Mr Mayor,
First off, I have not impugned your character or the statue in the park. Both ridiculous and unfair.

First, I suggest you get in your car and ride by Marbella before making uninformed statements. There is NEW CONSTRUCTION going on at the site and new sales, not just old inventory. I am shocked you do not know that as mayor.

Second, I have NEVER said I do not want the project to continue. I have always said it MUST continue. Perhaps you misread. What I have been saying all along is I want the leadership to assure we have success. $5 dollar fashions and wooden one bedroom apartments are not the path to success.

Mr Mayor, if you think 5 dollar fashions and wooden single bedroom apartments are the way to succeed then on this day you have heard from one of the 26,000 who do NOT agree with you, and I talk to many others every day myself. In my opinion if you cannot lead this development properly as it was sold to the people then resign.

Lastly, it is petty to hide behind a town hall meeting, saying we "should of heard it" . How dare you slap the face of hundreds of citizens. What about disabled people, I have many on my block who could never attend. Working class people? Not everyone is retired or able.

This project was packaged and sold as a high rent high class project. You can spin it anyway you like, but so far we have anything but high rent tenants, and the wooden apartments? I stand behind everyone of my comments.

Why have you not commented on Jason Richardson? His discussion of green space supports leaving open areas rather than foolish building. I shall repost it here for your review.

Jason Richardson
10:39 am on Friday, July 6, 2012
Green space has shown in urban planning literature to consistantly bring higher value to surrounding commercial spaces. New York's Central Park is the best example but any town square or modern city center is clustered around some sort of public space. Plant City has one and Tampa is finding the new open park space on the river brings throngs of people down to patronize surrounding businesses. Increased capital flow will remake the ample commercial space already in existence. This is not a new concept. You are rebuilding your downtown and making the same mistakes Tampa and St Pete made with Baywalk and Centro Ybor, it has taken decades for them to recover from those debacles, can Temple Terrace afford that kind of recovery?
While seeking advice for this project the city has consistantly failed to avail itself of local experiences and resources. You aren't remaking the wheel here. The USF Department of Geography, Environment, and Planning can provide support and evidence that your consultant from UCF seemed to ignore in his presentation. Developments like the one you're planning must been seen in the larger context of your city, not as a closed system.
Jason Richardson M.A. 2012
USF Dept Of Geography, Planning, and Environment

I think it's pretty unbelievable that a sitting mayor calls citizens names in a public venue. His insulting treatment of Mr. Diaz is unforgivable. As far as his comments to me I stand by my beliefs that a developer doesn't spend $10,000 for a statue unless he plans to get something in return.

His treatment of JW was pretty rude too. Thankfully he doesn't get to marginalized citizens who disagree with him.

Jason Richardson's comments are interesting, but he doesn't seem to know much about Temple Terrace, (thankfully) the city already has a plethora of greenspace - a city owned 200+ acre golf course that doubles as our emerald necklace central greenspace, neighborhood parks within walking distance of everyone, Riverhills Park, Riverside, Riverfront, Angel of Hope, Woodmont, commuity gardens, etc etc The percentage of greenspace in this city is already high. We also have some great single family residential areas. What we do NOT have is that "other" type of environment, a high-quality pedestrian friendly, mixed-use downtown, the downtown we never had - which is what we need. "The meadow" in the redevelopment is only temporary folks, please don't get used to it. P.s. In addition, "the meadow" would not add much to our tax base.....plus, places like Riverhills Park has The Meadow beat hands down.

The Meadow is officially named lol! The golf course is a green space, but not usable by the average citizen. It is for private members. There are no sidewalks, seats to occupy, playgrounds to play on. The 200+ acres look pretty, but if you dont golf, well.....

TT has more parks than many small cities but is by far not overly endowed with usable public green space.

I agree we need a "high-quality pedestrian friendly, mixed-use downtown." Are $5 dollar fashions and wooden one bedroom apartments "high quality" ?

The argument is the Meadow would be superior to inferior development. Single bath wood frame apartments and $5 dollar fashions are inferior. Once thats in place, you cannot remove it. This is a key point, ONCE ITS DONE ITS DONE.

Incorporate more green space and develop that space further at a time when economics and demand dictate it is needed, expanding the tax base with high paying revenue development that supports the tax base rather than low rent that drains it.

I would much rather have the Meadow than be strong armed into something that was not in the original plan as it was presented to citizens, regardless of what we "should of" heard at a town hall meeting.

Even a member of city council has said Vlass is holding phase 2 hostage. Vlass's goal is maximize profit. As citizens ours must be highest and best use.

Jason is absolutely right about Baywalk and Ybor. Throw in Channelside with the lot and likely dozens others across the state.

Not true, people walk their dogs, throw the frisbee, run, jog, etc,, on our golf course, the land is owned by the city (that's us), leased by the club. It is our central greenspace, the city was designed around it.

Yes, the downtown is not "high quality" yet, all we've done is wallpaper an existing strip center (and we've done a decent job at that sans PO parking), the new construction is where we have our chance to shine.

"The argument is the Meadow would be superior to inferior development." I would agree but you have that bar set darn low don't you think? High quality redevelopment is obviously the better choice, it is not our of our reach, yet. The Meadow may be nothing more than a space saver.

If Jason is saying The Meadow is a spacesaver until we have high quality development, I tend to agree. But I think he saying greenspace over ANY development.

"The argument is the Meadow would be superior to inferior development." Wood frame apartments is inferior construction, the fact that we would have to settle for more greenspace that we don't need because we can't keep the bar raised is a bit sad. The city would be far lesser without our picturesque golf course, it makes a far bigger difference than you imagine, and it is definitely greenspace. But we digress.....

Did I ever once discount the golf course and its aesthetic or financial value to the city? No sir, I did not. I questioned your choice of placing it within the definition of a multi-use green space like a city park. It is not that. If Temple Terrace did have the golf course it would of been ghetto long ago.

I do not understand this whole "bar raised" thing your trying to get across. "Hello", "Yoohoo" I want the bar raised!! I want it raised to the level of the original plans. Vlass is the one lowering the bar here.

I want the redevelopment built to the highest bar possible. I really can't be more clear on that, can I? Would I rather we sit on green space then make a mistake and get pushed into something less than the "bar raised"? Your darn right I would. We can always develop that green space properly in the future.

Are you willing to allow the the wood frame apartments as presented built? If you are for them then I would say you are the one with the lower bar, not I.

J A you did respond.I see or hear nowhere what you have done for Temple Terrace to deserve a statue. A legend in your own mind.I will not lower myself to your level by calling you what I think you are.

If the mayor truly believes that regulations have hindered his ability to lead this development, I challenge him to list those regulations and tell how they stood in his way. No need to insult me here, just asking for information.

Plain and simple Vlass and the Mayor have lost sight of our vision. Our only hope, a new mayor and council members to get this back on track. FYI, Vlass should be fired they do not have our best interest at heart, they are nothing more than bullies at this point and will never help recognize our vision.

I am not particularly happy about the way the redevelopment project has progressed but given the duration of the project, well over 10 years, it was inevitable that we would encounter numerous phases of an economic cycle. Unfortunately our timing was not propitious causing numerous developers to be involved, plans to be changed, prospective tenants reconsidering their commitment, etc. What we have to do now is to play the hand that is dealt us as well as we can - working within the constraints that exist. One thing I am definitely certain about is the integrity and dedication of the Mayor. He is the only politician that I know who I trust implicitly. He truly has never had any personal agenda to accomplish, certainly nothing similar to a statue or any other enhancement to his image or status. He has served the City well for nealy 14 years and I appreciate all of his efforts in trying to make this community a better place to live - while up against some very daunting problems. I regret the personal attacks on his character even though they are made out of ignorance. Thanks Joe.

John Chambers

Most will admit the statue was poor timing at best, it should be removed for a period of time, it has become a needless distraction. We can replace the statue when this project is finished.

The Mayor is doing the best he can but seemingly the only advice he heeds these days is from the developer. Certainly we must all recognize that the interests of the developer and that of the city are completely different. The developer is not our friend, this is a business transaction, that is all.

While my views on how the city and it's developer should proceed on Phase III of the re-development plan does differ with those of our mayor, I wish to distance myself from those who would call his character and integrity into question. I have known the Mayor Affronti for several years and have never doubted his vision for the future of our city was motivated by any but the purest of intentions. The allegation that he sold our city out for a statue is patently ridiculous.

I agree, the statute is a distraction. Vlass put the Mayor in a no win situation. The wise thing for him to have done was not accept it, but it is not his fault.

The attacks have really come from citizen frustration. The mayor should understand that. I do not wish him ill intent and I would hope no one else here does. I was, and am angry about the redevelopment mess.

We were presented with beautiful plans and while nothing has ever been "promised" outright, anyone who denies what was implied in the media is not being honest. The fact that citizens could not attend town hall meetings should not be used to hide behind possible bad decision making by officials.

The situation, as I see it, is we handed over the land to the developer with a gentlemen's promise. We have our vision, Vlass has theirs.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there is nothing in writing or contract to compel Vlass to complete our vision if it goes against their economic goals even to the slightest. In reality they can walk at the drop of a hat or change the redevelopment to suit their profits. Had I understood this I would of been against the deal from the beginning.

Why we would take taxpayer dollars, 24 million, hand it over and enter into such a deal is beyond my understanding. No business in the world would sign such an agreement. In simple terms, we may be screwed. especially in this economy.

Tozier warned of this. We kicked him to the curb. I regret not listening more intently to him.

This is such foolish bickering, it's almost laughable. I said almost! I'm ashamed to call myself a Temple Terrace citizen with this childish behavior. Shame on you people. And especially you Mr Mayor for responding to these nitwits that have nothing better to do than argue back and forth about who's right and who's wrong. You make yourself look like imbeciles.

"any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do." - Dale Carnegie

I never questioned the mayor's character; however I have recently experienced the mayor’s rudeness toward the residents at public meeting where they were expressing their opinions. I do believe the mayor has lost sight of our vision, this does not make him a bad person, however to try and turn his frustrations onto the residents is never acceptable. We have a new mayor and new council that will be in place soon, Vlass has no interest in pursuing our needs for retail, they continue to fight us every step of the way and bully us by saying it is their way or they quit, which they said prior to the last public hearing, we are two years ahead of schedule, better to take the tax hit now for the property sitting then to sell out to something the residents do not want nor will they support.
Pamela

To Ashamed TT Resident
I am not a nitwit; I am a resident who has supported the redevelopment since day one. To expect citizens to sit around and not reply or do anything would be irresponsible. I am also not a fool; I will not sit around and criticize, condemn and complain, I will make a difference starting with our city officials at election time. This is not bickering; it is the redevelopment of our city that has been in the works for over 20 years. I am 46 lived here 40 years of my life, a business owner in Temple Terrace and I intend to be an active citizen of my community. So apparently you are the only name caller here, I am a working citizen for my community.

...and why is Vlass not starting on Phase 2 ?

Vlass is not going to do anything else for our city until we back down and allow the apartments and cut in retail they have requested. They are nothing more than bullies, and I agree it is only about money for Vlass. What has been done to date is nice, but our vision is a far cry from where we are right now.

I have never questioned the mayor's character or integrity. I do question his judgement in treating a developer like a trusted friend and his citizens like naughty school children.

Bravo Lucinda my point exactly, you must have been at the public meetings.
Pam

Attacking citizens and using terms like "dumb" and "stupid" shows how out of touch Mayor Affronti is with public sentiment in the city. He is outraged that we question his relationship with Vlass Development because Mr. Vlass erected a statue of the mayor in the would-be downtown center. It would be OK if the statue was erected to celebrate an outstanding project -- or if Mr. Vlass placed the statue in his office -- or his own backyard. But it wasn’t. It was erected during talks to waive regulations so that Vlass can build small, low-cost, and easy-to-finance apartments in an area already saturated with apartments.
I believe that Mr. Affronti did not engage in any ethical shenanigans, but he and Mr. Vlass showed jaw-dropping bad judgment with the statue. First, it creates an impression of impropriety. Second, it is foolish. The Mayor’s bronze hand points to a vacant lot, proclaiming that our dream has been realized. Nonsense! That is too much like President Bush’s infamous “Mission Accomplished” to be anything but laughable. This is still a very hot issue, and it seems Mr. Vlass is doing his best to evade what few obligations appear to have been negotiated into the development contract in the first place.
Mr. Affronti is angry, but about the wrong thing. He’s upset that people question the impropriety of the statue, when he should be angry that Mr. Vlass seems to be intent on turning our downtown into a low-end apartment development

In the words of the late Rodney King... "Can't we just get along?" All perspectives and concerns expressed are valid, but the veiled accusations and name-calling and cheap potshots are not becoming. Our mayor has been one of the most visible and available and hard-working mayors any small community could hope for, and implications of deals and quid pro quos demean the long commitment and service he has given. So perhaps we can take a deep breath and respectfully focus on our options and on finding solutions instead of continuing this public mudslinging.

Those who are involved in name-calling should be sent to time-out...along with Mr. Vlass. Our city government should be lauded for the improvements to entry ways into Temple Terrace, brick sidewalks, attractive walls, etc. But all 26,000 TT residents should keep in mind that Vlass deserves no credit for these improvements because they were the result of state and federal grants or money out of Temple Terrace's (our) taxes. All Vlass has done so far is add makeup to existing stores and fail on what was expected of him. Tiny wooden apartments can NEVER be turned into condos "at a later date" because they would not meet code requirements for condos if they are built to apartment specifications. Let's think about no apartments and maybe no condos. Let's think about a beautiful park with 2-3 upscale restaurants, a Barnes & Noble bookstore and/or a craft store like Michaels or JoAnne Fabrics....some establishments that would bring TT homeowners into our downtown area again!

Better to be silent and thought the fool rather than speak and remove all doubt. Congratulations Joe!!

Think about this for those who say no complaints are due.

Vlass was handed 24 MILLION in land SCOT-FREE which is likely worth half that now, paid for by us. Our city council and Mayor paid top dollar for much of it in the largest RE bubble in history.

This burden will hurt homeowners hardest, with commercial and multifamily picking up some, but their portion is passed on to consumers.

Now this is quick chicken scratch math estimate. It could be less, but likely much more. It always is!

The 2010 census says there are about 11250 homeowners in Temple Terrace. Thats a tab of $2100 per, lets reduce to $1900 when we include commercial etc.

The number grows exponentially with interest. Money borrowed over 30 years at 5% the tab grows to 3700.00.

Don't even think about all the future debts at the state and national level sure to hit your wallet.

The development revenue, theoretically, will offset this debt.

Are you willing to pay for an asset worth much less now and not get what you were told, implied or not? Town hall meeting attendee or not?

Are you willing to forgo high quality revenue generating business/residences for low quality low revenue when you were sold the opposite?

If you don't stand up your going to own crappy wood apartments insurance companies don't even want to write policies on and Dollar General style anchors.

This is MY money too and I sure as heck have a say in how it's spent.

I agree that the deal with the Vlass partnership dead, there is no way possible that we will allow anything even close to what they propose, we will not accept wood structures or any other caveat that he has mentioned....

Though we need to understand that the loan the City took on the $24 million is not one that the City can afford, the law does not allow taxes or fee's to be raised enough to cover the payments...

The questions that need to be asked are, if Vlass walks away, how long will it be until the City defaults on the loan? what effect will defaulting on the loan be on the City? and if the default occurs what is the likelihood that another developer or bank would become involved with the City?

After these answers are received it will be clear that the old and new councils priority needs to be to get a new City Manager and then a new Developer. I like the Mayor and have had lunch with him many times, he is frustrated and rightly so...

So that it is clear we will not accept ANY changes to the MDA, lower than 18 ft ceilings are not going to be accepted, yes the MDA would allow more apartments though they can't be wood frame.

If Council believes that the past emails and/or citizen involvement was excessive they haven't seen anything yet, the Mayor's response has everyone talking and everyone will have their voices heard now, goodbye Mr. Vlass.

It's premature to say the Vlass partnership is dead, they know our demands, let's see what they come back to the table with. If it is not what the MDA and downtown code demands, then we move on per "breach of contract".

What do we owe Vlass? Nothing!!! He has a deal of a lifetime. He has threatened numerous times to walk away if he is not given what he wants. So are we just to accept what he wants for fear of them abandoning the project? Commit to the plan you agreed on Mr. Vlass, and finish what you promised. We as a city have been working on this for Twelve years and what do we have? We have a bulldozed building, a facelift on Sweetbay, a horribly designed post office, a statue with controversy, a master agreement that is trying to be altered, and people bathing in the fountain area. This thing is an utter train wreck because it has gone off course. STICK TO THE PLAN THAT WAS AGREED ON. Was there a clause in the original agreement contingent upon Vlass getting financing? NO.... End of discussion. Then either he holds up his end of the deal or WE AS A CITY have to make a decision.

I would like to know who has benefited from this project Who are the people the city paid for the property purchased for the various phases of the project I wonder if you will find friends and family of some of our city officials have benefited the most. I purchased a home in Temple Terrace( in 2000) Planning upon staying for the rest of my life. I am now just praying to be able to sell and leave. I too had high hope for a New downtown Retail neighborhood with better Restaurants Better types of Stores such as better Clothing. (Gap - Old Navy) Household Goods ( Sur La Table) , Good Bakery Coffee Shop ( Peets Coffee) ect.
I travel to CA often and find many small neighborhood type cities with all of these and more. Most are retail with residential above. Time to get rid of the Old Guard and find new leadership not more of the same self serving ones

We need a long term solution to this Redevelopment situation, not a short term fix.
Long term \solution would be to stay with the Citizens Vision.....retail, residences, restaurants and the arts center.
Short term fix...sell out for another apartment complex.
Carol Dell

Common sense does not seem to be to common! We the people have an agreement
with our elected leaders, known as the MDA. The leadership of Temple Terrace has a responsibility to support their citizens wishes. Find "another contractor" to build what the citizens want!
Pete

The latest : Temple Terrace mayor's statue keeps lonely vigil

http://www.tampabay.com/news/temple-terrace-mayors-statue-keeps-lonely-vigil/1243620