9.16.25 Pasco Board of County Commissioners Meeting (Afternoon Session)

[Music]

Down.

[Music]

Down. [Music]

Hey, [Music] hey, [Music]

Okay. Did Mike make it in? Okay.

All right. We are

rocking and rolling.

Let me pick up.

Okay.

I'm going to now call back to order the Pasco County Board of County Commission meeting of September 16th. Okay. I see you you up. Are you Are we thinking we're going to finish that part now or are we going to go on to our public?

I mean, that was the discussion that the board had had prior to breaking. Okay,

I didn't catch that.

So, we're going to continue with the budget item that we had this morning and then we'll go on with our public hearings.

All right. So, Amy Ferrell, budget director with the Office of Management and Budget here in Pasco County. And so, to we'll pick up where we left off. So, we were having some discussion around um appropriate reduction to the general fund millage. So, what I'd like to do is go through the remainder of the budget as we've built it with the 0.02 reduction, talk about um how that's structured, and then we can come back to the millillage uh towards the end. We do have a final slide where we can, you know, try to get some general consensus before we come back for the final public hearing this evening at 5:15 if that's good with the board. Okay. All right. So the tenative budget that we have put together before you right now, which includes a 0.02 mil reduction in the general fund is $2.24 billion. Now this is uh roughly $6 million less than the fiscal year 25 budget that we've adopted. And so we've achieved that through a few ways. One of the things that we've accomplished through the pretty lengthy budget cycle that we have through a lot of negotiations and efficiency findings during budget meetings is we were able to reduce the um department submissions within the general fund by over $3 million and then um looking at other refinements across other funds to bring that total budget down by just under six million. All right. So, how what's the makeup the components of that budget? Um, for those of us who are visual, I just bumped ahead to the pie chart slide. And so, you'll see the biggest piece is that operating. So, think the day-to-day work that our teams are out there doing. Um, 411 million invested into capital, 54 million for debt service related to larger capital projects, and then um 453 in reserves. and that is reserves across all of our funding. All right. So, the revenues that come into our overall budget, we've tried to break those up in a way that makes sense to the common person and not just um our fiscal accounty type folks. So, the purple piece of the pie, that's the property taxes. So this is general fund property tax, our fire municipal service taxing unit, um our roads municipal service taxing unit and the general obligation voter approved um debt service. And then if you go to the the next piece, if you go clockwise, um that's our fund balance across all of our different funding sources. And then that piece on the bottom are charges for service. So this bit of the pie, I think, um transactional. I I pay some money, I get this thing. Um, so like a one for one transactional type of revenue. So our utility charges, impact fees, ambulance billing, solid waste assessments, those types of things. Um, then if we go around to close out the pie, that green bit that says other services, think of these as kind of pulled revenue that then gets um divvied up amongst different services. So, we've got penny for Pasco, our fuel taxes, um federal and state grants, things like

that, tourism taxes in there, um communication service tax, those types of things. All right, so now let's narrow in our focus a little bit from our overall budget down to the general fund. And uh so this pretty much shows you what's changed from tenative, i.e. July and the first public hearing to today. And we'll do a deeper dive this evening, but I just wanted to do a nice recap. Um so based off of some um refinements and our revenue estimations going into this year, we are expecting a little bit more in beginning fund balance, but you will see uh we are eating out of our reserves a little bit as we discussed before the lunch break session. All right. So, how is our general fund broken up? So, the largest piece of funding in the general fund is our public safety. So, think sheriffs, uh, corrections, fire rescue, and that other is emergency management, um, public safety administration, juvenile detention, things like that. And then, so we already talked reserves, general government. So you'll see that is like our facilities management um IT think human resources county attorney those types of internal type support um support departments. Now if we keep moving uh the red piece of the pie is our other constitutional sovisor of elections tax collector the sixth judicial circuit make up that piece of the pie and then the green is our outwardfacing services. So, our parks department, community services, libraries. Um, and I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that our parks budget is three million more than it was in July. And a big piece of that was the sheriff giving us back two mill $2 million from his budget to reallocate to our parks department so we could start to put a dent a bigger dent into their capital maintenance needs. All right. So, our outside funding um just a friendly reminder, anything on this slide that is bold and italicized, those are those statemandated um things that we must contribute. So, Medicaid um health department, those types of things. And then those things that are not bold or italicized are at the board of discretion. And this is uh unchanged from the last handful of times that we've talked about this slide. So, constitutional officer budget requests. So, these are also unchanged from the last time that we we've shown these, but just to show you um how those make up. And then just a reminder that the supervisor of elections because 26 is an election year, we do see where his budget will bump up a little bit in election years and then we expect that to come back down um in the subsequent year as um as his budget kind tends to grow and then shrink depending on offcycle years. All right. So, our capital improvement plan, we are looking at a 1.8 billion five-year plan. Um, the biggest chunk of that is our transportation capital. And so, if we go to the next slide, we we see what that makes up. So, this

slide breaks it down into categories. And then we wanted to touch on some of the major capacity projects that are coming online as well as that sidewalk uh the Shady Hills Road uh Mary Gella Elementary to Bossley because that was such a board priority. We wanted to make sure that you guys were aware that we did get some money into the budget for that 426.

Um a question on that slide.

Yes, ma'am.

I had asked you last time about this 10 million for Starky Boulevard.

Yes.

Um I can answer that. Uh, thank you, Chair Starky. Um, yeah, that $10 million, um, I I misspoke at the last meeting. It is the county's obligation to build that roadway. And what the developer had agreed to do was, uh, build that for the county so that we can accelerate the project and not have it run through our our normal project construction process. In terms of the right turn lane that was um being required as part of the development project, the developer was going to build that, but then we were going to provide um mobility fee credits um for that work. So, in the end, it was the county funding that right turn lane as well. So, in terms of the entire expansion of that roadway, it's the county's um the county's going to be fully funding it.

David, is that what you recall? I thought there was too. There was a binding agreement for the development developer to do the work but us pay for it. Is that what you're saying? Okay.

Yeah.

All right. Thank you.

All right. So, this slide here shows the tenative mill rates that were sent at the first public hearing. And then this next slide, and the only change is the general operating millage. You'll see that is a 0.02 mil reduction. And so if we'd like to go back to try to round out our conversation from earlier this morning, um what millillage reduction should we come back for the final public hearing anticipating? What? What? What are you saying just now?

So, we've had So, earlier today, we had some county administrator brought forth a 02 mil reduction. We've had some earlier dialogue around 0.03. Um, but it seemed like we might still have some conversation that the board would like to have. Uh, it seemed a little bit rushed to get to close out for lunch. So, we just wanted to come back and allow some opportunity to further talk about it if the board desired.

Yeah. So, this is the part where I'd like the board to give us some feedback on what we bring back this evening. Currently, this is 7.4092 represents the 0.02 mil um reduction that we mentioned uh this morning. So the the question before the board is is you know commissioner Jagger had asked well what does 03 look like? I think half a million roughly. You we'd mentioned some wants versus needs. I did you know bring up well if if we were to make reductions there's probably a certain order of operations uh that we would like to follow looking at new spending other expenditures capital expenditures but we you know um you know the first thing that I could potentially offer up if if this is a path that the board wants to wants to go through is we have noncip as part of our facilities budget which represents projects which you know might be needed but can probably wait um and and we could we could explore that I have Andrew Baxter here if we we don't think we to get into a big discussion about it. But for just from a policy perspective, that's the direction the board would want to go. Uh that's that's one area where we could go, but there's a multitude of things, but I would need the direction as to what do you want the millillage to be.

Okay, Commissioner Waitman.

Thank you. Best time of the year. So, uh ask Eric and thank you Eric and Amy for being so patient and good with me during our budget budget time here. So, with the DR funds, uh, the county is able to be re my understanding, cut me off if I'm wrong, we're able, the county is able to be reimbursed, and that includes payroll and a number of other items that have quickly added up already. I'll let Aaron Eric speak, but approximately a couple hundred grand that we've already incurred in cost that's coming out of general budget. If we depending on how the DR process moves forward with staff time and everything else, if we're able to be this taxpayer is able to be reimbursed out of that fund, we can easily get to Commissioner Jagger's proposal of.3. Now, it's kind of like that one time cut, but it's given us an avenue and a layer of money to get through through through this year. Um, Eric doesn't have those projections yet. he's exploring them. But um appreciate you guys looking in into our last conversation and it might be the the way to to way to go. That could total pretty quickly. So

Madam Chair,

yeah.

So I was going to bring up the DR especially when it came up with United Way. 70% of the money is going to be spent on low income and I'd like staff to comment and look at it. Do you think it's an opportune way to actually instead of taking out a general fund money, use the CDB, CDBGDR money over the next five years and use that money instead and put it apply it to our allocation with the United Way?

You got to you're going to have to observe the strings on that DR money and anything you want you want to do. That's why I'm cautious about it. Now,

could United Way be your partner to distribute some of those some of those funds. Yes. But as you heard in the last meeting, you're not you can't supplant funds that you've already budgeted for United Way or anything else

in use of that in use of those monies. So, and while I've got the mic, the administrative costs are capped. And so, you got to that's another thing that you've got to weigh against. you can't just reimburse all of your costs. You're, you know, there's a cap on that money. Um, a percentage cap and it's got to be administrative costs of that program. So,

I

theoretically the answer is yes,

but it's all in the details. However,

I think there there's some I'm wondering if um you know, we're not we don't have the contract yet and we're going to have that discussion today. We're not, we haven't rolled out that program, but I am wondering if next year we have a better opportunity to really save some pennies when we know what we're doing. And to that end, it's my understanding they can't be on our CIP or it has to be new stuff, right?

That's the supplanting.

So, we really have to I I would suggest, this is my suggestion. Um, and let me back up for a second. What did we cut? How much was the roll back or the red reduction last year? What did we

Because we've rolled back numerous years in a row.

Yeah, we rolled back last year.

4292

and the year before that making me mad.

We were at 7.57. We went down to 7.4292, 4292 which is

there's no

I don't have what did what did we do I I'm trying to put you on the spot but we rolled it back how many years in a row

what's the average what

so three years in a row you've you've you've done it um and I think as I mentioned in the morning that's accumulatively.1984 mills

yeah so we were at 76 076 then we went back to 757 then 7429 92 and then proposed today is 74092.

Now to Commissioner Mariano's point that he was on the board then, but none of us were when they they kept things were great. Uh they kept rolling that back. Save Our Homes came in and we were devastated. Parks and Libraries closed. You guys weren't here. We were having to put machines in the front of parks and people were going to have to pay to drive into Starky Wilderness Park. You remember

Hudson Beach? We we all all all of our parks we had to charge people to go in. It it was the county was not in a good position. Um and but you know they anyway so we we have slowly come out of that. Um however I I do hear you know especially the business community.

Yeah. who are are at the 10% cap

that their property taxes are are going up much greater greater than their profits are going up. So

I I I I feel that I I am a small business owner. I get it. Um

so you know we I'm I'm balancing here. Um, but I think that we're being responsible in in rolling back, but not too much, but being careful for next year. I think we have a greater opportunity when we know when we can plan ahead, not and use this CDBGR money wisely to help our citizens in the budget next year. But to to cut something this year more than we have, I think starts taking us into dangerous territory. for me,

Madam Chair.

Yeah.

So, yeah. So, when the economy dropped and parks, libraries went down 30%.

And maintenance, I'm sure, got deferred. We're still not back as we know, right? We everyone agrees with that.

We looked at the MST. We thought about doing that. We decided not to because we want to put any more taxes out there, but we're still in a major deficit. We're not getting out of anytime soon. To do more cuts, it's tougher. Um, I went along with the point, too, just because I like the way Mr. Carella had set it up where it wouldn't be the painful part. Let me go back to DR though. So if we're going to consider the DR and again you can't supplant the only way I think it could work and Jeff listen at this and and Mike and anyone else if we're going to do that you'd have to cut the funding for the United Way today. I'm just saying here's what you have to do because if you have it in the budget for next year

and try to pull it back, it's going to be tough because because you could get it yanked back if you tried it for any time in the future. So it's it's not an easy thing. The the

Madam Chair,

regulations are tough.

Okay. Uh who was next?

I was.

Okay. Commissioner Jagger then Commissioner Oakley. Okay.

Okay. So, if we would just maybe explore my way of taking the 500 out of the general fund, then we're not touching United Way. We're not touching facilities.

But general fund is a United Way.

No, I'm saying though we don't want to touch the United Way,

but it's part of the general fund,

but it would come out No, I mean it wouldn't come out of the buildings would still get the maintenance. It would come out of reserves.

Oh, reserves. Sorry. You said general fund. Okay. reserves.

Okay. Uh, Commissioner Oakley,

well, I was just wondering if if the consensus is that we instead of the 0.02, 02 we do the 003 but I would favor um Amy and and Mike doing their work magic work on that to show where those cuts should come from because I think they work closer to our different budgets and make it work that way rather than uh if they take it out of reserves and then find a way that monies are coming back like you told that we were going to get some savings in other areas and then feed it back into the reserves. serves. I think that's a great way to do it without with less pain to any department. So,

so I think that the the approach would be is if the board wanted to do 03, you know, since that's on the table here, um just like the 02, our plan was to pull it from from reserves and then pay it back through savings throughout the year, right? So we use the the IT program as an example of one where we believe that we can find savings in and if that's the case then yes of course and and you know we can we can either look at organic savings that we achieve during the during the year or you know we we may dial back into some programs maybe maybe we don't hit facilities as deep but my recommendation to to this board would be that we need to prioritize reducing our recurring recurring expenses. Our recurring expenses, it's it's spending more than we take in on it. Um, and so I would I would prioritize pulling that under control. And I've talked with with Amy and Eric about, you know, how we can, you know, we look at that on a quarterly basis. And as those savings are achieved, we replenish reserves. That's the approach. Um, so that way we we are achieving recurring expense training, but paying ourselves back in into our savings account. So I'm committed to that approach all year long. And you know, and if I find more than 0.03 during the course of the year, well then that's great because our reserve balance is lower than it needs to be anyways. And we should also prioritize increasing our reserves as well because we are at 42 days currently.

Yeah, roughly 12 46 days roughly 12.5%.

Okay. So we're we're 14 days from where where we need. And then if we were to be paid back by FEMA, roughly 52 days if if if we had recovered that. So we're still it's it's several millions of dollars short and shy of where we'd be. My my recommendation is is any any reductions in budget, you replenish your savings, but we can we can try to thread the needle and do both. Um but you'll you'll have to you know we you know I can't promise no pain if we go to 0.03. We'll we'll have to uh you know make some reductions where they make sense.

I I have a question but Commissioner Oakley's next then me then okay wait me.

I think that's the right way to do it. The fact of it is is we're looking at this budget and we want to trim things back but we at the same time our citizens are asking for more roadways being done and more infrastructure being done uh street lights other things that that are coming up through that cost money. So you got to be careful what you cut. So you don't want to cut those things are very important for our citizens to be able to keep coming. And that goes along with different things that we do for them. They're um very important to be very very careful in how we make that move.

Um let's see. Did I say him then me? Right.

Um okay. A question on the CDBGR money. Um and I mean don't we have to spend it to get it back? Isn't it spending?

Yes, it's a reimburseable.

It's reimbursible. So, we have five What do we have? 571 million.

585 million.

We got to spend that to get that back. Where does who where do where you know this is this is my challenge at Amskill. So, you got to have it to spend it. Um, so where do where are we getting that from?

Yeah, we're we're working the details out now. Once we get our consultant on board, we'll, you know, we'll be bringing more more detailed plans back.

Could only come from our reserves.

I I don't know where else we write a $25 million check

to

How does that

We got a portion of it up front though. Correct.

My understanding is is there's a working capital account perhaps, but I again I'm I'm not prepared to talk about the details of it. I do think that

that would be helpful. DR funding obviously that way and making those reinvestments is is a tool.

Um ah good Mr. Lane is here.

Uh Chuck Lane uh director of office office of disaster recovery.

You can ask him

the um it is a reimbursement bank uh grant so we'll put in and we will have to pay these projects up front but we'll do it as frequently as we can. So it's it's not a big hit. I don't know how often that will be. We have a lot to do to figure these details out but it is a reimbursement uh grant.

Yeah. Okay. Okay. Um, Commissioner Waitton.

Hey. So, Eric, you think it's possible for this afternoon to figure out how much we've already So, when you look at there's already a pile of staff time, commissioner time, there's a pile, in my opinion, of reimburseable actions and work that have been done all the way up to here. We have a bid protest we're having to deal with that takes staff time. Like, to account for everything we've gone to set up this program to today, is there a way to get a total a pro a a rough estimate of what we have invested in.

I can work with the team to get Eric Brightenbach, assistant county administrator, internal services. I can I can work with the team to get a rough estimate this afternoon. But the specific question you had asked was relative to the procurement expense costs which are providing direct efforts towards getting the program stood up. We'll look at those types of specific costs

broadly a little a little more broadly

with with the work that we've got into it. Marcy and her team and setting up. I mean, um, that might come up to several hundred grand, which is a nice chunk that can go towards what we're trying to accomplish. It might, if it's two, threeund grand, then we're only talking about another couple hundred to make up the difference. So,

um, I if it's board's pleasure, I I think it'd be worth Eric and his team kind of jumping into before this afternoon, and that could maybe ease some of these. And to that point, Commissioner, I uh, you know, I wanted to verify with Mr. Lane, uh, for example, the expenses of the initial team with Connor and Marcy have been being build back to a DR account line item. So, we are expensing some of these initial expenses to to those to that item. But to your point, there are additional expenses that maybe they are. Again, my only my only point that I would just say to you is that those are one-time expenses. It's kind of similar to pulling out of reserves. You acknowledge that. Um, you know, I I really want to look at at meaningful recurring expenses over the course of this journey as we as we look to try to pull things together on this. I'm fine with that, but I'm alone.

Um, what let me throw out a number to my fellow commissioners to um make sure I get to my birthday dinner on time. Um, 025. Am I saying it with the right number of zeros? 025 reduction.

Yeah. Instead of 03,

you had come to us with a 02.

I could live with a 025. I think that's the biggest one we've ever done that I've been on the board. Um in the hopes that next year we can continue. Um but um because we have this unfortunate opportunity with CDBGDR

um I'm gonna hold I I personally would like to see us do 03. I think I think we can find it.

I mean back to the CDBGR we got to spend $585 million and you got five years to do it. Six

six years to do it. Think about that. We just had a hurricane last year that brought our reserves down 30 days, maybe a little bit less, but we're adding some more back in. Now, we get one more hurricane like we just did or another hurricane season. Guess what? You're not going to be able to spend the money and you're going to throw the money back away instead of doing it. And right now, I will tell you in in my area, I've got all these roads that were impacted by all the storms, all the traffic. I mean,

G Harbor is lucky they're about two or three feet higher, but up in Hudson area, some parts. Yeah. But in the Hudson area, this three feet lower and all the trucks, all the traffic have destroyed those roads. I got C pines

21 years waiting to get some

storm water relief, which we don't even have funded yet. And they're going to do roads and septic sewer after that. I mean, that money you're going to need it to go. You can say keep squeezing squeeze, but don't squeeze here or don't squeeze there. Guess what? Everything's affected. I think 0.2 is a good 002 is a good number. uh 0.025 I'm I'm good with. But I mean just to squeeze because we're trying to squeeze to make our state legislative people kind of like oh look what they're doing. Look what they're doing. And I had one texted me earlier. Um I mean we got to be responsible and and I've been through it when we cut cut cut because we wanted the cut was a great thing to do and then you come back to it and now you got to go fund the stuff. We got how many people have roads for the MSTUS or people waiting to get their roads done now that we put get rid of the paving assessment. We put this in. How many people are banging on the door? How many people want to get in the fields that can't get there? Whether it be wire grass, Starky, Mitchell, wherever. We got we got to take care of our people. They have imposed on themselves all the go bonds. We did nothing to go push that.

They said they said they wanted these things done from 20 years ago when I started to now. People want the services now. They don't want to keep on waiting and waiting and waiting. The kids are growing up. The lives are going on. They want the services. They want to be premier. They like what we're doing. all the things we're doing premier to just squeeze for the sake of squeezing

because it's not gonna affect anybody another half one millillage

one tenth another tenth it's it's it's minuscule

did you have your hand up

okay commissioner Jagger

um the only thing I disagree with you is we're not doing it for any legislators or anything like that I mean for me we're doing it for the for the people and two we're not talking about cutting paving we're not talking about cutting roads we're not talking about cutting any of those services if we get to to 03. We're not touching any of that.

I I understand that. But if if you if for some reason you took it out of reserves, which wouldn't kill us, $500,000, it's not going to kill us.

And we're at 0.03 and we're trying to get our taxpayers savings and every little thing helps right now. And that's that's what I have to say about that. I mean, I really think we can do it,

Madam Chair.

Yeah. question. What's the effect on a $300,000 house with the cuts we're looking at?

I see that typing away on his laptop.

03.

No. The difference between 002 and 003. What is that per household?

Dollar,000.

Dollar per hundred,000 of taxable assessment.

Dollars a year.

$1. Yeah, I don't think they'll

they ain't going to blink.

And yeah,

I just agree with that.

We knew you would.

I'm on where I'm going to be.

Um Okay. So, I just just so they have an understanding of flavor. I just want to I'm going to query my fellow board members at what your number is for right now and then we're going to move on to the public hearings.

Commissioner Oakley, what's your number right now? 002.025.03.

I think we can do the 0025 would be fine and we'll make it work. I think

Commissioner Waitman

staff's leadership and where it should come from. I think it'll work out.

Commissioner Waitman,

I'm gonna bet on 03.

Okay. Um I'm 0.025. Commissioner,

I'm 03.

025.

Okay. All right. So, we'll come back later and um but we we can't this is can't just keep talking. We got to do our business here today. Okay. Um our where are we at 130? We've got E75.

That was R72. Chair.

Yeah, we still have the bid, but we'll do that bid protest after

these. We won't take long with these. Item P75 was published in the Tempe Times on August 6, 2025.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Amanda Hill, Planning Development, Economic Growth. Item P75 is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, amending Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section 802, tree preservation and replacement, section 802.1, intent and purpose, section 802.2 2 applicability section 802.3 Tree removal creating section 802.4 New Development section 802.5 existing problem trees section 802.6 tree protection section 802.7 trees of special significance section 802.8 8 heritage trees section 802.9 uh tree mitigation fund appendix 8 definitions and other sections as necessary for internal consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for severability inclusion into the land development code and an effective date. This item comes to you with a request to continue this item to the October 21st, 2025 board of county commissioners meeting in Newport Richie at 1:30 p.m.

Move to continue time.

Second.

All in favor?

I I

P76. Item P76 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on February 5th, 2025 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. The item was continued from the March 25th, 2025 BCC meeting to the April 22nd, 2025 BCC meeting where it was continued to May 20th, 2025 BCC meeting where it was continued to the June 17th, 2025 BCC meeting where it was continued to the August 19th, 2025 BCC meeting where it was continued to today. Item P76 is an ordinance amending the pass county comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map math 2-15 and sheet 10 from res one residential one dwelling unit per gross acre to PD planned development on approximately 7.83 acres of real property located north of the intersection of Little Road and Jasmine Boulevard and a text amendment creating sub area policy flew 7.1.82 82 Little Road PD and a map amendment to the future land use map 2.2-9, excuse me, adding sub area map 2-982, Lit Road PD, and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency, providing for repealer, severability, and an effective date. This item comes to you with a recommendation to continue to the October 21st, 2025 board of county commissioners meeting in Newport Richie at 1:30 p.m.

Madam Chair.

Yep.

So this item I think came to us in May and I to spoke and I had said that there's no way this is a basin of special closed basin of special concern. This is when Alan Ray was in in his neighborhood. I said then they would do a big study to make this done. Our team is actually looking at this as well because the neighborhoods right now have water all the way through them. Staff is actually looking at it and it took them time to get with swift mud because we're not an emergency situation to go forward. But just the rain we've had, these people have water everywhere.

Yeah, I heard the engineering has to be redone.

It has to be redone. There's no way they're going to do this in October again. I don't think it's right for the people to have to like wait every 30 days to see when it's going to go. It's going to take at least 60 more days to get this done. And I don't know

if we've talked to them about

what time they need. here.

I don't believe so. Well, I don't know what what's Do we

move it without them being here? I don't I don't know.

You could continue it to a time uncertain and make them readvertise when they're ready to come back to you.

I'd also like to mention that uh there's a companion MPU PAT that's on today's agenda for this. So if we're able to go time uncertain, I'm going to make a motion to continue with time uncertain.

Second.

All in favor?

I I

Thank you.

P78 uh 77

77

P77 is an ordinance

publication first.

Thank you. Um item P77 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on August 20th, 2025. A77, an ordinance amending Pasco County Ordinance number 25-07, correcting the legal description of Newport Corner's Community Development District, pursuant to chapter 190, Florida statutes, providing for miscellaneous provisions, providing for an effective date and staff is available to provide a presentation if you'd like.

Um, th this is for CDD.

Correct.

But I have a question. It's not related to the CDD, but it is related to Newport Corners. Um, and I don't know if we got the answer yet. Um, I just actually had a conversation with the engineer engineering firm. When uh Newport Corners realigned PLA, they had neglected to realign the multi-use path that went alongside PLA. and we caught it um in a meeting and we had a meeting with the applicant and their engineer and everyone from the county side was in agreement that they needed to move the path over alongside the road because otherwise it's dumping everyone in the street and then they they hit Massachusetts and the multi-use path is is not on the road anymore. It's it's crazy what happened. So, I just want to be sure that got fixed. David Engel, planning and economic development director. Ma'am, I I'm not sure it got fixed yet. What I do know is they were supposed to submit a revised uh walkability connectivity plan. Uh they've indicated to us that's clear of you, the the engineer record that it's been complete and we're still waiting on the submission and the review.

So why are we approving things when we don't even have an approved plan? Well, th this is a scribner's error regarding a description on an already approved CDD. So, it's just a cleanup. Uh it's not a new CDD application, and we would certainly put that on pause until we resolve all of these connectivity questions.

Yes. Everything, you know, we we need to make sure sometimes things fall through the cracks.

Well, we're we're not let we're not letting this fall through the uh the sidewalk cracks.

We just want to be sure that we're not putting people in danger. um like that what they showed us was doing. Okay.

Um

All right. Take a motion.

Public hearing.

A public hearing. Anyone here wish to speak to this item?

Okay.

I don't have a um a signup sheet. I don't know if there's one up there.

And there's no one on WebEx for this item.

Move approval.

Second.

All in favor?

It's a roll call vote.

A roll call. Okay.

District one. Commissioner Oakley.

I. District two, Commissioner Wheatman.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

Hi.

District three, Chairman Starky.

I.

Okay. Next.

So, item uh P78 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on August 13, 2025. P78, an ordinance by Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending chapter 100 to create section 106.6, amendments after August 1st, 2024, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability, repealer, providing for severability, inclusion into the land development code, and an effective date. staff is available to share a presentation with you if you'd like.

Does anyone need a presentation?

No.

Okay. Um, this is a public hearing.

Does anyone want to speak to this?

There's no one on There's no one online for this item.

Okay.

Approve.

Second.

All in favor?

Roll call.

Roll call. I'm sorry. Roll call.

District one. Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two. Commissioner Weightman. I

District four, Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District five, Commissioner Mariano.

I

District three, Chairman Starky.

I

Okay,

next.

Rules.

What's on?

I believe P79 is the next number, but that's for the public hearings.

You don't give a rule.

You need to swear people in.

You need procedures.

Okay.

There are two reasonzoning agendas, regular and consent. If staff will present each application to the board of 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 or planning commission recommendation or anyone wishing to object to any condition of the resoning 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 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 for reszoning. Madame clerk, would you like to swear anybody in the public in that wishes to speak?

I will. Um, if you're here to speak on any of the matter matters to come before the board, please stand.

I guess it's just you. Please raise your right hand.

Well, that's a first.

I know. Are you sure you don't want to speak to any Okay. Uh, do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, so help you, God. Thank you. You may proceed.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Jamie Smith, Real Property Division. I'm sorry, Miss Smith. Let me go ahead and do publication on P29. My apologies. Um, item

79.

79. What did I say?

29.

Yep. That's not it.

P79 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on August 10th, 2025 and August 17th, 2025. Thank you. The real property team has received a petition to vacate a plotted rideway Regina Drive in its entirety together with the internal lot lines 1 through six filled uh it was filed by High-Tech Collision Centers Incorporated. It's everything that's highlighted in yellow. The purpose of this vacation is to allow high-tech collision centers incorporated easier access to the back of their properties as well as occasional overflow parking. There were no objections to this petition and the real property team recommends approval. Can you go back to that Ariel?

Yeah, that one.

Are they What are all those structures down there at the bottom? structures on the bottom.

I mean, are they is that is that how that's supposed to work? This code I'm asking I don't know who know here storing all those vehicles like that.

It looks like it's parking lot.

It is parking in the back of the structure that's closer to Bolton A as a the collision center. Yeah, I'm talking about those big trucks and things at the southern end of the property and and I'm trying to understand is the whole property concreted? There's no

Heather Wolf um real property division. The southern property consists of overflow parking currently for the collision center. That's where they park the cars that are being worked on for body body shop purposes and they wish to vacate uh that portion of Regina Drive to further expand on that so that they're not

they're already using the road our property and and where's their storm water ponds and all that for their business since I see all that concrete. I'm just curious.

I don't believe that the property has any storm water requirements. Uh there were no objections internally and they were not identified by the applicant survey. We do have the petitioner's applica the attorney for the petitioner. I believe they're on WebEx.

I just that's a permitted

operation there. that I that's what I'm asking it that because I don't see how they can do all that concrete without having any storm water runoff ponds or anything and and that's not to our code either. So, I'm just trying to understand if this is a legal business because if they're operating without permits, why do I want to give them our property? Maybe they are. I just I just asking staff. Someone tell me.

Um, we would ask that the attorney speak to this matter.

Well, I'll look it up. I can look it up on my

I'm here on behalf of the applicant. If you would I don't know if you can hear me. I'm uh appearing virtually.

We can hear you.

So, you have the question. This is Mike Carbala, county administrator. The question that the chairman has asked is, is your client's property um appropriate? Is his activity in an appropriate zoning

and permitted for that?

And permitted for that use

without any storm water, no landscaping. You know, I don't know what's required in this kind of use, but

I just Yes, commissioners. At this point, they have all proper permitting that's required for their uh purpose of business. They are a car repair shop. Um the only thing we are requesting is the uh vacation of Regina Avenue so that they can access the back of their site, but there have been no code issues. Um they are currently up to code with their business um up to

paved our right away.

Madam Madam Chair, yeah. Um, can we ask if she has been sworn in?

She doesn't need to be. It's a it's a vacation.

Thank you. Um Um, can we can we come back to this and uh let's go to the next one and then has staff do some research on there for me?

Yes.

Um Okay, we'll come we'll come back to you.

Okay. [Applause]

Oh, that's unreadable. I can't read that. Okay. So go on to the next one and then someone do some get on Pasco mapper or whatever.

So item P80 item P80 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on February 5th, 2025 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. The item was continued from the March 25th, 2025 BCC meeting to the April 22nd, 2025 BCC meeting, where it was continued to the May 20th, 2025 BCC meeting, where it was continued to the June 17th, 2025 BCC meeting, where it was continued to the August 19th, 2025 BCC meeting where it was continued to today. Thank you.

Item uh Amanda Hill, Planning Development, Economic Growth. Item P80 is Little Road MPUD master planned unit development when the a resoning petition from ER estate residential district to MPUD master plan unit development development to allow for 23 town homes and 32,452 square ft of commercial uses and associated infrastructure on 7.83 83 acres located on the east side of Little Road approximately 550 ft north of the intersection of Little Road and Jasmine Boulevard. This item comes to the board with a recommendation to continue to the October 21st, 2025 board of county commissioners meeting in Newport Richie at 1:30 p.m.

Move to continue to uncertain.

Yeah. Second.

This is the companion item to the one that you did on the

Okay. Do we have we don't have to take public comment?

No.

Okay. All. Is it a roll call?

No.

All in favor?

I

I.

Thank you.

All right. What's the next item? P81.

Okay.

Okay. It was published in the Tampa Bay Times on March 5th, 2025. The item was continued from the April 22nd, 2025 BCC meeting to the May 20th, 2025 BCC meeting to the August 19th, 2025 BCC meeting where it was continued to today. Item P81, Enclave at Livingston MPUD Academy at the Lakes, Inc., a resoning request from an AR agricultural residential zoning district to MPUD master planned unit development district to allow for the development of 178 town home dwelling units and associated infrastructure on approximately 46.3 acres located in South Central Pasco. I just wanted to state for the record that a revised agenda memo was sent to the clerk's office. That was to correct spelling errors only. And this comes to the board with a recommendation to continue this item to the October 21st, 2025 meeting at 1:30 p.m. in Newport Richie.

Move uh continue time certain October 21.

Second. All

in favor? I

I

Okay. And the next one,

the next item is item P82 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on July 23rd, 2025. Item P82, CPA2503, Elamp Con Map amendment providing for transmitt of a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map mash map 2-15 and sheets 5 11 12 17 18 and 23 from AGR agricultural rural residential one unit per one dwelling unit per gross acre res 3 residential three dwelling units per gross acre. Res 6 residential six dwelling units per gross acre. Res 9 res residential 9 dwelling units per gross acre. Res 12 residential 12 dwelling units per gross acre and ro retail office residential to conservation lands on approximately 2,813 acres of real property located throughout Pasco County. Staff is available to make a presentation if the board so desires and we also have staff online as well to answer any questions you may have.

This is your only consent item.

Correct.

Does anyone want a um presentation?

No.

It's

okay then I will take a motion.

No. Is there anybody in the audience?

If you want you can speak to Is anyone to speak against it?

Seeing no one, is there anyone online that wants to speak to me?

There's no one online.

We're good to go.

Approval.

Second.

All in favor?

I

Oh, yes.

I was going to say I'm not I'm not speaking in opposition.

2,800 acres. Keith.

So, yeah. Keith Wy, director of parks, recreation, natural resources. So, before I was your parks director, I was the environmental lands manager. So I think this this item today just highlights the good work. Yep. Talk a lot o about open space. Open space. And so the ELAN program has protected around 6600 acres to date so far. And some of you have seen the items of um uh agreements that we're going to be working with the Family Rural Lands Protection Program to add even more. So I just wanted to take the opportunity to applaud the good work of the team um and and and the efforts of the county to protect environmentally sensitive areas. So good work that

I was wondering with the addition of the um land that we did today. I know it wasn't an el um but it does protect that you know that conservation land today.

So Austin's

Yeah. So it's it's an agreement to work with the state program and it would be if if negotiated and all the numbers make sense. It would be a partnership with the el program through the county and the state. Yes ma'am.

Okay. So,

so, um, are we I was just wondering, are we still at 30% or are we higher than 30%.

We're we're we're moving. We're moving. Yeah. Little little little uh little ticks here and there. Absolutely. We're going in the right direction. So, we're not The goal is 30%. We hover between depending on which you're actually adding up anywhere between 18 and 23%. Protected.

Well, I guess we add, you know, wetlands and things.

You have a lot of projects that, you know, you don't build on. Correct.

Yeah.

You know, my understanding is there's 30 to 33% of the county that will not be built.

That's true. I

I'm very I'm always very proud to say that number.

I mean, I love saying that number that we

you know, we we we do have open spaces where some of our more developed counties, they don't have what we have.

Correct. I just thought it was a good opportunity to just, you know, cheer the program on. So,

I was trying I was reading the room and I thought, well, people may want to go get a snack or something for five. Well, the star.

Sorry.

Oh, thank Keith for coming up. Thanks, Keith. Okay. Um, I think we're we're able to go back to uh

So, it's my understanding that it's a C2 zoning and this is a body

shop, which is an allowable use in C2

and and they have all their permits that they don't have to they can cement that and not have any storm water runoffs.

The use has been there for Go ahead, David. grandfathered or

David Allen um assistant county administrator development service the uh the other question on this parcel was the pavement on there uh we looked back at the records and that that pavement has been in place for approximately 30 years. So the the the building footprint also is is consistent with what we saw 30 years ago. So whatever is there is has been in place for that time and and probably met the requirements at the time it was constructed.

Okay. So, if they're going to um add concrete to have another access, it's going to trigger something, right? They're going to have to be up to

Yeah. If they do site improvements, they would need to come to

They have to come in for a site.

Yes.

Okay.

Sure.

Question.

Yeah.

Question.

Commissioner Oakley.

So, the the parcel that we're talking about, I'm I'm looking at it here, but I don't see any lines on this, but the part in Greenwood Trees, that's where the roadway is. They've already paved our road.

So, this is all pavement on on that part of the the road, I guess.

Uh, Commissioner Oakley, um, yes,

it uh the pavement is is generally on the western half of that right-of-way parcel.

So, rest, that's just ground.

Yes.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. So, it appeared from the from staff's graphic that they own the two lots on one side of whatever that road is, that right undeveloped rightaway is and then the three lots on the other side.

I hope they expand their business.

So,

yeah, I'm just wondering if but the guy whoever owns the property on the right, do they want some of it too and split? They own all of them.

The same. Oh, they owners own. Yes. Oh, excellent. Okay.

The yellow box would be their their property holding,

right?

Okay.

Move approval.

Second.

Did you ask for public comment on this one? I don't think

is there any public comment on this?

Seeing none. All in favor?

I.

The only individuals on WebEx were the two attorneys for the applicant. No one else.

No, they don't. They're done.

Just let you know. Okay. Um, we will go to the um to the protest now.

Oh, I got excited. I have stuff to say.

Good afternoon. and Carrie Roberts, purchasing director, here for R73, review of the county attorney's decision, county administrator's decision in response to protest of solicitation number RFPLK25-100, disaster recovery program management services, award of solicitation number RFP LK25-1000 to IM International, Inc. in the amount of 32,337,11929. So, thank you commissioners. Um, we're here today to talk about the protest of the award. The timeline for this project. Yay, it's working. The timeline is that we received 11 proposals and we opened those on June 17th. On June 30th, the evaluation committee met and they shortlisted the top three high scores which were Grant Works, Hagerty Consulting, and IM International. On July 8th, they heard oral presentations from the three shortlisted vendors. On the 9th of July, a notice of intent to shortlist an award to IM International was posted on our bonfire site. On July 16th, 25, Grant Works protested the um award to IM. On the 21st of July, uh the purchasing director sent a letter of eligibility um accepting Grant Works protest. And on July 25th, we received a letter from M responding to the allegations made in the protest letter from Grant Works. We reconvened the evaluation committee on the 29th of July to consider both the protest letter and the response from IM. On the 30th of July, we post we received a letter from Grant Works to the county administrator outlining additional concerns with the evaluation process. On the 30th of July, the county administrator denied the protest um to Grant Works. And then on the 8th of August, we received a protest of review by the board. The protest um consisted of four major areas. The first was evaluator bias. The second was procedural errors. The third was IM's prior experience. And the fourth was pricing. In grant works protest, they alleged the evaluate evaluator bias that grant works asserted bias by a evaluation committee members, the lack of discussion of some aspects of the proposal and the lack of consistencies in the evaluation order resulting in confusion amongst the committee. The second point was procedural errors. They said that shortlisted vendors were not provided a set of score criteria for the evaluation of their presentations. The third point, IM's prior experience. Grant works asserts that they have superior experience to IM in the state of Florida in regards to HUD CDBG-DR direct funding allocations. Grant WWorks asserts IM had a contract terminated for default by the Pennsylvania Housing Authority in March of 2023. The fourth allegation was Grant Works asserts pricing was not compared on an applesto apples basis during the presentation evaluation phase. Grant works protest offered three solutions to the county to satisfy their protest. The first was to award the full contract to grant works. The second was to split the award between IM and Grant Works and the third was to reject all proposals and resolicit the project.

IM did provide a response to the protest allegations. The county requested a response from IM. Their written response included evaluator bias. The first point that Florida case law states fund findings of bias must be on hard facts and not mere suspicion or innuendo. The second point, procedural errors. IM asserts the questions provided to the county by the short to the county by the county, excuse me, to the short list of proposers constituted evaluation criteria for consideration during the second phase of the evaluation and grant works failed to ask the county for clarification prior to giving their presentation. IM also said as far as the consideration of past experience that IM has provided documentation that the contract with Pennsylvania Housing Authority was terminated for convenience, not cause or default as alleged. IM asserts the review by the HUD inspector general on the was a result of a regular review and not an indication of wrongdoing on the part of IM asserts grant works was not forthcoming in their own presentation by failing to mention a finding of fraud by grant works partner Horn LLP in regards to pricing. IM asserts that pricing was considered in a consistent manner with a two-phaseed RFP process by awarding to best value not low bid. The county's response. The county reconvened the evaluation committee on 729 to review the allocations made by both grant works and the response from IM. The evaluation committee voted to uphold their original ranking with IM as the sole awardee based on the following factors. Number one, the solicitation issued was issued with the intent that one contractor be selected for the implementation of the action plan. Number two, the protest letter and the response did not change the mind of any of the committee members from what it was when the original motion to award to IM was made. And third, the intent to make the best choice for the end user of the action plan, particularly in the housing c program category. Our recommendation is you uphold the decision of the county administrator to deny the protest by grant works under section 2-124 G2 of the purchasing ordinance and award the contract to IM. We have both grant works and I am here to purs to

we're gonna I could I'm gonna stop you. We're gonna take a break till Commissioner Star gets back. So let's take a five minute recess.

All right.

I want to hear

Yeah.

Never mind.

There she is. She's here.

We're good.

That was quick.

That was a quick five minutes.

Okay.

All right. We have both Grant Works and IM here to provide you with presentations. They both have 10 minutes um to give you a presentation and then they'll both be available as well myself and the rest of the staff to answer any questions you may have. They do have a hard 10 minutes for their presentation on the ground. Commissioners, I do have a couple of

receive file couple of handouts.

Call for a vote.

Okay, take a motion.

Got us a motion to second already.

All in favor? I [Applause] Sorry, I spilled water here on official papers. Give us a second here. What are we going to do?

Someone clean house. Okay.

No, sorry. Just kidding.

No.

Okay.

Hey, Mike, can you run somebody up with napkins? Paper

right here. They're coming now.

Please.

I got them.

Thank you. [Applause] There's plenty.

That's probably the first time that place has been cleaned in a while.

Yeah, I was just thinking that. Is that yours or mine? That's not mine. That's mine.

Go ahead.

Clean today.

Okay, we are ready.

Ready to go?

Yep.

Uh, afternoon, commissioners. My name is Dylan Rivers. I'm an attorney for Grant Works. With me are Rick Faircloth and Holly Miller with Grant Works. We appreciate this opportunity to talk to you. Um, you all know what this RFP is about, so I'll cut to the chase. It's half a billion dollars is a lot of money, and there's a lot of work associated with it. So, not surprisingly, the two most important criteria in the RFP were qualifications and relevant experience, and that's one, and pricing, too. The RFP was handled in two phases. Um, as you know, the my client was shortlisted along with IM and another vendor. At the end of phase two, the evaluation committee voted four to three for IM first and grant work second. Now, because it was a 4 to3 vote, we looked very closely at everything and and we found some important issues that we want to bring to your attention that we believe affected the outcome. Um, you heard earlier, bias, the RFP process, relevant experience, and pricing are those issues. And I'll start with bias. Um there's clear evidence of bias that that at least one evaluator was predisposed in favor of IM without regard to what was being presented by other vendors and the merits of their proposals. She said out loud in an official meeting it was theirs to lose referring to IM and her score sheet which is up here on the screen on the left has nothing more than anecdotal off-hand off-hand comments that have absolutely nothing to do with legitimate criteria in the RFP. They're cheeky comments and they have no place in this process. Regarding the process, vendors were supposed to be quote evaluated a new, this is language from the RFP, evaluated a new in phase 2 based on a new set of evaluation criteria provided to the short-listed firms in writing with their presentation invitation. Well, that didn't happen. Vendors weren't provided a new set of evaluation criteria. They were provided a list of 11 questions and they were told to be prepared to discuss them. That's it. Those aren't evaluation criteria. And likewise, there was no scoring rubric or instructions or guidance of any kind given to the committee telling them how to evaluate and score vendor responses to these questions. It was just left up to the subjective interpretation of these committee members. And while that's not their fault, what that leads to is what the law considers arbitrary and capriccious decisions. There's no actual objective criteria. It's just left up to each individual person. And you can see that one committee member on their scoreeet seemed to have no idea how to evaluate the responses to these questions. There's not a single comment at all on any of them. So along with pricing relevant experience was one of the most important criteria in the RFP and that we believe there is a big difference between grant works and IM on this. The team proposed by grant works has served every direct allocation recipient currently implementing a CDBGDR program like you

are about to with no adverse audit findings. On the other hand, in the last two years, IM has been terminated from a contract in Pennsylvania, a significant contract, and Rebuild Florida's Hurricane Irma recovery program run by IM is undergoing its second audit by the HUD Inspector General's Office. Now, this slide shows two of the questions that were posed to vendors in phase two. One regarding audits and the other terminations. And below that are are captions of information that IM provided in its proposal in to the to the commission or excuse me to the committee. As we point out in our protest, IM was terminated by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. And in its response, IM said the termination was for was changed from a termination for cause to a termination of convenience pursuant to a memorandum of understanding that they reached with the PHFA. And theou does say that, but in looking at it closer, theou also says that the termination would be for convenience pending the outcome of an audit. And in subsequent filings in Pennsylvania, the PHFA said that IM didn't provide requested information for the audit. And by obstructing the ability to complete the audit, quote, IM prevented PHFA from reinstating its termination of the contract for cause pursuant to the memorandum of understanding. end quote. So, however characterized, IM was terminated and the PHFA took over the program from IM. And when it did, these are some of the things they say they found. I won't recite them for you, but you can see these are taken directly from the PHFA's counter claim against IM. In terms of recent Florida experience, IM identified the Rebuild Florida Rebuild Florida's Hurricane Irma recovery program under Florida Commerce. And the reference they provided to the county was an individual who, to our understanding, hasn't been with Florida Commerce for a year and a half. Why not provide someone who's currently with Florida Commerce? This slide shows recent statements from that agency about IM, including quote, "The agency no longer does business with this vendor." End quote. Now, at this point, I'm going to turn it over to Rick Faircloth with Grant Works to give you some more granular detail about pricing. Thank you and good afternoon. Um, my name is Rick Faircloth. I'm the senior vice president of state and local government services with Grant Works. And I'd like to start out by saying that in our 46-year history, Grant Works has never submitted a protest before. This decision was not made lightly. However, the deeply flawed and troubling circumstances surrounding this procurement compelled us to take action. The integrity of the process matters and we felt a responsibility to stand up for fairness and transparency. There we go. Bear with me here with technology. So, I'd like to turn your attention to the slide before you. Uh, your RFP specifically sought experience from

vendors that had specific engagements with local governments implementing CDBGR projects of similar scope and scale within the last five years. As this graphic depicts on the left, the grant works team has exhaustive experience across the state. IM's team listed zero direct Florida local government CDBGR contracts in his proposal submission. Not a single one. It is clear that the grant works team offered the best value in terms of relevant experience. So, now let's talk about best value in terms of pricing. Quality and value do matter, but so does price. For every million dollar spent on admin costs, three to five Pasco residents don't get their homes repaired or replaced, or those funds could be used for other appropriate county needs. The slide on the screen here shows a pricing comparison between Grant Works and IM at the oral interview. As you can see, IM's price is over a million dollars more than Grant Works. A million dollars is highly significant. Yet, it wasn't discussed during the scoring evaluation. Nor was the fact that IM's proposed pro housing program delivery schedule would take a year longer than Grant Works. Pricing in particular seemed to be misunderstood by the evaluation committee. Now, I'd like to turn your attention to a handout that we've provided you. In particular, I'd like you to look at the yellow highlighted line item here. It's called individual housing programs construction management BCM fee. Here, IM has added a nearly $3 million additional cost line item at the contracting phase. $3 million that was not disclosed in IM's direct housing pricing submission during orals. This appears nothing more than to be a multi-million dollar bonus. IM is working into its contract post orals. To put a fine point on this issue, IM went from being $1 million higher than Grant Works on the direct housing programs during or orals to potentially over 3.4 million by the time they get under contract. That's quite an escalation. So that brings us to my last slide. When determining best value, we ask ourselves, how does IM provide best value to the to Pasco County when IM's price is millions of dollars higher? IM proposes to take one year longer to deliver housing relief to Pasco citizens. And IM's only relevant CDBGDR implementation experience is with the state of Florida who has publicly gone on record and stated they've performed poorly and will never work with IM again. Grant Works offers superior experience, better pricing, and a more efficient delivery schedule. And for these reasons, we believe Grant Works and not provides the best value to Pasco County. Thank you for your consideration.

Um, uh, how do we want to do questions? Let the other side speak first. Okay, we'll let the other side speak and then we'll

I have a handout as well. It's uh is included in the original RFP.

Receive file. Second. All

in favor? I

Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Christopher Lenny. I'm with the RAY law firm in Tallahassee, Florida. With me today is Tim Lagudi, the project manager um here on behalf of IM. What we want to talk about really is a question of what is what is the decision point here? The decision point is, do we believe that the staff was wrong at phase one, that the staff was wrong at phase two, and that the county administrator was wrong during the appeal? And the answer to that is absolutely not. This RFP and these submissions were very carefully vetted throughout this process. As we're going to explain, you know, my my counterpart at Grant Works has basically thrown four daggers. Two at us and two at you. the two at you are that you know you didn't understand the bias issue or that somebody was biased. We don't think that's right and the other one is that you had a process that was flawed. We don't think that's right with respect to us. Our experience is totally defensible and the pricing is a very interesting issue because frankly we're going to explain to you how they missed the price concept entirely. They printed this off and ran it on 800 homes. We ran it on 150. So there is a delta there but it's because they they did not do the math right. In the end grant works has the burden of proof here. Br grant works has to show you that this law and this process compels a different result. We don't think that happens with respect to bias. There's absolutely no evidence of bias. One off-hand comment from one evaluator does not conote bias in the process. In this case, this evaluator was talking about our past experience. In page 7G of the RFP, it required them to consider our past experience. And what was our past experience? Well, we helped the county with the action plan. And the action plan was one of 51 grants. HUD said it was one of the best they saw. So, we frankly thought our experience spoke for itself on that issue. But this was a close vote. It's not a vote indicative of bias. A 4-3 vote shows that there is no outside influence. There was no rules violated here and there's no evidence of clear wrongdoing. All right. The county's procedures. The county did say that the questions would be posed um for oral presentation that those would be the evaluation criteria and that's exactly what it was. They were posed as questions but they were timely and importantly considered. One of those questions was go ahead and build out a pricing model. So it was frankly a prudent process and as far as as those questions were concerned at the end of the invitation to come present it said if you have any concerns you're not clear in any way you can ask the purchasing director. So if they had any concern about well how is this weighted or how's that weighted they could have contacted the purchasing director. There's no evidence they did that they just missed it. They didn't understand the 11 questions. We got it. We understood the 11 questions. Frankly, there was also some suggestion

in the paperwork here that the administrator shouldn't have sent this back to the evaluation committee once they had the protest. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Why not send it back to the subject matter experts and say, "This is the protest. What do you think?" In this case, the county's ordinance says that the the criteria was to be considered a new, but that also the administrator here was to have a fair, transparent process. Um, it actually says a fair and equitable manner that he was to decide it in a fair and equitable manner. That's discretion given to this administrator. And the administrator did exactly what they should. Sent it back and said, "What do you think?" Nobody changed their vote. And the administrator affirmed the decision. pricing. I don't find this incredibly baffling. The pricing issue at phase one was basically hourly rates. The county had an Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet had some preloaded criteria for some specific positions and biders were informed that they could augment that with other positions. It's exactly what happened. If you look at the Q&A that the county produced here in an amendment, there were a lot of questions about pricing. People wanted to understand that and this was a fully developed issue. In phase two, the county did something I thought was fantastic. They said, "Okay, go ahead and give us instead of the hourly rates, go ahead and ballpark what your project is. How's it going to work?" IM ballparked it based on the action plan. And that's what you should do. IM ballparked it at 800 homes under RRE um and 250 under the manufactured housing. That's 1,50 homes. Their pricing is based off of 800. They say, "Well, for us it's going to take three years." That's not true. It's actually 30 months, but it's six more months than what they had, which is 24 months. Now, I went to law school, so I'm not the best at math, but I got to tell you, it's a 20% increase from 800 to a,000. And so, you know, frankly, the fact that that they're comparing us within a million-doll delta is compelling. It tells you that if they actually built their paradigm right, if they read the action plan, they would have gotten it right and their number would have been skyhigh. By our projection, it'd be something like 24 million. This ultimately too is a best value RFP. There's a lot of talk about apples and oranges and you know we got to do this comparison but this procurement instrument was overall the best value. What is the county buying when we look at this whole picture and that makes sense as you've heard today. This is a complex picture involves planning development. There's all sorts of money set aside for hardening these communities. These folks clearly need that. And so it's a complex process where you really gauge it on best value. So although there's a lot of talk about

price being determinative, that's not the case. The track record IM has done business in Florida for 20 years. We have 80 contracts that we've completed with task orders total. The uh IM CEO lives in Tallahassee for as long as I've known him and he's a former director of emergency management. If you look at the Rebuild Florida program, this was a massive program. We all know what happened in Hurricane Irma. The hurricane went right up I75. It caused a tremendous amount of damage and IM took that project over on a six-year contract and completed that project. There was a $1.3 billion program, 3,700 homes, 8,000 residents. Um overall we have this in our proposal but you talk about all the different aspects of this company 600 clients nationwide a thousand contracts they're clearly know what they're doing and this program was a success as well quite honestly um you know our experience I think can match with anybody when you talk about this process you're also talking about every home that we did over this six-year period had to go through multiple layers of approval. Had to have the county look at it. We had third party quality assurance people. It was a big deal. And so we're actually very comfortable with the Rebuild Florida program. I passed around um what really was page 18 to our exhibit because I noticed Grant Works put us up with sort of this hollow Florida. Yes, ma'am. That's actually page 18. I don't know if you all had it in a redacted form or not, but that's really what our our material showed, which was the extent to which there was work done under CBDG. Now, let me speak also briefly to this Pennsylvania issue. Number one, it wasn't a community block development program. Absolutely not. Number two, the whole issue here was a question about whether or not there was a termination of a contract. And we answered that. We answered it and they put the answer up. There was no termination for cause. There were two terminations for convenience. IM was not replaced in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Housing Finance Authority took that project back. If they called me tomorrow and said, "Chris, how would you describe this?" I would say, "Call it a termination for convenience." That's what it was. This never changed. It's never changed. And then if they said, "Okay, they took it back." back and I would say, "Well, no one replaced you." Then I would say, you know, that's that's what it is. You took it in house. That's exactly how they answered it. There's no lack of cander in responding to that question. You are the company that you keep. And in this case, look at the seven vendors that we're bringing to the table. Many of them have Pasco specific experience. We've got Nan McKay in here, Tetratech, Terracon. These are names familiar with Pasco County because they do business in Pasco County. But beyond that, we're leveraging up. We're bringing in people like Deote. These are people that have

tremendous resources to bear to help the county in a time when I think the county does need some assistance. If nothing else this morning, I feel like our client will work remarkably well with your very gifted public's works folks. It's it's really an honor to be able to do this work. Grant Works hasn't established any single reason that you should reverse these decisions of the staff or the administrator. And it's clear to me as we're driving around, we're still seeing blue tarp. We're still seeing storm water. These folks need the help. We're ready, willing, and able to give it. Thank you for your time.

Are we allowed to ask him a question or no?

Um, okay. Yes. Now's the time to ask questions. So, um, the other grant works has suggested that you would take a year longer for completion. Can you explain that to me?

Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much, Commissioner Jagger, for that question. It's a great question. It goes back to the pricing issue. Remember I told you that we bid the pricing based on your action plan. And so, that was 1,50 structures. That would take us in our estimate, and these are estimates. We all know this is estimates, but that was a 30month period, not 3 years. It's 30 months to do 1,50. I could probably get Mr. Lagudi up here to say that, you know, on 800 homes, we could probably do it in two years or less, but that's not the action plan. So, Grant Works, by our calculation, and we have numbers that we can share, um, they ran their numbers off a different subset. So they they base it on 800 homes and not 1,50 which is what the action plan requires.

Just one last question. So So when you see their their chart for money here um with the the difference from like a million to 3.4 million. Are you saying they didn't do the math right or is that truly

100% didn't do the math right? That's the first time I've seen that today. Um, I've I've given the board the material that we provided at the outset. I kind of came to this thinking this is an appeal and that there wasn't going to be all sorts of fresh new information, but here we are. So, so responding to your question, Commissioner, as best I can is yes. I think the math is dead wrong and Mr. Lagudi can probably explain it better than me. Um, I'm assured he's not a history major.

Okay. The the one thing I just you cleared it up but the one thing I just want to say about the year time difference is time is money. So like if you are taking a longer time cost of goods and services go up which then again you know we take from the taxpayer. So I just want to make sure that you know that's a point that you would be in a timely fashion and

message received commissioner.

Huh?

Message received. Thank you.

Madam Chair,

Commissioner Mariana.

Yes, sir. I have question I have question. I have a series of

I'm feeling I'm feeling popular.

Yeah. So when I look at the the letter from the housing agency in Pennsylvania, it um it says in here there was agency reserve to maintain the right to obligation to terminate for cause if the facts warranted such a termination for a cause. Listening to grant works, it says that the way it was written that they we're not going to be able to do that. Let me just go a little further. Um and based upon the facts gathered during the transition since January as a performance I am during the transition of the operation their operation the agency staff taken over it unfortunately has become evident the agency must terminate for cause one of the reasons was or the reason stated here uh report dated February 23rd 2023 as IM had only processed 636 application of the 10,281 assigned upon receiving the notice in January and still has 4245 applicators still need to be processed. Given that performance um would make sense why it's now the letter that you had sent for us to read, you've got all sorts of different uh court cases, documents, etc. citing your reasons why you're justifying everything. I'm I'm a little scared that if you guys perform this in this way here, we're at a big risk on how you're going to perform here. So, the way they've phrased it is the only reason you were weren't terminated for cause was because of that memorandum of understanding was written and it prevented them from doing so. Do you dispute that?

I think so, uh, Commissioner, and I'll tell you this. I mean, this wasn't a court case. This wasn't a litigation. This is their internal administrative remedy process. So, this has been called sort of a court case. Um, but it is an internal remedy process dealing with payment issues. And my understanding of this contract was that there was sort of a percentage payment. Um, and that the parties disagreed about that. Um, and and there were exchanges there. There's a history that's laid out where there was a letter and then a retraction. And to date, they've never really done that. I don't know why they couldn't try to say there was a termination for cause, but they never have. The one thing that has come out in that case so far is that IM uh prevailed on each and every change order to my knowledge and that was also one of the issues in dispute was the change orders.

So, so let me go back to the factual stuff. That's that's just as far as performance goes. You were given 10,000 assignments, 6,000 got done. Means like about 40% didn't get done. And that's what they're floating on. And this contract was started on October 7th of 2021. And by the end of March 8th, 2023, they were frustrated so much to write the letter. And in January 28th, they actually wrote a letter, which was only 15 months into a contract that I don't know how long it could have gone on for, but clearly there's a problem with your performance there for them to want to end the contract. Whether you say by cause or not, there's clearly a problem of work not getting done that was supposed to get done.

So, Commissioner Mariano, keep keep this in mind, too, which is when we were responding to that, we were focusing on the question that was being asked of us, which was, was there a termination for cause? And we answered that question. What you're seeing here is one side's presentation of this. Now, I'm not a Pennsylvania attorney. I'm not handling that case, but I I firmly believe that there will be a different set of facts there because just like every other payment dispute, someone's going to say you're behind, someone's going to say you're ahead. Um, keep in mind, too, this is a company with a 20-year track record. We are looking at a Pennsylvania issue. If you do disaster recovery over 20 years, there is going to be something that comes up. This isn't a community block race uh you know community development block grant program. And so I would urge you to look at it contextually. I'll see if Mr. Lugi has any other information on

Well, hang hang on to that because you're saying I'm I'm not even referring to grant works at this point. And I'm referring to the whereas resolution that's here and it it basically it says um failing to adopt the contractually required statement of work which included tasks, timelines, milestones, deliverable payment schedule and program metrics, failing to adopt adopt policies, procedures governing the startup PAF program causing inefficiency, delayed damages, failing to pay agreed upon out of scout work or change order and work in failing to refusing to timely pay invoices for contract work dating back to October 1, 2022. So, this is like information that's in the resolution that you both had signed. I'm not taking from grant works. I'm just going from what I've got here that's signed by both commissioner. I understand that. I would also tell you that the evaluation committee looked at the subcontractor here for grant works and the US attorney's office um you know publication in their press release that found that Horn created an applicant file for each person with a fictitious birth date, security, social security number, fake signatures on legal documents.

We're going to deal with that but I want to deal with your situation right now.

Yeah. Well, we haven't been accused of fraud. So I think

no, but you were again terminated and initially was going to be for cause. You did a great job negotiating or someone did to make it so it wasn't for cause and it was just for convenience.

And and commissioner, my understanding in speaking and communicating with the Pennsylvania Council on this is that this matter is ongoing. It hasn't reached a conclusion that the only interim conclusion that's happened so far is that the change orders that were disputed were granted in our favor. U but I don't have a level of detail on the delays that you're referencing on that mount and I'd be happy to try to supplement that.

You ever read that?

I have read it. Okay.

All right. I'm good.

Sure.

Um Yeah. And I I'm going to have a question for you, but I think mine will be for the other group first. Mr. W.

Uh my question is for staff.

Okay. Um, all things being apples to apples for number of units, 150. The other firm's at 800. What's the price per home? I don't I don't know the price per home, but there were 800 uh homes, single family homes, repair, uh, reconstruct, or elevated in that category. The other 250 was from a uh a manufactured home replacement program.

There's no way to to break out roughly the price price price per unit.

I I don't have that information, but I could.

I mean, I guess where my frustration is with this $500 million of taxpayer money was sent down here to help our taxpayers. And now we got to take taxpayer money to pay $32 million or whatever for a firm and the only one winning in out of this out of this whole ordeal are the firms that are going to manage this. To me, it's it's absurd that we have to take spend tens of millions of dollars to tell one governing body who gives us money to tell another governing body when it's all our money anyway on how to spend it. um which is quite frustrating to me and um I don't personally have an opinion on who's going to do it the best um since there's so few firms that are in this in this space. Um I'd really like some clarity from staff on who's offering the bre the best price here. This $3.4 $4 million discrepancy. Now other firms talking about it's only you know a million want some clarity on from our folks. So when the RFP committee got done with their work and they recommended IM as the preferred uh the preferred vendor we had some work to do because there were some things in their scope that we wanted to change. um what what they proposed was was good enough for us to really understand that that we had the right partner but that they were putting uh they had you know they were heavy in some areas on on on staffing light in other areas. So we had to do some juggling around with that and one of the areas in particular was the the uh the individual housing program. When you're dealing with homeowners and fixing their homes, you get down to a level that is incredibly detailed and incredibly staff intensive. uh and and we're gonna we want to have a very lean internal team. So in in order to keep that, we needed them to go heavier on that piece and that's where that extra funding came in. Um other areas they dropped the funding uh and some of the other project management type type of projects. We asked them to reduce because we know that we have good teams in place at the county that can manage those types of projects. So that's really where the discrepancy was. It went up in some areas and went down in other areas. I can tell you this. Uh, we're at as a percentage of the entire grant, we're paying our V, the proposal is to pay our vendor about about five and a half%.

Thank you. You don't have to do the

of the total contract of the total grant. I'm sorry. 5 and a half% of the total grant. Uh, the others that we we don't have a lot of comparative data, but we have comparative data from Penelis County, and they're up they're up around 10 and a half%. Great.

Uh, we got information from Lee County today. They don't have a not tot contract expenditures to date. They're at about 12% of the grant. So I think we've but we're in a pretty good place comparatively speaking against those other contracts.

Can I ask a question on following up on your your point which is a very good question.

When I saw that number I I took away 32 million.

Yeah. But 5%

we're public is out of out of our pockets and have to have a private firm tell us how to spend our money. Yeah,

principally I just have significant hard I have a very difficult time swallowing that that sand spur which

but is is that all for management of the grant or is that for some imple some other stuff? Is it just management fees?

It's management of the grant. It's oversight of construction. It's case work hiring case managers. It's it's all of the things that are that are needed that we need them to do in order to clean lean

reporting that they're gonna they're going to provide us with the documentation we need.

Davis Bacon garbage.

Davis Bacon Davis Bacon about it.

It's

Davis Bacon doesn't apply to the Well, it doesn't apply to the individual housing programs. Uh so there's no cost for Davis Bacon in that program and that's the most expensive program for them to manage. About 75% of their fee is in the single is in the individual housing program. No Davis Bacon applies. Okay.

When Davis Bacon does apply to some of the other projects, we plan to build that cost into the project.

Um, do you mind now if I ask my question? Okay. So, in doing my little bit of research, and I think there's flaws in both companies, we'll get to talk about Horn here. The the the pro the uh it's a co-lication here between Grant Works and Horn. It's just not just Grant. um my looking at my little research in IM and maybe the others two that I I I would is it performancebased? Do we pay as they perform because I don't want to put all this money out management and not have the performance running alongside

they're going to they're going to perform the work and they're going to submit payment uh requests for payments to us for reimbursement.

But there's milestones and and you know we're protected.

What's the change orders? were protected that it's not heavy on administration before any house gets fixed because my understanding has that was a problem with the state.

I mean,

I just want to make sure we've written

is this a time and materials contract?

It's a time it's a time it's a time and materials contract most specifically mostly uh uh hourly staff rates. That's really what it comes down to is it's about how much time they put into the project.

That's not my question. I don't think not. My question is

so so my my team's job is going to be oversight. We are going to per perform constant oversight. Everything that's delivered, all the documentation is produced, that's the lion share of what my team work of the work my team will do.

That's reimburseable.

Okay. But my I just want to be sure we're not paying out manage fees and not getting houses done at the same rate. I mean, I I just want there to be they don't get paid till someone's house is fixed. You know what I mean? Or that that there's some kind of matrix going along with payments and work done.

They're not going to get paid until work's done. Whether or not a house is completed, there may be interal draws, but they're not going to get paid unless work is done.

Commissioner Jerger,

is there anything in the contract where if they're not holding up their end of the bargain that we can uh terminate with them?

I believe so. ML car.

Yes, ma'am. We have the ability to terminate any of our contracts for convenience with a set notice, but we can terminate for cause typically within 30 days if we have a cause.

Okay. I just don't want to see something like we had with the jail where we're, you know, we're at we're needing more money and we're going back for plans and we're we're kind of in a position where we're stuck.

Yes, ma'am. We do have those out clauses.

Okay. Sure.

Yeah. Okay. Say, say we get we get into a contract and we have to terminate for convenience. This isn't one of these contracts where there's a settlement at the end of to get one firm to walk away and bring in another one or or there's a a fee.

No. All but all of our contracts do have the clause that says if we have to go somewhere else and there's a cost difference that we do have the ability to go back against you if you were terminated for cause

bond on this.

No, I don't believe so. No, there was you don't bond professional services.

Then how then what your statement of go back against you?

We we typically write a clause in that says if for example we are hiring you to do a $100 sidewalk and you walk away, we have to terminate you and it cost us $120 to do the sidewalk, we can come back and bill you for the extra $20.

Gotcha. Okay, Madam Chair.

Yeah.

I met I want you to really consider this because look what happened in Pennsylvania. They left 40% of the work didn't get done. They fire the letter off. They're going to be fired for cause. These guys do a masterful job litigating and get it for a convenience. And get it set into that memorandum where they couldn't then go back and even change that or do anything against that whole process. Look at what went through with Rad Sports. We were out lawyered. They didn't perform whatsoever and those details weren't in the contract. And guess what? We had the

I want to make sure we have very tight I'm going to tell you right now, if you aren't 100% tight, and I don't know what expertise you think we've got to go write this contract, but if you don't write that contract absolutely perfect all the way through, these guys are going to beat us in court.

We're going to pay and it's going to it's going to be costly.

I want this.

I mean, they cited they cited 10 different court things and just the the response back to to Grant Works protest. I mean, these guys are skilled. They are going to eat our lunch if they fight. I I say any contract that we do with this amount of money, we got to send to like the top law form law firm to just look at the contract. No, I mean I want to exit strategy all along the way.

You have this kind of cash that it's clear the sharks are circling.

Yeah. So we need we need more eyes on our

Anybody who wants a piece of this is a shark.

Um

circling. So I have a question for grant works because commissioners if you you submitted with Horn and maybe you wish you hadn't now but you did and that's what um is on your submission and Horn is being kicked out of many states for fraud and that's their partner. So what's happening there?

That's actually not true. I I have a um

a letter from the state of West Virginia that's a permanent withdrawal of that dearment issue that's been surfacing. But more importantly, this is a deflection of of the prime and the prime's obligation. Grant works is the sole prime just like IM is the sole prime. Grant works has never been terminated for cause in its 46 year history. We were very forthcoming. We don't pursue litigation against our clients. We're purpose- driven. We're missionled. We believe in what we do and we do what we say. Um, you know, we're we've been focusing on, you know, subcontractors and Pennsylvania, but let's look at what is happening right here in this fine state of Florida on the Rebuild Florida Irma program. It's all over the news right here in 10th Tampa Bay. I mean, during the procurement, there were news investigation reports going on about the Rebuild Florida Irma program. It's in your handout. Um, these aren't our words. These aren't our allegations. These are just real things and real people that are suffering. So, um, and I'd also like to make a clarification. The the, uh, attorney for IM, um, misrepresented Grant Works in our numbers. We, of course, read the action plan and our numbers and our estimates were based on the action plan. So, I I feel like there's a real misrepresentation there. Um, there was no apples to apples comparison in the pricing in either phase. And there was total confusion about what the pricing really represented. IM's phase one pricing, which was an hourly rate schedule, excluded like 18 or 19 of their total positions, including the program manager, the chief of staff, and all their core senior adviserss. Like, you know, if if it doesn't include your program manager, what's the purpose of the pricing submissions? So, I I would urge you all to strongly consider uh reviewing a renewed BAFO between the firms and let's really line up item for item what each firm is offering and let Pasco County get the best value for its citizens. Sure.

Yeah,

sir. So, you bid 1,50 homes.

Yes. It was a split between single family homes and MHUS. Yes, sir. Single family homes in what?

MHS manufactured housing units. Yes.

So to our staff, why can't we figure out what it is per unit? They bid apples. If each firm bid 1,50 homes as Grant Works is claiming they bid and I am uh why can't we figure out what it is per unit? Nothing.

Well, I'm waiting for an answer. Is someone doing the math?

Question was

No, you have to.

No, I want this come from Pasco County staff.

Yeah.

Question was,

sir, he's asked for staff. Thank you.

Sorry. So, so price per home is is that the question?

Yes.

Okay.

He's saying he bid the same as the other. They just wrote it differently.

And we've got we've gotten conflicting, you know, different price sheets up here. Like the county is supposed to kind of be the intervening body into this. What What are we at the feature one bid? What's the price difference between the two bids? A half a million dollars. So, if they're each bid for 1,50 units based on the split of manufacturer homes in the in the single family,

what's it come down to?

Well, I I am uh that their price per home. Now, it's going to it's going to fluctuate obviously per home, but there I I don't have the exact number in front of me, but it's about $22 million that they're charging us for the single for the individual home program, and it's 1,50 units.

Okay. And what's the other firm? Well, the other firm, we weren't able to have that that negotiation about about where we need their their services more heavily. So, I don't think it's reliable and and I don't have it off the top of my head. But, we had to work with IM to

good

we had to work with IM a after after the the preferred they were determined to be the preferred vendor. We had to work with them on on shifting their priorities and their manpower because we needed them to focus more on the individual housing program. That's why that cost went up. If if I may interject,

I don't think that's his question. This

Carrie, if you could please explain what the selection criteria were. I mean, pricing.

Carrie, this is an This was an

Yeah, it's not a bid. Correct. That's I wanted I wanted to get that on the record as to what the differences were. Yes.

And explain why the pricing sheet at least was I guess one of your evaluation factors, but there there are others. Could you please?

Yes, sir. So when you look at the totals, Carrie, what's the total price difference between the two firms?

Sir, that's very hard to answer because we did do the first round of initial pricing and then we came back and had the second round of pricing. Then we went and actually negotiated final pricing with IM. We never did a final negotiation of pricing with grant work. So we don't know where their pricing would have fallen if they had had all of the information had during negotiations. I owe you an apology, Chuck, since you it didn't go that far. Just say my bad, Chuck. I thought you knew something more that than you did.

No, appreciate that.

Thank you.

So, Carrie,

yes, sir.

So, there's no way to really answer that question.

Yes, sir. Correct.

Question.

Okay. Carrie, what

explain to the board the the the RFP process because that's I think that's where they're

they're confusing the Sure. bidding process, which is what they've they've had protests recently on.

Correct.

And the RFP process.

So, the main difference between a bid and an RFP is in a bid, we know exactly what we want and we go out and we say, "How much are these clickers?" And they give us pricing for these clickers. When we do an RFP, we know we want something that when we push it's going to advance slides. So, but we're not sure exactly how we want to approach it or we want to see what they have to offer. So, we come up with a set of scored evaluation criteria and we sub we get proposals in and we tell them you're going to be judged on X, Y, and Z for this point, this point, this point. Then, when we hold that evaluation committee, the committee has already looked at the proposals and they've given preliminary scores as to how they feel the written proposals met those criteria. The committee then discusses all of the proposals they received and if they are happy with their scores, they hit submit. If not, they have an opportunity to manipulate their scores based on what they've heard in the room. And that's when we have a final score. From that point, we shortlist. And sometimes we shortlist to two, three, depends on where there's a natural break in the scoring. If we have several, we have three or four that are in, you know, the eight high 800s and the next one down is 600, we don't see that one down because there's no no point to it really. So we see that natural break. We bring them back in for presentations. We provide them with the list of questions that's developed by the committee at their meeting. So when they shortlist, they sit around and they say, "Okay, what else based on the written proposals do we want to see from these companies?" And that's where that set of questions comes from.

Yes, sir.

So how in the world is Grant Works able to come up with a line item list like this?

Because we gave them basic parameters as to what we were looking for. So, they're comparing it. They're obviously comparing it. Sorry. No, you're

uh to their their line items that they have, but we haven't the county hasn't seen it.

Have we seen

They're comparing They're comparing IM to theirs and and so our staff hasn't seen Grant Works.

No, sir. We would not have seen that. No, sir. We We did not get a copy of that paper until today.

Wow. I have a question for

So we can't even get a professional recommendation then on the grant work side. So this is just hyperbole.

Let's wait for a good answer.

U Commissioner Jagger if Wakeman's okay.

I'm done. Thank you.

Commissioner I have a question for staff. So, I feel like Grant Works kind of deflected on um Commissioner Starky's question about Horn being um kind of kicked out of uh North Carolina, but then IM you see the letter here that they didn't do what they were supposed to do for Irma. So,

yes, ma'am. And as from a staff perspective, we have two companies that both threw mud at each other. And it's really up to you all as the board to decide what mud you think is thicker and what's going to stick.

I just really

We're not going to ever find a perfect vendor that doesn't have any blemishes.

Um

I understand. I just, you know, for our citizens, like it's just them getting back on their feet and rebuilding is the most important thing. And just thinking about the money, you know, if it's it's cheaper, that makes up our that makes up our 0.03 mil. It's all to me, it's all in the contract. And what you know, make sure we dot our eyes and cross our tees. Commissioner Mariana.

Yeah. I mean, I'd like to have grant works information looked at and verified. Um, when I look at the overall the overall sheets for the scoring sum for all this all all the numbers, when you look at all the slots going across, they're all very close. Um, one point where Grant Works comes ahead as far as experience goes. There are about 15 points higher from 226 to 241. So, the scores are very close to there. Um that's edge to grant works on experience on the on the here this is for you. So I'm looking at the scoring sheets and it shows the the scoring from AM to grant works. Grant works is at 241 for minimum qualifications and relevant experience out of a 250 and am is lower at 226. the one big difference between them comes out to tab E quality cost and controls. So I'm wondering how there's 50 points difference in your opinion to how that number comes out.

That would be based on the individual scores by the evaluation committee sir.

Oh and yes sir that was a section that was truncated because we did have a 50page limit and grant works did provide more than 50 pages. So we had to take everything over 50 pages out of their proposal. So the committee did not see the entire proposal because grant works did not follow the rules. And

it's common for you to do that.

Yes, sir.

All right. So here's here's a problem with the commonality for that to happen. Now you're taking the information that would give you something.

Well, that's their fault. They didn't follow those.

But I I someone made a decision on what pages to take out and it cost them 50 points which would have been the difference from one to the other.

Sir, we take out if we take out everything after 50. Pardon me. Arbitrarily, they made what? It's not arbitrary.

No, it's it's arbitrary what pages they took out of the

last 30 pages.

That's right. It's over.

Anything over their page limit, it's the same thing you get in court. Anything page limit gets thrown out.

Um here. So, you know, look, it was three to four or four to three. It was close. Um um so I can understand grant works trying to get to get in um but I think some of the questions you're asking cannot be discussed because this is an RFP not a bid first of all and you can speak

yeah that and I

but here's something that strikes in my mind something that grant work said and I I think we probably would have been fine with both either one of these companies um But frankly, when I look at what Grant Works is doing, they're all over the state. How much capacity can a company have? I'd rather have someone that will pay little will be their big dog and they'll pay a lot of attention to the citizens in our county.

And that shouldn't be considered either.

Well, sorry. I didn't say that, but that's kind of how I feel.

So, but back to back to Commissioner Mariano's point. So, in an RFP, you negotiate with the lead with whoever has been ranked number one on price. You don't negotiate with both one and two on price. So, you're locked into if unless the deal falls apart with number one, that's the only one you get pricing full pricing information on. That's the way this process works. So with the page here that shows the cost went up from the orals, I mean from the first set of orals to now, it shows they're up $3 million and you said you've had to add some things in there that they didn't have in there, project managers, etc. Was that factored into your decision- making as far as the negotiations? I mean, did you just give us give raise up our price three million bucks because they didn't have some things in there that should have been in there? The big thing that that that impacted that that number was they they talked about this in one of our negotiation sessions. We wanted them to have a higher uh a higher responsibility in individual housing program. So they gave us a proposal and they told us we'll write it up for you at the at the next meeting and it's about total management of the contractor pool. What we didn't want as a counties we we didn't want to contract with contractors that were going into people's homes and doing the repairs. We wanted to be removed from that. So the contractor will contract with IM on that project and and and they're going to manage the contractor pool entirely and do all the billing and the cont construction oversight. It's entire they're going to they're going to run that program because it's so staff intensive with a lean team. We we're unable to do that. So knowing that from the orals to the um next meeting that you had as far as for the debate, did that come up at that point? at any point have those things in there

that didn't come up during the during the uh the RFP negotiation the RFP committee

saying on the presentations and the submissions did it have in those that data or was it left out?

No. uh we did know that it would be a higher number on the housing pool as we as we get into these projects as we get into these proposals and particularly when we had IM as a preferred bidder we really that that's when we really developed and understood what we were looking for and what we needed because it it just wasn't that simple. So before or a so after the decisions made by the committee

into this process now we're digging into the details as far as what we're missing what we need and how we want to do it.

Yes sir.

Is there something wrong with that? No sir, because what we do is we find the best match for what we're looking for and then we get into the actual particulars because sometimes we're not sure exactly what we are looking for until we get to that negotiation phase. So we look at the overall proposals, the overall experience and the general pricing that they gave us when we make that decision. I'm going to disagree with you because as he said from what they submitted is not going to work for us to we want to do should have been in discussions and should have been discussed from the get-go even in the second stage with with this process.

Say something,

Mr. Jagger.

Yeah. And this is just an in general statement is when we first discussed this, I had asked if we could be on the committee to help choose this

because it was such a large amount of money. And here we are. I trust your process, but I also trust us as a commission.

Yes, ma'am. And we we have a voice and and moving forward, if we ever get blessed with this amount of money, I hope we have a say, honestly.

So, that is I'm sorry, ma'am. That's why we come to you with a recommendation. In a in a world where you were making the decision when you were if you would have been the evaluation committee, this protest could not have been heard by this body. you would have had to go straight to court. So there would have been an injunction. It would have been months, years before we could have moved forward. That's why we do it at a staff level to give you all the protest appeal.

Um so so this was an RFP. So now we enter into negotiations with the contract with IM.

Yes, ma'am. We've done we have done that. The contract is attached.

Okay. But we

we are going the ones that are going to be approved that contract, right?

Yes, ma'am. That's what we're asking you to do is I want to know with that contract if we have the insurancees that at least I want to know if you've put in what I've asked for and that is who wait you I I you know what I need more eyes on that contract. I need I need outside eyes on that contract. I want I just No offense to our county attorneys

and get in trouble. That's perfectly okay. But you're here on a protest. You need to you need to make a decision on the protest, but I don't have to approve the contract

before we can discuss the contract. I would do it as as separate motions.

The the only thing is I don't want this to be held up because we need to start working. I So in that contract, do we have non-performance outs? Madam Chairman, I'll say it again. You based on what I'm hearing, you need to decide on the protest

and then we can talk about

All right, I'll take the content

if anyone's ready. Talk about

Can we uh take a break for about 10 15 minutes? Um, I want to go look to this horn situation and I've just been sent sent some email information from my assistant looking up to what's going on there and I'll share with everybody too, but I think we should look at that just to see what's there. I'd rather information regarding the protest be from your staff or from the or from the the two people the two the the protester and the proposer I mean I

else

I I just think you're you're building problems into the into the hearing if you start getting information mid-heing outside.

May I submit what I

that outlaw lawyer thing

I discussed earlier

to receive and file

second all in favor?

I do you have copies for everybody?

Yes sir.

So real quick a question for county staff just going back. So like when we hired a lobbyist and we got to hear there and that's all I said earlier. We're not allowed to hear these companies presentations because if it went to court. Is that what you're saying? Yes, ma'am. That's the process is if you all are the committee and for that lobbyist, had you all decided that you wanted one company and one company protested, we would not have been able to bring it to you as the board. We would have had to stop work and we would have had to go to court. We would have had to have judges involved, etc.

Madam Chair,

yeah.

If one of the companies doesn't like the decision, can they still go to court? if they can if they can find a reason to challenge your decision. But the protests are you have a lot of discretion in both the award and your decision in the protest.

Thank you.

That wouldn't be a very wise move.

No.

Soon they have to work with us and they're just taking more from the taxpayer. That would be a very unwise move from either firm in my opinion.

We have material that explains how we've got to their calculations.

Statements have to be on the record or they're not going to be captured.

You have paperwork to submit.

We're if we're supplementing the record,

move to receive and file.

Let's see. and what is what are we receiving in file?

So, this is uh the analysis that we did that yielded that they were quoting on 800 homes versus 1,50. It just explains it more detail.

Motion's on the table.

Second. All in favor? I

I'm not sure that it could be relevant because that was a proposal and they've gone to a

but it was information it was information that the protester submitted and he's he's trying to

refute

rebutted.

Okay. All right. Go ahead. Let's get it.

All they want you to do.

You're judge Katherine right now.

Hey, I've sat on these committees when I was on the school board and it's not a good thing. You're

Madam Chair from works have a question.

There's two pages. So let's let let us look at it for a second, Jack.

Um,

yeah. And I'll have a a question, too. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Mariano,

um, first I'm sure they didn't want to see a copy of this. Um on the department letter um is it is it what's what's the status of Horn? Were they fined? Were they disciplined or or what? They settled uh with the state of West Virginia. They paid a fine. They admitted no fault. in the state of West Virginia, as as evidenced by this letter, dated September 4th, 2025, is a permanent withdrawal of notice of department.

They they paid like 1.2 million,

I believe. That's correct. Yes.

What about North Carolina?

They are they are currently delivering the state's CDBGDR program and are in very good standing with the state of North Carolina. Um, and really, I apologize for the mudslinging that you come in. It's really an unfortunate byproduct of this this industry and it's it's not very nice. That being said, IM is also coming to you today with a teaming partner, a subcontractor who's running the infrastructure program, Tetrate Tech, that was terminated from Sarasota County's CDBGR program recently here in Florida in the state of Florida. So, I we didn't go down that road until today, but if we're going to, you know, cast stones, you know, it's out there. So that's why we wanted to focus on the prime contract holders which is grant works and IM

maybe we just need it in house.

Madam chair, may I be heard very briefly. It's not about Okay, go ahead.

It's not about this person or that person.

U I wanted to address a point that was brought up by your council and I I believe it's correct that if the commission were to be involved in the selection process, you'd be recused from Yeah. But that same logic applies as to why this it first of all it's not in your procurement uh ordinances or procurement manual. Why we file a protest pointing out what we believe were problems and then it's submitted to the same people to say do you think you did anything wrong? That's the same logic and the same problem. I mean we're pointing out that we think you didn't understand some things. There may have been some bias, there may have been some problems and it's given back to them and say, "Did you do anything wrong?" The same logic applies. There were no independent eyes laid on these allegations until right now administrator was not on the committee and he looked at it,

right? It goes to you first.

Yes, ma'am. So, the process was that it went back to the committee. The committee made the recommendation, but all the information was provided to Mr. Carbala and Mr. Carbala made the final protest denial decision, not the c not the committee.

It's hard to and the only other point I wanted to make is uh with regard to commissioner Whiteitman's question, there is a way to resolve that. We be given the opportunity to submit a price.

Um Commissioner Marian, do you still want a 10-minute do we do we want a 10-minute or what do we want, guys? This is just a mess. We can't get outside. I hate these question for can turn. So because of the RFP process and this is obviously a very unique

can you talk into your mic? All right. The this is a unique circumstance and this is an RFP process, but there is no way with with these procurement parameters that we can't go and do a best and final.

Not un not unless you if you had rejected IM you could have gone to grant works and negotiated with them. But you have to you have to reject your primary the the number one ranked person before you get to talk to the number two ranked person.

But then

so you have the two of them up to bid against each other.

And if you kick out number one and you go to number two and you can't resolve things with them, you can't go back to number one.

So

best and final on on this between the two.

Now these are qualificationbased selections.

Madam chair.

Yep. I'd like Seth to take some time and go look at these two things we've got here.

Okay. Can you recap

because we've gone down path.

Why don't you put up the four points and contention and let's go through those.

Just remember what Oh, the four because I've strayed others here have strayed. Recap for us the parameters of our decision making.

Oh, no. I'm going I'm sorry, Gina.

Thank you. I know, right?

Nope. Go back.

That one. So, evaluator bias. The statute says that it has to be actual hard facts finding of evaluator bias, not innuendo or conjecture. In this case, it was a statement made by a committee member prior to the voting. Um each committee member was instructed that they are to give their own opinions. Committees do have varying opinions which is why we have a committee based.

Would you would you repeat what that bias statement was? Was

the bias statement was something to the effect of this is IM to lose.

And how many were on the committee?

Seven for the procedural errors. The concern about not getting a second round of evaluation criteria. That is what the questions in the letter are for. Um, Grant Works had plenty of opportunity to pro to provide us with questions and say, "Hey, is this the criteria? Is there a scoring?" They did not do so, which would lead me to believe professionally that they understood the process before they did the process. Um, that is how we do all RFPs. This was not something that we veered from our policy or procedure in this case. That is a standard pro procedure for the county. as far as IM's prior experience. Um, that is why we went back to the committee with the concerns so that they could see the concerns and hear the con hear the the response back from IM. And as far as pricing, again, this is a best value. Overall, we're not sure what the final negotiated contract with grant works would have looked like. It may have been higher, it may have been lower, but at this point, we do have to stick with that number one. And then we can go to number two, but we can't go back to number one. and having the ability to look at the finalized contract from IM Grant Works did have the ability to look at that as part of the agenda. So their numbers may have reflected that they had seen IM's final numbers as well. So we we don't have any way of knowing what grant works final would have been at this point.

Madam Chair,

yeah.

So based upon what they had submitted, if I get the final, how would they stand up? I'm sorry.

Based upon what Grant Works had submitted, how do they stand up?

I don't think you

we would have to negotiate a contract with them using the same criteria and discussions that we would have had with with the other firm. And so again, you know, firms were given information on how to pro how to respond to the pricing segment of of that RFP. So they were all given that same information. They come in, they present that as we go through, they may make assumptions. there's things that are made during the during the negotiation process where we may refine things or other details come out. Again, it's it's a portion and so you you look at it, it was one of several criteria that were considered, but it was not the criteria. There are number there are a number of other qualifications that that the team considered. So, I mean, you're effectively bidding them against each other if if you go down that path. As for pricing, to the extent it was relevant in the selection of of the rank the final rankings, it was weighed out by the selection committee and you shouldn't be reweighing that evidence.

Not that I want to reweigh the evidence, but again, as it's been said by staff, they had to go back and look at different management fees, etc., etc., that weren't included into the bid by IM. And now that affects what's going to be done and who's going to

So that would have been done with grant works as well though. We just did not go down that road because they were not the selective vendor. So we would have had those same conversations with grant works.

I understand. But the key is you didn't go down and have that information ahead of time which to me is a very key part of this whole thing and what it's going to cost us. It's just a point of order. It's just a point of order. We don't do that with any selection. Whether we're hiring engineers to do a wastewater treatment plant, we don't go down that path. we we make those selections based on qualifications and then we discuss pricing. That's that's how that's what qualifications based selection is about.

So one thing I just want to point out I I feel like you know if we don't go with IM then grant works already knows their prices and they can be higher than them and then we're sabotaging ourselves. So there's that

that can happen. Yes,

that can happen. So because now all the cards are out on the table and I would hate for that to

which is generally why we don't recommend you reject all bids

in a situation like this because everybody's cards have already

knowing that me personally I would uphold IM because I feel like we're going to be saving our our we have no idea what grant works is going to be due and then we'd be knocking out IM. we couldn't go back with them and then they kind of have have us over a barrel on price because they will hold all the cards.

Is that a motion?

So I make a motion to uphold uh the county administrator's um decision on the uh protest

deny the protest from Grant Works

from Grant Burks.

A second want discussion

discussion. So, I'm I'm just thinking about I just asked earlier because I had my sister go look up and see what these horn allegations were, etc. And I'm told that I can't well, we can't go look at that. What's outside information at this point? However, we've had other outside information coming in before us that we've been able to use just like we just got the letter from um M showing how they did their bid. So if I don't know I I I just think that if you've got issues that are here, if they're real, they're real. If they're not, they're not. But this whole thing is based upon Horn as far as what's hurting these people. And I don't I'm not comfortable with what we're doing here at this point.

Horn was Grant Works subcontractor,

right? And that the whole thing is and it's been all said about how bad they've been, etc., etc. But at the same time, you got other outside information that's come in. I think I've got some that just came online from my assistant and I'd like to take a look at I think we should all take a look at it.

Let me try this again. So, you're you've got a protest by Grant Works of IM's proposal. The four things that are on your screen is what you're supposed to be reviewing in this. The mud that has been slung back and forth really is not relevant. to your decision. Let me ask this. Did the mud of horn come out on the second meeting?

Yes, sir.

So, I'm going to say that if it didn't get considered, then maybe there was some bias.

Okay. All in favor? I I

opposed. No.

Okay. Now, I want to talk about the contract. Yes, ma'am. Um, I just want to be sure that we are not getting, you know, I just want to be sure that we are we're not going to be paying out without the homes being done. I need them to go side by side, the payments and the work, right? Or as close to it as possible because that's what I'm hearing was the issue with the state. We will require the work to be done. We'll we'll review the documentation. Uh we will do site inspections on on on a on a case-by case basis too if we need to, but we will not we will we will make payment when we see that the work has been completed or or at least the work that they're billing for has been completed. Okay. And then uh the question that there there was a comment made that um the project managers weren't included in the bid. You know, did so is the management cost going to be different than what they told us it was going to be?

No, we know exactly what that structure is going to be and we'll we'll check those costs every time we pay a bill that we're being built correctly.

Any guys have any other Yeah. to IM. Please don't waste our money with big shiny papers colored both sides. We'll do black and white.

Yes, ma'am. That's works.

No, I know that. But I'm telling you, we are we want to we want to stretch our dollars in Pasco County and I'm we are trusting you as a board and we take that job seriously to make sure the money is going in the and people aren't patting their pockets and we're not paying people to do nothing. Please use our money for our people

and please take that job seriously and not waste money like this.

Madam Chair,

yeah,

I want to make sure when we draw this contract up that we have tremendous flexibility in terminating this contract whenever we choose.

Well,

don't want to I don't want to go through a court situation or being delayed.

It can't just be for whatever you choose because they've got to hire people and staff up and then you can't it's got to be for cause. But right

could be good for convenience.

Oh,

it just that's just was negotiated.

Yes.

I just want to make sure we look at this and we have a uh we're not going to be trapped into a situation like happened in Pennsylvania.

Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. Go ahead.

This is Karen Lloyd, senior county attorney. Um senior assistant county attorney. The agreement can be terminated for cause as well as for convenience. So if the county finds that it's not in our best interest to continue with the contract, we can give them notice and get out of the contract. If they're not doing what they're required to do under the contract, we give them notice terminated. So we feel that we know from all of this discussion that it's very very important to be on top of everything that is built to us and on top of timelines. Well, we took that into account in drafting the contract,

Madam Chair.

Yeah.

So, the reason my my my emphasis on that is for 10,000 issues that were out there with inspections to be done or work to be done, 40% didn't get done and they still didn't get, you know, they started out being for cause and then ended up being inconvenience and couldn't change it. So, I just I just want to make sure we're protected because I don't want to fight that battle.

Um,

so so the contract was part of your agenda package. It has been signed by IM. We can send it out to outside counsel if you wish, but my office was comfortable with it. You've heard from the senior assistant that that was involved in the team.

Um I mean, we could

if if it is the board's desire, we could send it out to to Carlton Fields and have them look it over. But um because this was expedited because we were trying to get it closed off as of what you if if you decided to u uphold the administrator's determination. We wanted to be sure that we could move this forward on an expeditious basis and so we took the risk of finalizing the contract and putting it in your package.

And Cartonfield is under our contract.

They're outside council. Yeah.

So we could bring them in. I I I strongly suggest we do that and I I think they could get that done within a week and bring

that that was a week was my magic number two.

All right. And I I think I think that that can be done. I just want to again

I don't want to be in a situation where we're going to be losing money and spending money we didn't want to do.

Okay. I just have a comment. Um I trust the county attorney's office. Um I'd like to see the contract signed today. So there's no chance of us having court issues or things thrown at us, which is going to waste more money, more time. I say we sign the paper, let the team, you know, go off and running and start helping our taxpayers because there's a chance that this could be go to court and then what? We're out more money

for what I trust our our county attorney's office.

So let's let's ask the applicant, are you okay if we bring this out to our in council at tournament and bring it back for within a week?

Question.

So what I asked I am is would they be willing to entertain any amendments that we might have? Should we sign the contract today and should we find that we're not comfortable with anything there, they'd be willing to entertain amendments. They would work that out between the attorneys.

That's good.

So, I make a motion to have instruct the county attorney to have the um M sign the contract and also to make um a note of if we have any issues with the amendments that you would be okay with that. So, that is my motion.

Okay. So it let me restate your motion.

Restate it for me.

Let the lawyer state the motion.

Restate it properly.

Award the contract to the highest ranked proposer, IM International uh in a not to exceed amount of 32,337 or $337,1 I went to law school too. One $11929. Authorize the chairman to execute the provided agreement with IEM and board records to distribute as set forth below, instructing the county attorney to have the contract reviewed by outside council and if they believe any amendments to the contract are necessary, present them to IM for signature and negotiation.

That's the motion. Take a second.

Second. I I made the motion. I you somebody else has got to second it. Sorry.

I second it.

Um all in favor? I opposed.

Okay. All right.

Um and there's one more in this package. Do you want to keep

delegate the authority to the county administrator to execute task orders under the solicitation RFP LK251 100 as stated in the agreement in the amount of as we've just with the highest ranked proposer um provided that such task orders are within the scope of the issued solicitation and all other requirements of the Pasco County purchasing or ordinance have been met. I'll make that motion.

Second.

All in favor?

I

Do you need the in addition?

In addition section 163. That's just

who you asking.

What else was in your motion?

It's in the recommended board action section. We'll bring that back if it needs

Okay, thank you. That was a long one. Like I said, I think we would have been fine with either company with our good contract. Okay. Um, we are back to the budget discussion or are we going to save that for 5:15? Oh, no. We'll do commissioner items.

We've already taken care of that.

All right. Commissioner Oley. Commissioner items.

R72.

What?

We're done.

We do R 72.

I got two winners, by the way.

That was before lunch.

My birthday.

$4 and $4. Okay. It's not right.

All right.

You ready for these?

I'm ready.

All right.

Um had an opportunity to speak at Southern Charm, Sweetwater, and uh Settler's Rest.

What is that?

Uh communities. There are some RB communities. They're in in Zephr Hills, Florida, which I went to on September the 4th. discussed with them about the different projects coming in around Chanty Road and that area, of course, Chanty and 56 and 301 where 301's going to eventually be four lane from uh Highway 39 all the way down to 56 and that's uh starting in the near future. So went over those projects with them and they were very happy to hear about the things that were going on in and around Zephri Hills and also Paduka the cookie manufacturers on their way in their building. So it's going on pretty good. Um then I had the opportunity to go visit the top and off party at uh waste energy and uh had a grand day there with with the team and really saw a lot of construction going on and it's just amazing uh part of this that it's amazing because they they told us uh this of the burner they're putting in would bring us up to at least 50% of what we were already doing. And it sounded odd since we had three burners that it wouldn't bring us half, but the horsepower of that third burner was much greater than rest. So it will bring us up to be able to burn more product for for energy. So very good meeting. Um had a uh yesterday had a board meeting with Tampa Bay Water. Um, we've had a lot of rainfall here uh this this past month. I I say a lot. It's roughly uh 10 inches of rain we got. We were able to uh I believe I reported to you last month there was about 10 billion gallons in the reservoir. And at this at the date yesterday, we had a little over 13 billion gallons in that reservoir being able to pick up some of that rainfall and put it in the reservoir. So things look good there. We're actually um with our del we're producing about 16 million gallons a day uh through that system for the water we use. We use roughly I think the average right now is about 198 uh million gallons a day is what we use in the whole system and that's some of that surface water some of that's reservoir water some well water and also del water to do that. Also asked the question about uh the trail on on the new pipeline area they're talking about for the southern pipeline. what that deals with Hillsboro County and not Tempe Water. It's not up to Tempe Water to put that trail on there, but it's something Hillsboro County. So maybe you can reach out to our counterparts and ask them if they'll be able to get that done

because they're they're on your board. So hopefully they're working.

Yeah, that may be something we can talk about when we uh call

in our Tri County meeting. So that's all I have. All right. So, this is pretty pretty awesome pretty awesome team effort from school board to county commission, state members, house members, and senate and governor. So, um Rep. Maghard uh wanted to do a a check presentation um for the sidewalks coming down Curly Road.

Oh, that's nice.

And uh the student middle between Danny and I, his name is Joshua Patrick. He's he's an eighth grader and uh he came before NO. He spoke to us at NO uh a little while back and uh worked the advocacy um within his school and with the parents and and sent a bunch of support of the need up in Tallahassee. So, it's a pretty special day for everybody and for for Josh and his mom and dad. And um we'll do another um my understanding is we're soon to have about to be a potential groundbreaking for uh Pine View Elementary or Pine View Middle and Elementary School. And so we'll send out the invitation to everybody to do to celebrate that once we we break ground um break great break ground there sidewalk. So our sidewalk requests to the legislature so far are are pretty successful. So grateful to our legislative leadership. Uh next, so we um over the weekend we went to Homes for Our Troops um which is the difference between homes for our troops and wounded warrior is homes for our troops allows the veteran to choose where they want to live. And so a lot of these veterans are are picking Pasco County and Western Chapel area um or generally just in Pasco County because of its the the level of health service they can receive and their distance to to uh Haley. So the home at the bottom with Sergeant Lawrence, uh his family is the the folks sitting down in the in the chair. He's missing the leg there with his wife and kids. Uh this house is in Fox Ridge, so the MS uh BU pin is going to come in handy. This is it's a pretty phenomenal house. And then Sergeant Lopez, uh his house is in Quel Hollow. And what these folks are doing, and they're paying market prices for these lots and what these folks are doing, um you know, it's essentially a form of redevelopment and adding significant value. So they're looking for, you know, about an acre of land. And if the veteran chooses to live there, I mean, they're building 3,000 square foot fully adaptable homes. I mean, they're really, really nice housing housing product. And um

all handicapped improvements.

Yes, sir. All it's it's it's pretty special. and um uh I can't pronounce his last name, but gentleman in the bottom left standing with uh Sergeant Lopez, he's a brigadier, retired brigadier general uh and the number two in command of the Homes for Our Troops Foundation. And then we had Commissioner Oakley and I were always, you know, 911 several 911 remembrances this weekend um or this past this past weekend. And so this year, Wesley Chapel Rotary recognized uh uh one of our own, Buddy Alman, who's looking good, healthy, strong. He's anxious to come back to work. And uh Mrs. Cond was there. Uh and um Rotary honored officer um Conduct up on the wall. So they had a nice run, 5K run every year. And um just just a nice showing to remember all those impacted by by 911. That's actually a good good program that every year they put that

Commissioner Oakley got first place in the race mile run.

I didn't run.

Um yeah, and then St. Leo, we had a nice 911 tribute at St. Leo. Um a lot of dignitaries at that one. It was the first time that St. Leo had a had a 911 event. So wonderful work by Steve Spelman and and uh Tom Duca and everybody that that that honored all the all the folks there. Um and one other thing I'd like to reimpoint Jenny Engling to the commission on the status of women and if I can

second that.

Thank you.

All in favor? I

excellent. And uh we had a wonderful EDC banquet for those that were there. You heard it. USF was going to beat the Florida Gator. We were crystal clear about that. We're not going to discuss Miami, but wonderful job by the ED EDC staff

by Miami

Chair Chair Starky and representing M. Mr. Mitchell. And uh I will close with everybody joining me in singing happy birthday.

Oh yes.

To our chair, Commissioner Starky. Are you ready?

29.

Yep. And I got one from Gina.

Oh, sorry about that.

All right. Where's our staff? Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday. Take

Happy birthday to you.

Thank you very much.

My favorite way to spend my birthday.

Oh yeah.

With all.

Not really. We know the facts.

I am going I am going camping next week. So that's in in Zion.

That's for your birthday.

Oh, there they come. Look now.

Oh, they missed it.

Okay, Commissioner Y.

Okay, let's see. Security alert. Okay, this was the Healthy Start program ribbon cutting. Um, I worked uh with them for years. They're amazing. They have all sorts of programs for young families and moms. Um, they come into the home, they help get them set up with formula and programs and schooling. It's great. So, love it.

I love the way you're standing uh in front of that butterfly. I mean, it looks like you're wearing it.

Yeah.

Oh, yeah.

Is that on purpose?

I don't know. That's very cool.

That's just way it happened.

Um, so this was the Habitat for Humanity and Commissioner Starky sat right next to me. It was very fun. And that's the sneak peek of the um HD TV spot. It's very, very good. Um, funny thing was, um, Ronda Barber was in the

I have

right behind right behind me. He was sitting kind of by himself eating his popcorn just watching. And I said to Brad, I said, "I don't think people realize that's Ronda Barber right there until they announced him." But, um, so that that was just really great. They had a huge turnout at Ruth Eard Hall. So, that was awesome. This was at uh the grand opening of Pineh Hill Park. And I I have to give Keith and his team a massive shout out. Um so you guys know my son played I had four out of my five kids play baseball. So been to baseball fields all over. I thought that was turf when I got there. It's grass like I mean it is just pristine. So um it was really great. Um Brad know I forgot

the first pitch and um there was a guy there and he was like I was Matthew's coach when he was 10. So it was just great because we've been playing at the field for 20 years. So anyway,

remember we got to keep that maintenance coming so we can keep it Preston.

I agree, Commissioner Oakley.

I coached there and so did my husband. Brad coached there years. My daughter coached there. Yeah.

Years and years and years. Yeah. So, I I shared a story real quick that so during T-ball, my son, he was four and he his name is Jacob and he met his best friend Jacob playing T-ball and they played together on the same team all the way to seniors in high school.

So, kind of cool. Now, they both went to college separate ways playing baseball, but they've been best friends since T-ball and they met at that park. Okay. So, this was um the CryoE gala and this was uh raising money for veterans and uh where they can come to CryoE and get free care. They don't pay a dime. Um they've had people come in with cancer, things like that. Just the the breakthroughs they're doing are incredible. Um the gentleman speaking, he was um in 911 and his his speech was just very emotional. Um it there's not a a picture there's I didn't put it in the slideshow but um the gentleman there he had he had painted a picture of um for the Kirk family that's going to go up in in the headquarters and he did a portrait of Trump and it was just recently auctioned up for a million dollars. So this guy was very talented but um Congressman Belleris was at our table so um it was great. It was a great event and I think that's all I have. That's all I have.

Commissioner May and and just that picture just kind of strikes me a little bit. So let's if we could just have a moment moment of silence to Charlie Kirk.

Thank you. Thank you. That was a very sad sad event for the uh country and the world.

Yeah, I asked um county administrator to make sure that they prayed for his family this morning.

Um the CRUi is great great company as well. I actually tried to lower work with our benefits people to try to help them where I can help our people too. So it didn't happen this year but maybe the coming year it will. Um

you need to go next year.

Uh yes, I played in the golf tournament this year but I missed that.

Yeah.

So I just want to show you a picture. So, this is the building at Steps to Recovery down in Trouble Creek. Uh, they are moving along rapidly. Um, I know we got part of the opioid money coming for them to to help them out to finish off because of those Davis Bacon things that federal regulations drive up the cost. They also make it hard to interpret what they exactly want. But, they they are doing fantastic down there. It's going to take 33 veterans out of the woods, which is, I think, phenomenal. Um, I had asked my assistant Sonia to go put in a uh letter in letter on your uh on the day for um Sax and Rehab Management, the Sud Coast Recovery Center. Those you don't know, they were here about 5 years ago when they were first looking at a building that they had bought. Uh Kathy Pierce and her team were out there to look at it. Uh they finally got through the permitting process, the FEMA stuff, and they're still working on some things. Um they went and got their own financing. They're rebuilding the building. Going to be done in a few months. They're going to need some help as far as some uh landscaping grants. I told them I'd try to um bring it forward to the opioid. They didn't make this round through it, but they're coming up where phase two is coming if we can't help with this one, but for the next one coming up, they're going to be able to take 66 people that may be being picked up by a sheriff's deputies on meth this other thing. Give them housing as well as treatment to get them back on the road. It's the best program I've seen for the long-term housing for for this type of thing coming up that's coming our way. So, as they get a little bit further, they'll probably reach out to you guys, but I just wanted to share that letter with you. Um, and on the current solicitation list, I'm very happy to let everyone know that Johnson Road sidewalk was a very important road. It's right off right off US 19, connects over to Zimmerman. Very important road to help people go off and across, and it's just a terrible road to drive on is now on the list coming up. So, it's going to be uh done very soon, which is going to be phenomenal. Um, Jasmine Boulevard, the multi-use path is now out on the street as well, as well as Kitten Trail from Hicks Road to Giddy Applane sidewalk. So, thank you for staff, Mike, for for bringing those things forward. And, um, I think I might have another picture. I got Oh, that was actually go back to next slide. So, at the um uh TM Bay estuary and coastal management uh with regional planning council, they had a couple of presentations done and uh one of them was talking about wastewater deep well injection. I'm going to try to get those slides to us so you can take a look at what's going on. It's really a in-depth conversation about they've been doing this for a lot of years and they get some data on it that I think is important for us to know about. And uh I want to say Megan Moore, Dr. Megan Moore uh who works uh with us agent for Pasco County did a great presentation on the

scallop season. I was able to uh recognize Fish and Wildlife for working so closely with us and trying to get the season back open, but more importantly, they're going to work with us to try to help improve water quality uh for the future. So, it was a very good meeting. Um this is just a picture of some of the things at the Moffett um

opening um that uh we had attend. Commissioner Jagger was there with us. Commissioner Starky was there and I tell you the little uh orange block over there by the truck. That's a that's a elevator goes up and that thing flew up there. Yeah. Right.

Thank you. Just two items. Actually, Jeff was was on to something uh that there was one more additional motion related to the IEM item. Uh during the course of the execution of the DR grant, there'll have to be checks that will be cut, several several of them as we distribute funds out out into the community. And so this this motion is is to essentially delegate authority to to myself or a designate to issue those. So I'll just read it and if I could get a motion please and an approval it'll it'll complete the item.

I'll move.

Thank you sir. Do you want me to read it into the record? Okay. Thank you. In addition, section 136.06 Florida statutes requires approval of checks or warrants from a qualified depository by an authorized member of the board to streamline the distribution process of CDBGDR funding while remaining in line with section 136.06. 06. The Florida statute's approval is requested to modify the process by delegating authority to approve the issuance of checks or warrants to the county administrator or designate. All approvals will be ratified by the board at the next BCC meeting.

Second.

Wait, who made the motion?

Commissioner.

All in favor? I

I

Thank you. The other the other item I I did email you, but I think it's worth talking a little bit about and I I put Mr. Murphy here on the spot to talk a little bit about the quick honor that our Pasco County Fire Rescue Group uh was was honored with. JJ,

sure. Public safety's been really proud to watch BCS recently and public works today talk about their accreditation and we're proud. We weren't going to let you know we weren't going to rest in uh public safety. So, uh, in early August, Florida Department of Emergency Management came down and checked out our special ops team, and we just got word that both, uh, we were approved for type three swift water rescue team and a type four urban search and rescue team, ultimately making our response to our residents uh, premier and we're not only going to be utilized in Pasco County, but anywhere in the state or anywhere across the country, they need uh, these type teams, we're going to be able to support others. So, thank you so much for your continued support of public safety because uh that makes a difference and and I do want to also point out your your support of 911. Uh we got a lot of messages and uh you know they do great work and they appreciate your support.

Madam Chair,

yeah,

just and I forgot forgot to mention JJ and I were out at the 911 golf tournament over plantation palms. Firefighters were raising money for 911. So, uh, that was very, very incredible. And JJ, I'm very happy to see us doing what you're saying as far as the search and rescue, uh, because, you know, when Kevin Guthrie was here, the one thing he always said that that resonated with me is it's so good to send our people out to other areas have been affected. So, if something happens to us, we can be ready for it. And I think that showed really strongly the last storm. So, I appreciate you doing that as well.

That's all I have.

I don't have anything. Thank you.

I do. I have um I have an announcement. Um back in 2016, my office took over uh law library services for the county and um it's been going great, I think, but we're adding a new service to our service offerings that um I wanted to bring to your attention. I'm very very excited about it. It is a partnership with Bay Area Legal Services. So a lot of um individuals represent themselves in civil matters and um it can be really challenging to do that. We do offer a free online legal research, we offer form packets for the specific types of cases that you might have. Well, now with Bay Area Legal Services, they are providing an attorney in our office um in the legal resource centers to be able to meet with prosay lit litigants, those that are representing themselves and um it's for free and they can come and talk with an attorney about their case and how to move it forward and the attorney can give them some legal assistance and that is happening in both Newport Richie and in Dade City on Mondays. and really excited about the partnership and we started it with no no information out there to see how it would go and um we are we already packed um with um with attorney appointments already. So, we're very excited about that opportunity.

That's excellent. Um could you please talk about that program you guys offer because it worked for me when we

sold some land.

Oh, okay.

It popped up that hey, there's a title happening

on some of the property you own. I would u thank you for raising um a spotlight on that and I take every opportunity to talk about it. Um we have a a a free service that provides alerts if anything is recorded in Pasco County that has your name on it. You just have to sign up for it. It's as simple as clicking on the link. Brilliant.

Putting in your name as it would be on the title to your property or the any business that you might own. So I don't know if you did it on any businesses either. Um, so you put the name in and then anytime we index that name, it'll immediately send you either a text or an email with a link to the document that was recorded. So then you can look at it. There is a lot of fraud going on in official records. And I have to say there has been a lot of media coverage in the past year, maybe two, of this fraud going on. But I've got to tell you, it's one of the oldest frauds that it's going back to the beginning. Um, it's just now that it it is being known. Um, and I appreciate that because I want people to be aware of it and I want them to know that we offer a free service that will provide them with alerts um to let them know, hey, something's been recorded. Go and take a look. If it is something that you that you believe to be fraudulent. Um, we also have in our legal resource centers um and also online for free if you want to print them out your at home. Um, a legal packet with forms. so that you can go through the process of clearing that off yourself. It's called a quiet title action and it has instructions on how to do that. And then if you need legal assistance, you can come to the legal resource centers on Mondays to schedule an appointment with an attorney to go through that if you are a victim of fraud.

Yes. I mean there's that's happening all over the country. People somehow get on the title.

Can I have can I say one thing? So, I just want to give a shout out uh to Nikki because I had a friend, she was only texting me saying, "I'm so scared. Um they're about to come arrest me." And I'm like, "What is happening?" So, I tried calling her. She won't answer. She's like, "No, they told me I can't hang up." So, anyway, to make a long story short, very long story, she was being targeted for fraud. So, I had called Nikki and had Nikki on the phone. I said, "Let me try calling my friend." So, my friend thankfully picked up. She had left the bank with $5,000

and was going to meet these people. She was in tears. Nikki, talk to her. She's like, "I'm the clerk. This is fraud.

Go back to the bank. Give them your money." She was shaking, right? You could hear it in her voice. I mean, she was scared to death. And thank God

we got, you know, she answered her phone, you answered your phone, and you saved her $5,000. Yeah. But this was legit and Nikki's like, "Put them transfer them through. Let me let me talk to them."

I mean, and they of course wouldn't pick up.

So So on

she had taken out $5,000.

My friend um Allison Cromley that you all know from the school board, they were up in North Carolina. They got a call in the middle of the night from their daughter's phone that wasn't with them

and she was crying in the background and they were saying they had they were there. They were going to kill her. if they didn't send them money. Now, they called from her phone.

And so, they were, you know, like waking up like, "What? What?" And, um, they actually did send some money. Um, but, um, they were they called the sorry, they they did call for law enforcement and they did not go for whatever reason. So they called a boy, a friend that's a boy and that went and he went over and she was sleeping, but they literally called from her cell phone

and um and it sounded just like her in the background crying and they they it was a horrible experience. They

but it was it was fraud. So

did they get her phone? No, they they they I don't know how they did that.

They hacked into it.

Yeah.

Okay.

And and yeah, I don't I don't know if they're able to track down where the money went.

Um

so, okay. Um for me, um

don't forget um Keep Pasco Beautiful is uh September 20th. Uh I'll be in my tent out in the Utah desert. I'm going actually to the town where that the guy who

what state?

The shooters town. St. George.

Utah.

Really? Oh,

and I'm going to be right near Spanish Fork, which I've been to before. Um so hopefully it's not a zoo out there. Um

uh my staff uh spent the morning painting um one of the uh habitat houses.

Oh, and there's Paula.

I don't remember which day it was, but it was last week.

Um Then uh I want to thank the legislators. Um I thought we had a great meeting and I think I think they enjoyed it and um we we had a a great discussions on things uh on how we could make our county better. So um so all those who could make it and their staff and and we had a lot of staff there. I just want to thank everyone for a great morning. Um and yes, I I toured the Moffett Center that was amazing. My only my only I got a little concerned, you know, that they're just everyone realize it's a not forprofit and if they don't sell any of the land that any of those companies come from around the world to build their offices, we don't get the property tax. We do get tangible tax, but if the legislature takes the tangible tax away, how how you know,

well, they'll still be highpaying jobs uh within within the community and hopefully folks living here. So,

but that's that's 700 acres of high value property that we will see. I don't know what to do about it. I I I did ask Josh, please just sell at least sell a couple lots. You don't have to keep all of it. So, anyway, maybe I'm hopeful we can have those discussions with them. Um then, uh oh, Katie wanted me to let you know that was her idea on the IT buyback, so I have to throw that out there. So, she says she gets a day off. Um then, um I talked to the county administrator about this. She also she does she does good stuff. She found this out. So when you look when you go online and you look at property and it's in Pasco County's name, we have a lot of property that says property of in you know Pasco County you and it's on Ostein Road or something, right?

Facilities.

Facilities. Yeah. So um so what we need is real property will and it's this was in our rules and we're not doing it. Real property will coordinate with the Pasco County Property Appraisers Office to modify the second line in the owner's address of the parcel folio to add the county department that will be responsible for maintenance of the part parcel. So

that's it's not in there.

That's a bigger problem than because there's property that isn't hasn't has nothing to do with Pasco County that is registered to Pasco County,

but then it won't be there. But at least it differentiates a little bit, right?

Yeah. Yeah. So, because otherwise they think everything is ours or you know and we don't know who's managing it, right? Um then I want to hand these out. Oh, wait. I sent you some video. Gina, did it load? Let me see which one. Uh this is General Steel. So, last Thursday I was on that victory ship. General Steel was a third uh three star general in the Marine Corps. picture.

I don't know why she did that. And um he is the general in charge of the Intrepid uh Air and Space Museum up in New York City.

And um that once a year for 911 they make lunches and a lot of people come there volunteer and they stuff stuff bags and they do stuff for the community. But um he was very interested in ampskills actually that and he I've got his card and he wants to come take a look at it. So um again if you ever get an opportunity we're not on the victory ship here. This was a fundraiser for them. Um this is the star ship something but a couple times a year they open up the victory ship for tours. Uh what else did I send you? Oh okay. Here's my video from the habitat. I want you to see all the people that are there. This is really kind of amazing. Um, that's the couple that did they do the HGTV show. It was packed. There's Ronda.

You videoed him.

A lot of people had already left. It was It was a really good. Yeah. Let We want to try and get them to film that in Pasco County, right?

Um, okay. So, I want to pass these out. You don't have to run. You can walk or I already handed them out. So, I don't have as many, but a reminder that um we'll be hosting what is it called? Miles that matter. It's the first event for all children's in the county, and we're doing a a a very fun uh event at the market. We're expecting over 500 runners, and more and more companies are helping to sponsor it. Um let's see what else. Uh our our park is coming together, the um the bike park out out on the east side of the county and um tourism. We at the tourism council are very excited about what this is going to mean for us in the years to come because we will be we'll be able to host all kinds of events when the other bike parks around the country are closed down because of weather. So should be a real draw. And um also we're working with one of the groups that we we met um overseas on setting up a very interesting triathlon and um we have to have some volunteers to work on that but hopefully it'll come together. It's a triathlon that happens on three days so it's very different than the iron man format. The run happens on one day, the swim and the bike and you do it in different places so we can really showcase the county. Um, I envision maybe a swim being in one of the lagoons,

the bike over by Commissioner Oakley's house, um, in the hills there, and then the run in Starky Wilderness Park. So, could and they they would only do one per state. So, we would be the only one. I can't remember the name of the the organization. They're out of Brazil that are that we're working on with this, but very very cool event. So, okay. I think that's uh that's all we got. Anything else?

Under do the budget or no?

Wait till 5:15.

5:15.

All right. So, we don't talk anymore about it.

5:15.

Why? We just get it done at 5:15.

We kind of heard I think we have a majority idea.

That's why I did that.

Okay.

Yeah. [Laughter] [Music]

All right. Thanks everybody. Exactly.

What do I have to sign?

That's what I'm talking about.

So, we're done by ways and wildlife depend on you to keep them healthy. Excess fertilizer, grass clippings, trash, oils, and pet waste wash into gutters and storm drains when it rains. Storm water carries these pollutants directly into our lakes and rivers, creating an unhealthy environment for fish, water foul, and other aquatic animals. Storm drains are meant for clean rainwater. Most other discharges are illegal. If you suspect an illicit discharge, please contact Pasco County Department of Public Works at 727