Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comments Transparency Housing topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Public commenters urge greater transparency, affordable housing and ADA access at Charter Review Board meeting

5349860 · July 9, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Public speakers at the July 8 meeting urged the Charter Review Board to seek more transparency in county finances and planning, expand affordable housing, and improve meeting accessibility for people with disabilities.

Three members of the public used their allotted time during public comment at the July 8 Charter Review Board meeting to press officials on transparency, housing and accessibility.

David Coleman, a Hillsborough County resident, said he has attended meetings for two years and accused county processes of lacking transparency and ADA accessibility: “Meetings aren't ADA accessible, many with no subtitles, not virtual, and we wait months for transcripts,” Coleman said, later asking, “Where is the $130,000,000 in affordable housing money in the ’25 budget?” Coleman urged the board to scrutinize county budget documents and the county administrator’s handling of funds.

Business owner Gordon Schiff said he was wary of changing the county’s commission structure without considering trade‑offs such as gerrymandering, redistricting costs and the value of countywide commissioners who represent all voters. He praised current county administrators and commissioners and urged careful study before major charter changes.

Quentin Robinson, a candidate for County Commission District 3, said any change in representation should be “calculated based on population” and suggested the board ensure proposed changes would be put to a public vote. Robinson identified himself as a candidate and asked how the board planned to flesh out proposals.

Board members did not take action on the public comments but repeated that proposals to change commission structure would need technical analysis, public engagement and—if they reached the stage of a charter amendment—voter approval.