9/25/1997 - Strategic Planning
CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL WORKSESSION
CITY OF CLEARWATER
September 25, 1997
Present: Rita Garvey Mayor/Commissioner
J. B. Johnson Vice-Mayor/Commissioner
Ed Hooper Commissioner
Bob Clark Commissioner
Karen Seel Commissioner
Michael J. Roberto City Manager
Kathy S. Rice Deputy City Manager
Bob Keller Assistant City Manager
Richard L. Hedrick Assistant City Manager
Pamela K. Akin City Attorney
Pam Skyrme Organizational & Employee Development Director
Rich Baier City Engineer
Scott Shuford Director of Central Permitting
Tina Wilson Budget Director
Alan Ferri Economic Development Director
Carrie Huntley Community Outreach Manager
Diane Hufford Loan Officer
Anne Green Administrative Support Manager
Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk
Brenda Moses Board Reporter
The meeting was called to order at 9:15 a.m. at the Moccasin Lake Nature Park
classroom, 2750 Park Trail Lane, Clearwater, Florida for the purpose of strategic planning.
Organizational & Employment Development Director Pam Skyrme facilitated the
meeting. Participants focused on defining economic development, how it supports the quality
of life in the City, how government can track and measure its success, and the role
government will play in economic development. Key issues considered were: 1) Where the
City has been; 2) Where the City is now; 3) Where the City is going; and 4) Where the City
hopes to end up.
Participants felt that in the past, government: 1) Neglected to get community
consensus; 2) Neglected working with businesses; 3) Did not perform the required research or
build intellectual structure; 4) Did not pursue a tourism infrastructure; 5) Was pro-business but
did not engage the public; 6) Did not keep up with infrastructure needs (major roads, missing
sidewalks, road drainage issues); and 7) Did not set a tone for how it wanted the City to look.
It was suggested that the following issues also be considered: 1) Ecotourism will not
happen here or drive the community, but it will have its niche (ecotourism is water, trails, etc.);
2) No opportunity exists for reflection in the past; 3) The economy has historically driven what
is happening; 4) The private sector has been the driving force in economic development
(government did not create the Vision); 5) Former policymakers had individual agendas; the
1
msw0997 09/25/97
City wants to eliminate personal agendas; 6) The private sector must have an interest in
making the future happen; and 7) The future and Vision must be economic-based.
Participants were asked to summarize their views of economic development in
Clearwater from years 1950 to 2030. Key issues considered included: 1) Where the City has
been; 2) Where the City is now; 3) Where the City is going; and 4) Where the City hopes to
end up.
It was noted that there was a post-war building boom in the 1950’s. Clearwater was a
sleepy town. In the 1960’s, downtown growth began, trailer parks were placed on beaches,
and there was a shift to tourism-lite industry. Government did not involve businesses or the
community in the 1960’s or 1970’s. In the 1970’s, a building boom began at Sand Key,
Countryside, and in the suburbs. Malls were built, regulations relaxed, and Canadians bought
winter homes. Although the downtown area was bustling, the City’s architecture began to
decline. In the 1980’s, there was a period of large growth in the northern, eastern, and
Countryside areas. Plans were developed without follow-up efforts, and billboards and signs
became plentiful. Downtown started to become empty. The Land Development Code,
Comprehensive Plan, and impact fees were implemented. Morton Plant Hospital and its
medical education center played a key role in economic development. Tampa also was
flourishing. In the 1990’s, taxable values leveled off. Scientologists became the largest group
in the downtown area. It was remarked that downtown looks the same as it did in the 1980’s,
with empty storefronts. There was an identity crisis and a potential recession. The Penny for
Pinellas tax was implemented. Beach properties began to decline and many people felt there
was, and is, little reason to visit downtown.
It was remarked that the end of welfare is approaching and it is the beginning of
daycare crises. Many positives are affecting economic development such as City-wide
redevelopment relative to beautification and streetscaping efforts, plans for a new Memorial
Causeway Bridge, a new Main Clearwater Library, and more quality City-wide events. The City
Vision has been developed, job opportunities are increasing, ecotourism has increased, and
City staff are proactively seeking additional grant funds.
It is anticipated in years 2000 to 2030, there will be a well-balanced, viable economy.
More cultural programs and arts and entertainment specialties will be developed. The bluff
and the vacant Annex property will be developed to the benefit of the entire community. The
City will find its niche, which could be in the software, high-tech or entrepreneurial fields.
There may be rail transportation to the beaches. Many changes will take place to positively
affect the economic and employment base. It was remarked that baby boomers, who are the
wealthiest generation in history, will be retiring, which could affect the City’s economy. A new,
revised Land Development Code will be in place, further encouraging the City’s current
business-friendly policy.
The meeting recessed from 11:10 to 11:32 a.m.
Participants broke into four groups, and responded to specific questions related to
economic development.
2
msw0997 09/25/97
Question #1:
What are the public’s desires regarding economic development of our City?
Responses: 1) Not sure that residents understand what economic development is about.
They assume that quality of life issues drive economic development; 2) Residents do not
understand that residential development costs more than business development; 3) Are
businesses close to citizens (easy access to stores, etc.); 4) Citizens want high-paying jobs
without sacrificing residential development; and 5) The public wants a fun place to go to
(tourism, activities, events, service places).
Discussion ensued with comments that in order for the public to be involved in the
“process”, it will take time to positively effect progress. The City wants the public involved in
the process including discussion regarding quality of life issues.
Question #2:
How do we connect with people?
Responses: 1) The City has moved from selling an idea to getting information from the public
via telephone surveys, personal surveys, and public input meetings. People either do not take
the time to answer written survey questions, or do not spend quality time on them; 2) More
public debate is needed to bring issues to the forefront and educate people on those issues.
Utilization of C-View TV and the press is important; 3) Study circle groups should be
implemented that allow staff to visit neighborhoods and supply educational tools, forming
discussion groups in individual residents’ homes. Study groups would involve residents
inviting 10 other residents into their homes to discuss current issues, and those individuals in
turn invite 10 individuals into their homes, creating a link within the community; and 4) Years
ago, incentives such as coffee mugs or other items were awarded to those who took the time
to attend community meetings. Holding meetings in convenient locations in small
neighborhoods may be helpful. A wide variety of mediums to obtain public input is needed.
Discussion regarding the neighborhood study circle resulted in positive feedback.
Question #3:
What are some specific achievable goals for the next 4 years?
Responses: 1) Market, market, market!; 2) Determine goals, then specifics; 3) The Land
Development Code should reflect the economic development program; 4) Incorporate
minimum property standards; 5) Have support systems in place; 6) Develop marketing systems
and supporting data; 7) Attract new jobs; 8) Non profit containment; 9) Plan and budget for
more events; 10) Concentrate on retail recruitment; and 11) Continue beautification plans for
the beach and the bridge.
Question #4:
How do we measure success?
3
msw0997 09/25/97
Responses: 1) Need more data with regard to sales and rental rates, the tax base, building
permits, and renovation permits; 2) Share the information the City already has with other
departments; 3) Develop sites and locations to accommodate what the City wants; 4) Identify
key questions; 5) Establish some dates to accomplish goals and establish timeframes; 6)
Identify our limitations; and 7) Staff must acquire and maintain the wisdom, knowledge and
information necessary to effect positive desired results.
It was felt that it is important to have a clear and common vision of what the City wants
downtown, the beaches, and the City as a whole to be before pushing forward. The private
sector will play a key role in economic development.
Discussion ensued regarding a City Charter provision and upcoming lease expirations.
It was noted there are limitations in the current Charter that will impact economic development.
Currently, the Charter does not allow municipal property identified as Recreational Open
Space to be conveyed without a referendum. City Attorney Pam Akin referred to a map of the
City and reviewed properties that would be affected by the aforementioned Charter limitation.
The current provision reverts back to language established in 1994, which refers back to 1979,
and limits the Commission’s ability to convey property and enter into public/private deals. Ms.
Akin will bring forward an ordinance for Commission review that will update the Charter.
The meeting adjourned at 1:05 p.m.
4
msw0997 09/25/97