
it
from
kind
of
the
damage
or
intimidation
standpoint
instead
of
how
they're
riding
it.
D
So
they
they're
it's
already
required
that
they
follow
the
rules
of
pedestrians
when
they're
on
the
sidewalks.
So
as
long
as
they're
on
the
sidewalks,
they
they
shouldn't
be
knocking
people
down
or
anything
like
that,
and.
F
D
That
so
that's
why
we
were
defining
what
Transportation
would
be
because
as
long
as
you're
operating
for
the
purpose
of
transportation
and
not,
and
then
it
defines
what
you
know
leaving
in
the
ground
to
do
tricks
and
things
like
that.
What's.
F
F
D
I
mean
we're
very
we're
here
to
consider
anything,
but
those
we
found
it
to
be
a
lot
more
difficult
to
sit
there
and
describe
a
laundry
list
of
things.
You
can't
do
then,
rather
than
just
Define
what
you
can
do,
which
is
for
transportation
purposes,
and
it
was
difficult
to
come
up
with
a
laundry
list
of
all
the
things
that
somebody
can't
do.
That
is
more.
We
have
looked
at
other
cities,
a
lot
of
other
cities
just
flat
out,
don't
allow
skateboarding
in
certain
areas
downtown
areas
where
there's
pedestrians.
F
It's
just
I,
don't
know
if
I
mentioned
this
this
last
time,
but
I'm
particularly
sensitive
this
issue,
because
the
whole
fight
over
the
bro
bowl-
and
you
know
that
caused
tremendous
angst
in
our
community
and
and
got
us
a
lot
of
bad
publicity.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
do
anything
to
to
do
that
again,
but
I
I
would
rather
reduce
and
take
away
the
fines,
except
in
the
case
of
property,
damage
or
intimidation
or
hurting
someone,
but
I'll
yield
to
the
skateboarder.
G
I
I
have
to
agree
disagree
with
a
little
bit
of
this.
You
have
to
have
consequences
for
your
actions,
be
it
kids
or
not.
G
G
Some
people
are
just
not
courteous.
Most.
Your
average
skateboarders
are
between
teenage
kids,
probably
between
15
about
I,
would
say,
maybe
18
and
their
vavage
skateboard,
probably
between
the
ages,
maybe
17
and
24..
Those
are
your
real
skateboarders.
You
don't
have
small
little
kids,
skateboarding
I
mean
been
around
a
cop
too
long,
they're,
no
skateboarding,
but
you're
talking
about
two
things
across
from
the
destruction,
a
problem:
that's
criminal
mischief,
that's
a
different
element
versus
someone
just
and
it's
an
intentional
Act.
G
It's
no
different.
If
you
have
a
parking
violence,
you
park
your
car
and
you
know
you
park
your
car
parking
violation
is
probably
about
20
bucks.
What
20
25
bucks
you
know
I
can
go
at
reducing
the
skateboarding
fine
down,
but
not
to
have
any
fine,
though,
because
or
to
where
you
have
a
first
occurrence.
The
police
officer
can
put
the
person's
name
in
the
database
if
they've
been
worn.
G
Once
or
worn
twice
in
the
third
time
now
you
get
a
a
a
a
citation
for
10
15
bucks,
but
you
got
to
have
consequence
for
your
actions
for
repeat
violators,
I'm
still
hesitant
about
having
skateboards
to
me,
I,
don't
view
skateboarding
as
a
means
of
transportation.
I
mean
some
do
I
respect
everybody's
opinion,
but
I,
don't
I
mean
to
me
skateboarding
is
is
fun
activity
you
can
get
around,
but
most
again,
most
kids
I
see
they're
most
bigger
teenage
kids.
That
are,
you
know
you
got
with
their
friends
going
around.
G
It
could
be
a
way
of
getting
around,
but
when
you
Define
transportation,
I,
don't
really
see
it.
That
way.
What
I
see
is
a
lot
of
kids.
At
times
when
I
was
out
there
you
know
sometimes
they're,
just
being
a
jerk,
you
just
you
know
just
riding
skateboards
on
the
sidewalks
and
they
don't
give
the
hit
anybody.
And
then
it's
like
you
know
all
things
happen,
but
I
don't
believe
you
put
anybody
in
jail,
I'll
be
going
to
court
for
a
first
appearance
or
a
notice
of
peer
and
all
that
kind
of
I.
G
C
Just
want
to
ask
a
question
for
the
counselor
and
I
realized
what
it,
what
and
I
know
that
the
Riverwalk
is
a
an
animal
there.
A
lot
of
people
use
it
for
many
things.
What
about
skateboarding
there
kind
of
loud
or
not.
H
Yes,
Brandon
Campbell,
smart
Mobility
manager.
I
would
add
that
when
the
Riverwalk
was
funded
part
of
that
Grant
application
funding,
I
know
it's
been
discussed,
but
as
a
multi-use
path,
other
devices
Beyond
just
this
walking-
would
be
allowed.
I'm.
C
B
J
Agreement
on
this,
what
if
we
structured
it
first
time
a
warning
second
time,
ten
dollars?
Third
time,
twenty
five
dollars
and
Max
it
had
25
dollars.
No,
no,
that's
not
zero
and
it's
not
a
crazy
amount.
B
B
B
B
I
I
personally
cannot
support
any
type
of
fine
to
a
skateboarder
who
is
using
a
skateboard
as
a
transportation,
somebody
that
does
pipes
on
the
side
of
a
building
and
they're
damaging
a
building
or
they
run
into
a
car
sure
find
them
for
that.
The
skateboarding
shouldn't
be
illegal.
What
is
a
pleasure
Council.
C
I
believe
my
feeling
is
I
believe
you've
got
to
you've
got
to
have
something
to
enhance
the
ability
of
them.
Thinking
not
to
do
it
again
and
if
you're
going
to
have
just
a
continuous,
don't
do
it
again,
Harry
or
Charlie
or
Mary
or
apple,
whatever
that
ain't
going
to
resonate,
maybe
the
first
time
no,
but
we've
got
to
have
something
in
the
second
and
third
time,
and
it
can't
be
constant
25
to
find
is
like
a
dollar.
Fifty
when
I
was
a
kid,
that's
what
amounts
to.
B
E
Thank
you.
That's
where
I
think
criminal
mischief
comes
into
play,
so
I'm
I'm
not
going
to
support
any
type
of
fines.
I
said
that
before
I'll
just
say
it
again.
I
really
do
appreciate
the
re
just
defining
of
skateboarding
and
allowing
it
on
sidewalks
I.
Think
it's
appropriate
and
I
see
a
lot
of
skateboarders
on
the
bus
when
I
and
Peep.
So
people
use
it
for
that.
Last
mile,
Transit,
so
I
I
I
do
see
it
used.
I
I
probably
see
at
least
one
skateboarder
on
the
bus
when
I'm
on
there.
D
D
There
has
been
one
citation
issued
in
the
couple
of
years
that
that
has
been
allowed
so
officers
and
then
I
pulled
skateboarding
stats
in
10
years
of
skateboarding,
the
last
10
years,
eight
offense
reports
were
opened,
of
which
very
few
actually
resulted
in
anything.
So
predominantly
what
you
see
is
officers
are
always
using
their
discretion
and
providing
warnings.
Officers
are
not
out
there
looking
to
write
citations
for
skateboarding
for
motor
scooters.
They
are,
they
are
issuing
warnings.
E
Thank
you,
but
generally
scooter
riders
legally
have
to
be
18.
they're
required
to
be
18
to
ride
one
of
those
motorized
scooters.
If
I'm,
remembering
things
correctly
and
again,
I
I
really
feel
like
criminal
mischief.
If
there's
something
going
on,
the
officer
can
still
give
a
warning
under
criminal
mischief
and
can
still
then
give
a
fine
based
on
criminal
mischief.
I
think
we're
just
adding
something
to
where
it
doesn't
need
to
be
added.
F
Three
things
real
fast
number
one
you
talk
about
how
these
haven't
been
used
very
much,
but
it's
it's.
It
seems
like
these
kinds
of
policies
are
not
abused
by
the
officer's
discretion,
but
if
somebody
above
them
sets
a
policy
like
with
biking
while
black,
it
was
a
policy
from
above
that
it
that,
based
on
the
news
coverage,
incentivized
officers
compensated
them
for
writing
more
tickets.
F
And
so,
if
we
got
a
mayor
in
the
future
who
didn't
like
skateboarding
and
wanted
skateboarders
off
the
street,
it
seems
like
they
could
abuse
it
by
giving
instructions
of
police
to
to
get
incentives
to
write
tickets.
And
so
that's
why
I
would
like
to
protect
the
public
by
not
having
that
on
I.
Think
to
be
fair,
your
original
idea
and
coming
to
us
was
to
reduce
the
fine,
and
so,
unless
I'm
wrong,
to
have
no
fine,
we
would
have
to
undo
the
existing
ordinance.
D
You
it's
a
notice
to
appear
at
a
County,
Criminal
Court
and
that's
the
way
it
currently
is.
So
the
original
idea
was
to
reduce
it
down
to
a
the
lowest
categorized.
Fine
yeah.
F
F
G
Yeah
I
listened
to
my
councilman,
a
councilwoman
and
you're
right.
You
see
some
people
do
get
on
the
bus
and
that
last
leg,
the
user
skateboard
to
get
to
work
and
that's
the
joke.
I
agree:
I
hate
that
they're
skating
board
skating
on
sidewalks,
because
there
are
people
there
and
sometimes
people
are
not
curious.
That's
the
problem.
I
have
but
I
I
can
live
with
it.
G
Mr
Carlson
has
what
does
have
one
point
you,
if
you
have
an
issue
in
a
certain
area
where
people
are
not
being
courteous,
you
could
have
a
supervisor
or
somebody
citizens
make
complaints
to
say
someone
got
hurt
and
it
comes
down
where
you
need
to
go
out
there
and
have
somebody
monitor
the
area
and
then
yeah
you
could
have
somebody
else.
Supervisor
or
officers
go
out
there
and
write
some
citations.
G
You
know
you're
right
on
that
Mr
Carlson,
but
me
being
the
old
cop
that
ain't,
something
that
most
houses
y'all
could
be
doing,
I
wouldn't
be
doing
it
and
the
supervisor's,
not
the
right
man,
because
I
ain't
going
now
just
giving
kids
no
tickets
I'm
just
going
to
tell
you
quit
doing
it.
I'm
gonna
take
the
boy,
take
it
to
your
mama
house.
No,
that's
me!
G
That's
the
right
way
to
do
it,
but
you
can't
say
not
have
any
consequence
because
you're
going
to
have
those
knuckleheads,
they
said
they're
going
to
just
continue
to
do
what
they
want
to
do.
No
matter
what
you
tell
them,
and
sometimes
you
gotta
you
know,
take
take
a
little
bit
of
that
candy
money
away.
I,
don't
agree
with
75
like
I
said:
maybe
15
or
something
like
that
would
be
adequate.
You
know,
that's
not
a
big,
astronomical
ask
of
money.
But
again
you
know:
I
tell
my
little
kids
out
there
right
off
I,
walk!
G
You
talk
about
your
bigger
teenager,
kids,
but
I
can
look
at
about
10
or
15
bucks.
This
is
a
a
wake-up
call,
but
your
personal
warning,
you
know,
because
really
it's
gonna
be
your
protect
repetitive
person.
That's
going
to
be
keep
doing
it!
It's
not
going
to
be
this!
This
person
that
person
it's
going
to
be
somebody
who's,
so
I.
Just
think
that
you
know
looking
at
a
first-time
occurrence,
maybe
a
second
without
morning
and
then
at
the
end
give
up.
Maybe
10
or
15,
but
I
just
can't
support
not
doing
anything.
C
Thank
you,
I
feel
like
councilman
goods
and
what
we're
talking
about
is
escape
boarders,
but
we're
forgetting
that
the
skateboarder
is
not
the
only
one
on
the
sidewalk
for
every
skateboarder
there's
at
least
500
people
walking
on
that
same
sidewalk
on
and
off,
so
the
sidewalks
are
out
one
way.
That
way,
and
one
way
this
way
you
walk
anywhere,
you
want
the
sidewalks
and
you
got
people
walking,
east
and
west
one
going
east
one
coming
West.
You
got
a
skateboarder
coming
on
both
sides
and
nothing's
going
to
happen.
I'm
sure.
E
I
just
want
to
speak
as
a
bicyclist
on
the
Riverwalk
I
use
it
constantly
I'm
there
at
least
once
a
week-
and
you
know
most
cyclists
I
see-
are
pretty
good
either.
We
have
a
bell,
in
fact,
I
just
bought
myself
a
new
bell
for
my
new
bike
that
didn't
have
one
so
I
you
can
ring
it
and
then
you
let
people
in
front
of
you
know
they
move
over,
and
your
motion
specifically
said
you
know,
encouraging
skateboarders
to
say
something,
but
ultimately
oftentimes
I
hate
to
say
it.
E
Being
honest
on
the
Riverwalk,
and
then
you
say:
excuse
me
on
your
left.
Excuse
me
and
you
have
to
wait
and
you
just
slow
down.
So
that's
what
a
skateboarder
would
do.
They're,
not
gonna
mow
people
over
again,
yeah
kids
are
going
to
be
kids,
but
kids
still
don't
want
to
mow
people
over.
We
don't
we
aren't
seeing
skateboarding
the
way
it
was
when
we
were
younger
I.
E
Just
don't
see
this
as
an
issue
and
I
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
that
as
someone
who
uses
it
regularly
utilizes
the
Riverwalk,
the
cyclists
and
I've
seen
skateboarders
on
there
are
good
about
just
waiting
until
someone
passes
and
then
they
can
safely
pass.
It's
just
about
being
a
good
citizen
and
as
far
as
I
can
tell,
we
haven't
been
able
to
regulate
good
citizenship.
E
If
we
had
I
think
we
would
have
at
this
point.
So
that's
all
I
wanted
to
say.
F
E
I'll
make
a
motion
that
we
come
back
with
an
ordinance
that
says
that
just
takes
it
off,
but
I
I
do
think
that
we
need
to
have
the
definition
of
it
being
allowed
to
be
I
mean.
D
But
as
a
legal
advisor
I
have
to
explain
why
I
believe
there
is
a
need
for
a
skateboarding
ordinance,
I've
reviewed
a
lot
of
case
law.
So
the
reason
the
legislature
created
the
exemption
for
the
Escape
parks
and
things
like
that
is
to
encourage
state
skating
at
these
skate
parks,
not
on
the
sidewalks
and
if
a
skate.
If
we
don't
have
anything
on
the
books,
an
escape
order,
choose
a
city
right
and
does
tricks
and
does
whatever
and
we
say.
Oh,
we
don't
have
anything
on
the
books
prohibiting
skateboarding.
B
B
B
20
years
ago,
things
have
changed.
We
are
such
an
urban
environment
right
now
that
somebody
that
needs
to
get
five
blocks
away
to
where
their
job
may
be
a
skateboard
is
going
to
be
the
quickest
easiest
way
to
go
with
the
price
of
gas.
Some
some
people
are
relying
now
on
skateboards
times
are
different
I'm
sorry,
councilman
Goods
I
mean
Maniscalco
a
fire
dog.
J
Let's
just
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
that
we
just
reduce.
It
then,
to
a
warning:
now
we
take
it
off
the
books
but
from
a
notice
to
appear
just
take
it
down
to
a
warning
yeah
at
least
something
the
the
police
officer
has
a
discretion
to
say.
You
know
I'm
going
to
take
you
home
I'm,
going
to
take
your
board
I'm
going
to
you
know,
don't
do
it
again,
but
you
know:
if
there's
property
damage,
then
that's
a
separate
thing.
I
mean.
Could
an
officer
then
charge
somebody
there?
J
E
D
So
the
chapter
316
is
I,
gave
a
brief
overview,
already
discusses
bikes,
e-bikes
motorized
scooters.
What
we
are
talking
about
is,
though,
there's
a
specific
section
in
316
that
says
skates
roller
skates
are
not
allowed
on
the
streets,
but
the
cities
can
choose
to
allow
them
on
sidewalks.
So
there
are
certain
things
at
the
cities
traditionally
decide
whether
or
not
to
allow
on
sidewalks,
which
are
you
know,
are
pedestrians
use
primarily,
but
should
the
city
allow
other
things?
D
E
That
was
not
my
question,
though,
and
I
apologize.
If
I
was
not
clear,
my
question
was
are:
do
we
have
laws
on
the
books
that
fine
scooter
riders
and
bike
riders
under.
E
J
G
B
F
F
E
G
I
can't
support
that
I
mean
not
having
any
consequences.
I
can't
support
that
I
I
have
you
said,
a
warning
and
then
a
subsequence
after
that
maybe
10
10
12
bucks.
Something
like
that.
But
I
can't
support
not
no
fine
at
all
and
if
you
put
it
in
the
bicycle
chapter,
the
bicycle
shop,
you
already
said
it's
thirty
dollars.
G
D
Point
a
clarification
there,
so
the
current
ordinance
reduce
it
that
what
we
currently
already
have
just
reduced
it
down
to
a
warning
is
what
you're
asking
right.
Thank
you.
B
B
L
Surely
Council
Rivera?
Thank
you
very
much.
Hi
Chief.
Thank
you
very
much
ma'am
for
for
number
10.
What
I
was
actually
requesting
and
I
spoke
to
Chief
Bennett
about
this.
Yesterday
was
a
a
panel
of
of
citizens
picked
by
Council
mayor
et
cetera,
Etc,
to
see
on
how
we
can
improve
our
policies
holistically
on
Mental
Health
in
a
wide
array
of
areas,
so
I
I
wouldn't
want
you
to
go.
L
The
memo
was
wonderful
and
I
really
appreciate
it,
but
I
think
that
by
going
through
it
it
it's
it's
not
directly
on
on
what
I
was
looking
for.
I
guess,
if
and
again
wonderful
information,
but
in
other
words,
I
wouldn't
want
you
to
go
on
to
something.
If
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
that
kind
of
takes
it
in
another
Direction,
you
see
what
I'm
saying
so,
in
other
words,
if
it
pleases
the
chair,
I
would.
K
G
I
read
the
memo:
I
I
have
some
concerns
about
having
an
outside
piano
talking
about.
Policy
relates
to
police
and
fire
with
mental
health.
I
think
you
come
back.
I
think
you
got
to
run
to
some
Union
issues.
G
K
K
So
do
we
want
to
talk
about
10
first,
and
it's
going
to
be
quick,
because,
basically
with
that,
if
you're
looking
for
a
panel
to
talk
about
fire
and
police,
Mental,
Health
I,
think
that
should
be
something
internal
as
opposed
to
external,
because
we're
kind
of
like
the
only
one
that
knows
kind
of
what
we
go
through.
So
if
that's
what
you're?
Looking
for
I
get
back
with
Chief
of
Staff
and
the
administration,
and
we
can
come
up
with
a
panel
to
address
that,
but
I
I
personally,
don't
think
we
should
go
external.
It.
B
L
That
wasn't
actually
what
I
was
looking
for
it
like
y'all's
internal
policies,
that's
not
limited
to
that.
It
could
be
limited
to
it
could
be
dealing
with
the
Way
employees
deal
with
the
public
Etc
if
Parks
and
Recreation
benefits
just
overarching
deals
with
with
mental
health,
it
not
limited
just
to
police
and
fire.
But
again
what
I
was
looking
for
was
the
administration's
position
on
that.
So,
if
you
all
are
opposed
to
that
and
give
me
a
good
reason
as
to
why
it's
not
a
good
idea,
then
maybe
I'll
be
like
hey.
K
And
I
was
going
to
say
actually
the
policy
that
we
have
now
the
procedures
that
we
have
worked.
You
know
for
our
firefighters
and
police
officer,
First
Responders
sure
now,
I
can't
speak
for
the
ATU,
because
I
don't
know
exactly
what
they
have,
but
that's
part
of
the
city
policy.
You
know
for
any
City
employed
to
follow
through
that
program
that
they
have
and
you
kind
of
specify
for
Public
Service
safety.
So
that's.
Why
and
police
put
their
additional
assistance
that
we
put.
L
In
sure,
and
and
maybe
I
wasn't
again,
I,
don't
recall
what
I
actually
do
believe.
I
recall
what
I
motioned
for
and
I
think
it
was
for
an
overarching
policy
of
the
city
of
Tampa,
not
just
police
and
fire.
So
that's
why
I
spoke
to
John
Bennett
about
it
yesterday,
because
I
think
there
was
maybe
some
miscommunication
on
that.
So
again,
all
I'm
looking
for
to
see
is
the
administration's
position
on
it,
and
if
there
is
a
reason
to
not
do
it
then
I'll
be
glad
to
withdraw
it.
So
again,
I
mean
I
I.
L
B
G
I
just
know
the
history
and
I
think
the
chief
knows
where
I'm
going
with
that
you
know:
you're
gonna
have
a
hard
time:
Mr
Beer
convincing
the
union.
When
you
talk
about
I,
can't
speak
for
city
employees,
but
I
can
tell
you.
We
talk
about
police
and
fire
and
outside
panel
talking
about
their
health
conditions
and
mental
health.
G
I'm,
just
saying
I,
don't
see
that
happening
and
I
don't
want
to
get
on
camera
saying
why?
But
I
know
why
that
would
be
a
problem.
It'd
be
a
shutdown
quickly
sure.
So,
just
what
I
know
you're
trying
to
Advocate
that
there's
things
in
place
and
and
there
there
are
things
in
place
where
there's
someone
having
a
problem
or
they
see
the
distress.
But
when
you
say
you
have
outside
sores
coming
in
to
evaluate
Public
Safety
officials.
K
L
Thank
you
and
again
we're
having
a
discussion
publicly
on
on
something
that
should
probably
be
held
privately
I'm,
not
asking
for
people
to
be
evaluated.
I,
I,
I,
don't
we're
what
I'm
looking
at
is
things
like
perfect
example.
We
have
the
mental
health
professionals
who
work
for
Tampa,
Police
Department
right.
Can
we
better
fund
that
that's
just
one,
it's
not
about
doing
analysis
of
of
employees
or
anything
of
that.
L
B
L
Some
things
I
do
want
to
bring
this
thing
back,
because
there
are
some
requests
for
more
time
and
I
have
no
problem
with
that.
But
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
get
a
specific
time
on
that
which
I'm
sure
you're
you're
fine
with
when
you
deal
with
the
issue
of
New
Tampa
33647.
As
you
know,
the
issue
is
not
number
of
calls
it's
potential
response
times,
particularly
with
k-bar
ranch
area.
L
So
in
the
memo
Tampa
Fire
Rescue
says
that
they
need
more
time,
I'm
totally
fine
with
that,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
a
time
when
that
answer
is
going
to
come
back
to
us.
So
I'll
make
a
motion
for
that.
If
I
may,
for
North,
Tampa
and
I
know
they're
you're
in
speaking
to
you,
you're,
potentially
potentially
looking
at
Fowler
area,
potentially
for
a
new
station
and
you're
looking
at
real
estate
out
there.
Etc
and
again,
you
need
more
time
on
that.
L
I
have
no
problem
with
that
at
all.
You
know.
My
main
issue
is
that
we
had
a
million
dollars
in
the
budget
for
district
seven
for
Tampa.
Ask
you
right
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
know
how
that
money
is
going
to
be
spent,
because
there
are
real
acute
needs
in
district
7
whenever
it
comes
to
Tampa,
Fire,
Rescue
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
keep
on
that.
So
I'm
going
to
motion
for
this
to
come
back
to
us
on
December
15th
and
again.
C
K
As
far
as
first
of
all,
thank
you
all
for
your
support
with
temp
fire
rescue
and
for
getting
the
need
out
there
of
helping
the
community
and
for
the
men
and
women
that
are
responding
to
the
calls.
So
when
I
look
at
the
money
for
district
7,
those
moneys,
as
I
stated
before,
is
going
to
be
used
to
put
additional
resources
up
there
to
assist
when
I
reviewed.
It's
all
about
the
data.
We
have
the
information
and
you
write.
It's
not
the
response
call.
The
number
of
calls
is
the
response
time.
K
So,
when
I
broke
down
those
calls
a
lot
of
that
deals
with
non-emergency
calls
and,
as
I
explained,
the
a
b
and
CD
calls
so
with
that
I
am
looking
to
see
if
we
can
partner
with
the
non-emergency
units
to
see
if
they
can
have
someone
to
Stage
up
there
to
help
with
that
cold
response
time,
as
well
as
doing
additional
resources
for
temporary
rescue
in
that
area.
So
we
talk
about
two
different
boxes:
spot
262
and
263,
which
is
in
K
Barn.
K
We
know
it's
one
way
in
one
way
out:
I'm,
also
working
with
mobility
in
the
county
to
see
about
getting
an
Access
Road
off
the
off
of
Morris
Bridge.
Now,
with
that,
you
know
once
again
been
in
this
position
for
16
months,
helping
out
the
Newt
North
Tampa
area.
We
finally
got
station
25
and
that
leads
into
the
next
agenda
items
about
station
24
and
25..
So
it
took
us
a
year
to
get
that
station
up
and
running,
which
has
helped
out
the
North
Tampa
area.
K
The
call
volume
has
equalized
among
the
units
up
there,
which
shows
also
the
unit
hour
utilization
for
each
individual
has
decreased,
which
that's
what
we're
looking
for
and
I'm
looking
to
do
that
throughout
the
city
of
Tampa,
but
once
again
it
took
a
year
for
that.
So
it's
going
to
take
time
to
continue.
You
know
moving
along
now
with
that
we
talk
about
Personnel
I
have
hired
over
a
hundred
people
in
the
last
year.
I
do
multiple
hiring
groups
to
get
our
stats
up
and
our
numbers
up
to
help
accommodate.
K
You
know
what
we
need
for
the
community,
so
that
is
my
goal
now,
when
you
say
time,
we
have
I've
worked
with
the
real
estate
department.
We
have
looked
at.
They
have
done
over
part
about
25
plus
sites
that
we
have
had
no
good
luck
on
as
far
as
purchasing
you
know,
and
that
has
also
been
a
concern
and
an
issue
too.
We
talk
about
the
value
of
it
and
we
talk
about
the
location.
K
We
just
can't
put
it
anywhere
and
that's
what
I'm
not
going
to
do
is
just
do
a
knee-jerk
reaction
and
put
it
somewhere
where
it's
not
needed,
so
I'm
strategic,
strategically,
looking
to
find
the
perfect
spot
to
put
this
to
help
the
North
Tampa
area,
as
well
as
assist
the
community
throughout
the
Sea
of
Tampa,
not
just
North
Tampa
I'm,
doing
the
same
thing
for
south
Tampa,
East,
Tampa
and
downtown
Tampa
as
well.
In
the
eye,
sir.
B
L
You
and
obviously
not
looking
for
a
knee-jerk
reaction.
What
I
was
looking
for
was
the
million
dollars
that
were
specifically
dedicated
to
District
Seven.
L
When
you
speak
about
all
the
city
of
Tampa,
we
proposed
a
couple
of
years
ago,
a
public
safety
master
plan
for
all
the
city
of
Tampa
whenever
it
comes
for
police
as
well
as
fire
that
includes
south
of
Gandhi.
That
includes
Sulfur
Springs,
East
Tampa,
South,
Tampa,
North
Tampa,
new
Tampa
et
cetera
Etc.
L
So
this
I
don't
want
this
to
make.
It
seem
as
if
I'm
just
looking
out
for
district
seven
I'm,
looking
at
the
million
dollars
that
we
passed
into
budget
and
to
see
how
that's
going
to
go
to
address
the
deficits
that
we
have
in
District,
Seven,
very
simple
side.
I,
don't
want
my
motion
to
be
misconstrued.
K
So
with
that,
I
am
also
get
putting
a
heavy
Rescue
Unit
up
into
3347,
because
it's
a
need
for
to
respond
to
the
interstate
as
well
as
areas
up
there.
I
am
looking.
We
actually
have
a
heavy
rescue
on
order.
That's
going
to
assist
with
the
fundings
of
that
million
dollars,
as
well
as
putting
additional
Personnel
to
offset
that
unit,
as
well
as
additional
resources,
whether
it
be
non-transport
or
transport
up
into
334-33647
area.
G
Chief,
thank
you
for
having
us.
We
know
we
again.
You
know
we
started
this
journey
back
in
2019
with
a
little
station
10..
G
A
lot
of
work
needs
to
be
done
on
that
one
as
well,
but
you
know
we
were
able
to
get
some
things
moving
over
there,
so
I'm
grateful
that
we
did
get
a
Public
Safety
service
supposed
to
come
back
and
talk
about
the
different
areas
and
the
relief
up
there
with
the
the
new
station
with
the
remodel
station
that
helps
Sulfur,
Springs
and
maybe
severe
share
some
of
that
that
boundary
there.
So
we
appreciate
the
work
you've
been
doing
and
I
tell
you.
G
You've
hit
the
ground
running
from
day
one
and
you
haven't
looked
back
so
I'm
very
proud
to
say
that
to
call
you,
the
fire
chief,
because
you've
done
a
heck
of
a
job
I
want
to
make
sure
we
are
still
on
with
you
in
the
union
tomorrow,
at
10.,
I
didn't
sit
on
my
calendar,
but
I
have
it
written
down
somewhere.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
sir.
Talk
about
those
other
issues
that
we're
going
to
talk
about?
Okay?
Well,
thank
you!
So
much
what
you're
doing
see
you
tomorrow
morning
at
10.,
okay,
thank
you.
B
B
F
Yeah
this
was
my
motion
and
just
to
set
it
up.
City
attorney
has
sent
us
a
memo
and
at
the
end
of
the
memo
it
says
that
on
page
four
conclusion
and
recommendations
that
should
city
council
I'm
going
to
paraphrase
want
to
regulate
settlement
decisions,
the
recommendation
from
the
legal
department
is
to
limit
only
the
ones
above
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
and
the
ones
that
have
to
do
with
city
council.
So
unless
you
all
want
to
go
through
that
whole
presentation
here,
I
would
say.
F
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion
to
ask
the
City
attorney
to
develop
an
ordinance
to
delegate
City
council's
authorities,
as
defined
in
Charter,
section,
7.02
and
8.01
to
sign
contracts
or
lawsuit
settlements
under
a
hundred
thousand
and
to
make
payment
for
those
settlements
under
a
hundred
thousand
without
appearing
before
city
council
for
approval
lawsuits
against
city,
council
or
city
council
members
would
not
be
included
in
this
exemption.
The
ordinance
would
be
renewed
every
five
years
to
be
presented
for
first
reading,
consideration
on
December
15th.
B
I'm
going
I'm
going
to
say,
I
haven't
even
heard
the
presentation
from
Miss
Zellman,
I
I
will
say
this.
We
have
a
motion
on
the
floor
from
councilman
Carlson
second
or
from
councilman
her
attack.
My
discussion
is
going
to
be
I'd
like
to
hear
from
staff.
F
The
report
was
sent
to
us
a
couple
weeks
ago,
so
I
was
just
trying
to
save
time.
If
you
want
to
hear
what
presentation
fine
I
tried
to
get
a
charter
Amendment
related
to
this
and
the
the
recommendation
was
to
do
by
ordinance
and
specifically
exclude,
as
the
document
says
here
exclude
items
under
a
hundred
thousand
and
any
the
related
city
council.
So
I'm
just
following
those
guidelines
in
in
pushing
an
ordinance.
M
B
M
Yeah,
okay
and
and
it's
not
a
question
of
sides
versus
sides,
the
the
question
was
understanding
the
city
attorney's
role
with
regard
to
the
approval
of
settlements
and,
as
I
explained
in
the
memo
under
the
charter,
the
City
attorney
has
management
and
control
of
all
legal
matters
of
the
city.
M
Legal
matters
include
the
settlement
of
lawsuits,
which
typically
occurs
in
the
majority
of
civil
cases.
I
went
on
to
explain
that
we
have
at
any
given
time
hundreds
of
cases.
M
The
vast
majority
of
them
are
personal
injury,
lawsuits
arising
from
motor
vehicle
accidents
or
trip
and
fall
on
city
property
and
I
went
on
to
explain
that
when
Gina
Grimes
took
over
as
City
attorney
in
2019,
she
established
what
I
think
is
a
very
good
process
whereby
we
have
a
settlement
committee
made
up
of
the
City
attorney
a
deputy,
City
attorney
representatives
of
risk
management
and
then
the
assistant
City
attorneys
that
are
actually
the
trial
attorneys
in
these
cases,
and
we
review
proposed
settlements
at
Great
length
once
a
month
and
typically,
the
timing
of
those
reviews
are
driven
by
the
attorney
has
an
upcoming
mediation,
so
they
need
authority
to
have
some
dollar
amount
to
propose
at
mediation
or
there's
a
hearing
upcoming
or
worst
case
scenario.
M
M
You
know
all
sorts
of
things
that
factor
into
the
decision
as
to
how
much
any
particular
lawsuit
should
be
settled
for
and
then
ultimately
reach
a
determination
and
have
that
settlement.
Authority
now
just
just
to
cut
to
the
quick,
because
I
understand
that
what
Mr
Carlson
is
asking
for
is
for
City
and
Council
to
be
involved
in
approving
settlements.
So
what
I
had
suggested
was
actually
one
of
two
things,
although
it
sounds
like,
maybe
he's
combining
them
both
and
that
is
either
just
bringing
to
city
council
for
settlement
approval.
M
Those
lawsuits
that
involve
an
action
that
Council
took
an
example
would
be
several
years
ago,
Council
passed
an
anti-conversion
ordinance.
It
was
found
to
be
onto
anti-conversion
therapy
ordinance.
It
was
found
to
be
unconstitutional.
We
now
have
a
demand
for
attorneys
fees
for
which
the
city
is
liable.
M
The
demand
is
for
two
million
dollars,
we're
still
negotiating
that
settlement,
but
when
we
do
reach
a
settlement
amount,
it's
it's
going
to
be
probably
pretty
significant.
So
something
like
that
we
would
bring
back
to
council
and
one
little
piece.
I
left
out
of
this
is
four
Council
to
discuss
settlements.
M
We
have
to
have
what's
called
a
shade
meeting
under
Florida
Statutes
and
that's
an
exemption
to
the
government
and
the
Sunshine
Law,
where
we
have
to
notice
the
meeting.
But
then
we
have
it
in
private,
with
just
your
attorney's
present.
We
have
to
have
a
certified
court.
M
Reporter
present,
we
discuss
the
settlement
we
reach
agreement
once
the
case
is
concluded
that
meeting
the
the
transcripts
of
that
meeting
become
public
record,
so
just
just
to
be
clear
that
that
would
be
the
manner
in
which
settlements
would
be
discussed
at
city
council,
unless
you
were
simply
to
approve
a
settlement
on
consent
agenda
now,
but
again,
if
you
pull
it
off
consent,
then
that
triggers
the
shade
meaning.
So
again,
my
two
proposals
were
just
bring
you:
the
settlements
that
pertain
to
City
business
city,
council,
business,
I'm.
M
Sorry,
so
again,
an
ordinance
that
you
pass
an
action
that
you
took
the
land
use.
Things
tend
to
come
back
to
you
anyway,
because
typically
people
invoke
the
flu
drug
process
or
if
they
file
a
petition
for
rid
of
Sir
sharari.
In
any
event,
they
typically
come
back
to
you
with
a
new
proposed
rezoning
plan
or
whatever,
which
you
then
have
to
approve
at
a
public
meeting
anyway,
and
then
the
other
category
I
think
I
referred
to
was
maybe
and
I
can't
think
of
a
particular
example.
M
But
something
in
my
gut
tells
me
this
may
happen
someday
that
there's
a
lawsuit
where
maybe
future
similar
actions
could
be
prevented.
If
city
council
were
to
act
legislatively,
so
it
would
make
sense
to
bring
that
kind
of
settlement
to
you
and
then
my
option,
two
in
the
thank
you
in
the
memo
was
again
just
go
with
the
dollar
threshold
and
there
currently
is
an
ordinance
on
the
books
that
has
a
25,
000
or
more
threshold.
M
My
proposal
would
be
to
increase
that
to
a
hundred
thousand
that's
consistent
with
two
things:
one
looking
to
the
east:
that's
the
threshold
of
matters
that
go
to
the
Hillsborough
County
Board
of
County
Commission,
or
is
anything
below
that
that
can
settle
without
board
approval,
and
that's
also
the
threshold
that
Council
has
set
for
approval
of
contracts,
contracts
a
hundred
thousand
and
above
have
to
come
to
council
contracts
below
that.
Don't
necessarily
have
to.
M
J
We
would
have
lawsuit
settlements
that
we
would
have
to
approve
I.
Remember
one
was
like
sixty
thousand
dollars
and
there
was
no
discussion
on.
It
was
just
on
the
consent
agenda,
but
then
that
disappeared,
I
haven't
not
that
I
recall
lately
in
the
last
few
years,
maybe
three
or
four
years
that
that
that
has
appeared
anymore
was
that
an
executive
decision
or
from
so.
M
Salcharito
had
written
a
legal
opinion,
yeah
August
16th
of
2018.,
a
legal
opinion
interpreting
5.01,
to
provide
that
settlement
of
lawsuits
did
not
need
to
be
approved
by
Council
and
and
therefore
that
was
when
they
stopped
bringing
in
okay.
J
And
then
one
last
question-
and
this
is
to
councilmember
Carlson's
motion-
says
to
delegate
City
councils
Authority
authorities
as
defined
in
the
charter,
and
it
cites
the
sections
to
sign
contracts
for
lawsuit
settlements
under
a
hundred
thousand
meaning.
The
chairperson
would
sign
those
correct
just
like
we
do
on
anything
that
goes
through
yeah.
M
It
was
so
I'm
I
I
would
want
to
flesh
out
this
language
a
little
bit.
It's
very
rare,
the
it's
very
rare
that
we
have
a
signed
settlement
agreement.
Typically,
when
cases
settle,
the
plaintiff
will
sign
a
release
and
the
city
will
pay,
so
it
really
isn't
about
signing
contracts
or
signing
settlement
agreements.
It's
basically
just
authorizing
the
city
to
move
forward
with
a
settlement
in
a
particular
dollar
amount.
K
J
M
G
As
Elvin
talked
about
when
you
need
to
go
into
a
closed
session,
I
made
mention
about
that.
I
may
mention
about
a
lot
of
these
things.
I
may
mention
that
lawsuits
per
the
ordinance
or
Charter,
where
I
read
that
they
should
be
coming
to
city
council
from
HR.
So
we
can
know
how
many
lawsuits
have
been
settled.
G
M
I
may
city
council
attorney
Shelby,
made
me
aware
yesterday
that
in
2006
the
county
approved
an
ordinance
I
mean
the
county.
The
city
council
approved
an
ordinance
requiring
HR
settlements
between
ten
thousand
and
twenty
five
thousand
dollars
to
be
reported
to
Council
on
a
quarterly
basis.
Apparently
the
reason
none
of
us
knew
about
that
was
that
municode
never
published
that
part
of
the
ordinance.
M
So
to
my
knowledge,
it's
never
been
followed.
I
would
strongly
incur
whatever
result
comes
from
today.
We're
going
to
have
to
amend
that
part
of
the
code
anyway.
I
would
strongly
encourage
Council
to
remove
that
part
of
the
2006
ordinance
and
I'll.
Tell
you
why
there's
plaintiff's
attorneys
that
keep
databases
of
what
different
jurisdictions
will
pay
for
a
nuisance
settlement.
You
know
if
you
get
a
trip
and
fall
in
Hillsborough,
County
I
can
take
your
case
and
I
can
get
you
five
thousand
dollars
without
having
to
do
anything.
M
You
know
things
like
that
was
obviously
a
hypothetical
example,
but
the
last
thing
we
want
to
do
is
advertise
to
the
plaintiffs
bar
what
we're
settling
some
of
the.
If
I
tell
you
how
many
cases
we
get
all
the
time
in
the
cases
I'm
talking
about
are
where
they
actually
file
suit,
there's
that
much
and
more
that
go
to
risk
management
that
are
settled
before
a
suit's,
even
filed,
so
to
to
publish
to
make
public
in
an
easily
obtainable
database.
All
those
claims
is
not
at
all
in
the
city's
interest
and.
G
I
think
an
explanation,
but
what
bothers
me
is
that,
time
and
time
again
we
find
that
things
that
are
supposed
to
be
in
Muny
or
things
that
are
supposed
to
have
been
done.
I
can
recall
back
when
you
talk
about
the
audit
that
never
was
done,
but
it
was
voted
on
and
passed,
but
it
had
been
hadn't
been
inputted,
I
mean
these
are
these
small
things
that
are
happening
and
when
we
have
an
issue
with
this
Council,
it's
like
we're
the
bad
person.
Don't
we're
not
the
backwards.
G
Okay,
our
job
is
to
make
sure
that
to
protect
this
house
or
the
city
make
sure
the
rules
are
followed,
and
sometimes
people
don't
like.
When
we
be
big
brother
and
say
Hey,
you
know
for
rules
they're,
not
with
the
bad
people.
That's
the
problem.
I
have
with
with
the
way
this
government
is
running
here.
G
We
bring
up
things
that
that
people
know
that
are
wrong,
but
we
continue
to
show
a
blind
eye
to
them
and
it
will
continue
to
be
bad
when
that
issue
may
come
up,
maybe
a
couple
more
two
more
three
years,
but
eventually
it
may
come
up
again,
but
yeah
we
didn't
fix
it
the
last
time.
This
is
the
problem.
I
have
that
that
to
me
we're
not
sometimes
we're
not
doing
our
job
that
the
public
can
trust
us
to
do.
G
They
entrust
us
to
fix
the
issues
when
they
come
before
us
and
there
are
issues
that
we
have
not
fixed
and
now
today,
I
see
this
item
here
that
we
could
have
dealt
with
on
Tuesday.
We
could
have
dealt
with
it.
The
bottom
line
settlements
need
to
come
to
this
Council.
We
can
know
what
everyone's
doing.
M
G
F
Yeah,
you
know
what
happened
on
Tuesday.
Is
that
folks
said?
Well,
it's
just
make
it
an
ordinance
instead.
So
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
do
I'm
trying
to
follow
the
the
guidelines
that
were
in
this
document,
the
the
issue,
the
issue
which
I
described
the
other
day,
is
that
there
is
this
2018
memo
from
South
Torito
as
City
attorney
two
paragraphs
that
changed
the
Charter
One
some
of
the
reviews,
some
of
the
media
coverage,
the
other
day
said
we
were
trying
to
expand
the
powers
of
City
councils.
F
No,
this
is
a
case
where,
in
2018,
a
City
attorney
in
two
paragraphs
took
away
the
powers
of
city
council,
and
so,
if
you
look
the
you're
going
to
get
a
copy
of
in
a
second
but
I
had
miss
Shelby.
Do
some
research
and
there's
plenty
of
examples
of
this,
but
in
2006
there's
a
an
ordinance
that
was
passed
that
mazelman
just
referred
to,
that
that
gives
the
City
attorney
Powers
below
25
000.,
if
in
2006
and
pamayorio
signed
it.
F
If
in
2006,
the
city
council
delegated
its
Authority
below
25
000
and
no
Charter
amendments
were
made
between
2006
and
2018.
In
that
regard,
why
did
the
City
attorney
suddenly
make
an
opinion?
That's
adverse
to
a
a
an
ordinance
that
that
the
mayor
at
the
time
in
2006,
signed
and
was
okay
with
something
else
was
going
on,
and
so
what
we?
What
I
want
to
do
and
I
can
read
this
again.
I
think
you
all
have
copies
of
it.
F
What
I
want
to
do,
based
on
what
you
all
said,
the
other
day
is
pass
an
ordinance
following
Ms
zelman's
guidelines,
but
the
key
word
here:
I,
don't
care
if
you
all
make
it
follow
her
advice
and
make
it
a
hundred
thousand
I
pulled
that
from
her.
If
you
want
to
make
it
a
million
dollars,
that's
fine
with
me.
The
number
one
word
that
I
want
in
here
is
delegate,
and
that
is
to
protect
the
powers
of
city
council
that
were
taken
away
by
this
2018
memo.
F
We
cannot
allow
power
to
be
taken
away,
we're
not
asking
for
any
new
powers,
but
the
point
is
that
if
the
City
attorney
is
going
to
sign
contracts
and
and
pay
payments,
we
look
in
in
the
charter
7.02
and
8.01.
We
have
those
Powers
it
I
can
read
this
document,
nowhere
under
the
power
in
5.01.
Nowhere
in
the
powers
of
the
City
attorney
does
it
say
that
the
City
attorney
has
the
right
to
sign
contracts
or
pay
payments.
It
says
the
City
Kearney
can
negotiate,
but
negotiate
does
not
mean
sign
contracts
and
pay.
F
Just
like
the
mayor's
office
can
negotiate
a
lease,
but
we
have
to.
We
have
to
approve
the
lease
we
have.
The
the
mayor's
office
can
negotiate
a
sale
of
a
building,
but
we
have
to
approve
the
contract
and
the
payment
of
it
if
the
City
attorney
needs
flexibility
on
HR
issues
or
whatever.
We
can
add
that
in
here,
but
we
must
have
an
ordinance
that
supersedes
this
letter
from
2018
that
clearly
shows
that
it's
our
power
and
we're
delegating
it
to
the
City
attorney.
Thank
you.
L
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr
chair,
yeah
I'm
glad
to
support
this
and
that's
what
I
said
on
Tuesday,
which
is
I,
don't
want
this
to
be
in
the
charter.
If
we
can
look
at
it
reasonably
by
virtue
of
ordinance
and
and
I'll
repeat
what
I
said
on
Tuesday,
which
is
that
a
lot
of
settlements
to
to
have
a
policy
that
brings
all
city
of
Tampa
settlements
before
city
council?
What
put
at
risk
are
legal
claims
and
would
subject
the
city
to
more
lawsuits.
L
Plaintiff's
attorneys,
I've,
never
been
one
I've
been
an
attorney
for
19
years,
always
done
Defense
work
God
bless
the
plane
as
far,
but
they
have
sites
that
talk
about
what
you
can
get
from
different
insurance
companies
from
different
corporate
entities
from
different
governmental
bodies.
Etc,
and
if
we
start
to
publish
that
information
through
city
council
settlement
subject
to
city
council
questioning,
it
will
be
a
giant.
Kick
me
sign
on
the
behind
of
the
city
of
Tampa
for
the
plaintiff's
bar.
That's
a
fact!
That's
a
fact!
L
Then,
whenever
you
deal
with
settlements,
you're
also
dealing
with
things
that
are
a
personal,
the
impression
that
a
plaintiff
makes
the
impression
that
a
defendant
driver
makes
or
a
city
of
Tampa
employee
something
that
maybe
somebody
knows
about
something
in
the
case
that
is
not
public
yet
that
we
don't
want
to
have
public,
but
the
forms
the
basis
or
the
rationale
for
a
settlement.
L
Yes,
sir
diving
so
deep
into
those
issues,
you
know
and
again
this
this
ordinance
proposed
by
councilman
Carlson
100
for
because
it's
reasonable
and
it
pits
those
cases
that
are
larger
or
the
ones
that
originate
from
our
actions.
I'm
100
fine
with
that,
but
it
saves
the
city
again
from
the
having
that
giant.
Kick
me
sign
and
they're
behind
for
Morgan
and
Morgan
and
God
bless.
Morgan
and
Morgan
have
a
lot
of
cases
with
them.
Thank
you.
J
You
very
much
you
know
it's.
We
have
a
different
City
attorney.
It's
not
2018
anymore.
I,
disagree
with
the
opinion
of
2018
and
I
think
this
is
the
right
thing
to
do
for
the
sake
of
transparency.
Again
I
mentioned
when
I
first
got
here.
We
would
see
these
settlements
sixty
thousand
fifty
thousand
smaller
amounts,
but
they
would
come
to
city
council
and
the
public
had
an
opportunity
to
see
them.
I,
never
remember
any
type
of
discussion.
J
However,
it
was
in
plain
view
somebody
could
pull
the
agenda
and
say
oh
they're,
settling
for
whatever
and
they
knew
about
it
instead
of
not
being
visible
as
it
used
to
be
before
so.
I
disagree
with
the
opinion
of
the
former
City
attorney
I
think
this
is
wise
and
in
the
name
of
transparency-
and
it
just
takes
us
back
to
how
things
used
to
be
when
it
was
more
transparent
early
on
when
I
got
elected
and
I,
don't
see
anything
wrong
with
this,
so
I'm
happy
to
support
it.
E
I'm
sorry
but
I
believe
Mr
Goods
must
be
part
of
me.
I.
G
This
is
no
different
if
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
it
sounds
like
we're,
gonna
be
able
to
move
something
forward
today,
with
Mr
Carlson's
ordinance,
a
proposed
ordinance
to
me,
it's
no
different
than
6.03
when
we
talk
about
appointments
versus
the
charter
versus
an
ordinance,
so
I'm
I'm
going
to
be
looking
at
that
in
the
near
future
to
bring
the
appointment
situation
back
as
an
ordinance,
Mr,
Shelby
and
I
need
you
to
give
me
for
the
language
of
that,
because
I
will
be
making
a
motion
for
it
relates
to
bringing
that
back,
because
if
we're
going
to
play
the
shell
game
of,
we
don't
want
to
touch
the
chart
of
the
Constitution
versus
an
ordinance
situation
to
change
things.
G
E
E
C
Have
no
problem
the
one
that
signed
my
family
over
here,
April
2016,
changing
it
from
10
to
25.
M
I
was
just
going
to
say
if
I
may
I
I'm
reading,
Mr
Carlson's
motion
and
again
my
proposal
would
be
to
amend
chapter
two.
The
way
we
just
talked
about
some
of
the
language
in
here
I'm,
not
sure,
is
relevant,
so
it
would
be,
but
we
can
discuss
that
when
we
bring
back
a
proposed
ordinance,
never
mind
well
and.
F
M
J
N
Item
number
14:
is
you
ask
staff
to
look
at
ways
that
we
could
come
up
come
up
with
ways
that
we
can
help
with
the
probate?
Have
residents
with
probate
process
and
councilman
guzio
and
I
had
some
conversation
on
your
briefing
earlier
this
week
and
so
I
maintained
that
the
probate
process
is
a
private
legal
matter
that
the
city
cannot
interfere
with.
We
are
working
with
I
met
with
well.
N
Let
me
back
up
attorney
John's
Abby
feely
and
myself
met
with
Miss
Keela
mccaskill
that
had
some
ideas
on
what
we
could
do
with
pro-bred
process.
A
lot
of
it
is
being
proactive
and
making
sure
that
the
citizens
and
residents
know
what
their
options
are
with
property
before
it
actually
enters
into
appropriate
Pro,
the
probate,
the
importance
of
estate
planning.
N
So
as
a
part
of
our
tenant
Services
team,
we
are
working
with
Mrs
mccaskill
to
put
on
a
workshop
in
second
quarter
of
2023
and
we've
put
out
some
dates,
hoping
to
have
it
at
the
tamper
convention
center,
and
we
have
a
draft
agenda
for
what
that
day
may
look
like.
All
of
that
is
really
promised
around
being
proactive.
Educating
citizens
on
the
difference
between
as
well
the
differences
in
estate
planning
the
difference
between
a
will,
a
trust,
and
how
do
we
handle
real
estate?
N
The
conversation
that
we
had
on
the
briefing
this
week,
we
talked
about
clouded
title
or
keeping
properties
in
circulation,
particularly
in
housing,
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
shared
with
you
is
that
Deputy
Administrator,
Elise
strongo
is
working
on
setting
up
a
CLT.
You'll
have
a
presentation
on
that
soon,
but
if
there
has
to
be
a
public
purpose,
the
city
should
not,
and
I
would
recommend
strongly
against
it
entering
into
private
legal
matters,
to
figure
out
private
issues
regarding
real
property.
N
However,
if
we
were
in
a
position
where
we
wanted
to
click
a
clean
title,
get
that
property
and
be
able
to
put
it
in
a
CLT
to
protect
it
for
affordability
at
a
later
time.
Those
are
things
that
we're
gonna.
We
can
do
so,
there's
a
fine
line
that
we
have
to
walk
regarding
a
public
purpose
and
not
paying
for
private
services
for
a
for
private
benefit.
N
G
I
I,
I
I
believe
everything
that
you're
telling
I
still
contain
that
we
can
have
some
type
of
pilot
program
where
we
can
have
some
dollars
with
some
criteria
for
those
individuals
who
are
Indigent
who
are
having
issues
that
can
get
to
court
who
don't
understand
a
process
I,
don't
you
look
at
some
of
these
houses
that
have
become
dilapidated
or
have
squatters
in
there
incurring
code,
fines
and
things
like
that?
So
that's.
N
N
Of
navigate,
and
so
for
me,
okay,
so
when
you're
talking
like
that,
it
puts
me
in
the
real
estate,
mind
right
when
you're
talking
about
squatters
and
blighted
property
in
the
CRA
world,
you
purchase
properties
for
strategic
acquisition
and
if
I
was
trying
to
purchase
a
property,
that's
encumbered
with
multiple
ears
and
like
the
title
is
kind
of
clouded.
You
have
to
figure
that
stuff
out
there's
a
role
for
the
CRA
to
play
that
we
could
probably
Outsource
with
an
attorney
to
kind
of
work
through
that
those
things
take
a
really
long
time.
N
You
have
to
look
for
people
to
hunt
down
records,
but
the
public
purpose
in
that
is
to
eliminate
the
blight
and
it
is
a
strategic
acquisition
and
what
I'm
saying
to
do
that
is
I'm.
Not.
We
should
not
be
clearing
the
title
so
that
the
errors
can
then
do
whatever
with
the
property.
Our
public
purpose
would
be
to
clean
up
that
blight,
clear
the
title
so
that
the
city
can
purchase
the
property
free
and
clear,
perhaps
put
it
into
a
CLC.
It's
multi-transaction.
G
G
Those
who
don't
know
to
know
we
can
help
them
know
that's
what
I
want
to
be
able
to
do
to
do.
I
think
we
have
a
meeting
coming
up
with
a
gentleman
that
the
city
was
in
contract
with
in
reference
to
those
type
of
issues,
we're
not
mistaken.
So
hopefully,
during
that
meeting
we
can
clip
a
lot
of
that
as
well,
because
I
understand
somebody
is
on
the
contract.
It's
reference
to
dealing
with
some
of
these
houses
or
properties
that
have
so
many
liens
on
them.
G
G
You
know,
or
people
can
tell
people
something
is
coming
and
I
know
it.
Everything
sometimes
takes
a
moment
and
you
guys
are
on
a
lot
of
pressure
because
of
this
crisis,
but
when
I
hear
things
and
see
other
places
doing
things,
I
I
can't
negate
my
dudes.
By
bringing
these
things
to
the
Forefront
and
to
you
to
see
what
can
we
do?
Not
what
we
can't
do
so
I
appreciate
what
you've
done
so
far,
looking
forward
to
the
next
meeting,
and
then
we
can
finally
get
something
moving
for
our
citizens
who
who
are
in
need.
N
All
right,
so
the
only
thing
I
just
again,
I
like
to
set
expectations.
Redevelopment
is
a
long
process.
Those
are
not
things
that
are
quick,
but
as
we
ramp
up
like
you,
have
charged
us
with
with
the
CRA
to
start
looking
at
strategic
Acquisitions,
we
will
start
looking
at
that.
You
look
at
problem
properties
and
we'll
we'll
begin
doing
that,
but
again,
what's
coming
before
you
soon
is
the
Community
Land
Trust
And.
N
There
are
some
decisions
that
you're
going
to
have
to
make
with
that,
and
these
are
opportunities
when
we
get
properties
like
that
to
keep
them
in
circulation
and
also
control
the
affordability
piece
for
generations
to
come,
or
you
know
for
a
longer
period
of
time.
The
CLT
is
the
way
to
do
to
purchase
property
property
capture
it
and
keep
it
in
there.
So
me
going
to
Chicago.
Was
it
wasn't
in.