The LENS Road Show - A Bumpy Start

Apparently my take on Wednesday night's City LENS Road Show is a bit different than most. The crowd was estimated at about 120 by the Sunken gardens Staff.

Leslie Curran got things going with an introduction that included statements like "we will answer all your questions", and "we will stay as long as necessary to answer all those questions"

Chris Ballestra, the LENS project manager began with a rehash of pier history. I think that lasted about 15-20 minutes. It was a waste of time since the stated objective of the meeting was to discuss the recent LENS design changes. Most everybody interested in this issue has been through the Pier History a number of times.

Ballestra's comments were followed by some mildly useful information from Raul Quintana the City's architect about the actual design changes.

The new renderings on display do indeed show some of the new design details and as was pointed out by City staff, the LENS is a design work in progress, there are still a lot of unanswered questions.

Attendees were asked to submit their questions on green cards, and the cards started coming quickly. People continued to send up questions as the meeting continued.

Ballestra started off the questions portion of the meeting by saying "we want to answer all your questions and will stay here as long as necessary". He began reading the questions and providing answers. Quintana joined in to help with some of the details.

I couldn't help but notice that there was some shuffling of question cards as the meeting progressed. After about 45 minutes or so Quintana abruptly stepped in and said that's all the time we have for questions. Several attendees quickly objected saying you have not answered the question I submitted.

Council member Curran, calmed the audience down and once again said we will stay and answer all your questions.

A crowd developed around the podium where Ballestra and Quintana were standing and the exchange grew somewhat heated. Ballestra became agitated and frequently used the phrase "let me know when I can talk" as the citizens asked some pretty probing questions.

The crowd gradually drifted away and the meeting ended.

If this "information" campaign is be successful at all, enhancing an adversarial atmosphere is not going to help. There were supporters and detractors of the LENS in attendance. All needed to hear the questions and the answers.

Someone needs to take Ballestra aside and remind him this is not his personal fight to save the LENS. If you can't stand the criticism and critical comments and react to them like a professional then the City should put someone else up front as the information spokes person.

Next, the format needs to be geared more to the subject at hand- forget the history lesson. Begin with explanation of the latest design changes and then straight to the questions from the attendees. The only real way to find out what the public wants to know is to let them ask their questions and role that information into the next presentation.

If you don't want to answer ALL of the questions, state a time limit up front and then stick to it.

Finally, don't prescreen the questions and move the ones you don't want to answer to the bottom of the pile. That may not be what happened, but it sure looked that way.

e-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net, or send me a Facebook Friend request.

A little less defense and some better planning would help the information flow

South St. Pete - Something That Might Just Work.

Here is a Comment that was added to my Post District 8 Candidates on South St. Pete Quality of Life by Kim D:

I would like to see some sort of partnership - maybe USF college of Education, All Children's Hospital, SPC, and Eckerd College get together to intervene to stop the cycle of poverty and crime by providing medical check-ups and education for at risk parents- to- be. Then the USF, SPC, and other students studying to be teachers could begin to work with these babies from birth in a child care program provided free to the parents while they work to complete their education and receive skills and job training. If the education students had the opportunity to work with these kids teaching them the basics, talking to them, reading to them then when those kids later enter their classrooms they will be ready to learn, not way behind and struggling to catch up. The college students could receive credits for doing this and any money spent on this endeavor would be a good investment, not needed for police and prisons later. Why do we invest so little in our people? If we don't do something to break this cycle of poverty in our community the quality of life for all residents will continue to be adversely affected. I would like the city council and mayor to seriously put effort into something like this. It is a huge problem and until it is solved we will also have trouble attracting business here no matter how great the tax breaks.

I Reposted this Comment because a lot of people don't read the Comments under the Posts, and you should by the way, because that is where the real insight will be found as in this case.

I was struck and moved by the simplicity of the concept and the profound way everybody in this idea wins. This idea leverages valuable assets already on the ground in St. Petersburg and applies them right where they are needed.  

The outcomes: better prepared kids and better prepared teachers are to valuable to even put a price on.
I do not know who Kim D is but this is the kind of thinking that will begin to move St. Petersburg forward.
Unlike TIFS, CRAs and streetscape projects, ideas like this will actually help in South St. Pete.
We desperately need more of this kind of thinking and less politics and special interest pressure.

Someone in the current or next administration should catch this idea and run with it.
e-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net, or send me a Facebook Friend request
It is time for some out of the box thinking

Dr. David McKalip CandidateDistrict 4 Releases a Budget Statement

Dr. McKalip Proposes $10 Million Tax and Fee Cut, City Employee Raises, and Funding of Pension Plans.$80 million in excess reserves will be used in first year and spending reform and cuts in future years.

Dr. David McKalip City Council candidate for District 4 has released following response to the recently released City Budget proposal. Press release provided by the McKalip campaign and posted here with no editing.

St Petersburg, FL -- Dr. McKalip, candidate for St. Petersburg city Council, is proposing tax and fee cuts for the city of St. Petersburg’s 2014 budget year.  The $10 million in cuts to benefit the citizens is in stark contrast to the $10 million hike in property taxes and water and sewer rate proposed by the city government for 2014.

http://www.mckalipforcouncil.com/dr_mckalip_proposes_10_million_tax_and_fee_cut_city_employee
_raises_and_funding_of_pension_plans
Dr McKalip offered: “For too long the citizens of St. Petersburg have been taken for granted by a city government that wastes the citizens’ money and refuses to meet its basic obligations in a fiscally responsible way. The City of St. Petersburg government costs a family of four an additional $1,500 per year compared to a more reasonable baseline of spending in 2001 – that is with 3,500 fewer citizens and 365 fewer government workers!  It is time for some tax relief for the citizens.”

The Mayor released his 2014 budget proposal on July 1, calling for a 0.1% cut in the millage rate which would still result in a $3.2 million tax hike for citizens. In addition the city would raise water and sewage bills 4.2% for an additional $7.3 million.  Dr. McKalip observed: “Last year, the city raised property taxes $10 million for this fiscal year and now proposes to remove another $10 million from citizens and the economy –further hurting both.” Dr. McKalip is promising to work for a true tax and fee cut for citizens if elected to city council in November.  “I will not vote for any budget that raises taxes. I will hold up votes on budgets that attempt to raise taxes or fees in any way. If elected, I will be the first city council member in years to actually work to cut city spending”

While future tax and fee cuts are also entirely feasible after wasteful spending is analyzed and stopped, the first cuts will be financed by tapping excess reserves the city has built up. The city has placed into its bank accounts money from the citizens totally in $81 million above what is required by law or required for emergencies. $10 million of these reserves will be returned directly to the taxpayers and water, sewer and sanitation customers through tax and fee cuts. The remainder of the funds will be used to finance long delayed raises for government workers.  On average, city workers can receive a raise of $750 by using $2 million of reserve funds. A greater raise can be given if the workers’ unions agree to reforms in the pension and health benefit plans that will make them more fiscally stable in the long run and avoid tax hikes in the future. Finally, $60 million of the additional reserve funds will be used to begin to fill the hole in pension and retiree health benefits that have been underfunded by $325 million.

The additional cost of pay raises in the future will be paid for through reform of health benefits, pension plans, ending wasteful spending, ending corporate subsidies and focusing government spending on the basics of public safety, utilities, roads and parks.

Dr. McKalip stated: “Returning money to the taxpayers will help kick start the economy through true stimulus, resulting in higher tax revenue from the city through a broader tax base. That is the kind of leadership this city government needs and the citizens deserve.”

 Dr. David McKalip has been a nearly lifelong resident of St. Petersburg. He is a community leader and businessman who has practiced brain and spine surgery in St. Petersburg since 2000. Dr. McKalip is an elected or appointed leader on many boards and committees. He has been happily married to Ann, his wife of 22 years, and is the father of three wonderful children.

e-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net, or send me a Facebook Friend request.

Campaign Disclosures: Contributor to Darden Rice Campaign

Kathleen Ford’s Response to the TBT Editorial: Saving the Pier makes no fiscal sense

Posted without editing

Tampa Bay Times: Editorial: Saving The Pier makes no fiscal sense

In 2003 and 2004, Parsons Brinkerhoff performed an engineering analysis of our Pier. This examination (which included underwater analysis of spans) revealed the City’s need to renovate The Pier. Thus, on February 15, 2005, the City Council approved Ordinance 715-G, which extended the expiration date for the Intown Redevelopment District to 2035 and added Pier/Pier Approach Improvements to this District’s Plan. Specifically, the Plan identified the following repairs and renovations of The Pier as the project:
Demolition/Replacement of Pier Approach ($22.2 M);
Demolition/Replacement of Pier Head Structure ($12 M);
Demolition/Replacement of Pier Head Retail ($6.1 M); Restoration of
Inverted Pyramid Structure ($4.3M) and Design/Permitting Construction
Administration of $5.4 M, for a total of $50 million. This is where
the $50 million Pier Project number originated.

The Pier Task Force subsequently suggested widening The Pier approach (bridge portion) from 100 ft to 150 ft. This widening would never have been approved by SWFMD or the Army Corp, however, because both agencies limit construction of new piers to almost the exact footprint so as to protect our Tampa Bay Aquatic Preserve. The City’s estimate of $74 million for renovating the inverted pyramid structure was derived from this never-to-be-allowed-widening of The Pier approach. The City received a letter from architect Kenneth Kroger, showing how the construction costs for replacing the pier approach and renovating the inverted pyramid could be managed within the original $50 million budget by reducing the width of the pier approach.

Moreover, the City’s current annual subsidy would be greatly reduced and/or eliminated altogether if a new Pier structure was built, the HVAC systems were replaced, and the facility was more efficiently managed. Not too long ago, City staff advised City Council that the City made money from the Pier leases when the costs associated with maintaining the Pier approach were removed. In other words, the City actually made a profit from the inverted pyramid shops and first floor retail. Again, if a new bridge were built those significant subsidies would disappear.

To date, no engineer has opined that the inverted pyramid or the foundation supporting it is structurally unsound. And, there is expert testimony (architect Ken Kroger) suggesting that the cost to build this same inverted pyramid structure brand new today would be more than $35 million. Thus, the iconic inverted pyramid building is a significant City real estate asset. Furthermore, independent engineers (not dependent upon the mayor for a salary) have estimated that the Pier approach can be demolished and replaced and the inverted pyramid building renovated within the original budget of $50 million. Facts are important and should be the basis of all City fiscal decision making. Creative and artistic expression is an important element of our city life, but practicality and fiscal responsibility come first. Here, the citizens of St. Petersburg have a significant investment in their Pier and they should have the final say, vis-à-vis a vote, on
whether their Pier should be demolished or renovated.

Finally, almost a year ago, I proposed ballot language to the Citysuggesting that the City seek direction from citizens on whether to:
*save the inverted pyramid or
*build the looping figure 8 sidewalk over the water (the Lens) or
*seek a design compatible with the Waterfront Master Plan to be
developed that included the criteria established by the Pier Task
Force of a 36,000 sq ft building with 26,000 sq. ft of restaurant or
*demolish the bridge and pier head and restore the entire area to a
waterfront park.

Of course, I thought it would be fiscally prudent to obtain voter approval prior to spending millions of dollars on a project that might not be built. So now we find ourselves facing the August 27 vote where we will see whether Bill Foster and City Council wasted $3.8 million
on Maltzan’s Lens.

Campaign Disclosures: Contributor to Kathleen Ford Campaign, Darden Rice Campaign, Concern Citizens of St. Petersburg

Have your say. VOTE YES TO Stop The Lens.

Bud Risser emailed me this update posted here with his permission.

Here is a link to the Original Post 828 Should Probably Wait

Sir

I offer a correction of your recent post that someone was forwarded to me regarding Mayor Foster's plan for the Pier.

First, I am not part of that committee. I have been working with the Mayor in hope that my management experience could be helpful in forming a productive committee that could keep the momentum we now have should the August election terminate the Maltzan contract.

Second, your message suggests to me that you - and frankly a lot of others including Council - do not understand what the Mayor is proposing. This group is being formed solely to recommend a process that could (and hopefully would) lead our City to a better solution. When they decide the process, their job is completed. The group who would execute the process leading to a selection would come next. My guess is that this will be a much larger group, with lots of thought given to diversity, interests, politics and such.

For reasons I am certain you will understand, the idea here was to get a small group who understand the importance of compromise, and that would represent key interests and move quickly. My recommendation was 7 to 9 people. The Mayor chose to make it larger than that, which may slow things down. But you notice that CCSP and the Chamber are there. The Mayor wanted Sullivan (and I strongly agreed) but he said no. I do not know why. That is too bad because it not only would have brought his ideas to the table, it would have added credibility.

From my vantage point I can already see many places where there is already common agreement. It would be inappropriate for me to share those now, but I will say that most - if not all - of the ideas I consider important likely will be accepted by the participants I have talked with. As a result, I am optimistic that this could be a good start. I say could, because you know how quickly the complexity of these things can cause them to go astray. I would hope that using the Pier Task Force report, working in sync with the new waterfront master plan, and taking constant input from the community would be just a few of the things everyone could agree to. If so we should be able to avoid the problems that the earlier process created.

The truth is that this group of people, and many others, love our City and we are simply working to get the best solution we can. I look forward to you helping to keep our little world informed!

Best regards,

Bud

Thanks Mr. Risser for the update and the clarification.

e-mail Doc at: dr.webb@verizon.net, or send me a Facebook Friend request.