8.24.2021 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

[Music] need that she you better get it her I'm going ask her for some names here in a minut we got them ready that's it I don't have very many people signed up you don't no there's a whole room like the whole place would I know that's good are they certain [Music] numbers and 93 you somebody else no no they brought me oh they have a of good afternoon I now call back back to order the Pasco County Board of County Commission meeting of August 24th 2021 a reminder to everyone present please silence all electronic devices and mute your microphones um now we will proceed with public hearings agenda starting with ordinances and we have P where we at here p80 p80 item p80 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on April 28th 2021 good afternoon Mr chairman commission members Denise Hernandez Planning and Development item p80 is PDD 21354 it's for a ordinance amending the Pasco County Land Development code this was actually advertised as a continuance but I do want to read into record the correction this is actually a uh this one was supposed to be the adoption hearing on your item in p84 actually so this is scheduled for continuance or the request is to Contin continue the adoption hearing to September 28th 2021 at 1:30 in Newport Richie Newport Richie is a correction at stated dat City move to continue time Shon second got a motion a second all those in favor say I all oppos like sign motion pass 5 z81 item p81 was published in the Tampa Times on April 7th 2021 item p81 is PDD 21327 uh this is a comprehensive plan Amendment uh there's also a request for continuance the request for continuance to the December 7th 2021 uh Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 in Newport Richie wouldve to continue time certain got a motion second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 Z B2 item p82 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on June 9th 2021 p82 is PDD 21427 this is also a comprehensive plan Amendment it was also advertised for continuance continuance state is um October 26 2021 at 1:30 in Newport Richie move to continue time certain have a motion in a second all those in favor say I I motion pass 5 Z p83 Item p83 was published in the Tampa Times on July 18th 2021 p83 is PDD 21499 it's also a comprehensive actually it is a Mobility fee um Amendment to the Land Development code uh this is a request to continue to the September 28th 2021 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 in Newport Richie continue daytime second I got a motion second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 Z p84 Item p84 was published in the Tampa Times on April 208th 2021 item p84 I'm just going to read

this into record um because Mr Monaco who's my colleague will actually be doing a presentation on this PDD 21353 just for purposes of housekeeping on this one uh you will be accepting public comment this is the first of two public hearings and the adoption this is the correction is scheduled for September 28th 2021 at 1:30 in Newport Richie your your agenda memo state state city so that is the correction and Mr Monaco will present present the item thank you Denise good afternoon Commissioners Mr commissioner great to be back uh where's the clicker I'd like to read it into the ordinance oh actually Denise you read that right already in the ordinance no okay for the record an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development code chapter 600 overlay in special district areas section 62.8 vop development and administration review fees and map change to exhibit 602 e vop Master roadway plan exhibit a tindel Road East West Street a a RightWay realignment and other amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer severability inclusion to the land of M code and an effective date okay no action is required because this is only the first hearing and Denise mentioned that September 28 21 is the final adoption is that's when you have to do take action The Proposal is basically two pieces it's a map Amendment and a text amendment in the map amendment is timel road right away that was in the highway Vision plan I'm I'm going to show you that in a second and the second part is the text amendment is just the distribution of this the development and review fees on the map here you'll see vop is in that area the area to the the bottom part I'm going to blow that up real quickly so you can see that as well what you see in the the gray line that goes towards the bottom is what was existing proposed right way for tendale Road unfortunately it went it bisected the Pasco utilities a lot and they were they need that lot not to have s uh people coming through there the public coming through so they actually requested us a few weeks ago or actually few months ago we can't have that for security reasons could you please relocate the right of way um and so we looked at the situation I notified all the land owners in the area and what we did is we actually have an improvement it actually is straightened it still is on the PCU property um but it actually is much by having it more straightened the linear feed is reduced which saves a lot of money and and that sense and the lots are also still very marketable in fact some lots are more marketable than others so that's this one here and the whole reason again was just to prohibit Public Access from bisecting a utility site because they need it now to think about the water treatment that we need for vop in the future the second part of this uh is related to the development review and

administration fees that is the additional fee that all vop delivers pay they pay $400 per residential unit so at that $400 what happened in the very in the original what we passed back in January 26 is we didn't specifically State how that fee was going to be distributed and the P the property owners group basically has paid for all these documents here and it cost about 1.6 million to put all this together so so we are charging this fee and then converting that to credits part of that is credits for planning fee credits so if out of the $400 per unit half of that or $200 per unit is going to pay back the property owners group for all the work they did in this 125 per unit is going to fund the operations and management of the free free credit registry I will come before you in a few weeks actually with the consultant that's very interested in doing this um but automatically again what's nice about this is it just comes right out of the fee this is an additional fee that everybody pays in vop the remainder $75 unit is going to cover initially the cost for the um the development review that basically current planning has and and undertakes once the $200 per unit pays back the p that $200 in the future from that point on goes to the Planning and Development Department so initially the planning department does take a big hit in the beginning but once the p is paid off and we we Pro proceed about 10 years that'll go back to the planning department the purpose again is an annual operating funds are needed for the Fe feed credit registry the PO needs to get redeemed their planning Fe fee credits we did similar to the idea on connected City now they're in their fifth year we paid back half of those planning Fe credits for connected City it was a 10-year timetable we want to repeat that same pattern here and the additional funds are provided for Planning Development Department now just as a side note on May 19th the vop planning and policy committee agreed they had no problem they approved the proposed map Amendment as a recommendation they added the one condition to the development review fee they wanted the Planning and Development Department to designate a special person to review vop projects the planning department responded say we need time to think about this by the time I went to the LPA we they we explained to the uh the Planning Commission that it was just not practical for us to actually designate one person and I'm going to just go over some of the reasons here Cherry pedos is here as well Brad Brad is here as well talk about this in case it becomes an issue but at the end of the day we do not recommend a dedicated vop reviewer with that with those fees so when it comes on May on I'm sorry on September 28th that's when you make a decision this is just for information now and to get public input so let me review a little bit here the reasons why the planning department does not recommend a dedicated vop reviewer is because the unpredict

unpredictability of the preliminary development plan submissions it's going to make it too cumbers and too difficult to implement government agencies cannot hire and fire like that way you you can't like you don't know when you get a lot in you don't when you get a little in and you can't release people given that kind of schedule the condition would designate only one person to handle vop projects that $75 doesn't even cover that uh depending upon particular applications there's a lot of experts in the county that we rely on it's now you're now they're making the planning department B track everybody's hours really going to that's really difficult to do okay I mean they're still going to do their work but we like to them to focus on things they have to do and the intent of receiving the review fee was to compensate for the extra work needed to operate the vop review not necessarily to fund a particular position and find the existing PDD revenues must be used to meet Service delivery needs so we do not recommend we actually want you to think about uh really approving what the LPA approved which is basically not that recommendation for a single person to be used in that case so and September 28th this will be the recommended Committee Action okay any questions any questions Bernie this is a public hearing we have Mr to good afternoon Mr chairman ladies and gentlemen Joel 2 to an Associates Palm Harbor Florida I'm here on behalf of the vop property owners group that I've had the privilege of representing now for about 13 years they are the group that funded all the enabling documents and all of the substantial revisions that have been made since then I just want to clarify a couple points uh we're we're we're in support obviously of the text Amendment um and we supported that with the policy and planning committee uh but I do want to discuss the reviewer aspect very briefly but before I do that just to clarify under the current enabling document these property owners that funded $1.6 million over the last 10 or 12 years they currently have the right to use their administrative fee credits against the entirety of that $400 review fee uh which over time would allow them eventually to recoup theoretically uh the money they funded uh on the County's behalf uh they have agreed they voluntarily agreed to defer that by only being able to use half of their credits in other words only $200 at any one time because they recognize that we do need funding for the Fe Credit registry and for the review of plans but they're now going to be waiting twice as long to get a payback through those credits uh and of course this was to level the playing field because not every property owner out there funded this you had 10 or 12 that funded all this money and this was the only way uh that Mr Goldstein and I could come up with for them to ultimately recoup the funding so they're happy to give up half of those credits and defer their payback uh but our

thought process was that if they were willing to do that and to continue to to share this Venture that because I now have one MPD vop on the agenda today I literally have six more engaged in in process Mr hobby has two or three in process we have a large batch coming through we have a proposed development agreement that chairman Oak and Mr bows and Mr Goldstein are aware of where we're going to have one master developer funding approximately 17 million of roadway and utility infrastructure UPF front in vop so our point is we're getting enough Traction in vop it has very specific rules its own Land Development code provision that only applies in vop the problem we're running into in the MPD reviews is we get random assignments of reviewers and we continually get someone who's not familiar with vop or hasn't done one our request wasn't to have one person designated exclusively to sit in one corner and only do vop reviews and then be idle the rest of the day when they could be helping others the point was to at least designate one that would be the primary reviewer for whatever RW pH matters were pining at any one time they then fill the rest of their time doing all the other mpds but it would provide us consistency I think it would streamline the process we would get more consistent review the conditions would be more consistent and I think it would help expedite this doesn't require the addition of any other people it's just simply allocating your Workforce to have a designated vop reviewer now obviously if we get more vop imputes in the hopper than even one person could handle then those would have to be allocated outside so that was the request I don't want anyone to think that the property owners were saying we won't just quote our reviewer sitting there just doing our work because that was not the request so we actually urge you to consider that and asking PDD to reconsider their position because from my look at it it costs them zero it cost them nothing in their budget so that's the request we're happy to make the concessional the administrative fees and the property owner group greatly appreciates all your support uh that they 've had Through The Years and we're anxious to actually get something built rather than a stack of documents approved thank you thank you Mr chairman yes sir um and I watched the Planning Commission meeting I don't have an I personally don't have an issue with having a dedicated vop revie I understand this is very complex I think back to um connected City you know EP how complex it was my opinion and we have good people great people obviously on our planning team um if you kind of have that one person that's has that knowledge base and continues I don't know what the plan Department thinks but I I don't think it's a bad idea Mr chairman yes sir and to go along the same sentiment I don't think it's a bad idea either and maybe even if they had two that one or the other at least you got that consist back up as well yeah right yeah Mr PTO good afternoon Mr

chairman uh Naros PTO Planning Development Department so the Planning Development Department does work to build subject matter experts in these complicated planning projects uh we have dedicated individuals such as the manager of Special Districts which is Ernie that you just heard from uh and then down the line into the deeper into the department we try to build planners and planning and zoning texts that can address the special criteria and qualities that these types of uh projects have but there's a turnover that occurs over time and it does take a lot of time to build those that subject matter expertise um so we do work toward toward that goal of having one or two individuals who are very knowledgeable in these planning areas um but o over time that can change as people move from positions or from job to job so that that would be the the planning resp but you you feel you can take care of that issue within the house within so yeah so long as we don't dedicate a specific person where they get mothballed because there's not any vop projects coming in in three years or something right um yeah to Tech Our concern was if you set up a single position funded with this fee and this fee can only support 25% of a person how do you fund the other portion of that yeah right you kind of make them exclusive to this and so as Terry mentioned we don't have any problem getting a subject matter expert but right now you'll number you'll see later we have 40 muds under review right now you and so one more makes 41 four more is just a 10% of that so you know what we I think want to avoid is setting where we're sliding other mudds that are in process off to the side because one comes in and this and we have to pick it up and so the key there is building depth in the organization to do all these through the process but not hire a specific person for this Mr CH yes sir I don't think that's what's being asked now right that's not I don't Joel that's not what it's been asked um from my understand again from watching the Planning Commission meeting here what was being said today it's more like Hey try to have somebody that's dedicated to that so you know when David's involved whoever the developer may be because there's multiple developer I'm just throwing David's name out there because he's very involved um you know you kind of a core group of people easy to get to knowledge base is there instead of and I sometimes I think it' be helpful for your team I mean I you guys can shake your head yes or no but um being so spread out they're so working so hard you know but you're not again you're not being like you just stated what you're not doing is saying you can only work on this project right you know Terry or Brad or whatever that needs to obviously have her team member Ernie what whoever it is you know move on to another project because because there's nothing to work on they can do it but I think just the request is hey

let's just try to have somebody with that subject matter um you know expertise on this bop because it is so complex um that way everybody kind of knows who to get a hold of as well right and and we do have we will be adding a project coordinator to the department to help us facilitate this that's a good ad all right but the decision does have to be made today anyways this is this is just introduction so uh anyone signed up to speak to this item Mr chair I only have five people signed up for this afternoon and looking at the audience I'm thinking that maybe some perhaps did not sign up but I have no one signed up for this item is anyone here that signed up to speak to this item people were here anybody wants to speak to this item or anybody that wants to speak to this item seeing no one come forward then that's a non-action item we'll move on to um P85 hey Mr chairman yes do you mind um a little while ago we can we there was item give me one second here the Ridge Road continued it was continued U that was P I think is that p82 is that correct no no P p81 that was Tanglewood yes um is there an another item coming up for Tanglewood that's being continued so I think I have a sneaky suspicion that 95% of the audience was here for the Tanga wood item that was already continued um a little while ago on P p81 just so you know we have a p bunch of yeah so I'm just want to let you guys know that that was continued p81 was continued it was continued to December 7th at 1:30 yeah so if you're only waiting for Tanglewood you're welcome to stay welcome to stay but I just just wanted to let you know so you're you got it guys all right and it was advertised for that good call commissioner okay let's move on to um P85 item P85 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on July 28th 2021 August 4th 2021 August 11th 2021 and August 18th 2021 P85 is PDD 21536 it's an ordinance establishing the conon East Community Development District P pursuant to chapter 190 Florida Statutes providing for authority and power for the district providing for powers and duties of the district providing for the Board of Supervisors of the district providing for the District budget providing for functions of the district providing for miscellaneous Provisions providing for an effective date today we're asking that you adopt this item by roll call vote okay do we have anyone signed up for this item we do not have anyone signed up for this item is any anybody on the WebEx no one on WebEx sir move for approv second is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak to this item seeing no one I got a motion in a second item is P85 establishing the Connerton East Community Development District I'll restate my motion move for approval

second okay I have a a motion in a second by roll call vote District Two commissioner Moore District three commissioner starky District Four commissioner Fitzpatrick I District Five commissioner Mariano I district one chairman Oakley all motion pass 5 Z move to p86 item p86 was published in the Tay times on June 9th 2021 p86 is PDD 211 0426 is an ordinance amending the Pascal County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan text amend amendment to Sub sub area policy flu 7.1.5 2 Paul materials providing for a repealer severability and an effective date today we're asking that you adopt this by roll call vote this was transmitted on July 6 2021 okay anyone sign up for this item to speak no one has signed up for this item to speak and no one WebEx no one on web anyone in the audience wish to speak to this item for approval no no one I got a motion second and a second by roll call vote District Two commissioner Moore hi District three commissioner starky hi District Four commissioner Fitzpatrick I District Five commissioner Mariano hi district one chairman Oley I motion pass 5 Z Now we move to um zoning yes Mr Stein be happy to read the procedures Mr chairman there are two resoning agendas regulating consent staff will present each application to the board of County Commissioners if staff or Planning Commission has recommended approval and there's no opposition the application will be considered by the board without further presentation if staff or Planning Commission has recommended denial or if there is opposition to the application the applicant will be given five minutes for presentation the opposition will be given three minutes for each individual or five minutes for a group representative and the applicant will be given three minutes for rebuttal any individual disagreeing with staff for Planning Commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the rezoning May at this time request the petition be pulled from the consent agenda in which case that application will be heard under the regular agenda later on during the meeting otherwise all resoning applications on the consent agenda will be approved by a single motion and vote if you wish to speak to any petition please give your name and address and whether or not you've been sworn for the record these are Quasi judicial public public hearings the law in Florida is that mere public support or opposition of an application is insufficient for this board to take action please limit your comments to those criteria found within the board's Land Development code uh P 87 you want to swearing in while we're we got to swear in while we had a break um if you are here to speak on the items for the remaining agenda please stand and raise your right hands all right thank you do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God thank

you okay p87 item p87 was published in the Tampa Times on June 30th 2021 it p87 is PDD 27531 it's a zoning Amendment horer property mpud master plan unit development District the request is for a continuance of the September 15th 2021 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 in Dade City second is that a was anyone here to speak to this they advertise continuances oh advertis okay I got a motion in second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 Z p88 Item p88 was published in the Tampa Times on June 30th 2021 p88 is PDD 27546 is a zoning amendment in the name of Weiss Smith Properties LLC this is a request for continuance to September 15th 20121 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 in dat City motion to continue have a motion and a second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 Z [Music] P89 item P89 was published in the Tay times on July 21st 1 2021 P89 is PDD 27549 it's a zoning amendment in the name of Patrick Sullivan for a change in zoning from an AR agricultural residential district to a C2 General commercial District comes here with a recommendation of approval with from the planning and development department and the Planning Commission okay is anyone here to speak against this item I don't have anyone signed up sign and no one's on WebEx okay no one's here to speak against the item it remains on consent P90 item P90 was published in the P Tampa Bay Times on July 21st 2021 P90 is pd2 17551 it's a zoning amendment in the names of Wade and Ernest transo and Joanie hooks it's for a change in zoning from AC agricultural District to an AR Agricultural and AR agricultural residential district to an AR agricultural residential district comes here with a recommendation of approval from the planning and development department and the Planning Commission is anyone here to speak against this item I have no one signed up and no one on WebEx no one on WebEx no one here sign uh that remains on consent p91 item p91 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on July 18th 2021 p91 is PDD 21 7525 zoning Amendment vop Lac Bailey LLC Bailey mpud change in zoning from an AC agricultural District to an MP master plan unit development District this comes through with a recommendation of approval from the p Pasadena Hills planning and policy committee and the Planning and Development Department as the um with conditions of course as contained your in your agenda packet okay is there anyone here to speak against this item no but I want to make a comment no one has signed up on this item and no one's on WebEx for this item okay um it's an mpud I think I can make sure that there's a tree in front of every unit in the

front so that's just a condition of condition of approval for me and I think the board does that can that stay in consent with that with that approve is there a condition is there a condition already on that property I don't think that ordinance is done being well mpud I think we were working to try to make sure that was a standard condition yeah I just want to be sure so I was told this is the place where I add it I do not see that as a standard condition um so far that I've seen so we can we'll pull that out certainly add that pull it off consent pull it off consent pull it off consent okay we'll come back to it and that's the end of your consent agenda oh okay so entertain a motion on consent items second got a motion in a second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 Z consent items now Mr chairman on on 9 91 I would just like to add the condition that there be a tree in front of every house is Mr is the applicant okay with that you want to address that on 91 Pro yes Joel two again two an Associates for the applicant Bailey MPD we have no objection to that requirement being added as a condition uh in the conditions Prior to uh approval move to approve well wait a minute could we also make sure that tree is put there but we want to make sure it's put in an area that's big enough like if you put an oak Tre there we don't need it in a 2 by two spot we're going to have you come inspect and count them okay I'll join him I'll take care of that's no problem okay okay all right move to approve I got a motion second all those in favor say I I motion pass 5 Z move on to p92 yes item p92 was published in the Tampa Times on June 30th 2021 good afternoon everybody this is Tammy Snider from Planning and Development I present to you Ranch Hill mpud PDD 27534 um the applicant is Alfred T Smith through resoning from AC to MPD to allow 350 multif family apartment units on approximately 23.6 Acres and the location map and the current zoning districts you can see it's just on the south of State Road 52 and to the west of Old Pasco Road go ahead next and there's future land use next slide proposed is a resoning request from AC agricultural zoning District to an mutd to allow maximum of 350 multif family apartment units on approximately 23.1 they're also requesting A variation on-site parking LDC 97.1 they want to reduce the required number of parking spaces from 2.25 spaces to 1.9 spaces cons consistent with other similar project approvals in the area and here is their master plan they are showing an interconnect to the South they're showing an interconnect to the orange belt trail to the north which will be constructed once the trail is and there's they um they have one access out onto Old Pasco Road next Slide the subject's parcel currently

reflects its original zoning District of AC and it contains approximately 2316 Acres of pasture land residence and some out buildings the orange belt Trail is planned to be constructed by the county within the property abiding the subject property to the North and then once it's constructed the subject property will construct a bike pedestrian access to the orange belt Trail the mango Hills mpud AB buts the subject property on the west and south it received approval for a maximum of 415 single family detached and attached town home units and the properties to the north and Northeast of the subject parcel AB budding State Road 52 are Zone C2 and iil light industrial and Ro land uses apartments are a logical transition or Ste down from General commercial and Industrial uses to the residential uses the LDC specifies that variations from this code may be reviewed and approved by the plan Commission in the BCC during the public hearing for an mpud the applicant is seeking the parking requirement variation is noted previously and the proposed request is consistent with the Pasco LDC and the applicable provisions of the Pasco County comprehensive plan and with that the PDD recommends approval with conditions okay uh Miss W height speak to this item Barbara will height 6327 Grand Boulevard Newport Richie Florida 34652 for the applicant um we come with a unanimous recommendation by Planning Commission and staff and I'm not sure if anybody signed up um I have a presentation happy to make my presentation um but it might make sense to see if anybody's signed up and wants to speak and then I can is anyone sign up for this item no one signed up and no one on WebEx okay no one signed up no one on WebEx okay so to the commission um thank you I am happy to make a presentation you might want to call and see if there there's comment out there is there anyone here would like to speak to this item this is a public meeting so well I see a no one I don't think you need a present okay well I will well we have our book and it's beautiful yeah thank you y thank you we with that my client would ask yes sir just a question bar are the turn Lanes coming in and out from uh 52 on Old Pasco Road our access is from Old Pasco um we don't have Frontage on 52 the commercial non-residential has Frontage on 52 but we are coordinating our access with the mangle Hills project to the South M so that there's coordinated access because we're both neighbors um and so we'll be doing that with the site plan review okay um just a suggestion um seeing I don't where you have your pedestrian access is that a what is that green area right there my my contacts aren't working so well today where The Pedestrian access is going to the orange belt Trail can't actually read that myself um it's it's in this it's in this corner of the project right and there's I can't tell what it says underneath it but but but but here's what what I want to say and it's something that I've talked to uh Mr

pitos about and others and we're going to talk about it again tonight at the bpack meeting and that is um one of the things we want to make sure we do is is have the opportunity for um entrepreneurship along the orange belt Trail for people to come in and put in a little coffee shop an ice cream shop you know something that benefits and would be a fun place to go to if you're using the trail so I would hope that you might carve out a little piece here could be one of your residents that wants to run a coffee shop or a bake shop or something adjacent to that trail and I'd love to see it as a trail user so be thinking creatively about a retail or you know small commercial experience next to that trail we can certainly do that what what makes this project fit so nicely in this location is that all long 52 is non-residential so those uses can go on the north side of the trail a long 52 um and it'll buffer your trail from 52 as well as being able to have those serving uses so I think between what we might be able to do in the future and and the fact that there is non-residential already zoned up there I think that'll fit what you would like to achieve yeah but you could put the uses in ice cream shop coffee shop Lemonade Stand whatever if you're within 2050 100 ft of the trail whatever the right determination is I don't know what that is you can do it and it it's just a great benefit and a really cool thing to have along the perimeters of the trail especially that trail Mr chairman and I'll agree with those sentiments I mean you the way long leaf is set up with the starky trail right there it's a great little spot downtown you can stop in the morning get coffee or even in the afternoon get something or even dinner so yeah I think it would would add a lot and I I hear from people all the time that we don't have enough amenities along our Trails once you leave the starky market and long leaf you go all the way to Hernando County before you can H buy a Drink Along you know or an ice cream or anything along our Trail so I just want to really encourage some uh little entrepreneurship along the trails thank you okay with that I move approval second got a motion and second all those in favor say I I motion pass 5 Z thank you thank you move on to p93 p93 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on June 30th 2021 good afternoon Commissioners Jessica koal with Planning and Development Department current planning division item p93 is PDD 27520 for requested change in zoning in the name of py Home company LLC and Curtis law Incorporated next slide proposed rezoning request from a our agricultural residential district to mpud mastered plan unit development District to allow for 240 single family detached units on approximately 79.7 Acres next Slide the property is located in South Central Pasco County on the southwest corner of the intersection of Lake patience Road and Purdue drive

next slide this is a visual of the current zoning in the surrounding area next slide and its future land use currently and the surrounding area next slide the subject parcel reflects its original AR zoning District the subject site contains residential dwelling unit and agricultural Pursuits it is in the South Market and urban service area but is outside of the rural areas the proposed uh request has been reviewed and is found to be consistent with the Land Development code and the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan on July 22nd the Planning Commission unanimous unanimously recommended approval there are Mobility fee credits for RightWay compensation being proposed along with this condition this is a picture of their master plan therefore this item comes to you with staff and planning commission's recommendation of approval subject to the conditions of approval contained in your packet thank you we have anyone signed up for this item we do we have one person signed up for this item Anthony sent Ranger goo you have an applicant presentation yeah Mr chairman Clark hobby hobby and hobby PA 109 North breast Street Tampa Florida have been sworn we only had one person uh object at Planning Commission Mr chairman and so I'm going to keep this rather brief the s's located in the res 6 future Lane use classifications in the urban service area the South market area where we're planning for all this growth the client is proposing a density that is roughly one/ half of the density that would otherwise be permitted on the site and every property that's adjacent to the site running for approximately six miles has MPS or large scale uh development to the West so happy to answer any questions but I don't see what else this site would be used for thank you are those blueberry plants what's on there pine trees now it was a Grove oh okay I was wondering what that was competition yes sir come forward state your name and address hi my name is Anthony sangalo 20855 Lake patience Road have you been sworn have you been sworn no okay please raise your right hand excuse me do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God I do thank you you may proceed I live directly across the street from this uh plan development and I want to make aware the planners that there's a potential drainage issue um in my backyard um there's a pond in my backyard that loops around and it actually is maxed out right now there's a various houses around this Pond and uh um it uh right now it's maxed out it's a flat property and if it comes up much more it can come towards the houses uh um it right now when it when it overflows it overflows uh across Lake patients Road and into the area where they're going to be building this um I just wanted them to plan for that and

make sure that they don't try to dump water towards the pond because it's only going to overflow it more um want to make sure that it uh they plan to funnel it in a different direction um uh I don't know if you want to see the video or not but I I did take like a a 40sec video um of of kind of what it looks like do you does that matter you can yeah it's not very professional or anything but it's okay all right while that's loading just just know that they will have to build ponds on their property the capture all their runoff so they they cannot add any water off their property onto your property okay very good thank you yeah yeah they normally do that okay no no video okay yeah just uh so it's it's in my backyard and um it there is a um a tube that goes underneath the the road um that is the location where they they should focus their efforts um to make sure that uh it it goes elsewhere um not flowing towards towards everybody's proper because there is very little margin and if it comes up much at all it's going to start going on to everybody's properties yeah Mr chairman I think what he you're stating that um there's some cver of some type or something that's coming under under the road from that property to your property where theond located there's a there's a a drainage pipe that connects um the pond to that property and and the water flows I don't know if the if it works or not that drainage pipe I would hope so but um it it does connect over there and and that currently is the escape the reason why I know that is because when I saw it it rain very hard it actually flowed over the road in that location and so that's how I know where where the water's going um if you do want to know what what it looks like I don't know if it's possible to use the other person's um map of the property um I don't know if I'm he has they have your video Don't They I see it it's not coming up they they hadn't got a video okay you can you can email us the video yeah he come back but clerk can explain it Mr Mr hobby come back forward Mr chairman Clark hobby again I don't know if there anyone else who wants to speak on this matter if there is not I was just going to say we'd be happy to meet with him afterwards look at the video we have our engineer here we'll be happy to work with them to make sure we aren't exacerbating the drainage issue is there anyone I don't believe anyone else signed up for this item but this gentleman so is anyone in the room wish to speak to this item see no one then um I just need the applicant to agree that there'll be a tree in front of every house in the front at least you know at least one Mr starky yes we'll agree to that but we're building single family detached and the code already requires one street tree and one lot tree so you'd actually be bargaining against yourself well I just I'm happy to take it to one but we like to build nice stuff at py yes but I lots of times I

see that tree in the back and then the residence no it's it's we're required to have one street and one front on single family detached but right understood thank good thank you I can drive around this County and not and see a lot of houses that don't have that I just want to say that um he's going to discuss with me but I'm not a professional so it can't be my decision on on what's going to keep the water out of that pond I just want want them to know um you know the the issue that exists and uh to please protect all the houses Mr chairman sir you've also said that the the water is sheet flowing towards their property it is which means the drainage is going in the opposite direction from the P up to you that that's correct it's it's it's kind of like an l-shape the pond uh is is here and and there's like a canal that goes behind the houses and that canal connects to the road flows under the road and into their property when it overflows it's currently maxed out right now if I had the video I'd but you are to meet with them and talk to them about it thank you Mr chairman yes and I just wanted to let the citizen know that Swift Mud will have to oversee and all the drainage from that property will have to remain on that property so it will not interfere with your pond okay thank you all right pleasure the board uh move to approve with the conditions well make just make sure there are Street trees and another tree second okay we got a motion and second all those in favor say I I I motion pass 5 Z P94 item P94 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on June 30th 2021 good afternoon Tammy Snider Planning and Development P94 is the causeway and P PDD 27527 here's a location map it is just on the southwest of Lando Lakes Boulevard and roaches run and Causeway extension is on the South Side proposed as a resoning request from an mud to an mud to allow a maximum of 275,000 commercial retail square feet and introduce a land use equivalency Matrix with potential additional uses those uses are office medical office healthcare related Light Industry distribution multifam residential single family attached residential senior retirement Assisted Living aggregate homes and public institutional uses the applicant also proposes to change the name of the mpud from Causeway Center commercial mpud to just Causeway mpud to better reflect what the potential uses would be and variation requests from the LDC are 97.1 onsite parking um in the event the mixed use Parcels depicted on the master plan are are developed as mixed use trip ruction measures projects mutam then the on-site parking for the multif Family Apartments retail and office within the mixed use Parcels would like to be shared and calculated at 1.9 spaces per multif family apartment unit also SE section 7.8 platting the applicant requests the option to be able to submit for plat and begin the plat process prior to approval

of a no improvement plan a plat ni preliminary development plan and or constru construction plan as applicable regardless of any proposed Loom conversions the commercial retail square footage shall be a minimum of 100,000 square fet and residential uses will only be allowed on the parcels of budding us41 if they're part of a a vertically mixed use integrated building here's their master plan and then on January 8 2008 the BCC adopted a comp plan Amendment amending the flu from res 3 to Comm on December 20th 2011 the BCC adopted a resoning request from C2 and AC to mpud and then a comp plan amendment to change a land use designation from Comm to PD has been concurrently submitted with this mpud to allow for uses in addition to the commercial and Retail subject to the loom exchange to ensure that any such exchange is trip neutral as this project is on the west side of Highway 41 it is outside of the multif family moratorium the LDC specifies that variations from this code may be reviewed and approved by the PC and BCC and the applicant is seeking the parking requirement and pling variations as noted previously the PC heard the item at the July 22nd meeting and unanimous unanimously voted to recommend approval and the proposed request is consistent with the LDC and applicable provisions of the Pasco County comp plan with that pbd recommends approval with conditions okay um you have something BR yes hi Brad tip in planning and development I just wanted to uh mention also to point out a piece in here that one of the things that we're doing the uh development servic branch and public infrastructure Branch are working together to try and reduce the overall timelines to market for some of these types of projects uh so one of the things we've done in here is we've included uh a deviation from our Standard platting Process uh we only are doing that in this particular project and we can only do it based on your approval of this particular uh set of conditions that would actually allow us to do that uh we're going to give it a a trial run see how it works uh some other jurisdictions are doing something similar uh but we're going to use this as an option to to try and take a first step see how it works out and if it's a way to improve our timeline uh that's what we're hoping for so that's that's what one of those that planning uh condition is actually about right okay do we have anyone signed up to speak this um we have an applicant's presentation first application's coming but I mean I just wonder if anybody's here speak we do not have anyone signed up to speak on P94 and no one on WebEx okay good afternoon commissioner Barbara will height same address as before thank you um this is our fifth public hearing on this project um staff is in support unanimous recommendation of Planning Commission I wouldn't Echo um what Brad tippen had to say we worked very hard

with Mike Cala and Brad tippens group to work on this platting plan issue between your two different departments um and uh I'm really happy that they want to work with us as uh like they do and collaborate and uh I think we'll come up with something that'll bring these some of these projects to Market quicker I have a presentation again um but I'm happy to answer questions I have my team here as well okay thank you is anyone here to speak to this item that has not signed up see a no one players of the board second I got a motion and second all those in favor say I motion pass 5 Z but I I did want to talk about one thing um if you could put up the map come back I mean the the Project's approved I just want to throw something out there to the Commissioners um on the causeway the site the road that isn't going to be used is it Causeway that we talked about Causeway is ultimately going to be realigned by a DR Horton project um yeah so um we'll do our improvements to roaches run this might be what you're looking for yeah so there's a road on the southern part of this project that um I don't know if that map does it justice there um I think that's the best we have yeah that's still okay well I think we have an opportunity to have a really nice Trail come down and connect to the orange belt from the southern part of this project which is going to be down here um south of here um by weria Loop and a little lower um that there may be a road that we don't need anymore when they realign Causeway so I just want to look at that and see if um we can do something some better with that that Boulevard so I'll get with you Terry on that one I guess okay thank thank you thank you P95 I P95 was published in the Tampa Times on July 7th 2021 is the call Public Works have a power point oh thank um this is the PS um uh non ad Val assessment this is for the west side of the county um US 41 there are seven projects in this um presentation we have Alin Drive cont CL estate Edgewater Circle eane um Drive Gulf Trace oldgate Circle and um waxwing there are total of 51 streets uh for 7.41 Miles there were N2 assessments mailed out we had six written objections and we responded to them um for Gulf Trace there were some objections the form form of a petition we had received 1177 of those from the property owners and there's an attorney representing the gulf Trace um homeowners association in summary for both the east side and the West Side non-ad valm assessment we have a total of 11 Paving um assessments 55 streets 7.93 miles um just over 1 um1 million in total assessment over $220,000 would be added to the tax bill this year and there are 5 957 total assessment notification letters mailed six um objections and um we're seeking to have um this approved the nonat valum

approved the Eide was approved July um 6 that's it okay we have anyone to sign up for this we have four people signed up for this item okay so we have first person signed up is Eugene un and then John I don't know if it's Pennington is follow it follows so Mr is it uny you can come up please [Music] and please state your name and address for the record my name is Eugene hire and I am uh resident on one 270 social Drive in Country Club States I'm here to talk about the uh assessed value for almost 34 of a million dollars to the uh residents of this area I have three items that I'd like to address in this the first item is the cut through that was added from the Walmart into uh the Poo drive this has become Hazard because people are leaving shopping carts there there's also shopping carts that are being taken throughout the neighborhood and left all over the streets the other Hazard is people are racing through that cut through and have almost caused multiple accidents I've seen this because I drive to POA every day when I come home from work and every time when I leave on this the PO dumps out into social and it's just a nightmare sometimes going up and down the street the second item that I wanted to address on this was the traffic light itself I realized that there was a injury there that resulted in a death of a certain person and that this was put in to prevent these accidents from happening and I have witnessed sometimes before when there was just a pass through there that there have been near misses um the only thing that I have to say about this is it takes an extremely long time to change this light over when you're coming out from the POA onto 19 and it's almost easier just to go all the way around go down to the next cut through and come back up the other side uh I've waited there actually 7 Minutes almost one time uh because I got there just as the light had changed from the other side um so I'd like to see that light be made into a trip light if possible so that there's some time I realize that you know when the lights change but there's some sometimes to relieve that um buildup and there's been three and four cars sometimes sitting there waiting to go um out of theolo the last item of this pavement that was done had to do with the fact that I understand that this pavement was supposed to alleviate the flooding problem well it hasn't it has not done it at all theola still floods right at the intersection of social drive another street that um floods is Country Club Estates in the corner of Spring Drive which is the other entrance into into Country Club Estates the Gully that is at the end of The Polar Drive is a concrete pad it almost looks like a sidewalk that goes into a retention Basin that's behind the houses on um

Sola drive and the next street over and then there is a pipe that runs underneath the road which goes behind Walmart and down to a um I guess it's a runoff which runs adjacent to um oh I can't remember the name the the street that's along the side of the the Walmart that's there I I can't remember what the name of it is at the moment Capal Capital Drive no um it's between uh the Walmart and where the old uh Kmart was I think it's um Beacon Woods Drive yes that's it Beacon Woods Drive so right there on next to Beacon Woods Drive is a runoff and that goes all the way down into the Gulf from there so the retention Pond has been flooding to the extent where it comes right up to my property line the pipe that's there is not taken care of it used to be taken care of by the county in the grass mode and it hasn't been mowed and uh the pipe taken care of there's debris down at the end of the pipe down there I'm Sor time's up sorry oh I'm sorry that's okay thank you for your com thank you right the next person signed up is John Pennington good afternoon first of all I'd like to say I'm sitting in the front row and I can't hear anything that's going on up here it seems like it's low to me too it's very low and you know I'm partially deaf anyway but I live in Gul Trace um we recently I think last year received a survey from the county saying do you want your streets repaved or not and the vast majority of us said uh no thank you you we're fine with what we have next thing we get is an assessment from the county saying we all owe $ 4,387 and there's a lean put on our properties so for 10 years so now none of us can sell our homes until that lean is taken care of no that's not correct the paper says 10 years that shows how much you have to pay every year for 10 years or you could probably pay it all off I'm retired I don't have $4,300 that I can pay for something that we didn't want in the first place the streets are already deteriorating especially on my street it's a culdesac we get these large garbage trucks that come in there they cannot make the turn so they have to do a three-point turn and they're just tearing the tearing the asphalt up and they're leaking oil everywhere my understanding it's not legal for trucks to be leaking oil on the streets um that's what I was told I don't know if that's true or not these these homes are mainly retirees uh we've got a couple of invalid people that live on our street like I said they nobody can sell their homes now because of these leans the the HOA has now gone around and sent letters to everybody that has weeds in their yard so you're looking at 200 about 2 50 homes vast majority of them are vacant owners they're rented people can't afford to water their yards they certainly can't afford to maintain their yards I take a lot of pride in my yard so I do it myself but I I would wish that you would consider the the

hardship that this would put everybody in in this community in Gul Trace that uh that we have to be uh the bur take the burden of this um assessment it's it's pretty heavy burden so thank you for your time okay thank you for your comments next next person signed up is Colin rice good afternoon Commissioners Colin rice uh 101 East Kennedy Boulevard suet 2800 Tampa Florida 33602 uh attorney representing the gulf Trace home owners Association uh here to speak to you today about the aformentioned gulf Trace uh road paving assessment uh we had submitted a a formal objection uh prior to the deadline uh I do have a copy of it here uh for the record if you all would like but I just want to provide you some context and and what the community is experiencing um we're not contesting anything procedurally here we know that you know staff followed the code um so notice opportunity we heard we're not making any of those sorts of um uh claims today but what what I do want to impress upon you is initially I know that the ballot went out it was 72 uh yes to 92 no so in 2018 the residents uh expressed a desire not to have the assessment project undertaken we understand that the county can go ahead anyway that occurred um and today we're looking at a 4,300 to $5,300 uh burden for each homeowner this is as has been expressed previously a largely fixed income community the ship program that was alluded to in the materials that went out to the residents uh likely doesn't qualify for any of these homeowners it has to be $160,000 or lower base value per each home I'd be surprised if any home in this community qualifies for that uh what we're really looking for here is assistance um there are several areas of concern um with respect to the road work that had been done the larger trucks in the culdesac seem to be uh pulling up pors of the road we do have photographs I don't know if there's a convenient way to motion to receive a file second thank you did you want to show that on the all those in favor say I if we may it's just a handful give you a sense of what we're looking at Mr chairman we we're waiting since he's an attorney represent the HOA can I ask a question is that okay okay you okay with that okay as my mic falls apart here these are low by the way unless you get right up on it today you can hear me good now can't you have to eat the microphone as I turned off sorry um just a question for you um you stated that it was a 92 nose and 72 yeses so essentially it failed and then it was quote board initiated with the recommendation from staff knowing that this was a Paving assessment you speaking for the HOA I know you can't speak for all the residents but speaking for the HOA if this doesn't go through the HOA was is okay with the roads not being paved this they're paved commissioner these are this project is complete or

anything else oh okay I'm sorry okay any future any any any future maintenance or anything like that happening on it so they're fully completed sorry okay so fully any future maintenance or anything like that not um happening on the on the roads well thank you for your question um they are paved they're finished um the contention is that the state they're in now in in their improved State there are points of failure uh that's the point that I'm illustrating with these photographs they are county-owned roads um so in my opinion it would be the responsibility of the county to maintain their state of repair as well okay thank you okay um any another finish finished sorry may I say something too since you're an attorney um I I hope it's not your understanding of the law or our ordinance that they can't sell their home because that's not true and I hope maybe you've explained that to them I will confirm that they can sell their homes yes the the cost goes with the home not the person correct what may happen is this could show up on a title report as an incumbrance for lack of a better term doesn't prevent a sale right right so so you can sell your home okay just want I just wanted to make sure because that would be upsetting to people I'm sure if they thought they had to it passes on the property yeah correct um if um has anyone from our road department been out there to see any deterioration that may have happened in the C of saxs where trucks turn around in a call at Public Works um after we received the full the graphs um with regards to what was considered um deterioration I went out on August 7th and as a gentleman before me had mentioned about the oil there's um uh signs of hydraulic and engine oil and that is one of the um problems there I haven't found any Pooles there are no material defects or poor workmanship because we inspected this at the end of the the project so this is oil so let me let me explain a couple things that going on um one in this County we don't have franchised garbage pickup so we have the older trucks of the companies here they won't invest in the top quality trucks because they don't have guaranteed contracts here so they have told me we get their old leaky stuff and we can't we can't prevent that I don't think um the um let's see I had I had another oh yes so but something that your neighborhood can do and it's something that our family did when we developed long leaf is we um we made a contract with one provider um so the neighborhood can get together it has to be voluntary um but you if you everyone signs up with the same garbage pickup truck you'll only have one truck in there instead of having multiple contracts with multiple providers and having a lot more trucks on your neighborhood and um and you might find out which one has the better equipment that's not leaking on your streets but certainly would be better for you to have the same company coming

through instead of having multiple ones Mr chairman just to pile on a little bit and commissioner starky is is correct HOAs C HOA cdds can negotiate with with the huler if they if they'd like to on behalf of the residents there you know negotiate rates that's it happens all the time the community I live in they do that they negotiate with one hauler we have one hauler that comes and picks up our trash and does our recycling it's much better because you only hear one truck early in the morning right so if anybody's from the actual HOA itself there you can reach out to you know if you're if you're citizens agree on that you're you're HOA members so good okay but she's right that's that's not that's a good option yeah okay we see a picture up here now I believe some and these are part of the uh objection package that was submitted I'll I'll give you all a copy here today these are I apologize they're out of order it's just a fuse to give you a sense but we'll provide all that I'm sorry that's not nice um so this is one of the culde acts within the community these were actually from U Mr emmans who's present today uh he's submitted an affidavit so you know these are authenticated for if anybody's concerned about that but this is from about a month ago just to give you an idea what the present condition looks like yeah I would not let that company back in I find another one and so just to give you a sense of scale um just keep going through give you an idea Mr chairman which company Port we don't know Ajax if I if I may HX I meant the roads so HX is the Paving Company the huler I don't know I've I have asked our Solid Waste Department via text here to to reach out to the haulers to see what the issues are and see if we can't yeah get that taken I mean they have brand new beautiful roads and then they're putting this on when were these roads paved the paving looks fine I when when were they paved when was it between 2018 and present I don't know precise States like they're all done though they're done within the assessment area yes yeah okay so I'll I'll conclude I'll be happy to discuss answer any questions you have just so I hit my my points while I have time um I'd like to suggest a couple of tools in in your tool box uh section 94-294 d16b reads the BCC is authorized by resolution and its discretion to reduce interest rates or wave interest otherwise payable on special assessments we we need your help um our our ask is that the roads be repaired uh and and that our community get a degree of financial relief from from this burden that's pretty uh inordinate for most of the homeowners in this community so this this is my district um are we are they getting the 25% discount from the county in the called the public works all applicable discounts have been um already been included and what is the um interest rate that we're charging I am looking just one second and this is this is the process for

every Road in the county that's not a collector arterial so you're not singled out it's this is just the way the county does this at this time so um 3.25 well that's 3.25 I don't know what else your number yeah that's the lowest I've seen so okay and it's 10 years yeah I don't it's 15 years so what's the annual payment it depends on I thought I heard him say four something the lowest amount is just over $4,700 no no how much is it a year Mr chairman you need staff you need staff to yeah on here there's some that are $1,978 but we're only talking about golf TR uh the um GF TR um the annual payment would be approximately $400 uh $440 per year yeah I don't know we that's as low as interest as we do and that's as long as I've ever seen so I don't you I don't think there's really anything we can do with thatly thank you sir all right if I may I'll just submit the rest of the petition for the record yeah would receive file I got a motion second a second all those in favor I say I I motion pass 5 Z okay right I think there's still more people that want to speak do we have anybody else speaking I have one person one left last person signed up which is Susan mat excuse me I didn't sign up it's okay you'll get a turn yes good afternoon I'm new to this my name is Susan mat and I live in Gulf Trace I just moved to Pasco County um April April 2020 um M you just have to State your address for the record and then you can proceed my address is 3300 Hearthstone Court in Holiday Florida thank you ma'am okay so this is in reference to the paving that we're talking about right now um um I guess being how I'm I just moved to hear from pelis I don't I don't understand how things are done here I thought that our tax dollars paid for Paving of roads and stuff um I don't understand why we're being having to pay this bill when you know people can't afford it we lived in an area where it's a lot of um retirees mostly and they're unlim limited budgets and such and um it's a lot of money and you know it's it's hard for everyone not to mention on our street when we were talking about the damage I don't know if pictures were taken but on our street um down the road there's a uh manhole cover and close to the manhole cover is a great big dip and that dip was there after they paved it and when it rains the water pools there and you're you can actually feel the dip when you go down the street I don't know if anybody took pictures of that but um yeah so we we just need help with paying for this somehow I mean um Mr chairman go ahead I'm sure our staff will go out there and take a look at that dip um I will say it probably was um I'm not a realtor and I don't want to give out realy law but I think people have to disclose when you have an encumbrance like that coming I

would guess so you know that that that was attached to your house that that was a bill coming when you bought your house and you you should have they should have told you about it but um there are Provisions where um I don't remember what it is but you can anley what what a what is how does it work where you can get the discount for certain Financial hardships what that I don't know if it works out here but yeah that I mean if Mr uh if the lawyer is correct these houses don't qualify it's a nice neighborhood yeah um not that others aren't nice but the the value of the houses may not might not qualify for that so yeah I'm sorry that's so well oh I'll tell you about the the taxes so um uh there is an opportunity in our budget in our um in our adalum to collect money for local roads um it's called The Road and Bridge fund because all our money goes into silos we don't collect any tax money for local roads like that so you are not taxed in this County for Road um local road maintenance um we do have a second 5cent local option that pays for the potholes to get fixed and um we pay for collector and artillary roads for example Gul Trace Boulevard the county pays for those um but uh we don't collect any of your tax money for local roads that we are talking about changing that in the future because many counties do Levy a tax or a fee to everybody to pay for everyone's roads but right now the way we do it is if your road is deteriorating then then then it's the cost is divided amongst the people who live on on that road so that's how we do it here wow but but I will tell you that in a total our taxes are a lot less than penal County so hopefully you're benefiting from that so we do have to pay this and they did say that it puts a lead on our house yeah it'll be on your tax bill and is that is that the one for next year so yeah starting next year not this year next year and and the other thing is it's not just trash trucks that are coming in there messing up the road it's all kinds of other delivery trucks and everything else and the road was just recently paved and yes it's already looking bad in certain areas well and I will go drive through it and I'm sure ay will um can you say what road that is that has the depression what street that is Heartstone Court h e a r t h s t o n e Heart Take look at that staff check that out yeah Mr chairman okay thank you um ma'am just two quick question question for you madam yes when you bought your house did you have title insurance I might have missed that yes you do have Title Insurance that's where you should be going to try to get that because there should have been some type of notice on the search I would have probably should have picked that up um next question I notic there's a lot of tack lines and Ang you might even know are those tack lines from when the construction was done or do something happen after the fact like like black lines going through I think that's people driving through those oil bills or whatever when they

put the tack down in the base no yeah sure thank you talk I'm sorry that's tracking off the oil so you have oil dripping and then you have trucks or other vehicles tracking the oil okay yeah okay thank you all right thank you is there a Mr chairman is there a code or anything that says you can't leak oil all over the roads or there's ones that you can't set off so much pollution of smoke so how much oil can you're not allowed to drip oil it would not be local ordinance it would be state law yes sir uh give us your name and address for the record yeah thank you my name is Jeff thw I live on a wind Ridge Drive in Gulf Trace uh I moved in there in 18 I was one of the 92 that voted voted no for uh this project which came up right after I moved in but the point that I want to make is when this originally came up the assessment was going to be $2200 $2,300 right in there so boy the fact that it's 4,300 is is really bad news for a lot of people including myself uh that was the original amount it was somewhere in that neighborhood it could have been 2380 2250 and this would have been an 18 so what happened along the way that it's 4,300 well I'm I'm not going to let that go unanswered because I'll tell you how it works up here anley can you come up and and and say that when the suspense's given out it never can go up it can only go down okay sir yes but I think the question if I'm Miss um understanding correctly is that initially was 2300 and then now it is uh 4,300 or 40 right so what I what I don't know is where that number came from it may have been from the Housing Association from the HOA but that was the figure that was given to the residents in 18 prior to the approval now I I can't I don't know exactly where that figure came from different I'm I can't speak to that figure but I can speak to the figure that is being presented to the board right um we have an annual uh com contract Paving contract which is competitively bid and approved by the board the companies approved by the board and we put in the quantities that we anticipate will use for the repaving project so for example1 100 tons at $10 and we get get that number and that's when we notify uh property owners of the maximum assessment so our numbers are based on what is actually used in in terms of material and the prevailing um contract in place approved by the board but anley when they vote you have that number I don't have it here with me that's why when when when they voted they had the record oh this was board initiated Mr chairman but the commissioner is right there could have been a letter that went out that they voted down and then when it was board initiated the prices had gone up and they would have gotten another letter right okay yeah I don't know know we have so much going back and forth on on this but Mr chairman I just

I'm going to try to simplify something here um if if you look at the agenda memo there are different assessments I you know EG um different amounts per Road um in eru not everything we're looking at is the same here you're looking at different projects yeah yes because it depends on what is being done for each project yes sir exactly that's what I'm saying so they're not all the same some have storm water some don't some have base and then some don't right some may have um full dep Reclamation it depends on what is done for the indivual project Allen Drive it was 1978 oh this is an all got race yeah this is different areas yeah that's what I means so different areas exactly so we have so many we have different we're all we're voting on all these at once and there's different people here for different roads oh yeah we're not done can I ask that what date was that figure arrived at which the the my house happens to be 43 and change so what was the date that perhaps the board approved that 43 that would have been 2019 I don't have the information I can give you my card and I'll get that to you he can give you all that information he has it he has it in his files yes I do so he and let you know when Happ yeah so I you can understand my surprise I don't I I think perhaps in late 19 maybe I saw the $4,300 figure but originally again it it may have initiated from the HOA but it was a huge huge difference and and I think by the time I saw 4300 it was probably water under the bridge it had been voted on and past I suppose you know that in the scheme of things uh 4,300 for your total charge and then that divide out come 400 and something dollars a year that's a pretty good uh Improvement to your property and a way for you to pay it back you don't have to pay it all one time you don't have to no I understand I appreciate that I understand and but it helps you and it it helps bring up the community at the same time yeah I did vote no and originally and uh I thank you for your um explanation of why the assessment was made I've lived in houses all over the country I I've never been to a hearing where I had to pay for the road in front of my house it was County maintain and Pasco County we've done that for for many many years and I I can give you a real I learned something new it's because in our history of Pasco County the west side of the county over here had a lot more growth than the east side of the county with more rural we we had a lot more land and all and less people so the people over there didn't want to be taxed to pay for roads over here ah so you did it to us that caused it to be the P system basically just wait till your peases come out east they're going to be humongous cuz they have a lot less houses on their road yeah all right thank you yes sir thank you for your comments is anyone else want to speak to this item come forward and state your name and address cuz I got a lot of

commiss my name is Richard Emmons I live at 2809 ramble Rich Court Holiday Florida I live in Gulf trace and I'm the lousy photographer okay okay uh that's not bad what I want to know is besides the fact that we voted it down and then mysteriously it got passed uh then you know so you fig because I remember talking to you and one of you others said yo it got voted down and I looked at you and said what the hell we all doing here now it gets passed you build this you have this company come in that you may have a county contract with them but they have no information on their truck other than their name you can't talk to them you can't email them you can't send them a fax you can't communicate at all with them now the other thing is we bought our house in 2018 14 we had no problems I'm on a culdesac those holes were on my street my culdesac and we it um you know and the road's been less than a year we were promised we were made by a by a member of the board here all these roads would last 25 years they haven't last less than a year and a half now we have a gentleman or some inspector comes out and says oh no these things meet code they were perfectly built the way they were supposed to be why did I have why do we have to pay for an inferior Road I never had this problem before on my culdesac you know you guys I understand counties you know some counties charge taxes for roads you guys don't that I going appreciate but I just find it ironic that I'm paying for an inferior road that was built yeah we're going to take a look at it yeah but you're you're going to take a look at it but we're all going to get stuck with the bill still and my point is you know it's like buying you you want to buy a car and you wind up paying you want to wind up buying a Yugo for a Cadillac price that's kind of like the way this road thing works I guess I'm out of time one more minute oh well I'm that's I'm just saying that we never we've lived there 5 years before the roads were tore up we never had a problem now we have a constant problem that man is going to be sending people out to fix our roads on a monthly basis also golf Trace because of all the construction it's now tore up now you we are not going to pay for golf Trace you guys are on your own on that one but it's already starting to rip up and that's because you got all these construction you you guys are developing developing developing which I understand this is what this county has made its industry it's construction I've been here since 78 so you know and you can't help the big trucks you know whether they're garbage or whether they're Rock haulers and I'm just saying that you are asking my Comm my community to pay for a road that that is now in worse shape than it was before they did thank you for your time thank you for comment I'm just saying we'll go out and look at it together okay yes go yes go is that the is this does this require a motion is someone wanting to speak oh okay s anyone no you're there's a person

behind you that wants to speak okay but isn't there a warranty on these I'm sorry but I didn't sign up either this is my first time here for and I'm over here about Paving ma'am could you state your name and address my name is Barbara Mendes me ndes 6942 old Gate Circle Newport Richie and I believe I heard old gate was part of the saving am I correct yes okay um I wasn't so much concerned with having to pay for it because I figured that's the way the county works but I was a little surprised sitting back there and hearing that golf Trace is being charged 3.25 interest if I remember that correctly and a 15-year amortization well I have to do mine in 10 years and it's 5.25 interest and I guess my question is why why the difference in interest in the paving areas well that may be something we can take care of maybe thought it was a lower whenever a project is approve uh presented to the board and approve in October the prior year the board sits the interest rate so if this project was approved when the interest rate which was approved by the board was 5% that is what we have to present it at for example the project at 3.5 was approved by the board at 3.5% but um anley um is it possible to lower that to 3.25 or does that mess you up with your fund that's a board decision if the board directs us to do that we recalculate the amortization I make that motion all right I'm chair so I can't make that motion but I have no problem making the motion to lower it to 3.2 I'll second Mr I have the gavl and Mr carbal wants to speak no I just I just want to add that if if that were to happen we would have to bring a resolution I believe back to the board to yeah now you are this should have been done at the final public hearing not the not the final assessment role that is going on going to the tax collector and property appraiser is there a deadline of anything today if does this have to be approved today to go on the tax roll or is there still time to bring this this is next Miss chairman can we approve it and then amend the interest rate that's what we're asking so hang on a second staff tells me we can bring it back on nine okay so pull out old gate and um we'll see if we can lower that interest rate to 3.25 app and U is there any more public comment no you already spoke I think you already spoke you get one one chance to speak okay Madam chairman yes well unless his interest rate is higher no no no he's on the 3.25 just a couple questions is are all the others at 3.25 I I think it's only fair we make them all 3.25 no I'm fine with that uh did the AC cut off yeah I'm Dy okay yeah back again and M chairman I thought that at the time of the original assessment and then now it is supposed to be the lower of the two

interest rates when we said it that's what what we set at the public hearing yeah yeah Madam Madam chair oh now Mr chair commissioner it's think of like think of mortgage rates you know they go up and down up and down up and up and down so at that time that was what the interest rate was cuz they weren't all done at once so when they brought it for interest rate was 5.25 the next time the next one was brought it was 3.25 again you know to tomorrow I might be able to refinance my house at 1.5 and next month might be able to do it 2.5 well last time when it was brought in front of the board to set up a pvas and at that time it was 3.25 and we stayed at that time it is the lower of the interest rate at the time it was either the interest rate at that date or if it went up to 6.5 today it's the lower of the two no we said it and we said it yeah we don't change it every year it's set at the final public hearing yeah okay what do you have for us um what do you what do you want to know if any of the others have a higher Ang I think the board wants to have them all at 3.25 % so you need to pull the ones out Eveland is at 5.25 um waxwing just those two and Alan aloan okay Allen pull out pull out will you modify your motion um no oldgate is 1.75 that's the storm damage and remember with a storm Dam damage you had a lower interest rate well then we need a oh wait a second anley oldgate is what 1.75 which is the one who started all this it's only at 1.75 not 5.25 she said 5.25 oh my gosh we all over the place Mr chair yes Mr Mo it was notice it was notice as 5.25 but because it was storm damage the board reduced it to 1.75 thinkk Mr chair I okay just as suggestion staff's going to have to take some time to research this a little bit and look at the interest rates and probably bring this back to us in a whole package again I don't know what so I I think would agree I think we' have to continue this to another meeting I'd recommend that you that you continue it not defer it so continue it to the to your uh September 15th that uh meeting it that will be in dat City but that but everyone will get the lower but if that's if that's the board's intent is that that it it be at either at 3.25 or if it's been set lower lower okay so I'm so at that meeting you're asking us to present the interest rate was approved that and the interest rate no well at the next board meeting I'll make the motion um that you bring these back and anyone that was higher than 3.25 bring them down to 3.25 okay I got it that's my motion September motion second all those in favor say I I I I motion pass 5 Z all Mr chairman yes sir um Angel Miss Mendes these roadways that have been done uh we do have a year warranty on them yes there's a 12- month warranty on them against um poor workmanship and the material defect in

instrumental in bringing to life many of Pasco County's highly valuable and complex initiatives including but by no means limited to issuance of bonds for necessary Public Services projects road paving Assessment program peas to improve roads within the county Sunwest Park to provide a unique public beach recreational facility Ridge Road to provide an additional transportation and evacuation Corridor Wesley Chapel District park created the largest combination indoor outdoor Community county park facility board agenda software systems sire and Civic clerk for public access and transparency of board of County Commissioners actions for of for the county Wiregrass France sports campus development of a competitive Sports tourism facility fire station designed and construction throughout the county Lander Lake's Detention Center expansion to 3,500 beds and whereas in addition to Jane's intellect and legal skills Jane's thoughtfulness and kindness is abundant she is always among the first to sympathize with frustrations helped to organize celebrations and give others credit rather than engaging in self-promotion even when it is well deserved now therefore be it resolved by the board of County commissioners of Pascal County Florida Florida that the board hereby commends and extends its appreciation to Jane Fagan for her more than 19 years of dedicated service to Pasco County done and resolved in regular session with the Quorum president and voting this 24th day of August 2021 second got a motion in second all those in favor say I I I said I'd vote no on this one but I pass Five Z know how we need you up there well thank you very much it was a tough decision for the last time Jane f your assisting County attorney yeah Jane I actually heard this yesterday and so I reached out for your husband without him answering any calls because I heard you were moving back so you could be closer to your family and your husband and I wasn't sure he said that so I reached out to him but he I couldn't get a hold of him for a comment so I'll let it go this time and we'll let you go but we don't want you to go so well I just want to say first of all I'm just totally flored I this was totally unexpected and I appreciate it Jeff and the rest of the board I really do so um but thank you it's been an honor to represent Pasco County and to to work with all you all and all the staff it's it's been a really positive experience thank you it's been honor for all of us to be able to serve with you thank you so much and I'm not normally a crier but it's all I seem to be doing this week yeah mman thank you I think Jeff had something yeah uh Jane we're going to miss you uh I hope it works better for your family for you you were a solid tremendous worker for the county always protecting the county every step of the way and I appreciate that every step away and your creativity when we're doing the sun West Park first time we

did it and I'm going to tell you the words you put in there of first class condition put the county in a much better position to take the county park back and because of that work like there you put us in a position to get the car parked back in our control and it's now been booming as far as Effectiveness and people or so thank you for all you've done I wish you all the best in the world thank you so much Mr chairman I I'm just going to say a couple of words but you know I inherited a marvelous team when I got here Jane was one of those one of those people that were was there and was there to help me grow into the role of County attorney um you know I can't tell you how many emails I have gotten at 2 and 3:00 at the morning with her finishing up projects that just had to be done um she's always she's you always been there always ready to help sometimes when she shouldn't shouldn't be and has other things to do but she's always there to to help out her teammates and and for and has always thought about the good of the county um for the entire time that I've been I've been counting attorney and she will be very missed thank you so much really I just want to one too J you and I spoke a little bit talked a little bit was it day before yesterday I think it was and stuff too shock and all but you will be missed you are I mean what a true professional you are but and I hope you don't mind me saying this you're a sweet person at that as well very very sweet um but you know at the same time you know you're a strong attorney you know Jeff has an extraordinary team and we appreciate each and every one of you and i' I've said this to Jeff many times um with without yourself and the rest of the you know County attorneys and assistant County attorneys and such here you know the county wouldn't run it it would not function and besides you being there to do right by the citizens you're also there to protect us and make sure we're doing try the right job and following statute and following the rules and following the laws so you will be dearly missed I'm sure our paths will cross again you won't you're not that far away but again it's been an honor to work with you so thank you thank you and that's always been my goal to try to to give the best advice to the and and I'll Echo everything the Commissioners are saying and I and and we're losing a leader up on the third floor so what a void we're going to have I just I'll miss you and um best of luck where you're going to I just heard I will tell you my jaw dropped when they had that when they walked that on this morning and I texted Jeff are you telling me Jane is leaving I I I couldn't believe it so um just um you'll be very missed really appreciate your time here I'm working with you so much it was an honor to work with everyone to represent the county thank you it's so warm in I took my shoes off hey hey when you take that so I took my shoes off and they're in the

car we're stand back here that's why short I'm in my clip flop it won yeah we don't want to get [Laughter] Co there you go I said I'd come up go my tiptoes Davidson okay all right chairman you were looking down when I took mine I got to take it again all right I'm good oops I got three in shorter uh that's we're not taking any more pictures after wasn't expecting pictures we still have p96 all right guys we got a few more things to do oh this okay here's the step on the meeting I missed that doesn't make any sense okay we move on to p96 item p96 was published in the Tampa Times on August 8th 2021 and August 11th 2021 okay good afternoon Justin Grant director of public infrastructure fiscal and business administration p96 is a resolution here we go resolution revising the water and wastewater and reclaim water fees and charges providing for an effective date all right uh just a little opening here um that's a picture of a sign out at our Shady Hills Wastewater Plant um just want to note that uh We've fared very well with all the big three rating agencies and how we govern and manage the utility um so we we've been noted that we have a very strong financial profile strong service area and affordable rates that comes from Fitch uh they're one of the most strict out of those three and so that's High Praise So today we're going to walk excuse me we're going to walk through the big picture of what we're working on with our four-year rate study and so most of you have seen this before this is a similar type structure why we do this we came four years ago so I'll walk you through that and some of our big highlights you see the revenue requirements um operating cost Capital cost Financial policies that we need there how do we allocate allocate those costs uh between residential commercial industrial how do we design the rates and then how do we Implement all those fees and charges needed to support that all right so this is a quick little graph to kind of uh show comparative to the National Water and Sewer uh CPI you see over the period of about the last 10 years a 54% increase whereas our rate rate increases are only at 32% and so you see a nice 22% Delta here I'm waiting for the slide to advance my apologies the clicker is pausing here for a minute there we go yeah little thank you Todd dramatic effect so 22% Delta uh versus the pace of of the rest of the country and so we remain affordable um it's notable that when we compare that to an affordability metric that fits uses we're only at

1.89% uh meting household income whereas their target Target is about 4% all right this slide walks us through our average bill currently it's at $79 with this increase it'll go to $813 um that increase uh relative and I know it may be tough to see um you have the slides in front of you but that uh that chart there on the right U looks at some of the um other area utilities and what their rate increases are uh as you can see we have a very moderate 1 and2 and 3 and 1/2% across the next four years that's 1 and 12% for water 3 and 1/2% for sewer and reclaim um relative to our our peers and what their rate increases that are planned over the next uh four years we will not change our position in the bottom third of where we stand with those other relative utilities all right so this walks through uh some of the reasons that we do this right we're looking at at customer growth um and what's happening um obviously we're all subject to what we see um in the media in our daily lives with inflation uh that certainly affects the utility as well and so in order to uh to support all the different things that we have going on um obviously we have a four almost a $400 million Capital plan over the next couple years um with a large portion of that over half of that going towards growth related activities to support the utility it's crucial to have a four-year structure in place uh that's able to collect the appropriate amount of Revenue to support those activities okay so um relative to the last structure here um for the last four years the notable change here is we're taking a little bit of a different look here uh to amend our reclaim rates and so previously you had $10.70 uh was your residential reclaim rate uh that allowed for unlimited consumption uh as well as your backflow uh device fee charge we're looking at changing that base charge to be $11 a month that will include up to 10,000 gallons worth of consumption um and for every um th000 gallons of consumption above the 10,000 gallons would only be another $110 and so for someone that um is using 15,000 gallons that would only equate to just over $5 uh in additional structure and so you look at um cost recovery right it's notable that when we look at our reclaim structure uh changes like this are necessary uh both to balance the demand on the system um between bulk and Retail as well as uh to try and achieve a better cost recovery parameter um you look at retail rates that have historically been subsidized by the rest of the utility um versus the rates that we do charge all right and so bringing uh here for summary uh one and a half and three and a half for the next four years just as we had done for the past four years um no other structural changes other than reclaim bul rates will uh will adopt cost of service here in 22 and then index along with the rest of the plan and other fees will go in as well uh with miscellaneous charges that are

updated every four years recommendation from the utility is to adopt the 2020 rate study and the resolution outlining the adjustment fee rates and charges for utility services for the fiscal years 22 through 25 Mr chairman yes um question for you yes sir and and we had this our discussion when we talked about reclaim rates yes sir um and my concern is golf courses um you know Magnolia Valley Timber Oaks all went under I would say all for cost but cost is a factor Gulf courses are struggling now completely we've got a market for reclaim water now which we didn't have before when we set all these reclaim Provisions up the rates that they used to pay uh were substantially less um I don't think it would be a dramatic hit in the rate structure I'll let you comment to that in a second but I want to give you another thought to think about which just kind of like clicked right now for me um if the golf courses could use more wellwater as opposed to using our reclaim water it's better for them anyway for the final product do you think we could work with the golf courses the next year year or so to try to get Swift to allow them to pump more water they would need to use ours and that would enable us to even uh let other people use reclaim water than May wanto so that's a little more complicated because clearly we have agreements with the Water Management District and so if there were agreements in place to do reclaim projects uh then that would probably float contrary to those agreements uh you know whether or not golf course I I believe it's part of the consumptive use process is alternative sources so they would have to show how that is not feasible the district has a process for that and I mean that's on its surface I'm not sure we should be involved in that but well his his is his situation though the struggling right now we've had a couple closed down I mean the lyx golf course shut down causing all sorts of people you know a tremendous drop in quality of life and other than this big push for property values going through the roof you would have seen a drop in values which what does affect the tax base for everybody um and and commissioner you said on Swift month so you have more probably knowledge to this I'll I'll defer to you a little bit as well but if there's a way we can help then one way or the other if all the reclaim water is going to used even if the golf courses don't use it let's go try to work with swift to try to help them increase their consumptive use permits that they can get if not tell me what the rates would be if we did set them back to the rates what they were six seven years ago sure so so we rough we ran a rough scenario that would be about that so if we cut uh by 50% um to go back to that and we to achieve the cost recovery that we're aiming to do if we shifted that balance over to the retail side of things that would take that $11 that we looked at and bring that to about 12270 and so instead of the $110 for every additional thousand gallons that would bring that

to about a127 for the retail retail customer an increase so and the other notable good thing is is so we've got a 7 2 rate 72 Cent rate and a 36 Cent rate that offers for differences in um with and without storage and pumping and so the golf courses do have that lower rate and so we verified I think we sent your office over some details um on some of the rates that those current courses are paying and they are on that lower rate right now let me add something to that uh I think Lake trita that's public wh right there that they have public water lake Javita golf course I believe Lake Javita has some reclaim for sure well they they com claim right now but if they had to go the other way and have to pump more water and that was the issue they were having before they couldn't get enough water through their well system to provide the golf course and and what else they needed so the fact that they wanted reclaim because that was going to give them the ability where their well for pot water or more usage and they were having an issue with their consumptive use permit on that well so this this provid Ed where they could use that that war like they should Mo most of the golf courses historically from the 9s water use caution areas when they got public Supply reclaimed water their consumptive use permits were ratcheted down to emergency use only and so they they literally can only use them if if the municipal supplier has a fail that they can't get the more right I agree and it would have to unwind all of that um basically conservation that the Water Management District has done for the last 30 years to to get them back on groundwater and and again I'm not I don't really want to change that but it was a thought I had going through but again the financial viability of a golf course is really tough right now uh people are doing other things and not bringing up kids like they used to you know I I grew up as a caddy that's how I kind of got the game there's no more Cates as carts anymore so that 30-year plan of not having those kids stay involved is having an effect I think there's going to be still a strong Golf Course Market uh for years to come but again the financial viability especially in Pasco County they're struggling and I don't want to see any more golf courses close if there's ways to make it happen I'd like to see us take a look at you know bringing the rates down so if you would maybe show us how the numbers would affect the total okay okay um the only other notable point i' I'd make would be looking at the indexes um so it's 2.9% change for the golf courses right now so it is a little bit sub where we're looking at reclaim indexing at 3 and a half% but we can certainly look at those other numbers and get back to you so that's not the numbers I'm I'm talking about I'm talking going back to the previous levels I like 50% less right so so when we talked about in if we're aiming to achieve the cost recovery that end result would end up if you shift

that if you go cut that 50% you shift that over to the retail side that would take that $11 to$ 12270 and up to a127 so the 10% increase to the retail rate payer on our abouts yeah okay I just want from a percentage Bas it would increase the retail rate payer 10% to reduce the race on golf courses all right but that's that's putting it in a silo because years ago as Mike will tell you it was a loser big time you were trying to rec you know trying to make money on the reclaim money years ago it was just a Los or loser we did it for the Environmental reasons for all the right stuff now we try to make it where it doesn't cost as much money but it's for the good of the whole system good of the whole County that we actually raise the rates up to try to collect that extra money I didn't like going up that high then I still don't like them being up this high now if you spread it amongst the general rates across everything what would that effect be taking that entire increase and then spreading across the $791 would it go to like $792 is my question are I'm sorry commissioner so you're suggesting then that the reclaim rates for retail or whatever we we would spread it across all customer classes sewer water I'm saying because right now sewer subsidizes the reclaim program corre so and and so in the past we've achieved just over 50% cost recovery more or less and our consultant can talk a little bit more about those numbers we're targeting a higher a higher recovery rate to to lessen the subsidy thus the reclaimed customers are actually paying what what is fair so right now we've targeted 70% to avoid a shock in part two because quite honestly as we've seen uh during May in fact when we were were were running on shortages the the reclaim water has become a fairly valuable commodity and so part of the reason of of bringing these costs in here too is is to provide some some some cost uh um demand management demand management thank you uh by by actually getting away from the all you can use for flat rate model and and I think you know our Consultants can talk about you know we we'll figure out what that elasticity is once once we once we Implement that if if we were to I don't believe that we really have an analysis where we looked at put spreading it across um all all of that I mean we did look at within the reclaim structure itself if we were to Move It from this class if we were to cut bulk rates by half you would see an increase on the retail class I mean basically to achieve the same number that and those are the numbers that Justin has put forward again years ago when these golf courses came into play they helped us getting rid to reclaim water they helped us they we they were doing us having place for it to go exactly so they did do us a favor the business plan went along the way when all of a sudden demand came up we changed the deal what happens to the golf course now is now they're paying the highest you know much higher reclaim

rate rate but they don't have the option to go back to using you know well water so it's like you know I I I don't I really I think these golf courses add value to the properties that are around them I don't think you going see a major Exodus on people building more golf courses so we need to keep the ones we've got um and I just like I said I think if we look at the broad race and what that difference would be it'd be a lot fairer to go than to take the reclaimed customers now who are helping us offset the loss that we used to have but at the same time you spread it amongst everybody I got to think it's got to be a very minuscule number on that $79 number what it would be if you did just that one segment for the golf courses to what that number would be so it would be like $79 and couple of cents more or where we be so what what might be two two quick points uh one Mike I think kind of talked a little bit about the system demand and system load back in 2011 versus 2020 um we looked at those numbers right roughly increasing somewhere in the neighborhood of 17 to 20% we're above 95% hovering around 97% in terms of the demand on the reclaim whereas we were hovering around 70% in the period of time you're talking about in early 2000s um if you'll allow it might be helpful we got je Jeff dyster here with stantech Consulting who's our rate consultant you can talk a little bit about um how other utilities and regions handle golf courses and Municipal rates okay yeah good afternoon jeffra with stentech a couple of just points to make um currently your bulk bulk reclaim water rates are about 80% cost recovery so even at their current levels and the proposed levels um not fully not fully cost not fully recovering their cost so with the proposed rate structure that we have here is really an adjustment on the retail side to increase retail cost recovery with this new structure to be closer in line with the bulk cost recovery so if you were to for example reduce bulk rates by 50% they would drop from maybe 80% down to about 40% cost recovery um while retail is going up so you're kind of inverting we're trying to catch retail up to bulk currently with structure whereas with that with that approach you'd basically flip the the Paradigm um and as as Mike mentioned currently sewers um subsidizing reclaim water at the moment yeah I mean I understand what the method is I just think it's hurting a business that used to help us now we've trapped them with swift mud and water consumption to go the other way and the net I think the net effect would be if you're going to have let's well let's go back to the other first idea I had out there as far as getting them to allow pump more water the people are going to use a certain amount of water anyway whe Mo you know whether it's reclaim water or not it might even enable us if we want the to my first suggestion that they would use the the people would use more reclaim water we would make more Revenue to that end if it kept even the rates the same if we help them be able

to pump more water instead but I I understand it's cost recovery and again we we we were as as a county we did a phenomenal job leading the way and reclaim water I think around the nation so we did a lot of great things I'm just saying that the effect right now is golf courses are struggling with with numbers you know our demographics don't support golf courses like they do in penela Hillsboro so the dollars that are going out there are affecting what's going to happen in the future and I don't want to see them get penalized any heavier not this this may be the bottom line or not but everything's going to matter so if there's a way to structure it I just like kind like to hear that number what it would be yeah the revenue impact the approximate Revenue impact of that on the system is about between five and $600,000 um so if you just today if you took bul bulk rates cut them in half it's about A500 or $600,000 I'm not saying that as far if you cut them in half it would be how much about about $550,000 of reeven if you spread that over the whole utility not just the reclaim what would that number be can you do that not are you saying are you saying what would the increase be to recover the additional $ 500,000 from right so right now we're at $79 now was it yeah for a typical Bill all right so $79 now and I I don't know the slide right in front of me but $79 8130 8130 8130 mhm all right so over at8 8130 if you took that number just for the golf courses what would that affect that number to be just trying to run so Jeff I think I I if if I understand correctly if if we were just to what you're asking is is maintaining the bulk rate at whatever the you know we go back to some baseline cut it in half then and we're not making that Revenue up other than through just it would be subsidized by the sewer customers I mean ultimately so it would be half a million dollars onto the sewer customers which means that I mean it it' probably be a a blip in terms of a percentage on the sewer customer Jeff I I don't know but that I think that's really where the number that the commissioner is looking for yeah I don't want to hurt the I don't I don't want to affect the retail customers on the the reclaimed I'm just trying to help the golf courses save money if you spread it amongst everything Mr what would that number be when we're still waiting for an answer well I can I can see legally I can see tying it to the sewer customer because the sewer C you are generating reclaimed water okay I have a problem when you're starting to put it on the portable water customer that's what I was let all right let's go that way then okay which is exactly what we that's fine that's exactly what we would do reclaim as a product of waste water and okay thank you the I'll wait for the commission I'd like you just get the answer though now that we know where we can go we got to

go with the sewer what would that number be on the sewer rate we'll run the numbers if we were have to do that right three and a half% probably would go up by you know I don't know go 3.6 3.65 I'm not sure exactly what that figure would be um if we're going to do that but that's where it would have to go we would have to go on that sewer rate So currently 3 and a half% it would uptick that by a nominal amount all right but to make a decision we got to know how how quick can you make it that calculation if there's another comment we can try and run that I'll just go okay now this is probably for Mr Stein Snider obviously this utility funds are they're incumbered we cannot use those funds we cannot take those and put them in the general fund we cannot no this is a question I'm not saying we want to do this but just to kind of prove a point taking general fund dollars and putting me in Utility Fund is a no no as well I that is that has been generally my position with the Standalone um enteris Enterprise accounts yes right so the objective of the pasal County Utilities is not to make money the objective is cost recover cost recovery right so can you back up to slides maybe three for me real quick slide three yes sir let's try wait let me see yeah one more if you don't mind we may get there two maybe one more this one theill comparon I'm I'm looking for the increase okay the comparison right here yeah nope look go to all the increases that are being proposed the one slide that has all the increases I apologize that might be where he was the last the summary2 cents that's not being inreased with the um right here the region NOP that's not it you had a list of all could be your summary that you were May did summary 72 cents and 36 Cents and I was told I asked that specific we're still we're still on the same yeah yeah asked that specific question during wait here sir one look here hold on a sec they weren't changing okay we can use this one that's not so we talk about connection fees um we've had this discussion as a board on on numerous issues you know how much should new growth be able to pay it for itself so our current customers aren't paying more for the additional and New Growth right so we look at connection fees how much are is this increase in connection fees do you feel and we had this conversation so I guess it's really for the rest of the board and that people watching home can offset what possibly could be necessary additional increases across the board whether it be sewer whether it be reclaimed so unpack increasing connection fees right so connection fees so I don't want to um mix up the two issues um we did have this discussion you're absolutely right sir um so today is to adopt the four-year structure we will be coming back about a month we're going through the structure right now working with the county attorney's office moving things

around with the ordinance Land Development code will be coming back in the month and I believe we'll finalize October 26th meeting is when everything will be final so this board will have an opportunity to review connection fees in detail in the balance that you're talking about and so our goal here today is to adopt the four-year structure um in order to have that separate discussion because yes you're correct right growth is out of balance right current connection fees do not recover enough uh to cover what growth is costing the utility to exp so in Ence you're having to dip into your fund your fund to offset the cost of the connection fees so yes sir the current the current water and through a rate structure because connection fees do not recover cost this rate structure has to pick up some of that bill if I can get some clarity in in this slide when you're talking about connection fees are you talking about the rebranded connection fees so that you that we haven't so the rate study that we've completed um calculates those fees we are not bringing those fees together for the board for adoption they will come back later this month so yeah are you really are you really talking about impact fees or or are you talking about what used to be called connection fees but now you're moving to moving impact fees into that same rubric so separate yeah so separate actions right and so right now we're working together with with your office um and all the different parties right ordinance development team all of that um impact fees to connection fees that will be a separate action comence in so just to continue the conversation um is is there a way or is there a possibility with impact fees connection fees whatever we'll call them to offset some of the cost to our general customer when it comes to their charge you know their charges on water and or sewer or reclaimed is it possible for any of those funds to be moved over to offset any possible increases or or increases in the future so if I understand your correct let me get some clar you're doing here's what I I see you're doing you're like it's like you're thinking like what's 8 plus 20 that look you know you're trying to do a problem in your head I'm tching no I I I um currently I I don't think we carry much of in what we're going to be calling connection fees former impact fees as you may know them balances on those we we are we are using those 100% so there there's really you know there there's there's but I guess the essence of your question is is if we raise the connection fees is there a corresponding decrease in the rates is there could there potentially be what would I guess the cost of that be you may not be able to answer that question today yeah I can't answer it because I haven't looked at the numbers I would defer to our rate consultant on that one yeah so so if the question is an impact fee can an impact fee pay for the cost of new growth that's what an impact fee

is designed to do absent what the legisl did to us this last session um so in theory you can capture your cost for new growth capture the cost of plan expansion capture the cost of of anything you that that they're paying at the time they pull a building permit if there is the will to charge that much most times you most times most jurisdictions have draw have written down some of that cost because it gets it gets pretty cheap but right legally you could so calculate one that way but could you could you actually use that any fund balance to offset any other additional costs that are related to those connection I mean I think unrestricted numbers and accounts we could use I mean correct so I apologize I missed some of what you stating but the getting deep in the weeds sure so impact fees the way they're defined right we we do have Bond covenants so we' have to look at a lot most of that anything that's collected in Impact fees and and we're going through the definitions of connection fees those are restricted funds right so we call them kind of red money and they're intended only for those certain purposes so water impact fees are only allowed to uh to fund water expansion Wastewater same thing and so you can't so if your question if I understand you correctly is could we use balances from those funds if we were to adjust all those maybe upwards right to offset some of what we're doing today for one and a half and three and a half the answer would be no right I have I'd have to coordinate make sure but those are restrictive funds you couldn't use impact fees to sub okay anwers my question thank you chairman sir yes okay but Al also at the same time with new growth new developments and new communities they are required to run this require the reclaimed water lines as they're running the potable water lines is what not all require no it's very specific it's based upon a number of things commissioner when we require reclaim water um size of the community location of lines it's very much a judgment call um you know as we as we move forward in fi developments we may not necessarily require it as a general rule that's our first approach but when looking into specific new growth and new development if it meets specific spe ific requirements when I was in the meeting with you yes ma'am um we had discussed that the new growth when they meet certain specific specified requirements they had to run the reclaimed water lines with the potable water lines you're talking about new development that that comes in so yeah this was and they meet specific requirements I mean I can I I mean we could speak to that I mean you know the the the county codes and Land Development code specifies when portable water is needed and and of course we're we're we we're developing specific

standards for reclaim and working with with the building industry on that but if if we determine that reclaim water is appropriate um the developer runs the pipe at their costs we do not recover our impact fees are not calculated to recover that that cost of that pipe we we looked at the development Community to build the pipe we build the plants so that should help offset some of the new growth costs because the developer is now putting in the reclaimed water lines correct we we normally would would not pay for those anyways we would we would push that now in some in some I'm not saying that's case in all cases because there's always specific things but in general we we look to cover our plant expansion costs with the connection fees and then going back talking about the unlimited reclaimed water it used to be $11 for every 10,000 gallons I'm recapping no ma'am so the 1073 under the former rate structure so 1073 and I believe it was 522 correct on a back flow fee uh charge that was the old retail rate structure and so that allowed for paying those fees you could use as much as you needed to and so now under the current structure would be $11 for up to 10,000 gallons $110 for any additional correct so you originally had unlimited use of the reclaim water the old rate structure did yes ma'am for ret rate structure it's $11 up to 10,000 gallons and then at $110 for additional 1,000 gallons now going back because I had specifically asked you during the meeting as well when it comes to the golf courses and everything else it was 36 Cents and 72 cents so if they housed their own and stored their own water it was only 36 cents per gallon because it was only half of 72 cents and at that time I thought you also said that those rates did not increase or they only went up like a couple so they only yeah so they only went up 2.9% that's what we were we were just talking about they um I believe each one increases by about a penny correct one and two pennies correct yeah okay so and those are for folks behind a Master Meter right so those are not your retail customers and so the developments you that Mike was describing with those new housing developments would not be subject to that that rate if they were doing individual meters correct so it wouldn't jeopardize because it wouldn't be changing the structure for the golf courses they're going to still be paying around the same amount that they've been paying correct so so even the golf courses would on average have thank you sir would on average have about a 2.9% right so if you look at um so I'm just going to pick one right so um Lexing Lexington Oaks right if you look at their current consumption right they're going to be looking at about an $18 almost $19 difference in their bill overall a month a mon correct of an increase yes because I thought you had said it was only going up a penny per gallon so per thousand gallons right so their user right based on their average usage habits we did some of that

research and it looks like for them it would be about 19 gallon $19 increase per month so 2.9% is is the relative figure for all those golf course discussed at the beginning we wanted to encourage as many people to switch over to reclaim water so we wanted to have the least amount of impact on the developments in the golf courses that agreed to use the reclaim water I'm not sure I understand your question ma'am we wanted to impact the least amount on the golf courses we don't want to increase their rates so drastic that it was going to have a negative impact on them and that's why you had said it was only a couple cents difference when charging into the new tax structure or Bill structure so correct so 2.9 is is a nominal r increase uh 2.9% relative to those bulk rates and so the the the major change you're looking at is actually that slide right there and so when we look at the re retail structure and our consultant just kind of mentioned that a little bit the change in cost recovery relative to what we spend to support that program um their cost recovery percentages remaining equal to the old rate structure and so that Penny and two pennies that we're talking about is on par with what it costs us to support that program we're shifting a little bit of and like Mike talked about a little bit with demand management right because we've got that additional load on on the system we want to be able to um support the retail customers as well at the same time right we just discussed Wastewater subsidizes that and so that's what we're trying to change so to to put a brief point on your answer right uh 2.9% is rising right along with the cost it it costs us to support that program because we wanted to continue and to encourage people to continue to use the reclaim water so we don't want to increase the rates too drastic especially for the golf courses or other sure so we want to we want to encourage use but we want to encourage responsible use right and so when we look at that's kind of one of the big drivers when we look at the retail side of things and we talked a little bit about the load on the system um when you have that unlimited structure right sometimes you have folks on the higher end of the curve that are um consuming you know more than their you know fair share of reclaim if you will um and so putting this there just ends up being a little bit of a signal right 10,000 gallons is the median in terms of consumption for retail and so um that that hopefully is allowing to balance equation now does that answer your question ma'am thank you yep commer we have answer awesome yeah so just crunch some quick numbers um relative to your question on the the impact on the sewer rates um be looking about four instead of a three and a half% next year it' be a 4% and that would be about a 30 C increase on the overall bill that you saw so instead of about 8130 in 2022 it would be about 8160 but you know so right now would be

it's 8130 it would go up to 8160 8158 81 okay so 28 4% increase yeah so 20 28 cents I mean I think when someone looks at a bill it's not a that's pretty minuscule and that's compared to if everyone paid the additional 28 cents which is min school um compared to them their bills going up $18 a month like lexon Oaks no the $81 the $81 that's referenced that's a homeowner residential homeowner what I'm talking about yep if we increase everyone's Bill 28 cents then Lexington Oaks wouldn't go up to $18 because everyone would be absorbing it correct the rate would actually be reduced in a half roughly from the current um current bill so so the golf courses would get a benefit of rolling back to what they used to pay on the or initial agreements on when they agreed to lower their water consumption down so someone's total monthly bill they're going to get goes from 8130 to 8158 I think it's worthwhile to lower lower to that bring it to that number the notable thing there um just one thing to add on that would be that would be for all bills whether they are reclaimed customers or not if we do that that would be for all water sewer customers it would be on the sewer side of that bill yeah I I'm a little uncomfortable with that because you're picking out one group of people to subsidize that makes me a little uncomfortable you're not you're not subsidizing though this these listen right there customers are subsidizing golf courses all right so let's let's take a look years ago I'll go back to 5 years what they were paying so the number there on the chart would have been from 80% to 40% there was a major bump that they took years ago you hammered them many years ago not you but the the board that was previously here I think so that that they took a a strong jump and they had no way to offset what they were going to do they were doing the right thing using reclaim water and they had to cut down their water consumptive use permit for the good of the county now they're paying and still have been paying they're paying 80% cost recovery the other reclaimer rates are still at you know they were at let's say just over 50% they're still going to be under 70% they've been shouldering the burning for years and again you had Magnolia Valley go down timber Oaks went down the links has gone down um and it's all about money or mostly about money as far as these things go if they can't make money they're going to go under I don't think it was reclaimed water causing that isue yeah not I say not exclusively that but you're throwing an extra burden on these guys and have been for years when they were there helping storm water situations quite a bit now I said now it's like shoes on the other foot now they're struggling where they could take care of the cost before we don't have the same demographics of golf as we used to have and now they're struggling do you want to see another

Golf Course go down um Mr uh chairman the administrator wants to say something Dan's been waiting to say something Mr BS I was just checking if if we did what commissioner Mariano recommended I was asking what that cost recovery subsidy chart looks like would because right now they're roughly 80% roughly so they'd roughly go to 40% so the sewer customer would be subsidizing 60% of their bill instead of 20% of the bill you're increasing yeah sewers picking up and picking up yeah so one one of the things I mentioned if you look at this graph too that's interesting um so bulk is at about 80% cost recovery right now yes and so with the proposed rates with the retail structure we're getting that up to about um just under 70% so instead of this Dynamic where you're no flipping that um one one opportunity maybe to reduce the bulk to 70% more in line with the retail um so while the bulk rates wouldn't be cut in half you could see you know at least a little bit of a reduction in there that would have less of an impact on Steward just just as an option I I'd even favor something of of a concession for these guys because they are carrying the load and they have been for many years because if you do that you're just basically flipping the cost recovery problem from bulk to retail um so this would be a way to maybe balance that out so so rough numbers you would go from 28 cents to probably about 14 cents yeah we're I'm running it right now but a number your few but now you're now instead of being 8130 be about 8144 and get that gets them in line to where others are guess commissioner the I understand your point and they they'll run the numbers for you I guess from a policy perspective right now the sewer customer whether they have reclaimed or not is subsidizing the Vault customer 20% of their bill and they're subsidizing the reclaimed retail customer 30 well 30% under the new rates but about 40% under the current bill so those are people that may the sewer customer that may have reclaimed and the sewer customer that does not have reclaimed correct right it's all sewer customers it's all sewer customers so you know I get from a policy perspective ultimately where does that subsidy where do you want that non reclaimed customer from a sewer the sewer customer doesn't get reclaimed how much should they actually subsidize or reclaim system today you're subsidizing it to a tune of 20% and 40% I mean ultimately do you want that subsidy to be zero or do you want that subsidy to be somewhere in you know the average 88% around 80% so about a 20% subsidy Mr chairman let me flip the table on you take a look at if you didn't have the reclaimed customers your sewer rates would be higher so they're helping the reclaimed customers are actually helping lower the sewer bills is how it's really working it has been for a while and again these

golf courses took the brunt of it 5 six years ago when we really escalated their rates so much so that they've been higher than even the retail people who do want to get it in yes sir and just so you know my first choice is to let them go pump other water rather than stuck with this I don't I think that's that you know that's not the some it's not we can make that call here today I understand I'm just saying I think the other the other thing to think about is you know we are a point now where reclaim is a valuable resource and if we don't do some kind of consumption charge which is what we're proposing May what happened in May where our retail customers could not get reclaimed at certain parts of the day because we were out we'll spread to May in April and June because we will run out of that resource and so we got to go to a consumptive charge because right now the only thing that tells you you can't water more than once a day are our conservation rules and it's a code violation there is no penalty if somebody uses reclaim 5 days a week other than a code code violation yeah exactly what he's talking about those two numbers I I quoted earlier right when we look at 2011 right there was roughly 70% average Demand on the system or above 95% now right when we look at that and that's why you had that 97 was the number I ran just last night so that's the challenge Mr yeah you made you just brought up a good point about um having to lower the pressure for reclaim I don't know if you guys did but I have quite a bit of Comm communities in my neck of the woods um I know commissioner starky does and commissioner F Patrick begin you do as well um because you new developments that required to have reclaimed but I got a large number of emails and calls and com I hate to call them complaints but concerns um from customers wondering why their pressure was down talk to people in the in the I'll say the irrigation industry right um for example a gentleman that was came to my house to repair um my irrigation system um once we got into conversation and he found out what I did he started asking he goes man he goes I'm going on jobs every day he goes but I can't do the job because the pressure is not high enough for me to actually put the irrigation in and test if it's working um we don't want to go back to that is is my point as as well as some of the CDD and master plan communities I was getting calls from um cdds chairs HOA chairs um about their concerns and not being able to again the pressure not watering flowers you know foliage all that you know dying and not looking up to par so we definitely can't have that happen we don't want to see that happen again again I don't know if you guys got any of those calls or complaints I got quite a few I I'll say that in a lot of my district they may be on County Sewer but they don't get reclaimed because they're older neighborhoods so they don't even get the

option to have reclaimed and they subsidizing on the sewer so I'm not I'm not so inclined I probably be just sticking with the staff recommendation all right but it's previously by having the reclaimed water it was offsetting the cost of sewer for everyone in the county as a whole correct so o overall having a reclaim system in a broad notion right you're correct right having a reclaimed system a system of treating and disposing of extra Wastewater would bring down overall Wastewater costs so it discounted the county as a whole by having the reclaim water yes and then we asked golf courses and new developments to take this excess reclaimed water because we had too much of it at that time and we were giving it away and then we started Charing charging these new developments always there there was always a rate structure in place um for those golf courses right and so yes you had systems where there was just different disposal challenges right we talked about that 70 and 97% right with the utility being needing to uh dispose of that and reaching agreements with golf courses that would allow for that disposal to happen um but as that has shifted and we've got much more growth in the system again 97% load now the the the arrangement really can't be there and still be able to like commissioner Moore was just stating right everyone to be able to have pressure at their houses to turn on their irrigation all the time you wouldn't be able to have those type of things we asked them to take this water and dispose of it and we weren't charging and now we're turning around and we're imposing these fees after fees so they they're not to my knowledge we we entered into an agreement typically with a lot of these golf courses and those agreements stipulate how payments and and rates and charges that that are adopted you know occasionally by the board of County Commissioners those rates those rate structures have to be followed so contractually that's always part of the deal you know you don't enter into a 20-year agreement necessarily promising that that it's going to be a free commodity so those those Agreements are in place with with a lot of these golf courses and and with all of our customers and oh so so what Mike is talking about about Fue I'm sorry when and fgua if we're going to go back to Jasmine Lakes didn't we take over Jasmine lakes's water and then distribute it over the whole County as a whole so the board took separate action right last year and made the decision to acquire the aqua system we're she's asking but it's not connected into our system yet right well not not on reclaim but but to your point we we brought those systems in the board made a conscious decision to bring these systems in assumed the debt the debt was spread across the entire customer base and rates were increased at at a rate

appropriate to to absorb that debt and now they pay the same rates as all County customers so now we're also taking in additional utilities and spreading nose across the whole County and that's why we're going up an additional $2 no in this particular case the the next system to fall and I believe the County Administrator put that in his presentation this morning there is there is money being set aside to help offset the debt which would negate the need for additional Revenue we can recover that that Revenue with with the customer base to to cover our costs so no rate increase in this proposed rate increase covers any Acquisitions it's not necessary provided the money that the County Administrator cost correct it what the pleasure of the board on this item because uh we can just keep on talking this the rest of the night but it's hot in here yes commissioner it is warm so is this something that needs to be or the I don't I don't want to punt because we already we punted a lot of stuff to Future meeting so and these rates would be effective on the 1 of October so we all the revenue models assume the rates are effective one October can I get an answer on what my last question was what that number is I don't want to use my assumption of calculation but uh the question on if you got to 70% for example if cost recovery if you went to well all right let's go to that one first yeah 70% yeah so I mean at 70% you're talking about a you know call it 8 cent reduction on the the top bul bulk reclaim rate um so 4% reduction on the lower one um so at that level of reduction it's really within the margin of rounding on this and I don't you wouldn't have to really adjust the sewer rates accordingly um so it kind of fits within that with the parameters you got set up exactly y all right so I'm going to I'm going to make a motion to approve staff's recommendation with the exception of taking the golf course reclaim rate at an 80% recovery to a 70% recovery which will keep their rates the same right so I'll second that with that so I'll second that okay correct Mr chairman just to keep it moving so if that's if that's the will of the board they're going to have to read vertise this and bring it back to you because specific rates were advertised for this hearing nope I take back keep the same correct Justin I mean I just looked at a proof of publication that had all these rates as advertised did he just say he could keep the rates the same because they're in the same eror the same you're moving charges from one to another that's just reducing a charge let me make sure I understand this commissioner what you're saying is approve all the rates with the exception of the increase to the golf courses and leave the golf courses at the 70% recovery rate which effectively leaves their rates alone yeah so all the rates that are published except for that rate

are correct so in in going with that I would ask the County Attorney um if we could read vertise only that set of rates for bulk reclaim and move forward with the remainder of the rate structure to be implemented on 101 you could and and before you take a vote here this was a public hearing public hearing so you're you need to take comment I mean it was tax yeah if do we have to read vertise if we're not increasing the rate if we're leaving the rates where they at we're not increasing it so do we have to going to show a low we would leave the make sure I I'm sorry are you with are you with a staff no I'm sorry but are you with st okay yeah public hearing is over yeah I thought you were with them I was conf this we're still in a public hearing we didn't public comment so you can't take a motion without taking no no it said afterwards there's public comment it's right now we thought you were staff I'm like you trying to get to the microphone I I got what you're asking for go with our recommendation on everything but the golf core races hold the golf court rate as they are in 2020 which effectively makes them 70% subsidy okay right make sure I understand that right that's what I said but just where you going to get the money to to make to do that subsidy basically it sounds like that's a in the model itself the 80% to 70% is effectively rounding error if I kind of oh prob in the model that that small adjustment correct if no other if no other rates are going up to meet this one you should be able to drop because you're charging them less you should be able to drop it based on the advertising that's already been done good because it wouldn't change the current rate it wouldn't change the current rate need the motion repeated there was an issue with power all the question until you have a public hearing yeah let's have a public hearing should anyone here to speak to this item Mr chair you're speaking to the item as public comment my name is Barbara Kennedy and I live in Heritage Pines okay we are on reclaimed water we have maintained Villages and self-maintained Villages the self-maintained pay the basic rate the monthly rate we pay per gallon as per thousand gallons as does the golf course it's killing us because the rates keep going up and up and up and our bills are range between $800 a month and $1,200 a month now if you implement my question is if you implement what you're considering what I think I understand you're considering for the golf courses will that apply to my bulk rate Bill also yeah I I believe the bulk rates that were golf courses are typically the the storage without storage these these Villages and Heritage Pines actually are utilizing system pressure so it is at a higher rate and we're currently I thought it was it was close to 70 cents it's 70 it's 68 going up I'm

sure let me let me confer with our rate consultant for just one second here to make sure my understanding is correct but we're talking the bulk rates if we do a 70% cost recovery is across the board for bulk rates whether it's pressurized or non-pressurized correct in which case then we would hold we would hold at the at the 70% level as as you've said so we would not be doing the increase that not being doing the increase and would that be a decrease for us you know I'm only half partially understanding what's going on here there's a lot bounc chairman back and forth and I'm trying to get a grasp on it you have spoken with be the same rate it would be the same rate it' be the same rate now right but after that well then they're they're pegged to the the three and a half perc or are we holding that for four years what is what was your assumption St so the the assumption is is that we would hold the bulk rates at 70% recovery and then index at the three and a half% annually just like we're doing currently so term index that adjust adjust for inflation so the the the numbers right now currently proposed are one and a half% for water 3 and a half% for sewer and reclaim so our costs increase every year in order to operate the system so we would we we we will not do the the jump to 80% which is what we're what we're talking about we would hold it at 70% recovery and then they're indexed according to our cost which is 3 and a half% so they will go up Up 3 and a half% every year uh versus the 3 and a half% plus whatever was proposed as part of the normalization to get to 80% so this year they're flat next year they go up three and a half% and the year after yes sir okay so you avoid a 2.9% just Mike thank you yes maam yes Madam clerk no problem yeah so um that effectively by holding the rate avoids a 2.9% increase on that rate right now and then like Mike said it will index along with the rest of the plan because if you don't right then your cost recovery will dramatically that Gap will dramatically widen over the remainder of the rate period so this is just for the one year it would freeze the rate it would freeze the rate increase and so there would be no increase on on those rates this year but then the following year right you would 22 you're talking yes ma'am it would index along with the rest of reclaim and Wastewater rates yes which would be three and a half% take whatever in October 22 yes sir in October 2 public comment so as of October 21 your rate would not change under this proposal okay is anyone else to speak to this item thank you seeing no one Mr chair um you need a repeat of the I do need a repeat of the motion thank you chairman okay okay are you going to repeat the motion I have a question what's the question at what point would be the break even analysis for them to convert from the 72 cents of us storing to them being self storage so they can get the lower 36 C So currently I don't that would require a capital investment

on their part if they don't have the facility so it would be very specific to whatever it is that they're doing so that analysis would be a project type analysis do we know the average cost to for them to install that or in my past experience with projects here with the county definitely seven figures thank you okay I'm going to restate commissioner uh bar motion she had to step out for a second okay wasn't it thank you my motion wasn't it commissioner Mariana's motion wasting the AC working got the AC working we appreciate that open the door and let motion the motion is to accept staff's recommendation with the exception of the bulk rate going from an 80% recovery rate to a 70% recovery rate which keeps the rates the same for this current year and second all right second so I have a motion and a second all those in favor say I I I I motion pass 5 thank you you almost have no motion if you're here okay uh thank you now we're going to move back to regular items we going back to good job team you can r78 lot of chair you know just looking at the time and I kind of think there'll be some miscellaneous business that needs to be dealt with it's okay with us if you'd like for us to bring back 78 and 79 at the next board meeting sounds great dve City don't don't add anymore 28th because I'm leaving early right it' be on the 15th in dve city if it's a pleasure of the board we can bring those two back in D City then go straight to missan you could do one of them cuz I'm here I got a meeting at 5:30 right here in this room so not in this room yeah not if we're still oh no we're upstairs never mind okay we'll just um continue those two items and bring them back on we'll bring them back on the 15th of September yes sir okay as regular items thank you then you go to miscellaneous business miscellaneous uh Mr Moore I going to be quick I just just want to go over um some numbers from tourism real quick um we looked at comparisons occupancy rates for January through June of 21 Pasco County's occupancy rate was higher than both Hillsboro and pelis counties and over the state of Florida's occupancy rate for that time period so congratulations again to the DMO team pasco's occupancy rate from January through June was 76.4% Hillsboro was 64.1 and that was pretty incredible right panel's was 73.7 uh state of Florida's average was 65.3 so again great job to our DMO and let's be honest we know why those numbers are why they are because of the changes we've made as a team with along with our DMO when it comes to being Florida Sports Coast all the tournaments that came in during that time across the county that's what J the room nights that's what brought us over the edge so just wanted to put those numbers out for you guys and uh that's all I got sadly I have a lot all right oh no we'll start with um my pictures the

Amazon in Bexley I knew that would get someone's attention so um we have some design standards for a large um big box and um it left out these kind of buildings I guess we weren't anticipating these kind of buildings and so I want to um make recommendations that some of that the details that we acquire on um large scale commercial retail buildings and large scale commercial retail development projects um have um do not have unbroken blank walls and have uh the architectural details that don't give us these this is really uh not a good thing for the neighborhood I think I speak I think I have Mr carbal speak to it because he drives by it every day and uh we've got we've got more of these coming and I have been working with the developer of the next one it's not the same one that did this one and and while it's beautifully built I would say we can do better and they will they will do better if we ask them to because I've seen it in other counties um also the Landscaping on this one yeah is a real you know real problem for me I've mentioned that here before if you go back to the picture before um no the first one that is not enough to go against that big wall that is just not enough and um I mean one tree for every 60 feet I think is what we have going on there so I definitely want to see us do better um but I I would like this board to um ask our staff to make um some changes to the special development standards for these kind of buildings as well so what what does that entail over there is that a very big ask or is that something that can be in the next update we have one of these coming on State Road 54 in a very prime location I've done all I can in my district to encourage them to put in some architectural details but we can't make them so nario PTO Planning Development um so we have the the big box ordinance in place I think that's 1102 um section 1102 of the Land Development code yeah not 2.1 yeah so there's a model there to follow to address some of the architectural uh pieces to distribution centers such as this uh building um and I think also the big box ordinance does talk about the type of foundation Landscaping that can go along the large retail users there's a model there as well that we can extrapolate and think about how we want to uh address these types of distribution centers as well um it it's not going to be part of the next round of amendments as those are coming up soon enough um however we could take a look at that and uh potentially add a section into 1102 that addresses uh distribution centers yeah and is that do is there anything else that we should Clump into there and not Le I mean is it only distribution centers I don't want to make sure I want to make sure we're catching it all what what else right so in terms of other things that we would want to um think about a lot of these distribution

centers are taking advantage of some of the industrial um policies that we have in place um so that's something to balance as it relates to um how we approach the additional landscaping and Architectural requirements Associated for these types of industrial users okay well um does everyone agree because that we need to fix this okay good that's number one thank you commissioner while I support the way the planning director is um saying he wants to handle this which which is a code Amendment um if you know that a particular user is coming in in an mpud at the mpud could have those regulations in it as well does that site H the site that we're talking about 54 have is that an mpud most of these types of uh developments are coming in as muds so the County Attorney is correct we could also deal with them on a Case by case through the mpud I I would prefer to handle it the way you've suggested as it overall so that everybody knows the rules coming in but if but if there are muds in process that have these types of uses that should be something that the planner that is reviewing them considers before you get that code amendment in place is what I'm suggesting we would like the planners to know that we want to see better buildings yeah so that you can start dealing with that in your meetings not in my meetings Madam chair does that works but we also want him to fix the code but until then right so so let me just try to get throw an idea out there until the code gets fixed do we allow them to apply for a trans a uh the Landscaping Grant so they don't have to bear the cost but they can still improve the facility until the code changes they have plenty of dough to put in some trees you're good I'm good I want to use that Landscaping money for old businesses okay to bring it bring it up but these guys will put the trees in oh yes M chair okay so again when I traveled out of the state and I was in Connecticut and Stamford driving down the main road from Stanford to downtown Stamford on the right you have Nestle and on the left you have synchrony you would not be able to tell that there were these big box stores because it is all trees in the front you have to turn off those roads and then even Pepsi in Terrytown New York you have to turn off the main road go up this windy turn to get up to the building at the top of the hill but it is all blocked off by trees and nice scenery so I don't see why there wouldn't be enough buffering here to make it look just as nice as up there agreed okay um okay so I did that one I'm G to save my hard ones for later um uh Green Key well we kind of talked about we talked about about that and I would like us to find a way to fix that road and make it more attractive out to our park and um um I I did get word from some folks in development that we that we they were we they had some staff that were bucking them doing rear loaded um

designs and I don't think that's what this County wants we want rear loaded design so I want to make sure and I talked to administrator about this and I hope that's been taken care of we encourage reloaded designs but something that I had in a conversation today with someone who was in a planning meeting was that they were concerned about well the the alleys have to be wide enough for emergency vehicles no emergency vehicles can use the front row just like in every other development so don't put more burden on a rear loaded design and say it has to fit emergency vehicles because they can use the front door they don't have to come in the alley if there's a problem and so I I I don't think that's the right way to be dealing with alleys if there if there's an issue where service Vehicles need to get to both sides of houses then every house should have roads on both side of the houses so I think you're penalizing a a a rear loaded house personally um today we approved a uh a development with 40 foot with all I think it was 250 40 foot wide Lots I don't want to approve any more developments with only 45 40ft Lots unless it's a special reason I think we need to start mixing those up or we're just we're going to we're going to have a lot of holiday again um I've talked to um some of our folks in the development community and they agree with me that we should be asking for a mix a 40 50 60 product even if it's the same house just or you know put a little more features on it but why widen those have a mixture and not have every single one cookie cutter the same um but I'm not going to improve any more I'm not going to be okay with any more only 40ft Lots I had someone come in and want to do 80040 foot Lots seriously I we need just move to 50 and above I don't mind a 40 foot lot if it but it well you know when I don't want to mow grass and when I in 10 years I won't be mowing grass but in some instances A 40ft lot's okay but you can't have a whole developments of 40ft lots I think that's worse than the apartments personally um okay um two more oh wait I sent you a picture of I don't remember what it was what did what did I send you it was a road section I'm not sure where oh yeah yeah so I'm going to bring this back um because I was going to um stop the meeting today and deal with this but we're going to bring this back um this is the road section of vop what's wrong with that TV it's also the the road section for Conor no um connected City and looking at this and I I was texting out last night about this to many of our development folks that I I was shocked to see two 5- foot sidewalks on either side of the road when you have 205 26 36 what 41 feet and you got a 5 foot sidewalk so talk to David and the way way I'd like to deal with this is to bring it back and say one of those sidewalks has to be 8 ft and there's plenty of room in there to get that in there but you you don't want kids riding

their bikes around the Villages of Pasadena Hills in the street pry sure there's an explanation what yeah Brad tip in planning and development uh just to be clear when you see these typicals that have the letters AA next to them that's the initial phase of this road that's when it's not anticipated to have a large amount of traffic uh the section that's labeled 70 bb or 70cc in these Master plans shows those expanded trails and those Trails off out of traffic separated and much more of what you're what you're thinking of and that's in the ultimate plans for for the both of these areas okay well I I do want to see the trail Network for vop but um Pat Gasaway who lives in Connected City said what he sees is the little ones right on the 5ft sidewalk with the Walkers and the older kids are in the street so that's not what we want I don't think um I think I don't understand why one of those sidewalks can't be wide enough for for for young kids to ride their bikes off of the street I love that they have the golf cart Lanes I think that's great but no one wants their their kid riding street so maybe I I need to see what you're talking about but jolu was fine with amending that yeah any any time if you'd like to set up a a time I'll come to your office and I'll sit down with the master Railway plan and we can talk about some of those things and how that works they're they're kind of unique in those areas the way they're designed okay uh but I'd be happy to to talk about that um Mr sty Mr starky not not your office here my office is his office Mr starky can I can I add a a little bit to that yeah all right so and if you look at the roadway as wide as it is right now it fits the two cars and on both sides you get those smaller Lanes I think we we it'd be a much better design to have it on both sides skip the roadway bike trail or golf cart path just make it even if you had to go 9 or 10 ft wide won't cost him any more money to go do it especially if you're doing at asphalt and they could run the strips on both sides it'd be safer better and you could have golf carts and bikes going together or put them both on the same side and go like no both make both sides like 9 foot get rid of the centerart in the roadway so it's safer now everybody's off the road whether it be a golf cart or whatever Peach Tree City they have everybody on the side and they have they even have cut cutting through houses cxs but if you put it all on the side everybody's got room and to go through well I'm not sure what you're saying but this is already approved and built in Connected City all right so let me in many places all right so let me just start for other other developments just keep the two roadway sections where the white lines are next to the cars take away the asphalt that's near the curb and gutter on both sides and instead just take your 5ft sidewalk and make it like a 9 foot path on both sides well uh I appreciate what you're trying to do and that's what we do in a lot of places like State 56 is like that but they don't want golf carts on those paths um and that's why they have them

on the road correct they're context specific too let's don't take that I mean these need to be context specific as well because if you put a 10 or foot 12 foot concrete path in somebody's front you now that you're starting to impact you know marketing and some other stuff so there is a there is a way to do that but it needs to be site specific design with a trail plan thought out and there is one for vop that we can share commissioner that's been there and one for connected City and so it's it's really site specific spefic context design it's really hard to do a blanket do the whole County like this because you really need to be spite specific context design that works with the marketing plan the developer wants to use with the product yeah but I I want to understand when it's okay to dump a little kid into the street here so I'm anxious to look at that's a that's a great idea I can actually I can speak with you as well and and at today hopefully when I get back the office assuming all the computers are up and running uh I can send you the final stage phase of this it actually shows what you're talking about so you'll be able to kind of see that that's timately where it goes it's just at this early stage there's not enough trips on the road certain things are allowed to share the roadway under those lower congestion uh situations so that's kind of why it's like that that's just the first of three phases for that one and commissioner starky what concerns me is on State Road 54 when you have a pregnant woman pushing a stroller with children in the middle of the road on these side of the road Pathways so I would like to see them I don't ever use the bike Lanes on the side of highway um okay two more two more things um um so I want to take you back to um a time when only commissioner uh Mariano and I were here and Stein Snider Goldstein and Kathy's gone so we had um I don't know if I have any maps on this but can you just pull up um Google Earth uh and do the Oaks at Riverside so we had a a a strange um thing come in where we had a developer who had a a one site left inside of development uh and he had all the um approvals that he needed except a site plan and it was zoned mf1 and zck you'll remember this and he um he the market was in a recession and so rather than build Town Homes he was uh coming in to build apartments and it is a really bad place to put a rental Community inside this this existing community that that was built in a very strange way it's a what's called a subd we don't have those anymore and um but uh and and a lot of the roads into this part were um blocked by my predecessor commissioner Hill de brand sadly I we don't do these anymore for the most part we don't block roads because you end up with the problem that we had had have here but this is the property up here um along Amazon and we have one spite strip over here connecting it to Southern Oaks

which um the person who owns it said he would give it to the county so we can go ahead and connect those roads um but so this property came through and our attorneys told us we had to approve it by law because uh he had everything that he needed all we had to approve was the site plan we had five we had a you didn't even have to do that commissioner it no it was appealed to you the site plan was an administrative approval that was appealed to you and you wanted to overturn it yeah so well not no I I not you I was La that was that was the issue was whether it was going to be over 100% I'm following the law so um so we had a very contentious hearing we had a group that said we are 5,535 strong of the community in here and they didn't want um to have 268 I think it was Apartments here and um although there is multif family all around it um and so uh but we had to approve it but two of us voted to approve it and three voted not to app approve it and then they they were personally sued and um it was brought back to us by one of the ones who voted no realizing that they had to vote Yes and we approved it but immediately I asked the development attorney if their client would consider selling it to the county if the residents were willing to buy it so I'm just giving you the some of the history so we had a big meeting here with the leaders of the HOAs from the community and we said you're either going to have Apartments or you're going to or we can do an msbu and you can buy it for your own personal Park um and they uh said we want to have the msbu so this County did do an msbu um the I think it's $135 a year for 15 years for 1,700 homes in the community um but then we had um a legislator who thought he might be able to get some some State money to buy this and so for for a couple years he tried that and it was vetoed because this is not State's interest to stop an apartment complex in here so um so we have never enacted that msbu I've take took the administrator by here I've taken Keith here numerous times say what about a County Park and he's like no it doesn't work for County Park one small correction the msbu is enacted you haven't levied any assessments on right we have an msbu we just haven't levied so um it's been sitting there it's been sitting there and uh what's it called again Oaks at Riverside o Oaks right so um knowing that we have the gulf Harbor's msbu coming up and that there are some people in the county um there's interest in our msbu they all need to be treated the same just as we today approve you know did some of the other msbu so um we uh I had some of the um so I went to talk to I talked to our attorneys you know what do we do with this property and um it was suggested to go talk to Senator Fano who was involved in this before so I went to talk to Mike and he's like yeah no I understand you know as long as it's not apartments and that and a lot of the people that

spoke when they said when they looked at their lots and made the decision to purchase this was zoned mf1 and they saw that but they thought it was going to be condos um or something like what's in Heritage Lakes not Apartments so um he said just just I would suggest you talk to the Heritage Lakes HOA so I had um I think five members of the herit Lakes HOA and um turns out one of my girlfriends is on the river side HOA so we had a meeting here and we went over everything that I I just told you and they remembered the meeting um I'm not sure if Jessica did but asked do you want the msbu or would you like us to Surplus it and none of them wanted at at that meeting they did not want to have to um they did not want us to fund or the msbu um so we went up real estate has looked at this property and and um we have come up with a plan to restrict it through deed restrictions I was saying reona but that's not right right uh yeah no we're we're working on it um to deed restrict it so that uh it has to be um someone buying something and take the units down from two 228 or 38 or 48 um we we made a stab at it at 175 um to see to see where that number got us and we're at 4.2 million so we can we paid three I should say we paid three million for it so I think we need to at least get 3 million out if we Surplus it I think there's room to still down down Z down am I saying is down zoning not the right word deed restricted to a lesser number it it could be down zoned it could be deed restricted it could be down planned it yeah whatever the right term is you just want to make sure that at the end of the day when you sell it it doesn't come back as something right you don't want there so so we could get it down um just I think we just need to at least get it down to $3 million what we paid for it that wouldn't be fair to the taxpayers if if we didn't um one of the thoughts to use the revenue from this property is that I'm not going to say where we we have an opportunity to purchase some land for a boat ramp uh and it's one of the last piece of properties if not the last to put in a boat ramp and it's just it's it's you know if this board chooses because this is General Revenue money but this board chooses we can maybe um but either way if we if we Surplus this if this board chooses we could um get that property if it if the res the residents have told me they may want to go back to the msbu and so um even if we go to msbu we can still use that Revenue if we want to get this property that's the last piece that there are other people looking at it so I don't think we have a lot of time to waste um the question here is we already have an msbu in place I don't want to go back to what we did in Gulf Harbors uh but I think we need to hear from the from the community and and I don't know if one of the attorneys has a good idea on how to do it we could have the

HOA leaders come in and ask Ms no one lay out the facts msbu or Park um the issue is it's everybody it's got to be all the 1700 homes which are different communities around the park so it's it's it's not um it's not an easy thing but uh I I just wanted to lay that out for you that that's coming commissioner and I'd like to jump in I remember that one well yeah that was awful and and I think you're you're on a good path I think it's let's go take a look there may be a couple different options I think if they hear something something fee simple so people own it that's good I think if the Height's lower that's also good so whatever number it gets you when you may go a couple of different ways whether it be town homes or single family homes maybe set it for both ways and then whatever the market Bears to bring us the $3 million then you know let it let it let it go once we take the office we can take a look at and see which looks best for us yeah one of the things we tossed around at that HOA meeting was that um you know what if if they build a clubhouse and a pool and a tennis court it could be to the developer advantage to open it up to anyone who lives in this area to become a member you know for a fee and then they get some of the amenities that a normal neighborhood gets these days that is a drri or a CDD because they have nothing they have nothing they don't have a park they don't have anything but they have in here and you can see the tracks they have people they have homeless people and they have dumping it's her District she let to weigh in on yeah um I wasn't sure if I should wait till my turn but I I am very involved with this community I have had met with several citizens in that neighborhood I have gone to the community um the five HOAs two Fridays ago they would like to move forward with the msbu and BSS the levies um and I was going to make a motion but I gu I make it now or later but um so the citizens are very involved and they have been reaching out to me so so some want it and some don't but if hey if proing you have to bring it back correct well it does okay yeah so I I've tried I've tried tried to based on conversations tried to weigh this out I mean it wouldn't officially be a public hearing but I think you probably want to do something that looks and tastes and smells like a public hearing because otherwise if if either commissioner decides to go outad and work I care whichever way and and workshop it with them and bring it back I think I think they need to if I make my motion that we just well yeah I mean if let's go meet with them met with all of them I did meet with all of them so I was going to make a motion today to have a the County Administrator bring forward The Oaks at Riverside property back as an agenda item and update the board on moving forward with the msbu that was set up in 2014 and have Community input so we we would put it we would put

it well as long as the rest of the board agrees with that direction that's fine not vote I mean it's we'll make a decision when that time comes but they would like to move forward being levied the taxes but I would like to hear everyone's input because I met with the main five main HOAs I personally think we need to take the input of the HOA and leave it there so the HOAs the five of them that day I have a list of all of them that came to the meeting there was probably 20 of them there it was the head HOAs and they all every single one of them that was at that board um board meeting that evening said they were in favor of moving forward with being an assess the levy well if if you just want to take public inut from the HOA leaders yeah then let's set it up as a workshop at the end of the agenda and have them come in and and you can talk to them you can talk to them and and make a decision from there is good can I share with all of the Commissioners I had the list of everyone sign in that night I don't know if we all want to have that list of everyone that was at that meeting that said they were in favor of the that's probably a sunshine I wasn't sure that's why I'm saying it in public here let us hear from him I don't know if we I don't think we can Mr Steiner really information from a meeting that one of us wasn't at I don't know it's your well it was just the main leaders and HOA members I me materials but I could all right so I I think that's a good idea let's just have the even if they sign want to just send a letter okay and have them all sign it again basically send a letter from HOA if they agreement and don't need a meeting then we don't need a meeting okay if it's if she's already if if that's done Mr chairman okay yeah um so commissioner Fitzpatrick when you talked with them did you go over like the options of like either having single family homes what it might bring for a price Town Homes fee simple what it might bring for a price they were all not in favor of the town homes or multifamilies they really they wanted to continue with the natural and Par natural environment and the park and I did speak to Senator Mike Fano and I did speak with commissioner Wells about this project and how um what was the original agreement was and the communities did want to move forward keeping in a natural environment and turning it into a park so just to be sure this is their park and they have to pay for all the maintenance and fencing and anything that happens it's not a county park they would want to take ownership of the property after the msbu was set up okay what do you think Dan well David I don't know if your mic is working how long you been with us I think you have to hold it while you talk hear me now no same the button on the back there we go okay so the $135 that you quoted

before for the msbu is only to pay for the acquisition cost for the land does not cover any costs of maintaining the property and my understanding is that from Keith Wy is he has no desire to right maintain this property or make it a park so if you're looking to move forward with the msbu for a park you probably would have to add some additional money to that assessment to cover the maintenance cost of a park otherwise it would be in its natural state and its current Natural State no maintenance so they would actually be charged to 3.22 five million which would be divided over the 15 years which gives it $138 a year and that moving forward they have discussed amongst themselves about possible um Wilderness parks that continue with it being a Wilderness Park that's still going to take some maintenance cost to maintain that well they would take over the maintenance so we can because I ask them specifically about taking over the maintenance and are they able to afford the maintenance and they're like no we want to take over the maintenance yeah I don't think the maintenance will be that much you know with 1,700 houses they I think for what we're doing at um Gulf Harbors it's um $10 to $15 a year per and so even if it's $25 a year year for them um I don't know if they're you know going to mow it or whatever it is in its natural States just the chasing out the bad stuff that happens there I don't if they want amenities they can always come back and add it right right I I think you know I haven't heard from everybody on the Das but if if everybody is you know concurs with the district commissioner's approach we can take that and develop something for some options to bring back to you either in a regular item that has the HOA present or something I will say this won't go into effect until the fiscal 23 budget because you just approved the other msbu today yeah so me you're done for this fiscal year so we have effectively 12 months to get it in place for you to set the rate well not really because the be you have till December 31st of this year to notify the tax collector and the property appraiser that you're going to be bringing it up for next October but okay you you've missed this year that's clear well I'm glad something you know whatever it is I'm glad something's moving forward on this so thank you and um what do you think about exploring taking the funds from this and um working towards that the boat ramp purchase I cannot say where it is because we don't want the price of the land to go up so um cuz Keith will bring that to us in a future board meeting as they're negotiating great have meet with us I would like them to bring It Forward let's bring it back I think yeah I think and I did talk to commissioner Wells yeah and he all in on uh whatever his name is Wells what's his title priser yeah him so he's all on board with whichever way we go with this

and and what I want to do cuz you know he's he's all for another boat ramp okay lastly um so uh as you know I chair the international um whatever we call ourselves the international Economic Development Council at the pedc and of course um the at ni and um we have a trip coming up where we're taking some local businesses um to Germany and Switzerland in um in no end of September November and we're also doing an amps skills Workforce um trip alongside that as you know I've done seven or eight of those um we have plans with that one to bring some people at the state state level from Tallahasse along uh with us to learn about why uh apprenticeships to learn about apprenticeship so um I will be not here for that first meeting in November and and apparently this year we have only one meeting in November um so normally we do reorganization at the I think the second meeting in November but um then talking with the administrator and the County Attorney um we see no issues and seeing if you guys don't mind moving reorganization like we did last year to the first meeting in December okay that's it are you sure well I have Fairway Springs in here but I'm not going to talk about it you talking you going be lateat okay so I was going to say thank you to Pat Phillips I did get some citiz I did have citizens reach out to me about the trucks being parked out at Magnolia Valley and thank you to Mr Mike carala for following up with that I know we have signs and the citizens are happier now we do have I did attend want to say it correctly the rosala rosley renue project and it is when we teamed up with St Vincent depal cares of Pasco they have provided permanent housing for 171 households and they have an 85% positivity rate for not going back to homelessness and they've also serviced to 267 households in the past 9 months so thank you I know Kathy Pearson is not here but thank you to her team for helping with that project as well and oh you knocked off half my stuff um next I would like to say I was also able to be in attendance with go when Governor Dan santis came with commissioner Mariano and commissioner starky I think it's very important that we also help raise awareness and he had came in and he was talking about the monoclonal antibody vaccines at the Mike Fano hurricane shelter and I think it's very important that people know they can go to the Mike Fano hurricane shelter 7 days a week 9 to 5 so this as soon as you when you find out that you have tested positive for covid-19 I think it's very important that you know you can go to the mikano hurricane shelter 7 days a week 9 to 5 they can service 300 patients a day and with the regeneron it should be able to kick your symptoms within 24 hours for with covid so I would like to let as many people know

about everything happening at the mikano hurricane shelter and website is and the website is patient portal patient portal.com thank you so as you can see you can go straight to the patient portal sign up and it's always I'm going to leave it at that so thank you very much and lastly if I can just have an update in the next month with the airport protection plan I would just like to see where we are on um Mr pitos was working on the airport protection plan if I can have an update on where we are with that I know we've been working on that for several months good afternoon again uh nario PTO Planning Development um the airport zoning commission met yesterday uh and discussed uh amendments to the comprehensive plan um where they made a positive recommendation to forward to the local planning agency that will hear those amendments of the comprehensive plan on Thursday of this week um and then those amendments of the comprehensive plan will will track together with the property rights element uh updates that we're bringing to the LPA on Thursday and to upcoming board meetings in September and in October thank you and do we have someone to represent each of the airports including Hidden Lake uh Hidden Lakes is not on the airport zoning commission although they were present at the meeting yesterday and uh were able to participate in any discussions I would like for them to have a representative as they do have an interlocal agreement with the county so I think it's very important that they have input on this board um I think that would require redoing the airport zoning commissions that's right they were not they're not a general aviation airport which is why they didn't get a seat to begin with correct they're not public but they do allow for hospital and different transportations and we do have that interlocal agreement with them so I think they should have some input and we should be protecting their airport as well we have it or the sheriff has it I believe we have it and Mr Craig leaport had gave one to everyone in the folder that he provided when he was here that day the Sheriff's Office was it's either a public airport or it's not a public right you can that may be yeah I'm not aware but that doesn't mean we don't yeah with the interlocal agreement I was under the impression that it is the minimum um standards is to only have public use airports but we can expand it to private use airport as well especially since they do offer a lot of um benefits to the community as well we'd have to we'd have to look at it but again you've already had a meeting of the of the of the commission they've already made their recommendation I have been asking for someone to be from Hidden Lakes to be a repres reprentative on this board since for the past few several months I think the airport zoning commission as a body dates back a number of years um possibly to 2016 2017 we just added Spencer just

recently a few months ago to represent as a public us pilot country and a couple others and yes I would like it to be expanded to the private use airport because we have that interlocal agreement and because they provide benefits to Pasco County they allow emergency landing for local hospitals as well and we should protect them especially with mafit coming in that's going to be right down the road we can look into that and see if uh what we would need to do to update the airport zoning commission and include an additional airport okay so thanks thank you and I just want to say thank you for everyone that was there when Governor Dan santis was there thank you to Governor Dan santis I think it was extremely important we have 15 Lo there are he's providing 15 locations around the state and I am very excited to have a location in Pasco County where people can go and get the treatment that is known to work thank you thank you so just like Katherine take stuff off my list sorry oh good no uh yeah that mocin antibody treatment is a phenomenal thing I think everyone should if they get Co been exposed to co it's a good treatment to go get um regeneran is the name that we're using and uh I I than the governor and Kevin guthrey was there our old emergency manager director was there and uh he's doing a great job for the governor as well um I'm very happy that the folks from Green Key came forward today didn't know they were coming but um they they do have some issues and I'm glad to see that we're going to take care of addressing them and I do think we need to work closely with the City of Newport Richie uh coming up to to study that storm water situation as well as to coordinate a Paving assessment in that whole area now they're not going to be able to do a Paving assessment like us but we need to get them to do some of their roads at the same time we're doing ours to make sure the drainage is going to be enhanced and hopefully they'll be good with that um and hopefully with the County Administrator and uh Sally's team we can work with the sheriff's office to work on the homeless that are in that area to make sure that area does get trespassed it does get cleaned up and it maybe even to the point to be so bad in there which is pretty bad that we even just get it cleaned up one way or the other I'll just say that uh I think I like the street light Assessment program which we can do along with the paving Paving Assessment program at the same time um part of it may be City Pate maybe County but I certainly would help the area and let me ask about Philly Lane um we've seen emails go back and forth and I've had everybody I think included Dan and and and Mike um the road there does go low it's a basin that just the water's going to go there no question about it there's one access point that goes across I don't even know if it could get to that point but we need to at least try to do some pumping I remember years ago we did it the way we did it we pumped it to one area it

was kind of up the hill and it came back down the hill if there's some temporary way or some better way we can go do it I think I like to study it and go take a look at it um do you Dan do you and and Mike still and Jeff as well are you with the opinion that we can't go pump for those people or we can't at this point in time so my understanding with Philly Lane is that you know if if there's Road related type flooding and I can't recall but let's just assume that it's it's our road and and we we maintain it you know we the roads are passible um so I think the residents were concerned about flooding on their property um in which case we we need to tread cautiously there I guess would would be what I would say I mean I I can we can certainly look at it let mean let me look at it let me come back with a coordinated response on Philly Lane so we can fully address the nuances that are going on out there okay I appreciate that um and on beer Wood's Drive um the citizen came forward to speak on that the place they put in the ground it's a hassle you took a two-lane left turn on be drive going south now it's down to one uh traffic did a great job making the timing of the lights go better to give it more time to get the people out there but uh it was very frustrating and I sent an email earlier this week uh to staff saying why not why isn't any work going on while this you know traffic impediment is still out there um I haven't heard anything back I don't think I had Sonia checking it but I didn't seen it as a lunch um we could follow up just to keep pushing along I was happy to say that after I did send the email two days later there were a couple of trucks out there at least doing something but the next day there was no one um and lastly um you know I think we're doing a a great job in many different things one of the things that happened just a couple of weeks ago is we did I did I'm sure the rest of the board did an evaluation for Dan um for the trust and Dan I trust you um but I think it would be a good idea if we go back to what we did years ago was to do an evaluation on the County Administrator and the County Attorney uh Regional planning Council does it every year if and I know Jeff has his old one that we used to have I think it's good if we bring that back and let us do an evaluation as well I I can I'll resend the board what I sent I think about 18 months ago so I mean okay was a draft appraisal I want to say it was about 18 months ago maybe a little longer now it was pre-co that's all I remember okay effect a lot but that's all I I have hard copies of the form that we used that I can give all the commissioners before the end of meeting okay that's all I have thank you okay Mr BS due to the time I I'll just mention you probably got in your email but um we've now established a Pascal County City meeting for the Westside cities it's uh November 2nd at 10:00 a.m. at the the new starky TLC I won't be here on the second November oh no that's oh

yeah I'm here second yeah I say they they confirm yeah yeah it's the next month Miss no no where am I gone look at my anyway just want to let you know you should see that in your email we'll start working agenda items with the Westside cities on that but November 2nd 10: a.m. sty TLC well I'm looking forward to going there that's all that's all I have chair tonight [Music] gery uh Mr chairman members of the board uh I believe you all got emailed uh a memorandum that I was going to bring up in Old business uh the and I'm going to butcher this name but one of the manufacturers of opioids Malin yeah Mal draw draw it looks like um has filed for bankruptcy as did Purdue um it's gone through the reorganization process uh um outside Council has told us uh they sent us a letter just recently that said that they wished that we abstained from voting to approve that plan and basically let them continue to try and negotiate with on their committees to get a better deal for member counties um so I would like to ask the board to direct the county attorney to follow that recommendation will abstain from voting on the proposed plan uh and allow outside Council to cast Pasco County's vote in accordance with the consortium's recommendation in a bankruptcy I mean the the rationale for this is in a bankruptcy you're going to get what you're going to get and and if they think they can get us a slightly better deal by holding out now uh um I think that's in the County's best interest because that either the bankruptcy judge is going to approve their plan or they're not and we basically are not going to have any great deal of sway but as a Consortium they will have sweat so we'll be making a sure be making a motion to approve the recommendation for board action yes please got a motion that was my motion so move me say it again have a second do I have a second I had a motion but iar I didn't hear a motion okay got a motion and second all those in favor say I I motion pass 5 Z and that's all I have for tonight thank you okay Madam Clark yes sir um I wanted to provide some recognition for my team um we won the distinguished budget presentation award from the government Finance Officers Association for the 10th consecutive year so um congratulations to my team and 10 years consecutively all this effort really is in the hands of Chris metler in my office so thank you Chris metler and also thank you to Heather Grimes who in recent years have also lent her her um abilities and talents to it as well so I just wanted to let everybody know that also um we are in the process of doing our annual audit plan and last year was the first year where we took in your comments from the uh board as well as from my team at the clerk's office as

part of the risk assessment to determine what to audit so you will see emails going into your inboxes um we are surveying from leads on up including um all of the elected officials here if you would like for us to um help in any way please let us know we will be happy to do that and then we will be submitting the annual plan for um to the board on public record so you'll be ble to see that as well and finally um I am not able to discern the budget amount for my office from what's been posted to the County website or what was submitted at the July 6th meeting and I just want to confirm what the amount is that is going to be proposed for next year's budget for my office I do have a an email that was sent by an assistant County Administrator to my chief it says the amount is $ 5,960 n99 I just want to know is that the amount that I can rely on public um hearings for the budget is coming up in September and I need to plan accordingly so how will I be able to know what the amount is I don't have it with me today but we can get you that amount I appreciate it thank you okay provide that for you anything else that's it thank you that's it all right all I have today I noticed um you know we had resolutions today and we have folks that um are retiring and leaving for other reasons um like Jane which we will miss and all all those that are going to be changed and they've been here and they've U made those sacrifices to make Pasco County a freemer county and we certainly appreciate all they've done and we hope that all of our uh staff that remain here and continue working and strive to be as good as they are because they're very good examples of what led Pasco County to be a premier County like it is so I I give them all the support in the world and I appreciate all the support that all of our staff gives us with that we'll adjourn thank you sir I have 15 minutes [Music]