11.12.25 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

to the afternoon session of the board of county commissioners meeting for whatever date it is today, November something. Um, please silence your phones if you have not done so. And we're going to start

with P.

Did I get the right one?

Yeah. Madame Chairman and members of the board, we have proof of publication of the hearing of this matter on August the 6th, 2025, Tampa Bay Times for the for this meeting.

Okay. PTO's plank development econom economic growth. Item P-57 is an ordinance uh by the Paso County Bord County Commissioners to amend the land development code to update our tree uh preservation and replacement uh standards. This item is being requested for a continuence to the February 17, 2026 board of county commissioners meeting in Newport Richie at 1:30 p.m. This is a continuence of the adoption hearing all the way out to February 17. The item will be heard at the upcoming November 20 LPA meeting, corporal planning agency meeting.

Okay. So, this isn't an extension from when we talked last time. You're not pushing it out further.

No, this is a continuence of the adoption hearing itself. So, we'll have the November 20 LPA meeting. Then there will be a subsequent uh presentation to the board of county commissioners where no action is taken. And then February 17 is the adoption.

Okay. So, we're I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding. Are we going to hear anything more in December or why do we have to wait so long?

I just want to get this done as quick as

it's got to get through planning commission. Your first hearing. This is the adoption hearing.

Second, the first BCC hearing is going to be January 6.

Okay, that's what I want to hear. Okay. So, you don't need a motion, right?

Yes. It's time s.

All in favor? I I

All right. Thank you. P58.

We approve the publication in the Tampa Bay Times uh July 23rd, 2025 supplemented by affidavit to certify mailings of PI site postings for the September 3rd uh board of county commissioners meeting where it was continued to today. This item is an ordinance amending the pass county comprehensive plan for a small scale comprehensive plan amendment uh to the future land use map from AGR agricultural rule to res one residential one dwelling for gross acre in the northeast rural uh pas county rule protection area. This item is being requested for continuence of the January 6, 2026 board of county commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in date city.

Move to continue time.

Second.

All in favor? I

59.

We approve publication in the Tampa Bay Times September 3rd, 2025 for the October 21st, 2025 board meeting where it was continued to today. Item P59 is PD260002. This is an ordinance by the Pas County Board of County Commissioners amending the Paso County Land Development Code section 522.9 connected city master plan unit development district. Section 901, infrastructure standards. Section 901.1, transportation corridor spacing. Section 901.6, street design and dedication requirements. Section 901.7, bicycle facilities. Section 901.8, pedestrian facilities. Appendix A definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for severability, inclusion into land development code, and an effective date. This comes this is uh the first presentation or reading of the proposed ordinance. No action is required. The board of county commissioners request to accept public comment and we have a presentation if so desired.

Okay. Does anyone uh need a presentation? Okay. Um let me see if there's any public comment on this.

We have no one online.

Sign up.

All right. Okay. And I this passed unanimously out of the planning commission, right? I listened to the meeting.

Um All right. Did anyone want to I guess no action taken. Is that what I heard you say?

No, this isn't this is except public comment. Yeah. But yeah, and no action taken. It's the first of two public hearings.

I know Rebecca, you worked very hard on this one. Do you want to give a presentation or are we good to go? I'm ready to give a presentation today. That's maybe like 10 minutes.

Okay.

Or this will show what the new pedestrian standards are going to look like along collectors and arterial roads.

Okay. Let's get let's have the presentation. Okay.

Rebecca Bow, Planning Development Economic Group.

Yeah.

All right. So, the intent of this ordinance upstate is to make some updates for internal consistency. Um, we're also allowing friction course as a roadway material. We're consolidating sections 901.7 and 901.8 into a comprehensive section titled bicycle and pedestrian facilities. We're also including in that rewrite some enhanced standards for site location and connectivity. And the overall goal here is to strengthen the county's position to require land development projects to build segments of our overall multimotal network. We did take this to the planning commission on 918 and on 1016. At the 9:18 hearing, there was a lot of discussion about our previous version of this rewrite where we were asking for these trails to be built on the south or east side. There was concern that this particular piece was rigid and may cause issues with aligning with existing facilities. So, we revised it to require 10-ft trails or multi-use pave trails on both sides of arterial and collector roads. and we hope that this will create a symmetrical network, support updates to future typical sections as well as simplify administration. There was also concerns at the 918 LPA meeting regarding whether or not we should be requiring these facilities in rural areas. Um, in response to that, we went back and explicitly exempted um these requirements in future land use categories AG, AGR, and RES one. Um, can I stop you there for a second? I don't know if you saw the 2-year-old that was killed. Um, because they were walking out here somewhere and there's no no sidewalk. No, no, no place for that father to walk with his 2-year-old safely.

It's behind public in the community and there are sidewalks in there. Oh, so so he was he chose not to be on the sidewalk.

Okay. All right. Go ahead.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right. So, we also brought this to the 1016 planning commission. Um, and at that meeting, there was discussion about the requirements to uh mark shoulders as uh bicycle facilities. Ultimately, we there was a motion made to remove that language. All right. Oops. Okay. Okay. So, um the summary of our overall changes here is our current 901.7 is applicable for res 3 future land use or higher and it's on subdivision collector roads. They're required to provide either a bike lane or a 12oot multi-use path. Section 901.8 8 pedestrian facilities is also applicable. The res 3 future land use or higher on all street types except for alleys. Um and the requirements there are for either a 5-ft sidewalk on collected or arterial streets or a 4ft sidewalk on all other streets. What we're proposing by combining the two is a land development code that's applicable to all sites except in the agricultural agricultural rural and residential one future land use categories. And the requirements would vary by street type. So, on arterials and collectors, um, there there' be required to provide a 10-ft paved multi-use trail on both sides. On residential subdivisions, we're asking for a 5ft sidewalk on one side, an 8 foot multi-use paved trail on the other side. And on our residential roads, we're looking for five foot sidewalks on both sides. We're also adding connections um or standards for on-site circulation and connectivity standards. So this would require land development projects to connect all their buildings connect to the external bike ped network and in parking lots with 100 spaces or more they're required to provide sidewalks from the parking lot to the principal building. Uh we're also adding a payment in lie of construction option. This option would be available where there's already a facility programmed in the capital improvement program um or where it would otherwise not be feasible to build a facility by the site. We're also adding a definition um for paved multi-use trail. This is our overall vision, what we hope this land development code will ultimately create. And as mentioned, this is the first public hearing with adoption set for December 9th.

U any questions?

Question. Did this go before the uh TBE builders association?

We did have communications with them. Yes, via email.

I think you need to have a meeting with him.

We didn't have like a meeting. No,

you had a Was it a phone call or a Zoom meeting?

It was an email communication and of course we took it to our ordinance development team in the horizontal round table.

Okay. So, they had presence there.

Yes.

All right. And did they have a problem with it? They did provide some comments like minor adjustments to the um corridor spacing language which we need some tweaks to. Their biggest concern was our requirement for boardwalks over wetlands. Um we're asking for those boardwalks to be constructed of concrete materials.

Yeah. Because the other ones don't last then the neighborhood has a massive repair building. [clears throat]

Um I have a question. Uh, does this take care of issues like um some of the new developments that were built say along 52 that did a not put a sidewalk across the front of their property?

Yes, this would require all applications post adoption to build a 10-ft facility.

Okay. Because that's I don't I don't know how we're going to fix that, but we have some issues that we're going to have to go back in and fix. Okay. Uh, is there anyone in the public that wishes to address this ordinance?

Okay, thank you very much.

Okay, thank you.

Long time coming.

All right, next one is

P60.

We approve publication temp.

We approve publication temp. Bay times October 5th, 2025. [clears throat] Item P60 is PD260022. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code section 1302.2 mobility fees to clarify that the 2025 mobility fee schedules do not expire on December 31, 2025, and amending other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability repealer, providing for severability, inclusion into land development code, and an effective date. This also is the first uh presentation of the ordinance to the board of county commissioners. No action is required but we ask to accept public comment and there's a presentation if desired. Um board members, do you have any questions?

Okay. Is there anyone in the public [clears throat] that wishes to address this? Okay, seeing no one, we will move on. Anyone online?

No one online.

I think it's a no action.

No action.

P61.

P61. We have publication temp time September 3rd, 2025.

P61 is PD 26001. This is an ordinance by the Paso County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code creating section 530.25 backyard chickens and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for severability inclusion into the land development code and an effective date. Uh this comes to you with the recommendation to adopt the proposed ordinance amendment by roll call vote and to accept public comment. We have a presentation if so desired. Well, I think we heard the presentation already, but um

Yeah.

So, I think we're good.

What? 14 years coming or 15 years for this [laughter] town?

Yeah.

Is there anyone in the public that wishes to address our chicken ordinance?

Question. Terry,

did you take I just want to be clear that your team took the bureaucracy out of having chickens. Correct. [laughter]

Yeah. We'll let uh

I mean chicken should be fun and somewhat easy to have and

yes

the original way made it cumbersome and seemingly not very fun.

Afternoon commissioners Amanda Hill Planet Development Economic Growth. Uh the previous recommendation by the board to remove the permit requirement has been removed.

Thank you.

Okay. All right. So let's take a roll call vote. I need a motion first. Move

approvement.

Oh, I did. I asked if anyone want to speak about chickens online.

No one's online. Okay, I take a motion.

Second.

I'm glad no one.

Roll call vote. No one's No one's here to talk about my chickens.

District one, Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Wegman.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Jerger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

Hi.

District three, Chairman Stury.

Uh, hallelujah. I fine.

You going?

Chickens are in. Okay. P62.

P62. Proof of publication again September 3rd, 2025 in the Tampa Bay Time.

No. Did I skip one?

Yeah.

P61. Sorry, I already flipped my paper.

61 was back there chicken.

Oh, that was another one. 62.

Uh, wait a minute.

Related to 62.

Okay. P62 also chickens.

Item P62 is PD260028. This is an ordinance by the Paso County Board of County Commissioners amending the Paso County Code of Ordinances amending section 14-27 definitions creating section 14-150 conditions for the keeping of chickens. Section 14-151 coups and enclosures section 14-152 health sanitation and nuisance. Section 14-153 education and other sections is necessary for consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for severability inclusion of the court of ordinances and an effective date. This comes to you with recommendation to adopt the proposed ordinance by roll call vote and accept public comment and we have a presentation.

Chair y

Terry back to our previous conversation. Um don't really want to have code bogged down any more than they already are. So, did we we make it um less cumbersome for the coups and everything associated with it like we discussed the last meeting?

I can provide a presentation of the provisions for this.

Let's do that. Okay.

Okay.

High level not you know.

Okay. So the intent of this ordinance is to provide standards related to the keeping of chickens for residential properties as now allowed by section 530.25 of the LDC. This is a summary of those provisions. Um the amendment proposes the creation of a new article 3 in chapter 14 animals. Section 14-150 specifies that the property owner is allowed up to four hens, no roosters, and requires a property to be occupied and not used as a vacation rental. Section 14-151 provides additional details on the coups, including the maximum size and height, space per bird, and specifying the location to be restricted to the side or rear yards. The coups are required to be accessible for cleaning and maintained accordingly so as not cause a nuisance. Section 14-152 speaks further to the requirement for nuisance control and provides procedures for disease management and disposal of birds. And finally, section 14-153 requires the completion of the UFIAS course, the ability for code compliance to conduct monitoring compliance as necessary, and the requirement.

Let's let's pause there.

Yeah, I thought we took that out.

Well, that the the course was supposed to be

the permit requirement was removed

and the course

the course was supposed to be removed also.

Yeah.

Yeah. I'm okay with that. The actual code language

how to take care of chickens.

So I'm going to read directly from the actual red line as to what the language states right now. So prior to obtaining chickens, the property owner must enroll in and complete a certification course offered by UFIS of Pasco County. The property owner shall allow access to the premises by code compliance officials for the purposes of monitoring compliance with the requirements of this chapter. Failure to allow for inspection upon request with reasonable notice shall be addressed by any of the methods available in section 108 of this code and article 5 division 4 of the Paser County code of ordinances. That's the language in terms of monitoring and compliance.

Yeah, you were right. You were taking the course out, the permit and the course.

Yeah. What's what's the it's the section 14-153 that we were thinking might have been overkill.

So, that section had both the course and the permit requirements and we removed the permit requirements. I have details on the course here in terms of what it includes. It's at the board's question if you would like staff to remove that language as [snorts] well regarding the course. But we thought that it was important to include that so that persons who are firsttime chicken owners that they have the necessary education to take care of the chickens because they're not similar to pets. They have specific needs and to ensure that they are in compliance issues caused due to how the chickens are kept.

Yeah,

I understand you as staff think it's important to include that. We as a board last meeting specifically in the majority said remove it.

It couldn't have been any clearer.

Yeah.

And I'm I'm good to have the information available for the people,

but taking the course just looks like an extra expense for to slow down. I'm okay with the monitoring as well.

Yeah.

Because I think you need to just in case you have someone who's going rogue or maintaining it and you got rats and snakes or whatever.

So I'm okay with the monitoring part, but just just that education part.

Okay. You can make it available which I think I should do but

but not a requirement.

That would be it.

Commissioner,

can we can we say it is suggested that participants

but not

I think we include that on the website orational type of thing. I don't think

Yeah.

I mean obviously if they didn't have a course then other counties don't require that. Great.

Yeah. Okay.

Okay. Move on.

Did you need me to pro provide details on the course itself?

No.

No, we don't need the ordinance.

We don't want it.

So, this is just a comparison by jurisdiction that we did looking at some of our neighbors and what they currently have. Most of the communities do not have a permit requirement. uh city of Brandon and uh let's see, Hernando County, I believe, were the only two jurisdictions that required a permit. Uh were middle of the pack in terms of the number of birds and not having any roosters allowed. And in terms of the square footage uh of the coupe and the minimum size per bird, we're also middle of the pack there. Uh most of these ordinances were adopted between 2011 and as early as 2025. Um, I have a question. What the heck is a pullet?

Little chicken.

A what?

Little chicken.

A little chicken.

Young young young chicken.

A chick?

No.

No. Bigger than a chick.

It's like a

Never heard of it.

Kind of like a [laughter] sort of a teenager.

A teenage chicken.

Sort of.

There you go.

Oh my gosh.

Tweet.

Okay.

It's not yet laid. [laughter]

Tweeny. Okay.

And I'm available for any questions that you may have. Um, this comes to the board.

This comes to the board with a recommendation for approval and we would make the changes to remove the educational requirement.

Okay. All right. Um, we've made our comments unless you have some more. Is there anyone here that wishes to address the chickens and pullets ordinate? Did I say it right?

Yeah.

Actually, it's hens and pullets. Um, do we have anyone online who wishes to address this?

No one online.

Madam Chairman, in addition to the motion that's found in your package, can we also get you to wave introduction of this ordinance?

Okay, I will accept that in the motion.

So move second.

Yeah. That we need to modify the motion to change the language to the county administrators shaking his head. So we need to amend the motion to the IUS language to

Yeah.

motion made that the county attorney set with a noted changes on no education.

All right.

And I second.

Okay. Um and this is a roll call vote.

District one, Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner Wel.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Jerger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

Hi.

District three, Chairman Stark.

Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much for all your work on the chickens. P63.

P63. We have proof of publication of the hearing of this matter in the September 17th, 2025 edition of the Tampa Bay Times.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Denise Hernandez, Code Compliance Department. Uh today is the adoption hearing on this item. This item was uh there was a full presentation on October 21st of this item. This item was presented to the local planning agency who found um the ordinance consistent with the Pasco County comprehensive plan and it was also presented to the horizontal round table interested parties meeting on September 17, 2025. So today I ask that you adopt by roll call vote. It's an ordinance by the Pasco County except public comment of course and then adopt by roll call vote hopefully. Um, an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code section 530.5 parking or storing of recreational vehicles. Section 530.16 parking and storage of commercial vehicles and commercial equipment in certain certain residential areas prohibited and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for severability inclusion into inclusion into the land development code and effective date. again ask that you adopt um accept public comment adopt by roll call vote and I'm here for any questions that you may have

chair.

Yeah.

So, uh Commissioner Jagger brought this up when we discussed this last time and started looking further into it and spoke with the county administrator about this yesterday. The employee the employer employee markets have changed and commercial commercial vehicles are smaller. Some people use them as regular family cars. You see them in lines when kids take them to schools. They're just not wrapped with, you know, mics they see on there. They just be plain clothes, right? And [clears throat] for employers that allow some of their employees to take their work vans or utility vehicle, it's not an oversized vehicle home. The reasons for that is their van may be loaded for that week or that project for first three four days of the week and they can go from home to the job site and come back which it takes less traffic going to and from their jobs their day, you know, where their office is for commute and what have you.

So I'm torn with this because because that's just the nature of the market. So

I don't think that's what this is addressing.

No, it doesn't allow them to park it at their home because they're more commercial. That's not what we're addressing. Um it that that is already not allowed by the regular ordinance. All this is clarifying is that they can't be parked in the in the county rideofway and they can't be parked in MPU. The the remainder of the ordinance doesn't doesn't change.

So for

So are we going to bring up potentially amending that down the line?

I don't know. What's going on on this and and here in Starky Ranch and other developments that have on street parking

on on main roads is people are bringing their boats, their four-wheel what are those trucks that they have the cabin

semi-tractor trailers

semi-tractor trailers their RVs and they are parking them along Starky.

Yeah. They're using on street parking spaces that are supposed to be for people who live there to park their number one. That's why we're modifying 530.5. Again, this was a code compliance issue uh for recreational vehicles. So that basically what people are bringing is their boat trailers, just putting the boat trailer in an on on street parking space. Uh they're putting the boats and the port boat trailers. They're also doing as uh commissioner uh commissioner um Starky stated, that's why we're modifying 530.16. They're also bringing their semi-tractor trailers, their tow trucks, etc. And they're parking them in on street parking spaces that are dedicated for just regular

passenger vehicles to to park there, residents to park there. and the resident's guest in front of our blueberry farm which is converting to residential community. We have on street parking that um our family donated to make the so that there will be parking spaces that will be um counted in for the apartments that will go there one day. And we have had for a couple months now three people park in their work trailers there. You know the kind you pull by the truck like a lawn mower company or whatever. and they've been they've let they've been leaving for months. That's what this is addressing.

I think that that happens in Avalon Park. It's been a consistent issue. But

okay, that yours is another

maybe. All right.

Well, now what I was going to ask Denise, but what the commissioner is referring to is also covered in this portion of the ordinance. And so if the board wants to take that up.

Okay. So I'm not separate all the way crazy then.

No, you're not.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Because I have a note here, too. [laughter]

Yeah. Yes.

Yeah. I just wanted to make it clear that we're not really modifying not parking commercial vehicles and residential because that's already it's already in the code. See, the only thing that's being modified here is what's included in un bold red underline.

Okay.

So, everything else is regular code.

But back to since this since this code is up.

Mhm. If the board's willing, I'm open to to readressing uh the people's work vehicles if you know they could be used also as a family van essentially if they're similar that they should be able to park them at at their house and not be sided.

So, Commissioner, I think that might be a little simpler which is perhaps we can work on modifying the definition of a commercial vehicle.

Okay.

And that would handle that.

Thank you. Yeah,

if that makes sense.

Nice fix.

Do that and bring it back. Yeah,

but let's keep moving with this because we got to [laughter] deal with this issue and right now we can't do anything. The sheriff can't do anything. The communities can't do anything. We can't do anything. Yeah. All right. Um, so is there anyone here in the public that wishes to speak to this issue? Okay. Um, Denise, I have a question for you because, um, you know, we've been working with the Starky Ranch CDD. Um, how does it, and this might be a David Goldstein question, I don't know. How does it work with the CDDs when, um, I'm trying to understand who owns the park? Who's in charge of the parking spaces? Who is the one who's going to call for ticketing or towing? Is it the county? Is it the CDD district? How does that work? Um, is it Can we check to see if Sam Bounty is on this call? If not, I'm going to try to address that to the best of my ability. Is Is he on WebEx? Not

see if he's paying attention.

No problem. So, okay. No problem. So, I will try to address that. So, my understanding um and I think we have to still have one last meeting with start with uh Starky Ranch. So my understanding is that the CDD is going to work on placing signs. Yeah.

And that the actual enforcement of it is going to occur through the sheriff's office.

Okay.

That is the last that I had heard on the matter and that is roughly a week and a half ago when I when I tal talked about that.

Okay. Okay. And I think we're going to do a little um period of information first to let everyone know, okay, you're not allowed to do this. And [clears throat] there'll be a little grace period and then people are going to have to do the right thing and

that the enforcement is going to happen through the sheriff's office.

Okay. Great.

Okay.

Okay. So, no one's here to speak to anything. Anyone online?

No, we have no one.

Okay. This is

approval. Second.

Uh roll call vote. District 1, Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Wake.

Hi.

District uh four, Commissioner Jagger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariana.

Hi.

And thank you, Denise, for looking in that.

Thank you.

All right. P64.

We have Amy Ferrell, budget director with Pasco County's Office of Management and Budget. I'm here with item P64 or B26.

Hang on. Hang on one second. Amy,

proof of publication. Personally, we have [laughter] proof of publication in the Tampa Bay Times October 22nd, 2025 at the hearing of this matter at this time.

Okay. All right. All right. Amy Frell, budget director with Pasco County's Office of Management and Budget. I'm here with item P64 or OMB260003, which is an ordinance to establish a law enforcement municipal service taxing unit. Um, so there's a couple statutes that allows the board to establish a municipal service taxing unit. Those are up there on the slides. The first step is um for the board to adopt an ordinance that would establish it. If the cities were to participate, one way that they would do that is by after our ordinance gets adopted by the board, they would have to adopt one of their own. So what this ordinance provides, it establishes the MSTU for law enforcement for the unincorporated areas of Pasco County. It will define the powers, boundaries, and duties for law enforcement. Um, it provides a legal existence and status. Allows the levying of advalorum taxes to provide funding, but this is not the actual process. We won't actually be talking about millage rates here. This is just setting up the ordinance. And then we would follow the typical budget process and um the trim process. All right. So I pretty much just said this. So we so let's assume this gets adopted today. We [cough] would then come [clears throat] back at our trim meeting in July to establish the maximum millage rate and that would you will remember require a unanimous vote by the board and then uh the the tax would be stood up for the fiscal year 2027 budget. All right. So what do we need to do today? Accept public comment and then vote on the ordinance to provide for the MSDU by roll call. Wonderful. Any questions?

Madam Chair.

Yeah.

So, we looked at doing this years ago. Yeah.

And as we talked about the the problem came in when

uh really one gentleman made a comment. You're going to put the burden of law enforcement on the We've got July 14th is the date you for your next step. I know you're working with the cities right now, but I I don't want to support this until you've got the agreements in place. Um, you know, we help with parades, we help with certain things that they need help on. Um, you can structure it where it's population based as far as how you tax like gas tax. We don't break out for every little gas station where they are. We just base it upon everybody equally sharing getting the share where they can allocate how they want to spend their money. So that's like equity for everybody at that point. So I want to see that done because uh to me I don't want to put that shift on unincorporated citizens the way this is going to be shifted now.

Uh question on that. Go ahead commissioner.

Well I'll go after you.

So you got cities you're talking about they're not paying but yet they have their own police force.

Exactly.

So they are paying toward their own police force within the city.

Yeah. just

Yes,

we're still helping like Pasco County Sheriff's Office is still going into the cities and helping them.

Then there should probably be some kind of fee that they have to pay

for extra help from the county

and maybe that fee looks is different than the MSTU. Maybe we just say we're not coming into your city unless you're helping pay and let's figure out what that is.

Yep.

And remember those cities are little.

You need 50 grand.

Yeah. It's an [laughter] all farm price. I mean,

hey, if we have no property tax, do you want the sheriff to come to your house? How we going to have fun? I don't know. So, if I may, Madam Chair, I I have been in contact with with the city managers and have had this discussion and I know uh Chase and Sheriff's uh sheriff's office are are kind of piecing together what those actual costs look like in terms of serving the citizens, whether it's through SWAT, detective service, or or even parades. And so, um I' I've gotten, you know, commitment that we're going to work together towards something equitable. Understand Commissioner Mariano July is is is not too far away. It's far enough away but it's not far away. And so we will endeavor to work on interlocal agreements or whatever the necessary mechanisms are to ensure equity for the citizens of Pasco County when it comes to providing law enforcement services. Noting that yes, some do have police services, but that the sheriff also, you know, is is the, you know, the big law enforcement uh agency here for for the county. Provides a [snorts] lot of service and backup to to police. I know Chase is here in case you know if you wanted to hear from the sheriff's office, but I I think we've, you know, we'll we'll work to endeavor to what the board's wishes.

Yeah, I think we work really well with our cities.

I I would love to hear how I I honestly would love everybody to hear how the sheriff's office helps other cities. That's okay. Good afternoon, Chase Daniels, uh, under sheriff community outreach operations, Pasco Sheriff's Office. Um, thank you very much, Commissioner, and and as the administrator noted, uh, we have been working very, very, uh, closely with this. I thank Amy and her team as well for, uh, for including us. Um, as it stands today, we are fully in support of of this MSTU in this language. um to speak specifically to h how it works with the cities. Um so yes uh you you all are are absolutely correct that we do help the cities. So for instance um most of the cities do not have the ability to investigate um major crimes things like homicides. They do not have their own forensics units and things like that. So that is a resource that we we provide to them. Also when it comes to large events for instance the Christmas parades that are coming up uh we provide security and assistance with those types of large events as well. Um so what we are working on uh so the sheriff has a quarterly meeting with the chiefs of police. So as part of that meeting we will be informing them moving forward that this could be an option uh or and something they need to talk about with their city managers or city councils. Uh we are also starting to build payroll codes. So for instance if we have someone that is on uh someone who our forensics unit who has to go out to one of these scenes to assist the cities we are going to start capturing exactly how much time we spend assisting the cities. um whether it be like I said forensics through one of those um one of those big events or th those major events like the Christmas parses. We're going to start capturing all all those things and essentially telling the cities you hey if you do not come on to the MSTU this is going to be a build service to you or you can you know take it upon yourself if you wish to create a forensics unit or or something like that but essentially if a city does not come along those are the options that that we're planning to give them right now.

Excellent.

Yeah. So the unincorporated taxpayer is really carrying the weight of a pile of additional services. Y

Madam Chairman, if if I can ask Chase a question. So the cities that you currently are providing 100% service for because they don't have a police force. You have a con I'm assuming you have a contract with them and they fund that operation in that manner. Correct.

Yes sir. That that that's correct. So for instance uh that is San Antonio and St. Leo. They enter into a contract with us and then we provide those law enforcement services in lie of the in le of the cities. But those are paid uh for the for the total cost of the deputy

and so they and so they b they are levying a millillage on their residence for your service and collecting it that collecting it in that manner.

Yeah. However it goes with with the contract we we just know they they pay us the contract. However, they they raise that revenue to pay that contract.

And so that would be an option for the other cities as well. If if they wanted to contract with you for SWAT services, for forensic services, that would be another pulling them into the MSTU. They they could provide a funding source for that contract

as well contractually if if that was something that they want to pursue. Absolutely. Or again, you know, we could just give them the the real cost of services or they could they could do it on their own. Uh the one thing I I should note uh in like I said in discussion with the minister of carbala if there is some type of life safety thing for instance that there is is if there's an active shooter um you know god forbid in in zephr hills or something we will obviously make sure to provide those types of resources. We're not going to let anyone be be in danger o over this but it's kind of more of those ancillary things that that happen after the fact that that we will um you know be be billing them for or raise that fee for.

Madam chair.

Yeah I'm good with that. Part of the thing with like if you're going to do utility charges, right, you've got to have the certain pipes in the ground, the treatment in place, the staffing involved to be able to run utility. Whether someone use a drop of water, there's a fixed cost that's there. When you're going to set up for a forensic unit, we're going to set up for a SWAT team, other other instances where you may need nine deputies on a vehicle for a school thing that's in front of a school that's in a city that you're going to jump on. You're not going to be able to account for all that. And part of the reason I said just like we do with the gas tax structure so it's b population based everybody shares whatever the costs are to run the whole operation for the year just like in a budget. That's what should be factored in the MST for every year every year every time every time a city is is in there as well. You can't just go all right we're going to tell you forensics here we're going to pay for the squad over here because it's not going to break out. You need those people in place. You need the training in place. So again, the reason this thing died last time was because of the burden falling to the county and I just have the big fear and until I see this work out, I'm not going to support it. I want to see all the agreements in place. I'm good with Hang on. I'm good with San Antonio and St. Le the way set up because that's a different scenario. But you still got to factor those other things in, too.

Whether they're going to use SWAT or not, that's got to be factored in your fixed costs. So, I think these things need to be structured and I want to see ahead of time before I'm going to shift the burden or it could fall heavier on the county citizens that aren't incorporated.

Commissioner Mariana, we could go ahead and set up the MSTU, but we don't have to fund it uh with anything until those deals are worked out. The sheriff's in support of this. I think we should move forward, but I I hear what you're saying and I think there's plenty of time to work that that

I'm not comfortable with it. I'm not going to support it because we've had all this time to look at it, all this time to talk about it. I don't think a quarterly meeting now we're going to talk about it enough. This is going to be a big enough of an issue that it's going to come forward. This stuff need to be worked out ahead of time before the next steps taken.

And Commissioner Marion, I have spoken with the city managers and I would say over the course of the next three months, they recognize it's it's it's important to get this ironed out by the February March timeline as we're establishing budgets. So, um, we will we will certainly do our part to work with the cities. I think you've got some you've outlined some great ideas. The base charge variable cost sort of model, you know, makes makes sense and resonates, but we'll we'll bring that. We we will certainly we understand that we need to bring something back.

And I'm going to say this is not a thing that has to happen today. It's not something that has to happen this year even. But I think the details are more important to make sure it's laid out that everybody knows what's going to happen, how it's going to happen, where the costs going to come. And if that takes more accounting, more time, etc., So be it. But I want to see it placed before that burden ever shifts to the the unincorporated county citizens.

Okay. Um, is there anyone here in the public that wishes to speak to this item? Is there anybody online?

No one on.

Okay. Well, I will entertain a motion.

Madam Chairman, before you entertain a motion, um if the board is wishing to move forward with this, again, I would ask the board to add add to the motion. Um the uh waiver of introduction of this ordinance. Um and the final ordinance the underlining uh which appears in section one uh should be deleted.

I think it I think it's a leftover from when drafts were going back and forth, but there's there's underlining in your final version that shouldn't be there.

Well, thank you for pointing that [snorts] out. I will accept what he said in the motion. Yeah, I'll make a motion that we accept what the county attorney just stated and that part of the motion.

Second.

Okay. Any more discussion? All right. Roll call vote.

District one, Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner Wakeman.

I.

District four, Commissioner Jagger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

Nay.

District four, Chairman. Three.

I a three. I'm three.

Three.

Three. But we heard you, Jackie. It's important to get those word.

All right. Um, P65.

Yes, ma'am. Let me catch up there. Uh, P65, we have approved publication October 22nd, 2025, Tampa Bay Times for this hearing at this time.

Morning, commissioners. Ryan Gwyn, fire chief. FR26-10004 is an ordinance by the county board of county commissioners amending and restating ordinances 79-28 and 01-012 pertaining to the Pasco County municipal fire service taxing unit by providing for additional municipal services to be funded providing for a repealer providing for severability and providing for including into the county code of ordinances and providing for an effective date. Um essentially the ordinance is to amend the restated ordinances 7928 and 0102 specifically expanding the municipal services so we can fund other uh uh assets out of there including medical services and this is the only required public hearing. So we uh ask that you accept public comment and adapt the ordinance amending the fire tax district and by roll call.

Okay. Board members any questions? Commission

question. So, similar to my line, and this is a lot different than when we're just looking at bringing a new thing in. We're already doing it for the fire. Now, we're doing it for the ambulance service.

So, in doing so, it's probably a lot easier for you to set costs that are coming up going forward, but still there's some fixed costs involved. We're looking for the cities to be involved in this as well.

Yes, sir. We automatically we already charge for for EMS services. We charge all the citizens whether they're in the city or out. So, we recoup that money from them. the fire side. We do have the we do have mutual aid agreements with the count with the cities, but there are other services that we do bill for our specific services much like the sheriff's office are uh hazardous materials responses, heavy rescue responses, things like that.

That's why we're so grateful to your department chief.

They are fantastic.

Proud to recognize them every year.

They break records every month. So, we're super proud of them, too.

Okay. Uh, anyone else wish to speak to this item here?

Do we have anyone online?

No one online.

Madam Chairman, again, I would ask that introduction be waved in in addition to the motion that's been um provided to you in your packet.

With the county's attorney's information, second

roll call vote.

District one, commissioner Oakland.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Wakeman.

Hi. District four, Commissioner Jagger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

Hi.

District three, Commissioner Chairman Stark.

Hi.

P66. We have proof of publication of this item in the July 9th, 16th, 23rd, and 30th of 2025 editions of the Tampa Bay Times for meeting on August the 5th, 2025, where it was continued to September 3rd, where it was continued to October 7th, where it was continued to today.

[clears throat]

Nectario Pitos Plank Development Economic Growth Department. Uh item P66 is PD 260000008. This is an ordinance amending pass county ordinance ordinance number 21-40 contracting the boundaries of Two Rivers North Community Development District pursuant to chapter 194 statutes providing for miscellaneous provisions providing for an effective date. And this comes to you with the recommendation to adopt the ordinance by roll call vote. Go ahead.

There's a presentation if you would like on a CDD.

I don't know if we need that for a CDD. Anyone on it? No. Okay.

Uh let me see if there's anyone who wants to speak to this item. Anyone online?

No one online.

Okay.

Um you've got somebody approaching.

Oh, someone's approaching. Feel free to approach. Brian Lamb, authorized agent for the Two Rivers North Community Development District. Um, available to answer any questions if you do have.

Well, I I did have a question.

So, you made the motion.

Um, not well verssed on chickens, but we can

No, no. [laughter] Um, on on uh I think it's Laneir. We had some folks talking to us this morning about Lenir, and I was trying to see it on my map. I know this.

Um, are you connecting to Laneir? It looks like there's a little strip there. Um,

as far as the the access for this uh site that's being contracted,

wait there, see Laneir

and that goes to Gralie.

Yeah, this this parcel will be connected off from the the main entrance in just prior to Laneir which is running pretty much east west.

I'm sorry, what did you say? the parcel that's being contracted from the district. Uh the hexed out section there.

Oh,

what? Commercial or something in the front?

Correct. Yeah, that'll be a a commercial parcel.

Okay. But do you know if Lenir is connecting? The two leners are connecting. I mean, I think when we establish this development, they were supposed to connect.

Yes. Notorious Pet economic growth again. um lineer as it moves north from the Two Rivers development does connect into the old Laneir which goes um beyond.

Okay. And what about Anata Drive and that other one?

See coming off of Sunflower Hill Drive.

Yes. At Anata Drive is also

there's another connection. Excellent. Okay. Thank you,

Madam Chair. Hang on that for a minute. So, I'm trying to understand what we looked at earlier today from the comments, but so Two Rivers Boulevard heading to the north. Commercial section is over here we're adding in. And that Laneir Road is is that the section of the road they were talking about with the residents today?

Well, it's not it's not done yet.

No, but but I mean is that the LER road that the people the res

to the north because they're they're having to uh divert from

it would not be within the CDD boundaries.

Okay. So, it's above from the CD boundary up,

right? It's that lineer based on the information we've seen over the last hour or so. So, it's an old antiquated plat that is labeled lineer, a grid pattern plat, which I'm assuming is north of the of the pink area there, but it would not be within the CBD boundaries.

But that road needs to be improved and and taken over by the county.

What is what So, what's driving the traffic up there? What's going on State Road 15?

There's a there's a a sinkhole.

Okay. All right. I will say this. At one point we had a um a big issue on State Road 52. We directed people to go through Timber Oaks. When Timber Oaks came in for their assessment, we actually took care of the assessment because we did a lot of damage to that road. So that may be something we can consider for air for the future.

Oh yeah. Yeah. I I definitely asked them to look at Laneir. It should be not a It needs to be better quality road than what it is now. County needs to take the maintenance over.

Okay. Um, all right. So, there's no one here to speak to this. Back to the board.

Motion on the table.

Motion second.

Okay. Is this a roll call?

Yes.

Okay. Uh, roll call vote.

District one, Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Wakeman. Hi.

District four, Commissioner Jerger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

Hi.

District three, Chairman. Sir,

I.

P67. I approve publication of the hearing of this matter in the July 23rd edition of the Tampa Bay Time. Item P67 is PD 26140. This is an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map 2-15 in sheets 05 11 12 17 18 and 23 from AGR agricultural rural residential one dwelling unit per gross acre. Res 3 residential three dwelling units per gross acre. Res 6 residential six dwelling units per gross acre. Res 9 residential 9 dwelling units per gross acre. who has 12 residential 12 dwelling units per gross acre and RO retail office residential to con conservation lands on approximately 2,813 acres of real property located throughout Pasco County and providing for additional tax text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repeal servability and an effective date. This comes to you with a recommendation to adopt the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and ordinance by roll call vote. And there's a presentation if uh desired.

I don't need presentation. We'll take a land to come. Right.

Marshall Waitman. Any questions on this one?

Okay. Um is there anyone here in the public who wishes to speak to this item?

Do we have anyone online?

Do we have no one online at all? See no one uh moved approval.

Second.

Roll call vote.

District one, Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Wiggman. Hi.

District four, Commissioner Jerger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariana.

Hi.

District three, Chairman Sir.

Hi. They got some code grass to take out of there.

They will be very busy. Okay. All right. Um, we are to P60

seven eight

eight.

All right. And then we go back to the R.

Right. P68. Uh, we have proof publication October 29th, 2025 in the Tampa Bay Times supplemented by site postings.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Do you have resoning resoning items nor do you have any quasi judicial items? So that the two items don't need to be sworn in or we don't need to recce utilities engineering and contract management director. P68 is file number UTD26-0098 for a resolution establishing a utility connection fee sir charge for the development of utility infrastructure along State Road 52 beginning at US 41 and ending at Interstate 75 establishing the rates for the search charge establishing the boundaries for the search charge provided for applicability and an effective date commissioners we have been planning and and we're about to finalize the water waste water and reclaimed water master plans for pastoral county utilities. Uh our objective in uh considering future improvements is to maintain adequate water quality flow and pressure throughout our system and to our customers. We do that by looking at and monitoring uh trends in population growth uh user demands uh the existing condition of our utility infrastructure. We take all that into account when planning for future expansions to not just our wastewater and water plants, but also our water main and sewer uh transmission network. I'd like to focus on one item in terms of future demand, and that's uh employment centers. This graphic shows within the county, the uh orange highlighted boxes, uh areas that are zoned as employment centers which derive which could derive an additional benefit to the county in terms of job uh creating jobs that will create additional economic growth for the county. Uh our focus is uh from the comprehensive plan is to identify extensions that could serve future employment centers. Again, the the the opportunity there is there to increase the economic uh base of the county. You can look at this graphic and see the dark blue lines are the existing extent of our water main network throughout the county. The light blue lines are the water main networks for other utilities such as cities and private utilities that are that operate within the county. I'd like to focus on That one right there, that employment center, that's called the Central Pasco Employment Village, uh is essentially along State Road 52 from Aaron Cutoff to Bellamy Brothers Boulevard. You can see that there isn't any uh adequate water supply near that employment center. We already have commitments for uh development in that area that would also benefit from extensions in that area. Our plan is to take advantage of an upcoming Florida DOT construction project. The DOT plans to widen State 52 from Aaron Cutoff to Bellamy Brothers. They're going to start sometime next year. It would be great if we could start this water man enforcement extension project to coincide with the DOT construction project with the hopes of minimizing u disturbance to the traveling public in the future and also by saving costs upfront if we are able to incorporate

into the DOT project uh in today's dollars we'll be saving uh in the future in terms of the necessary water imperments needed for that quarter that shows you the extent of where the water main connection would have to uh occur. occur. Essentially, we would have to bring water manes from US 41 up airing cutoff to 52 along 52 down old Pascal Road to create another loop that would uh increase flows and pressures in that area. on the sewer side. Similar thing here is the uh central Pasco employment village and you can see that we don't als we also don't have uh adequate uh sewer uh network near that that employment village. Our plan is to again leverage that DOT project to build uh the forcement along the 52 corridor with the road construction project. Uh that one will also require forcement extensions all the way to uh the Wesley Center wastewater plant project. This is a blow up of that corridor along 52. You have air and cut off on the west side. There's 52 all the way to I75 or Old Pasco Road and down Old Pasco Road. The plan is to build both water and sewer extensions on Aaron cut off 52 Old Pasco Road to serve that employment village. But in the process of serving that employment village, there's a potential area, what we call a service area that has almost 16,000 equivalent residential units in that area. An equivalent residential unit is essentially one eru is the size of an a typical average single family home that requires water and sewer service from the county. Uh with those water manes and force mans being planned for that area, we expect to serve uh around 16,000 uh erus in the area, some of which would be office and industrial, which generate jobs uh for the county. The plan is to construct these improvements uh to coincide with a phase out that's over four phases over the next 10 years. Uh but starting uh now with the DOT construction project, those four phases will cost somewhere around $62 million in today's dollars of which uh uh starting a couple of years ago, we budgeted uh $15 million for just water and sewer improvements along 52, but at that time we had not finished the master plans. We weren't sure the extent of how far beyond that quarter we would need pipelines. Uh we now think that all those pipelines on Aaron 52 and old Pasco uh it's going to take about $62 million worth of improvements of which the county would fund a quarter of that upfront. U we have been working with a group of private investors, a group of property owners that could fund another 40% of the the total cost and the remaining third would come in the form of a utility search charge fee assessed for each equivalent residential units. uh the county would fund that money up front, but then we would re reimburse over time as those developments came online. With that, we're recommending you approve uh the resolution that could serve not just the service area that's highlighted in blue in the graphic, but

potentially if there's sufficient capacity available toward the end of the project, we may also be able to serve areas west of Aaron Cutoff in those pink highlighted areas. Uh we recommend you accept public comments and adopt the resolution. This is part of a companion item that will be heard next.

Madam Chair.

Yep.

Could you back to the slide with the finances?

So the shortfall of $22 million is that expected to be collected at 100% out of this lower number out of this the other search charges coming up?

Yes. Based on those assumptions. So, what we're assuming is that 80% of the total entitled uh erus will actually be built there and we develop a a uh a fee based on that 80% buildout. By the way, Commissioner, we also looked at uh if there were any federal state grants available to fund that shortfall. We cannot find any right now. Most of the grants are associated with water quality improvements, nutrient reduction, things like that. But for extensions, we could not find one right now. The other thing I I failed to mention is that the fees will be assessed and collected on applications for connections to those uh mains. Within that service area, there are approximately 50 to 60 uh single family residentially zoned lots that would not be required to connect to the system. They are small enough there. The comprehensive plan doesn't require them to connect to our system based on their density. What's the total number of dollars for the office and industrial uses? What's what do you expect that number to be?

We're not going to uh assess a fee on the US office and industrial because one of the reasons is that it's going to benefit the employment center in terms of providing that that water and sewer supply for the employment center. So all land uses except office and industrial will be assessed.

Okay. So we we could be expected to carry on the on the other basis with the residential it could be 20 30 years before we got our money back from this whole system. Correct.

It could be depending on the buildout schedule for each development.

All right. So knowing that I mean you say there's no grants available for the the lines that we're trying to get though we are trying to bring office in industrial and then looking at the jobs that are needed from this nation that we saw earlier today. Um, I would like us to somehow be able to structure this where we can go after that number which would supplant some of this other monies rather than waiting 30 years to get it and but not not put us in to say we're going to supplant the money so we can't go after the grants. But if there's something that's out there and again with all the things that are out there I mean we could put an AMS skills plant out there to help train uh other things could come out there between HVAC's etc. So, I want I want to make sure we don't trap ourselves to be locked in the agreement where I can't go get that extra money. So, I don't know how we structure it, but just like we talked about the other day, I want to I don't want to be trapping us to the all four phases until I know that I've at least looked at what I can get for the let's say for the even the final phase.

Well, fortunately, we have budget or we will be proposing a budget that's a four or five year phase budget for the project. So, it's possible that in the out years we could uh eliminate those funds if we were to be able to secure some state or federal grant for it without affecting our obligations to the joint funding agreement. So, and again to guarantee the joint funding agreement, I want to make sure we have the verbiage in there that says we can go get outside money if it's available.

Chair.

Yep.

Understood. Commissioner,

can we go back to what about the 16,000 units additional units? Is that what you're saying? So approximately 15,000 units, they're probably those folks are probably on septic and well.

No, sir. Most of those are uh vacant unimproved properties right now.

They're not.

But if without this, they'll be on likely on septic and

in a recharge

within the blue area

in a recharge area. What my point where I'm going with this is the wellfields in the recharge area. And if we're looking at as commerce comes online and folks capture these properties, if there's utilities there, the septic to consumer conversion funds potentially because if we don't do this and they're all going to be on septic system, right? And it's going straight to Tampa Bay's drinking water supply.

Yeah.

So,

so your argument

on top of already the folks that are on septic and well in the area. And your argument is basically it's a preemptive

correct project.

Correct.

And that's you know 15,000 that's

you see some of the numbers that accept the sewer projects that are in the low thousands. You know this is

well those 15,000 are future developments future lots to be improved. They don't account for any existing developments right now. Correct. So for instance in that blue area there's somewhere just under 60 lots that are zoned single family residential. All other lots within there are zone some some other kind of zoning commercial agricultural industrial but those single family residential are not required to connect even if they had a water man and sewer system along their property front because it's a low density. Now it could be done in terms of a septic to sewer program uh but they're very small areas that we would then incorporate as an individual sub project.

Yeah. So it gives them an option to get off maybe they abandon their their septic system and they stay on their well if their well's still good but at least it's an opportunity to get off get off their septic system.

We can't make them

attach.

No, it doesn't require them to connect to it. They can voluntarily or the county could fun. I thought if they were in a certain distance they had to.

Yeah. Usually if you have a gravity main within a certain certain distance you can you are required to connect within a year but this type of people wouldn't

all right because I'd like to get everyone

Madam Chair.

Yeah.

I mean you can't like try to imagine the Phillips family trying to connect to 52 and hooking up.

Oh yeah.

Three mile run. You cannot do that. No, but if they're someone in this area where we're coming down the street,

well, I mean 52 is right in front of the Philips property, too. But, you know, you wouldn't make them have to run a line that far.

No. But and again and I'm trying to make sure that as this is structured that we do not prevent ourselves whether it be a septic sewer wind that they actually see the value to that or some other grant that's out there whatever it may be I want to make sure we can still go after the the grant funds at the same time not slowing down what we're trying to do at least phase one two three

but I mean the basic question is does this agreement prohibit us from pursuing any additional funds I don't see how a private agreement would

it does not us from doing that

no it may not prevent us from doing it with them. But if I get a government agency saying, "Well, you've already got it funded. We're not going to give you the money." That's what I'm afraid of. I want to say that we have some type of clause in there that says we can go after the money and this agreement under acknowledges that. If not, we'll cover it, but if we can go find funds, we're going to try to do it and our on our end.

I think your your problem would be with the federal government, not necessarily with the parties, if I'm understanding you correctly.

Probably. But the state could do the same thing. I mean, Swiftman, look how those agreements go. we get outside money from the feds, swift money cuts takes their share and cuts it out. I don't want to have any of that happen. I want to just take a shot. Whatever may happen, maybe we put a big AM skills out there. Maybe Florida builds some big training facility or some AC company like Train wants to go build something for training. I don't want to prevent any of that being able to change to try to get that money. But if you're going to put a clause in the agreement that says you can go after a grant, Miss Wolf Graham is cutting me off, so I will yield to the senior assistant county attorney.

I'm Jordan Wolf Graham, senior assistant county attorney. I think what you're trying to avoid is a supplanting issue and because the agreement does not we cannot tie the board's hands. So because you annually appropriate your budget, the agreement will not interfere with your ability to remove that from your budget in order to avoid supplanting if grant funds become available later. Does that

So if we put some type of clause like that in this contract, I'd feel a little more comfortable. But I want to make and if that's if that covers us without the grants, that's great. But I I think we should at least make mention of it that we could look to other things. We want to be have that option without affecting other contributions that be coming in. Okay. And I spoke with Clark who represents most Yeah. Let me let him speak for his

commissioners Clark Hobby Hobby and Hobby uh PA 109 North Brush Street, Tampa, Florida. Uh the property owners group has no objection to that. Commissioner, um I certainly understand what staff is saying, which is they would what they would likely do if you ever were to receive that kind of funding was they would adjust the calculations for the charges at the time, which I think they'll be required to do. But we have no objection if in your resolution you wanted to add a clause that said there's nothing to prevent the county from later adjusting it based on grants that it receives. Let me ask this. Are we paying a full 50% or are we paying a little bit more than 50%. The way this comes out all the phases

the for phases one through three the count you will be paying 50% of the total cost for phases one through three. And then for phase four the county is fully funding phase four.

Okay. So I want to be able to make sure until that fully funding that we're paying for at the end whatever that number is that we can get grant money all the way to that before I worry about splitting back with the other parties. I want to be able to reach out as much as I can. If we collect more than what that other extra money is, then we can go back to it. But I don't want to be taken where we're fronting the end. I want to make sure we collect everything up to that bid before we start going back to do a separation split.

And you're you're wanting that done in the agreement. Th this item is for the resolution. And the resolution has some assumptions baked into it that we made to calculate the search charge. So if grant funding was received, that's what Clark's referring to is we would have to go back and recalculate the search charge based on the the funding that was received.

But if I'm doing the final phase where I'm covering the full cost and that money can be tied to that, there's no reason to go split back and recalculate those other numbers. I'm paying more than 50% because I'm covering the last phase, right,

of the overall project,

right? So, I want to make sure that if I'm gonna get money, I'm gonna make sure I'm collecting all that money before we dip into recalculating the other monies.

Commissioner, I I think the point that Jordan's trying to make is when the county adopts this kind of resolution, it's based on mathematical assumptions. And if you get more money in there, they necessarily have to recalculate the the funds at that point. There's I don't think there's anything wrong with putting in the resolution some kind of savings clause, which is what you're talking about. But to be clear that the property owners group portion of it, this is only on the county's funding. We wouldn't receive any of this funding in any event. So, this is the county's money and if it wants to have language in its own uh resolution adopting this that has a savings clause that gives the county to readjust it based on grants, there's nothing wrong with that.

All right. So, that based upon the 50/50 split, if I go outside source and I get all my money from an outside source and I cover myself that way, you're not going to be looking at clawback 50.

We don't we're it's very clear in the agreement we don't get any of that. All we're doing is getting reimbursed from the county on a specified 50%. And then what we would have to do later if the grants occur is you might not need all of the searchcharge revenue to make the county whole because the way this is set up and just want everybody to know in the public

the county is getting made completely whole on its investment here. The POG is not. We're we're paying at the net amount, the property owners group is going to net pay for the majority of this unrecouped.

So, but if the county recoups more money so that it doesn't have to use general revenue funds or whatever, we have no objection to it. We have no right to that money under the agreement anyway. All you're doing is reimbursing us for up to 50% of what we spend designing, permitting, and constructing the project. Okay.

All right. Thank you. All right. So, with my concerns, do I need to do anything different with the resolution here or can we do do is that going to cover the next item?

I think you'd want to cover that in the next item because that relates to the POG, not the the collection of the search charge.

Very good. Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Um, is there anyone here in the public who wishes to speak to this item?

Okay. Seeing no one, I'll take a motion. Thank you. Wait a second. If I may, Jordan,

if I just understood the conversation correctly, wouldn't the commissioner want to put it in the resolution, not the agreement? Because what what the representations have been is that the they can't claw it back based on the agreement. the the res what the commissioner is asking for is that the that the sir charge would be readressed I think if we get we can get money

it it would it would already be have to be readressed because the assumptions would be would it change and it says it will be re-evaluated if the assumptions change I I I thought the I thought the concern was the POG having some right to any offset cost we found for the grant money. Is that

and Mr. Hobby represented that it's clear that they don't

correct

in the agreement. So I don't I don't my my concern is you just said address it in the next item. The next item would be the agreement that

and what I'm hearing is that the agreement doesn't need to be addressed.

Technically it doesn't. But if the commissioner wants the the language about the grant to protect the county's interest and prevent the POG from getting it, I can double down.

I I I would like to see a protection whether it be one or the other. I'm just taking guidance from my expert uh to what's the best way to do it. Commissioners, there is a clause in the resolution that states that if the underlying assumptions change as to how we calculated that connection fee, then the county can come back and amend the connection fee, reduce it, increase it based on changes to the underlying assumptions. It's based on what we think we're going to have to fund for the project. If we end up getting grants for it, that's a significant underlying assumption that change. We can then go back amend the resolution to reduce.

But if I get that extra money, I'm not looking to amend the resolution. which I will keep keep the splits just the way they're going now. I just want to make sure that if we do get it that they can't come back and claw back from us. You got this much money. We're going to take this much back.

If I may, Madame [clears throat] Chairperson Joel to I'm also representing Eisenhower Property Group. Um at the risk of complicating it, I'm going to try to clarify it. the existing agreement. Let's talk about that first because I really think that's where that's where part of the commissioner's concern is coming. The existing agreement says that the search charge is for two reasons. It is to ensure a future mechanism for 100% payback of the county loan amount that you're advancing to get the work done. Now, that's that's obviously a primary goal. But the second reason is to make sure that third parties who aren't funding $25 million, which my clients are not getting back their 25 million on top of paying their base connection fees and on top of paying their search charge, is to make sure a third party interloper can't come in and connect to that system for just a base connection fee without also paying what would be a fair proportionate share for that money that's and spent. So that's why there was a mechanism that the search charge is established an amount that's more than your required payback. And once you're paid back, that's when it becomes a 50/50 split because the county has made an investment and the private pod members have made an investment. So I think you have to be careful about saying we're just going to eliminate a search charge if you get grant money. Now obviously what would happen it would depend entirely on how much grant money did you get and I think what Clark and the county attorney are saying is that if and when you get a grant so that you know exactly what you have then you would be required to obviously adjust the searchcharge ordinance but all I'm saying is it's not simply a math thing because you'd have to say okay what is still a reasonable amount to charge for that proportionate share amount to avoid that system. Um, so that that's what I'm concerned about. Now, the way the agreement is worded right now, I agree there's nothing there that precludes you whatsoever from seeking a grant because it basically says you fund this however you decide to fund it. Okay? It's open-ended. And logically, if you got a $10 million grant, then you would reduce your loan amount. and the fact that you got the $10 million grant would go to reduce your loan amount and therefore you would be paid back sooner on your loan. And once you're 100% paid back between any grant and the search charge once you're 100% made whole, that's when the 50/50 split stops. So, in my view, what really should happen is I actually would not change the searchcharge ordinance because as the county attorney said, you would wait and revisit that based on what grant amount you do or don't get. I would suggest that you just add the provision you're looking for. A short provision added to the funding agreement that says nothing herein precludes the county from seeking and procuring state or federal grants in which event any grant amount

would reduce the required county loan amount. It's just that simple because the intent is for you to get wholly paid back, but only get wholly paid back, not more. And then once you're wholly paid back, the deal's 50/50 on the search charge. But I just be careful building in language that suggests the search charge might go away due to a grant because you still need to charge new third parties a reasonable proportion amount to tap into a system. Okay,

so I hope that hope that helps. But my suggestion is to just add that provision to the funding agreement.

All right, Mr. County attorney.

That's fine.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay. So then I'm ready for a motion, but I need What are we putting in?

I'm ready to make a motion, but I want to make sure how we want to structure the language that you

Well, this not for this

based on based on what I've just heard, you don't need to make any modifications to the resolution. It's the it's the next item that you

All right. Approval. Second.

Okay. And I don't think this is a

No, it's a roll.

Okay.

Any more discussion from the public?

No. Okay. All in favor?

I.

Woo. That was a lot of work for everybody. I know. Okay. Um, now we are going to go to

R56.

Yeah, the R. Okay.

Are you doing that one too?

Yes.

Okay. Adula Gonzalez, utilities engineering and contract management director. R56 is file number UTD26-000085 joint funding agreement between Pasco County Mu Lanco Liquidating Company LLC, SF Lanco Liquidating Company LLC, EPG Hillrest Holdings LLC, EPG Pelmet Ridge Holding LLC, Lenar Homes LLC, Pelmetal Ridge Cattle Company LLC, and Jen Holdco 24 LLC, State Road 52 Old Pasco Road Utilities Corridor $40,722,000. This uh commissioner is the followup to the resolution. Uh I had mentioned uh some of the reasons or the criteria we use to extend water and sewer mains. Uh typically when they're required to be extended by the county, it's because we already have commitments out there in terms of we have to provide additional water sewer service. In addition to that, we sometimes require developers to extend water and sewer mains if it's within the comprehensive plan threshold for them to extend those lines. When our extension is optional for developers, when they exceed when their property exceeds the threshold uh for extending water and sewer facilities to their site, at that point can then voluntarily decide to fund the the improvements completely or or find some other means of providing water and sewer for their properties. Our current policy for quite some time has been developers pay for extensions, county pays for water and wastewater plant expansions. That's what we typically do based on the comp plan thresholds. Uh we already have uh a master plan created for that state 52 utility corridor that includes the rightsiz water and sewer facilities to serve that corridor from 52 to old Pasco road essentially all the way to I75 uh over the course of several phases. The plan is to build what is needed for the first three phases of expected eru or development activity in that area uh with that DOT construction project. Uh this graphic shows the limits of the water facilities needed for that state 52 corridor essentially all the way from US 41 up Aaron cutoff 52 and down old Pasco road.

Can I can I ask you a question on this real quick? Um, so this is coming what's going down Old Pasco that's not existing. Am I understanding that right?

Correct. None of that along on the right.

There are some water manes on Old Pasco, but the there is an additional parallel water man that needs to be constructed to provide enough fire flow. And

okay, so here's my question. This is what I'll write and maybe it's a funding thing, but I mean that road's under construction. Are you going to tear it up? Whatever is being done now, we're going to go back in and tear it up to put this in.

Some of that is already under construction. It's part of the old Pasco Road widening project,

right?

So,

I have

this isn't permanent or designed or anything yet. Right. So, you now you're going to go back in and tear it up.

I'm pretty sure also that there were old plans on the books that accounted for the widening of Old Pasco Road as well as placement of utilities. I seem to call that being in your role many many years ago.

I Mike, I can't I don't think anyone can hear you.

Oh, I'm sorry. I I I think it's counted for, but [clears throat]

it would be on the west side of the road, right?

Yeah, there were already plans. I mean, when I first started working for the county, there were there were plans that were already on the books. I mean,

so the plans are done already

and construction is underway for that second.

Okay. But you're putting this in now?

Yes.

While we're doing the construction, thank goodness. because that was needed for one of the first phases of development in there, that northwest quadrant of I75 at 52.

Okay. Just so many times we don't put it in because the developers aren't paying for it. So then we have to come back and tear up something we just did to put the stuff in.

Um commissioner, I just asked the engineer, one of those lines already is in an old Pasco road. They the developers literally have been paying and doing this and we've been negotiating the agreement. The second line, the plans are approved and they are doing directional drilling where required. They're intentionally not impacting the roadway work. So they their plans contemplated that work and they're working around it.

Yeah, that's the right way to do it.

Okay.

So chair.

Yeah. Yeah. So with off so this plan today allows us to really work in concert with DOT and get get this project into the in the ground and when they start their road project. It's not going to prolong Bob's barricades, which is good for Bob's barricades uh up and down east and west on 52 with they built the road now dig it up, put pipe in, then repave the road again. like we should be able to actually have a fluid help do have a fluid project here.

Yes, sir. That is the plan to do it concurrent with the road construction.

All right. Uh this is a graphic of the planned sewer improvements along the 52 and old Pasco corridor. Uh and again the the intent is to do it with the road construction to minimize any disturbance to the public. I mentioned the comprehensive plan distance thresholds when developers are required to extend mains. So for large master plan uh communities uh over 100 erus the distance threshold is a mile for sewer and up to a mile and a half for water. But in this case, we have over 13 miles of water main network of transmission mains that need to be built and over nine miles of sewer that needs to be built to provide adequate flow and pressure uh to that corridor. Because of that, uh we decided to leverage that public private partnership with the property owners group to fund the $62 million of of construction of which we are harding $15 million. The other $23 million that we're funding up front, we intend to get reimbured via that utility searchcharge connection that you just approved. And that is to serve the Central Pasco Employment Village as well as the service area in blue with the possibility of extending that area if there's capacity available to the areas in pink. With that, we recommend approval of the joint funding agreement

and your issue.

I want to have the language stated by a county attorney to add on to it that we need.

You're the one who's negotiating with them. [laughter]

Well, clerk said he was going to talk and then pitch it to me. So, I was [laughter] Anyways, yeah, I was typing while we were talking. So, um I I'm not exactly sure where to put it in the agreement on the fly here, but um I'm thinking something to the effect will be added to the agreement that says notwithstanding any of the county funding provisions, the county retains the right to apply for and utilize grant funding sources for the county loan amount, which is a defined term in here related to phases one through four.

Okay. Um is there anyone here?

I think it would be one of those one of the letters. Um, you know, you got

Yeah.

Yes. I'm specifically looking at

one second uh part B where it talks about phase 1 through three infrastructure costs allocation. Um, there's a subp paragraph E that I think is where we're going to put it.

Okay. Is there anyone here in the public that wishes to address this?

No windows compensation.

Sorry,

it's not a public hearing item, but you can hear from the you can hear from the folks that'll be signing the agreement.

Commissioners, uh, I just want to take a few minutes. I, you know, I've sat here for so many years and sometimes I can't stand it when people go on and pontificate when we get to the end of a big project like this. But I can't let today go by without thanking your staff and our team. And there's some I've been working on this for 2 and 1/2 years. And this week I had to go back and look at how much time I had. And I have over 300 hours working on this in the last 2 and 1/2 years. Uh what happened here is our clients bought a bunch of property and you all approved the zoning for it and we all thought we were going hunky dory down the road. Then we found out that the pipes that were out in front of some of these big projects just literally did not have any capacity. And that started a very long- winded discussion with Pasco County Utilities about how we might fix it. And basically, we're fixing a regional issue for the county working together in a partnership. But it we could not have done this without Jordan's help, Brford's help. This guy Adulo over here has spent a ton of time and effort with us. David has worked on it. Mike's been in some of the meetings. David Allen and David Engel have been in meetings, but Joel Ed Rogers on our end and Jordan Walker, our other uh PE of record, who's laid out a lot of the phase work that's going to occur here, have all been working on this nonstop for 2 years now. And what ended up happening in this process by working together and there were points we didn't think this could happen is we will make sure that the county's whole on this project at the end of the day. So the county will make a bunch of money uh selling the utility services over time to the developments in this corridor. We will have paid the county back and we have built this gigantic infrastructure that will serve this whole corridor for years to come. and we will make sure that it's done ahead of the DOT project. And

we need to show you uh Hillsboro County how to do it.

Yeah. Yeah. So, [laughter] I just

you know how long we waited for that plant in southern Hillsboro County.

Again, to Joel and to our whole team and our clients for letting us do this. This was a difficult project, but it's ended up being a great project for everybody involved. So, I thank you all and your staff for for working with us on it. Thank you. And I I do have one question, not it's not for Clark, but um you know, I listen to all the planning commission meetings and it used to be that they were saying is the infrastructure in place for this? And I haven't heard that in a long time, but as we're checking through the boxes, you know, is someone checking to see if we need that the that we're up to date on our water sewer? Seems to me that this happened on VOP as well. We kind of got caught without a utility plan. Is that right?

Yeah, the the utilities are undergoing regular master planning. I know. I think we got a couple of items that they've either gone through or sometimes they run together. So, the team has done a phenomenal job. You know, it was um you know, nice nice words there from from Mr. Jav. But I would say that ultimately this is this is just a great example of of trying to get ahead of the game. There's great system benefits as a result of this that benefit all the rateayers of Pasco County. And I think too, you know, doing this in conjunction where we can with with road widening projects definitely um you know, we only like to touch things once. Sometimes in government we'll touch things two or three or four or five times in sequence. And uh I think it's I think it's a boon to the public as well and just has a great public benefit to everything that we're doing here today. So

is there another area in the county where you think we'll be looking at next?

Uh along the line road corridor at the very north end of the county. Shady Hills up county line up in there.

Okay. All right. Um,

do we have a motion?

We have a motion.

I'll make a motion. And, uh, let me just quickly say, Adalfo, Joel, Clark, everybody, you guys did phenomenal work in this thing all the way through. Um, I just want to make sure we protected ourselves with that one clause. Um, and I'm glad to hear that El Paso Road is being has been being done because I wasn't sure of that, but yeah,

great great news there. So, I'll make a motion to approve with the conditions stated by staff that we can be protected to go get grants that won't impede uh the funding of this agreement.

I'll second.

And again, uh thank you to everyone who worked on this. It's great when we can all work together like this and achieve something so so important for the county. With that, all in favor?

I opposed.

Okay, great job everybody. job.

Thank you so much.

Waiting for the county

and um make sure that we're taking care of the coen grass over there.

Oh man. CP EV or whatever it's called. And when are we going to get a new name?

I I I can't take that name. Um full of cocon.

Okay. Well, now what are you up here for?

Teer resolution for

Oh, okay. We approve publication of uh this item in the temp times October 12th, 2025.

Oh, this is kind of a

This is a pretty easy thing.

Yep. All right. So, Amy Frell, budget director with Pasco County's Office of Management and Budget. Item P69 is a tax equity and fiscal responsibility act application and public hearing for John Hopkins all children's hospital.

All right. So, um a tap for hearing. So, federal tax law allows for the issuance of taxexempt bonds for qualified private activity. IRS regulations require approval from the county commission as the highest elected governing body with jurisdiction over the area in which the project will occur. A finding the project is in the public interest and a public hearing to gather input from the public. Approval will allow the John's Hopkins Health System Corporation to borrow at a taxexempt rate. Um, the hospital system is seeking to borrow up to $280 million. Funds will be issued by the Maryland Health and Higher Education Facilities Authority, not Pasco County. And the purpose of the bonds is to finance the acquisition, construction, renovation, or equipping of a five-story approximately 226,000 square foot patient care facility located in Wesley Chapel, which will include 56 patient care units with an emergency department, imaging, surgery, ambulatory care, that is hard to say, and supporting services. Um, and it'll fund capitalized interest and other costs of issuance. It's important to remember that the county is not responsible for paying the debt service. There's no cost to the county resulting from the approval of this applications and John Hopkins is not borrowing from Pastor County. All right. So, uh, recommended action accept public comment and vote on the resolution. Okay. Um, is there anyone here that wishes to speak to this item? Seeing none, I have one question for the county attorney. I am on the board of trustees for John Hopkins, but uh do I need to recuse myself or I don't

That's not a paid position, is it?

No.

No, you would not.

The opposite. [laughter]

Yeah. No, you would not need I think I think we I think we we did the we did this research before. I I'm I'm pretty sure that you're you're fine if it's an unpaid position.

Okay.

Did that was that a motion?

I'll make a motion. Yes.

Okay. Okay. All in favor? I opposed.

Anybody online?

No, no one's been online all day.

Okay. All right. Thank you very much. We are on to the county administrators. I

Madam Chair.

Yeah.

Uh I'd like to show those pictures of the elk if I could. And then just one quick thing about the disaster recovery meetings we have coming up.

He had pictures he was wanting to show before but it had they hadn't loaded up yet.

So there's all the veterans. This is the ARPA.

That's the steps to recovery and the Elks members that were there for the uh for the banquet.

Nice.

All just the veterans themselves. RTC was there. Junior RTC did a great job. I get to speak a little bit about the great things we're doing here.

Look at that tie.

Who is it?

As the president, they were very very pleased, very happy. Just great to see the camaraderie of the whole group.

Okay. And if you could, let's put up the uh disaster recovery housing program meetings. Um, and I think it's good to see it because if people can pull on online to see the picture, they know the meetings. These meetings uh I think we all all met now program.

You guys got a brochure here.

Yeah. So I think they're doing a phenomenal job. The first meeting comes up November 18th, 19th, 20th, and the 22nd, 24th, 25th. I'm going to be able to hit I think the first four of them. I won't be able to hit the other two, but I think everybody has an opportunity here to hit one meeting or another. Um the program as as they get started is going to be able to help some some things a little bit quicker, but March is like when the most going. But the eligible activities for the individual housing for reimbursement of repair expenses for homeowners, repair construction of elevation of homes, demolition and clearance of blighted structures, the voluntary buyout location, all the requirements tied back to hurricane Adalia, Helen or Milton, um and the household income at 80% or below the area uh median income is going to be critical and those are going to be taken care of first. And I think it's important that we all know that we need to make sure that we get this not only approved and funded, but we don't have any clawbacks later on because we didn't hit that 70% threshold. So, I'm comfortable with staff making sure we get to those numbers, figure out how we got to get there before we actually have the other people that were higher incomes that are going to get some help, too.

And I'm I'm grateful for staffers swapping the November 18th with the November 22nd because that's the only meeting I can attend. and I wanted to be sure uh cuz the 19th I have a no a fact and I have my husband's charity event. So, uh, in Tampa. Um, so I I can only go to one. Um, and I plan to be there on 18.

And I'm going to go to the fact, but I'm going to drive back for the night time.

I got this event. My husband speak.

All right. Thank you, county administrator.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one item really. I'd just like to take a second to uh acknowledge our emergency management team. You may or may not be aware, but in September and October, there were a number of flash floods uh in Gila, Arizona. So, we deployed a team out there, Andy and some of our folks to uh provide emergency management services uh to to that area and they they've done a phenomenal job. But uh just Andy had given a shout out to the various areas of the county that also assisted with this, namely our our public our media relations communications team uh really stepped up in a big way. uh our solid waste department, especially with debris management, also also stepped up. Uh purchasing GIS and and other team members. And so again, just a another great example of how we've leveraged our experience with disaster to help other communities and it continues to help our folks train and to be better at what we at what we do. So I talked to Andy about his trip and he said that because they are not used to having dis emergency, you know, disasters, they had no idea how to do disaster pickup

and the communications part and that we were kind of running the communications from here for them.

So uh they were out there for I think two weeks and um and I I'm sure that I'll talk to the commissioners from there and Yeah.

Yeah. Well,

I'm so proud of our guys.

We we see it as a good example to not only train but also give back and assist where those need. So, pass those out there up in the forefront. That's all.

Okay. Um I never remember which one you [laughter]

um and this time I have something. Um

yes, you did litigation.

Uh no, you don't need don't need a litigation assessment meeting. Um, as the as the board is aware, um, there was pending litigation, Coastline Boat Lift Covers versus Pasco County. Um, on October 27th, 2025, um, the court dismissed their case against us uh, based on the adoption of the new ordinance. Um there was a motion for summary judgement that had been issued by the court April 20th, 2023 which we appealed to the second DCA uh based on the error we think in the court's language u regarding the advertisement for the uh 2019 ordinance. Second DCA said basically it was premature to appeal at that point because a final action had not been taken in the case. While I believe the court was in error in that summary judgement motion um I also am aware that if and now it would be ripe to appeal. Um, I'm also aware that the district courts of appeal are highly unlikely to take a case which has been resolved in all other aspects. Um, and by your adoption of the new ordinance, I think that would be the position they would take. So, long way of saying while I would like to appeal it, I am recommending that you not appeal it because I don't think we'll get anywhere. It'll just be good money after bad, so to speak.

That makes sense. Um and at this point the the issue with regarding regarding boat covers and the uh that particular vendor has been settled. I think we let sleeping dogs lie and move forward.

Sounds good.

That's it.

Do you have anything?

Madame clerk has nothing to bring forward.

Okay. Now my list, sorry I have a lot. um on the TDC. Uh first of all, I need your approval for two new appointments, Erica Broadnecks and Antonio Perez. So move

second.

All in favor?

I thank you. Um so as Commissioner Joerger mentioned, we had the dedication um we had a couple dedications. We dedicated the new kitchen and um county administrator was there. Uh and then we dedicated the um you see the sign here the Wilton Simpson self-sufficiency residential center. Uh all these signs they were new to this to this event. Also the Scott and Kathy Frink was West Pasco campus. So uh just a a great morning. Um what they have done and invested in in what the west side of the county is amazing and the community is forever grateful. They are helping so many families to um get back on their feet. So great event. Uh let's see what Oh, so this is uh Scott Fanks. No, not Scott F. Tim Mark's um retirement party. Um we had it down at the yach club in Tampa. And there's Mayor Caster. Gave him a proclamation and it was the who's who I guess of Tampa Bay. I don't know. It was quite the event. And um it was very nice send off for Tim who did such an amazing job at at Metropolitan. Um this is oh so let me say let me cross these off because these are not in order on my paper. So TDC met so as some of you know I do a couple t couple times a year I I take my international CEOs on um field trips and this was our latest field trip. So, the first place we went to was the Hillsboro Pas uh public PSCO, public safety.

Yeah, POC, I guess. Public safety operations center. Um, we went there, Commissioner Oakley, before and um they got to to tour that and see what government does when there is a uh an declared emergency. Then we went on to the Coca-Cola plants. Um the gentleman there by the red Coca-Cola bottle, Leroy is the current chair of Amskills and he offered to give us a tour. I had eight or nine CEOs from the area. You see Matler, Toledo, um Touch Point, um bunch of bunch of the companies here, Farmer Works, um The Point, uh I can't remember all the companies. And um then we toured their new state-of-the-art distribution center, which is right around the corner. So uh at the end, we went to the victory ship. Oh yeah, we had to wear these hats. Uh in the Coca-Cola plant, you know, they do the smart water. So, if you're anywhere in the southeastern United States and you're buying a bottle of smart water,

not not the one that

there's a special Smart Water. I don't even remember what's in it, but the regular Smart Water, it's coming from here in Tampa, which I had no idea.

Um, so then we went to the American Victory Ship. Joe McGee, um, who's right behind me is, uh, on the board and they gave us a tour. That's the general there on the blue shirt. um special ops guy in the other blue shirt uh that gave us a tour. Um and uh you know what happens on these is these businessmen talk to each other and and business gets done and Joe has a company who wants to move to Pasco County that is a I think it's a perfume company and needs a bottling plant. So he and Spencer are doing some business there. So nice.

Yeah. So, it's really nice to have this um this going on. Um and then you the one guy is from the XGen XGen X I don't remember how to say his company next to Pascal from Touchpoint. He has an amazing company here in Pasco County.

Yeah, remember. And um and and he was plugged into everything. Okay, next picture. Get off of that one. Um, oh, I spoke at the, um, Tampa Bay Chamber Public Policy Roundt two mornings in a row. I had to be in Hillsboro County like 7:30 in the morning. That was that was a little tough. Um, so that was what that was. Um, they wanted to those were the three chairs from three different counties. I also turned s toward Saddle Brook. Look at that pool. What an improvement. And the the uh, clubhouse is looking beautiful. I'm very excited for them. And I told him, Jack, that we were going to work on getting back there for one of their meetings.

Right.

Yeah.

Okay. Um, next. Um, oh, so this is this is a crazy thing that's going on. If you go down Little Road, this is the new Jallow car wash next to Pit Boss. Um, and for some reason, these two don't connect. So, Jallow has a a del lane that goes into the car wash and then Pit Boss. Is there another picture? Did they do two pictures? Oh, watch this. Watch this.

So, everyone's They don't connect. Did you see the grass?

So, like while I'm standing there, a car pulls into Jello and then drives across. Um I And I don't know. I I should I had to picture that, but everyone's It's the craziest thing. And I don't understand why we don't I thought we require Here's the car coming in. So I thought we required interconnects and that that just happened.

Jello wanted to happen.

Well, it should be that they have to

usually takes two to tango. I can't speak in this particular case on site.

Yeah. So this is crazy, but you know that's what's going on there. Um I thought they were required to connect. Okay. next.

You would think so cuz you see the curb cut.

I know. Well, I did it my first time, too. And and and they told me, "No, [clears throat] no." And I'd stop like what? They said, "Don't think he's going to tell us.

You got to go around and go out back out on Little Road and come around."

He can tell you all about it. Chair David Allen, assistant county administrator, development service. Yeah, this is um Mr. Carbala said it takes two to tango. We did require um as part of the the project to have that connection. However, the neighboring property owner where the Pit Boss Barbecue and the strip mall was unwilling to um

uh approve of the connection between the two and then

customers were benefiting.

Understand that, but but again, it's a private property issue with with a private property party that was unwilling to cooperate.

Well, it doesn't look like it's stopping them. Well, we're all finding a way to uh do that delane and get in there until they put something across there. Um okay. All right, then. Um I had a meeting last week or two weeks ago with my constituents regarding this. Um I don't know. Is it Panos? Who was at this meeting? Panos, were you there? No.

Yeah. Okay. So if you want to come up and explain this and if you could put on the map Gulf Trace Boulevard and Lacanto Street in St. Louis, you'll see this in the big picture. These roads, this road used to connect. And when they when they built Gulf Trace Boulevard, they put in like they stopped the connection. And I just want you to see, you know, I'm all about connections. I want you to see why it's important. Um so but if you want to go ahead

Panos Conces assistant u uh engineer the services uh director uh this [clears throat] was one of the connections that the board identified for us to explore back in uh I believe in June or earlier than that. So this is the connection between St. Louis uh road and GF trace boulevard. Um so we coordinated with the local community. We had a meeting at their clubhouse. Uh Commissioner Starky was there. I was there and one of my staff was there to present the concept which was shown just before. Um the community there were about 15 I believe attendees.

Uh they were very perceptive of the project. They were very positive. uh they themselves uh pointed out that that connection will improve the access to Gulf Trace Elementary and also recreation uh center which is to the west of the connection and also that that connection because of those access improvements the property values will will be increased. So

okay will you uh zoom out there please? I want you to see what these people have to do. Okay, if you live over here on the corner, let's say of Mir and St. Louis and you want to take your kid to baseball practice or soccer and you get and and they're not walking, they're not old enough, whatever.

You have to go all the way.

You have to go all the way down. Zoom out more, please. You have to go all the way down. Keep going to She show us 19. Zoom out. Zoom out. You got to go all the way through all these neighborhoods to get to US19, make a left turn up to Gulf Trace Boulevard, way up there, past Sun Coast Toyota, and come around and go up Gulf Trace and you live like it could take you one, two minutes, but instead you have to do that. Same with the elementary school. You can you see the elementary school there in Gulf Trace Boulevard. So, how how we let this happen. This is and everybody that was there was for this.

I am sure we might hear we might hear from the person on the corner if it's an older person that doesn't have any kids in the park or the school that they don't want anyone all that traffic driving in front of their house. But for the vast majority of people here, it's going to save lives. It's going to save lives.

Should have been there.

Yeah. So, um, there are three or four of these around the county.

Um, one of them is

Pepin.

Um, I know we had Mrs. Ostein come in here, but sometimes I mean this is this is just planning 101. You must have connections. So, um, thank you so much for your team for coming out and, uh, God speed on getting us connected. We own the land,

right?

Yes. There's no rightway issues. We can build the road. just now we're trying to fund it in our CIP to do the design and immediately after we can go to construction. There's no any impediment to to build the road with regards to right away or utilities or anything like that. So,

thank you so much and we'll see this um coming in front of us whenever they get the project ready and the funding.

Thank you so much panel.

Thank you.

All right. What's next?

Is there anything else for pictures?

Okay. Well, I also attended the inaugural education legislative plat partnership forum. I wish we had another half hour. I think it would have been great to take questions, but I I thought it was wonderful. Um did the pit bass jello that that Saddlebrook. Um okay, so um I wanted to um uh talk about Charlie Kirk and I just wondered like many communities are doing if we wanted to think about naming a road after him. So

that looked good.

Yeah. I don't know where or which one, but you know, think about it and let's maybe come back with some ideas. Maybe something in front of the county government. I don't know. Um I think would be good. Um work uh a legislative legislation has been filed for um ebikes, scooters, and pocket bikes and rocket whatever those things are called. Uh talking to a lot of commissioners from other counties, it's a problem everywhere. actually it's a problem across the whole United States. So, um I wrote wrote the uh two legislators who are sponsoring the bill and offered to work with them and give them stories about things that happened in our county and um Ralph love to work with you on that. I want to make sure we stay involved in that because I want to see something get through. Um and then I lastly I have some very um oh I attended the Ahack workshop that's a statewide workshop on um affordable housing. Um and I did the Tampa home talk interview but I um I want to give you some sad news. Keith is gone, I think. But those of you might uh David um who worked on Starky Ranch that um I'm gonna get all choked up that Matt Call who was so instrumental in doing such a wonderful development working for and work for Wheelock, my son's company. Um you know, last a couple years ago, he developed pancreatic cancer and he fought a very good fight. Um but he um he did pass away this week. So uh they have a service for him on the 29th. Unfortunately, every Stark is going to be in Virginia. So we're going to going to miss the service. But um what they did with that P4, I think it was the first one in the country with the Starky K8 and the park and the county. Um I don't think any developer in the county has stepped up like they did. And um I really wanted to get tell him that and to thank him, but he went into hospice before I got that opportunity. Um so he has two young kids and um and he will be very missed. Okay, with that we're done. We're

and wish everybody a wonderful

Yes.

and grateful Thanksgiving.

Yes.

Happy Thanksgiving.