CONTRIBUTORS
LINKS
AUDIO
Spend a half hour with Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio and you're likely to hear the word "methodical" several times.
Her approach to getting light rail transit? "Methodical." Her efforts to institute green initiatives? "Methodical." What kind of person should succeed her in office? A "methodical" one who tries to get along with everybody.
Iorio has never been known as someone who leaks to the media, who calls a lot of press conferences, or who trumpets for or against issues. She keeps her head down, does her homework with a policy wonk's fervor.
Iorio was 26 when she was first elected to public office in 1985, part of a youth movement in Hillsborough County government at a time when local voters still skewed Democrat in their choices, in the aftermath of a scandal that saw three county commissioners led away in handcuffs in a bribery investigation. Iorio is the daughter of a University of South Florida professor, and her political approach and demeanor border on academic. (She received a bachelor's degree in political science from American University and, seven years ago, a master's degree from USF.)
After two terms on the County Commission and two more as Supervisor of Elections, Iorio became mayor of the region's largest city. But for someone whose politics are centrist and who has enjoyed strong support in every campaign she has undertaken, Iorio elicits a strange blend of adoration, grudging respect and underground criticism for her cautious approach.
Fans of her work say she dismantled the good ol' boy system at City Hall, deliberatively recruiting professional administrators with years of experience in either government elsewhere or, more often, the military. Neighborhood leaders applaud her as a real partner who has empowered them.
Criticism is muted, mostly because some activists in Tampa fear the power of the mayor's office and can't quite understand how they are sideways with Iorio despite her often-progressive stances. Some environmentalists say she moved too slowly to save the Hillsborough River. Urban advocates grumble that the city bureaucracy ground to a halt during her administration and hasn't moved to increase densities or change the city's 1970s-era development codes and regulations. She upset many Tampa Museum of Art backers when she killed plans for an expensive new building for the collections and, instead, undertook a "methodical" search of downtown buildings and sites before settling on a scaled-down plan along the waterfront, in Curtis Hixon Park. And the project for which she has shown the most passion -- a $40 million Riverwalk stretching along almost all of downtown northward into a planned development in Tampa Heights -- has drawn only middling private funding support. Critics split: some believe it represents Iorio having too expensive a vision, others point to it as an example of how her vision is not grand enough.
I ran into her at lunch a few weeks ago and she started the conversation by saying, "I heard you on the radio the other day saying bad things about me," during an hourlong interview on WMNF 88.5 FM. She never pinned down exactly what I said, but she insisted we get together, and when we did, Iorio gave me a folder full of green initiatives that the city has undertaken and that have received little public notice.
That meeting led to a promise to meet again for a more in-depth interview for our "Influencers" series. Here are excerpts from that conversation, which took place in her office on June 19.
CL: You're now finished five years in office. ... Is there anything that you thought you would have had finished by now that you have not been able to do?
That is an interesting question. The 40th Street project is taking a long time. I think any time you get into a situation where you have to acquire property, I have learned that that process can really string things out. You would think you could just come in and say, OK, 40th Street will be a priority, and we ought to just widen it. But that's going to take the full eight years.
Riverwalk, that may not be done by the time I leave office because of private funding that we still need.
I don't think I ever came into office thinking that you get things done right away. I guess because I've been in government so long that I do understand that it takes a while. You have to build consensus. You have to get funding. If it's something that you're building, then the market has to be right. You have to get the permitting. It all takes a while, so that's why you give someone eight years to be mayor. Even that's not long enough.
You talked about the pace of government and building that consensus, and you describe your style as methodical.
I think I am.
How does that style serve the public, and have there been times, say during the recent window of the condo-building boom, when that hasn't served us well?
Being methodical works well because that's my style, so I can't be anything different than that. When you bring [lots of] people in, you don't make rash decisions.
I give the example of the discussion of mass transit. I started three years ago in the State of the City speech saying we need to focus on transit. ... Well, then that started a particular cycle of conversation. Then the next State of the City speech I upped it a little bit and starting talking about now we have to have light rail, and then I produced a white paper. ...
So you can say, "Well, why not just declare that we need to have light rail and go for it?" Because it doesn't work that way. ... You have to get to the point where other elected officials feel comfortable stepping out and saying, 'Yeah I'll support a referendum for that.' ...
Now, today, light rail is an acceptable conversation for anyone to have. We're talking about going to referendum in 2010, and I'm trying to push for a starter line that's going to be from USF to downtown to Westshore.
That's how I see public policy issues generally. It's not up to the mayor to say, "Now we're going to get this done, and all by myself I'm going to go and get this done." That's more of an ego-driven political mindset that really does not get the job done.
Instead, you nurture issues along, and you get to the point where the whole community becomes engaged and it's not just one person's issue, it becomes a lot of folks' issue. I think that's a very important way to govern in this environment.
Are there any times that are appropriate to use the bully pulpit of the mayor's office?
There are.
I recall your statement on human rights and how the county's policy discriminates against gay pride.
That's where I do think you use the bully pulpit when it comes to issues of discrimination, fairness, justice, treating everyone the same when it comes to human-rights issues, when it comes to issues. ... where there shouldn't be any flexibility.
Back to transit, do you feel like the consensus and the dialogue is where it needs to be in terms of a referendum for rail?
I don't think it's where it ought to be yet. There still needs to be more county commissioners engaged on the rail issue. ... All seven should feel comfortable putting it on the ballot, even if they disagree with it, even if they are anti-tax, they should feel comfortable saying I want the voters to vote on this. Then if they want to campaign against it, they should do that.
You were a county commissioner yourself. It seems that there are different wants and needs of people living in the county vs. those living in the city. ... How do we get everyone on the same page?
I don't think people are on different pages. I think that some elected officials have put a wedge between city and county.
I used to live in the county. I've only lived in the city of Tampa since 1999. I grew up in Temple Terrace, then I lived in the unincorporated part of the county and then I lived in the city of Tampa. And people are no different. Sure, perhaps if you want to live out in Riverhills or Fishhawk Ranch you do want a little bit more of a remote, suburban lifestyle, but that doesn't mean you don't want to go a Lightning game. It doesn't mean you don't want to go to a Bucs game. It doesn't mean you don't want to go down to Channelside.
The people who live in Fishhawk [and other suburban communities] recognize that "This is the city, and boy am I proud of it, because when I went to the Performing Arts Center for whatever I attended, it was clean and I felt safe, and the parking was great, and isn't that a beautiful skyline. Isn't that great?" Everyone's proud of the community. I'm proud of the whole community, the whole county.
People in the unincorporated [areas], they can't wait for the Riverwalk to be done. They say, "Oh, I can't wait, I'll go down there, and I'll be able to bring relatives." The people who live in Carrollwood or Wimauma or Ruskin or Valrico, where do you think they bring their relatives who come from out of town? You think they say, "We'll just go to the movie theater here in Brandon and then call it quits?" No. They start ticking off all the things that are in the city of Tampa.
It's the elected officials who have, recently, created this unnecessary wedge.
I'll say parenthetically that when I was on the County Commission, there was not any anti-city sentiment. We had a lot of respect for the mayors. We wanted the city to succeed.
It really, I think, was only in recent times -- and particularly Ronda [Storms] had a lot to do with it, of kind of poisoning the well on the commission -- that there was the city and then there's the rest of us. Unfortunately, what should have been dismissed as a minor voice became, oddly enough, a majority viewpoint. And it's a very interesting case study of how one very strong personality can permeate an entire organization and change the political landscape, because that certainly wasn't the attitude in my eight years on the commission.
I've traveled throughout the county, and I've seen polling results, too. ... of how people view the city of Tampa in the city and how they view the city of Tampa and me in the county, and you know what? There's no difference. I bet if you and I went out right now to Carrollwood and sat in a coffee shop and talked to people, they want the city to succeed. They're proud that we're hosting the Super Bowl; they're proud to see the skyline changing; they're proud that we're investing in the city because this is their community, too.
Do you see a role for yourself, politically, as the most prominently elected Democrat in the region, in helping make changes at the County Commission in the upcoming election?
Not really. I don't really view myself in a partisan way. I've always been at the local level: commissioner, supervisor and now mayor. It's never been about party.
Do party members express disappointment to you that that's the case?
Yes.
And what do you tell them?
I tell them that I believe that I've always been elected to represent everyone and just to do as much good as I can possibly do. Excessive partisanship drives a wedge between people and prevents progress from being made. All we have to do is look at our state Legislature and look at our Congress over the past 20, 30 years to say that has absolutely been the case. People get locked in ideological struggles. They're told by party leaders how they are going to vote. And they don't think for themselves. I can't tell you how many people I've talked to during the past couple of years on this whole property tax issue, and we talk to them one-on-one, legislators, about our situation and what perhaps could be a different angle to take and not to be so punitive toward local government, and the response that I got was, "I have to do what leadership tells me to do."
Well, that's not me.
I couldn't survive in that situation. I can't tolerate that sort of thing.
The excessive partisanship in this country has hurt us terribly, just terribly. And yet I understand the role of parties. I understand the need to have organized systems. Maybe it's just the quality of the people who have been elected over the past many years, and maybe they just aren't thoughtful enough to think for themselves.
Let's switch gears to "green." Talk about the gulf between your view of how green you and the city are and the fact that some people say you are coming late to the game.
Where I fail is not tooting my own horn enough. ... I don't feel I need to be constantly in the news, declaring one thing or another. You just make progress without a lot of fanfare, and what happens is that people live in a community and they say, "Hey, I think the community's a lot better." And that is what I hear from people.
I get a lot of satisfaction out of that. That's what it's all about.
The green initiative, we started that a couple of years ago. [I told staff], "We're going to become a certified green city, and these are all the different steps you have to take." I didn't hold a press conference; I just gave them the marching orders and told them this is what we're going to do. And you know what? In the next several months we're probably going to be [certified as] a Green City.
The only thing that I'm really at odds with some folks on these green initiatives is giving the incentives to developers.
And why not?
I don't agree with that. They don't need it. In fact, they tell me they don't need it. I just met with this fella who is building this green commercial building at MacDill just south of Kennedy -- Green Earth, I think, is the name of their company -- and he said to me, "Mayor, stick to your guns on giving us rebates. We don't need it." He said people should not pay less to build green; they should be building green because it is the right thing to do.
We're going about it the wrong way when we just throw money. You know, government is funny that way. Some people in government feel that they have one of two roles: They either take money from people or they're throwing money at people.
I think you have to be very careful how you take money from people, and I think you have to be very careful where you're throwing the money, where you allocate the money.
I'll go ahead and sign the ordinance, but I sure don't agree with that part of it, because first of all, nobody's building any homes to waive the fees right now. Secondly, I've talked with enough of these green builders, and they say that's not it. They say what they do like is the faster permitting, which we've already done. They want to work with a city government that's flexible, and we are. We're welcoming to that. Other than that, they want to be left alone.
Going back to the transit issue, is there any effort underway to increase urban densities in the city to accommodate light rail? How do you go to existing neighborhoods and tell them that things are going to change?
I think that's going to be our big challenge of the next decade. If a referendum passes in 2010, then it's going to take a good eight to 10 years to build that first light rail line. ... In the other cities I have visited, it is very clear that there is transit-oriented development at these stops that is very beneficial to the community: beautiful apartments and condos and mixed-use developments, all positive. And people can live in an apartment complex and then just jump on the rail line and go to work. That is what we're going to need more of.
But it does take a consensus-building. Neighborhoods need to know that their single-family residential neighborhoods will still be protected, and the fact that further down the street there's a transit stop, and there might be a condo or apartment project associated with it, with shops and so forth and office, that does not degrade their neighborhood.
The City Council has voted down some cases that would increase the density, on the Bayshore, in Old Hyde Park. Do you feel like they are on the same page with you on this issue?
In theory they are, but in practice it is difficult for them to implement it on a day-to-day basis. I've been in zoning hearings, too. I know how hard it is when you have an angry group in front, and they're unhappy and [say] "I'll remember you at election time." I had eight years of that, so I remember exactly how tough that is, to say in spite of the group that's down here right at this moment, "I happen to think that this is in the best interest of the community in the long term."
That's a tough thing for a lot of these elected officials to do. In theory, they love the idea of light rail and increased density and urban living and a walkable, sustainable community and all that great stuff -- smart growth, infill. But in practice, when there are projects in front of them, sometimes it is hard for them to vote the way that fits into that overall theory.
Where do you see yourself next, after 2011?
I don't know. People tend to think I have some master plan. I had to be cajoled into the mayor's race at the last minute. That was not part of any master plan. In fact, my master plan had been not to run. I had decided not to run. Then, at the last minute, [supporters said], "Why don't you run?" and they showed me a poll and, you know.
Now that I've been mayor, I don't have a master plan beyond that either. I just have never operated that way.
I'm not a person who has great ambitions or great master planning to my career, but I always believe that there are many opportunities in life. You have to be open to them.
There is a move to create a county mayor position, and some critics believe this was done to create an office for you to run for. Interested?
It certainly hasn't been created just for me, that's for sure.
This discussion has been going on for as long as I've been in office and even before then. When I became a county commissioner in 1985, I was all new to politics. Ron Glickman and I were the under-30 group. I probably was a county commissioner for all of six months when I saw, boy, this system sure doesn't work well. I've been for a county mayor ever since 1985 or '86. You cannot govern such a complex community by committee. I reached that conclusion when I was in my 20s.
Now I'm in this position as mayor. How county government is formatted is their business. I'm not involved in it whatsoever. I don't even know if the position is going to be created. I have absolutely no plans to run for it.
I think if they do create it, they're going to have a very tough transition to it. You don't just snap your fingers and create a form of government. There's going to be a lot of pain and suffering along the way.
Your last two jobs have been administrative rather than legislative. The job's not open right now, but how do you think you would do as the president of the University of South Florida? Is that in your future?
I don't see that in my future. Judy [Genshaft] does a great job. I don't want to speculate on such a thing. I don't speculate on any job. I wouldn't speculate on county mayor. It's just not fruitful for me to do that, particularly when I don't have a plan on aspiring to any of those positions.
Then let's try to get you to speculate on who should be the next mayor. You've publicly touted former Congressman Jim Davis.
He's a good person.
Do you have hope that good person is going to be your successor?
Of course. You can't help it, when you pour yourself into a job like this, you care about the city, you care about all the things that you've set into motion, you care about the staff, the citizens -- of course you want the next person to be in the job for all the right reasons, to be a person of integrity, to be a good decision-maker, to be a thoughtful, methodical person, to be a person who's not just thinking about the next political job.
I do care about who follows me. Having said that, it has nothing to do with me. It's up to the voters.
There was all kinds of tea-leaf reading when you mentioned Davis as a successor. Was there a reason you did that?
Because I like him. Because Jim is my kind of person. Jim and I, we think alike in the way that we do things. He, too, is not the kind of person to have a press conference every other day and make all kinds of pronouncements. He, too, is the kind of person [where] it's not going to be a friends-and-family type of administration. He's going to hire quality professionals. He's going to do things the right way. He's going to want to build community consensus.
So I see in him the kinds of qualities I'd like to see in a mayor. That's the only reason I said it, because when I am asked something, I am pretty direct about it.
He has shown no interest in it.
Have you talked with him about it?
[Laughs] He always says to me, "Pam, what are you doing to me?" He's trying to build up his law practice. But he's a talented person. He's a person who a lot of people like. He doesn't ruffle feathers. He gets along with everybody.
One of the things I've seen in this office that is very, very important is that you get along with everybody. That can't be underestimated. When people look at the next election, you need someone as mayor who can get along with everybody.
Now, that doesn't mean you're going to get along with everybody 100 percent, but you sure have to try, because you're setting an image and a tone for the city. You know what, if you're picking fights with folks and you're an argumentative person, and you're always looking for the next headline, that's the day that somebody is sitting across the street in the Hyatt, and they're visiting from out of town, and they're opening up the Tribune, and they're trying to decide if they're going to relocate their business here. And if they see nothing but trouble in the local community, they don't want to come to Tampa.
The people of this community, they don't want to open up the paper every day and see nothing but fussing and fighting and an argumentative mayor who's always out there stirring the pot.
COMMENTS
RE: Mayor Iorio declares her independence
Posted by Mr_Technical_Dude on 07.02.08 @ 07:40 PM
One problem I have noticed that the Mayor and therefore the City of Tampa has is that the good old boy system is still here in the form of local residents who work for the City despite professional administrators. Unless the Mayor has sufficient backing and her backers are willing to use whatever power they have accumulated to see a project through then you can bet there will be impossible resistance from within. For instance. Believe it or not some people are against sidewalks and want nothing closer to the house than the street. They want the green space and not to prevent someone from taking the chance of being hit by a car. While newly hired administrators may be professional and elevated you can forget about lesser positions filled to the brim with ignorance, stupidity and self-serving desires.