7.14.26 Pasco County Board of County Commissioner Meeting (Afternoon Session)

a lot of signups for data centers. Uh we are going to pull that item up. This is going to be the second hearing, but just for the all the sake of all the people that are here, rather than have you wait till the end, uh we're moving that up forward. So staff can present.

84.

P84.

Do you want to know was

proof?

Yep. So P84 was advertised the Tampa Bay Times May 27th, 2026.

All right, Amy Tall, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. while we get the presentation loaded. Uh this is a county initiated ordinance to protect the county from any intrusion of uh the uh moratorum for development orders and building permit site plans for the relationship to data centers. And while we're pulling up the presentation, I'll go ahead and read the ordinance into record. It is so item P84 is PTE26-0777. It's an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners establishing [clears throat] a temporary moratorum on the submission and acceptance of applications for building permits, site plans, development orders, development agreements, special exception uses, conditional uses, reszonings, and comprehensive plan amendments related to data centers, largecale data centers, and other large load customers within unincorporated Pasco County. providing for authority, legislative findings of fact, temporary moratorum imposed, duration of temporary moratorum, severability, and an effective date. And I have Amanda here to do the presentation.

Good afternoon, commissioners. Amanda Hill, Planning Development, Economic Growth. So, I'd just like to state for the record that additional public comments were received for this item and have been submitted to the clerk's office for the followup record. So, at the last public hearing for this item, we discussed briefly the data center moratoria um activity that was happening across the state and I just wanted to give you a brief update on that. So this updated map illustrates the 25 counties and two cities that are currently considering in the process of enacting or already enacted a moratorum regarding this matter. As a reminder regarding the applicability of the moratorum, the draft ordinance previously proposed to establish a 12-month moratorum during which the county would not accept any applications for data centers and other large load customers. The moratorium would not apply to server rooms or other computer rooms that typically house IT and network equipment and accessory or incidental uh data centers that are on site for the principal use. Now, if the board determines a public necessity, an existing development agreement or [snorts] a new one can be adopted for a non-large load data center, provided that the conditions imposed address at minimum the items listed on the screen. At the first public hearing for this item, the board directed staff to include e-waste as a category for the conditions to be addressed if such an agreement is amended or adopted. On June 16th, 2026, the board applied the pending ordinance doctrine to this ordinance. The public hearing for the proposed ordinance was first advertised in the Tampa Bay Times on May 27th, 2026. As such, upon adoption and filing with the state, the moratorium will be retroactively applicable from May 27th, 2026. And a new wear clause has been included in the ordinance to reflect this decision by the board. PDE further contemplated the board and LPA discussions regarding the exemption of data centers that serve as an incidental use for this ordinance and based on additional research a proposed cap of 2.5 megawatts is established for the maximum power demand for an incidental use. This will help to ensure that the exemption is not abused or utilized in a way to circumvent the moratorum. Additional revisions were included to align the language used in section 3 applicability with the established terms that are currently defined within the land development code. Additionally, section five, duration of temporary moratorum, was revised to further clarify the board's ability to extend the moratorum based on a legislative determination if so desired. And this item comes to you with a recommendation for approval. and I'm here for any questions that you may have.

Okay. So, this is a board initiated uh item that started back in May 27th. We had to have had two public hearings after we advertised it and had it brought before the board. After doing that, uh we did have

three public hearings. Okay.

Commission.

Okay. So, two board of county commissions and a planning commission. Um the first one we did make some additions. Instead of being at I think 10 megawatts, we went down to uh 2.5. That's a big drop. E-waste was a conversation piece that come up. We did add that in there. Other than that, it's fully intact to what we had looked at proposed and I think you guys did a great job in speed getting it forward and then in and the complexity. I think what you've isolated is this moratorum is rock solid for us. So we don't have to worry about any data centers for a year. Um at the last meeting there was conversation and I think you're going to find everybody supports what we're doing here from the board. Um, so I've got a lot of public comment. The reason I I move this item up forward because we've got a lot of business. We have two major items we didn't even get to this morning because of time resolutions and and our lobbyists can really talk. Um, so that slowed us down. So we got a lot of items to go through. So I brought this forward and again it's important to us that we get this right and I think we've got it right and I think you're going to find full support. Um, and to make it easy for the board, I'm going to just ask the board. Do any board members have any uh questions or for the staff that you want to discuss further? You think we all have it in place?

Everybody's good.

Okay. So, for the public to speak, [snorts] that pretty much tells you this is going to get approved. Not big forecaster, but it looks pretty good from what I can see. If you support what we're doing, you really want to speak, if you want to just say like the state does, I wave in support. You'll save time. Otherwise, you'll have your three minutes to talk, but we really want to get through the rest of our business. But I do want to take care of this to let you know how important it is. We are moving it right up. So, if you really need to speak, so be it. If you can pass on that, you'll let us get the rest of the work done, which is quite a bit today. So, is anyone here would like to speak that has signed up?

All right.

Okay.

Do you want me to call the names the opportunity? Okay. Well, maybe not everyone will come up. Why don't just take the ones that raise their hands? Well, they can they can wave in support if they're if they're

when I call their name.

When they call their name, if that's what they wish to do. Otherwise, they can speak to you.

Okay. So, the first one I believe is for P84. It doesn't say Cindy Scarta.

Thank you for uh letting me speak today. I appreciate your time and your consideration. We all know how important this

Miss Scarta, can you give your name and address for the record? I apologize.

My name is Cindy Scarta. I'm at 29157 Cochi Lake Drive, San Antonio. I'm here on behalf of myself as a concerned citizen.

Okay. Go ahead. Thank you.

So, I appreciate you taking the time to listen to all your constituents about this big item. It's very important. Florida's very unique in its aquifer and it's very permeable because of its limestone base. So it's different than any other state in the country. I think we have enough data centers as people have talked about and I appreciate your moratorum consideration, but I also think that maybe we need a permanent ban. There are two other counties in the state that have moved to make a permanent ban on these data centers uh the large scale. So I appreciate your amendments and what your recommendations are from your staff and uh just want to take the time. There was a big headline here recently. Rep. H Harriet Hagman from Wyoming demands answers after Mark Zuckerberg's 800 million meta data center caught contaminating Wyoming's waste water. Um it forced the city to shut down its reclaimed wastewater system for months and it was because of bacterial contamination in the facility's closed loop cooling system, a technology that is marketed as being a solution to high data center water consumption rates. So there is a big risk of contamination to our groundwater and I just wanted to bring that to your attention. Thank you very much for time.

And those who want to bring in other information, we're going to look at this for a whole year through this whole year. If you have data or stories that come up that you want to share with us, staff will take a look at it. They'll be part of the record. We're going to look at all of it. So if you would want to just make that to submit it to us, we can submit that to you at any time.

Well, thank you. I have other stuff, too. But

okay, send it all to us. We'll take it and we'll put it in the record. We'll take a look at it and we're going to bring it back again as we go further with this. So again, all the information you got, if you just want to submit it, we can submit it and look at it.

I appreciate that. Thank you very much,

Mr. Chairman.

Yes.

I just wanted the county attorney to talk about the process about permanent bans.

Yeah.

So, Mr. Chairman, I'll be happy to. The the purpose of a moratorum is to do an analysis to see what restrictions would be necessary to permit a data center or if there are no if there there are no if it can't be adequately protected through your regulations to allow then you may be able to consider a a that is not an appropriate use to be housed in in Pasco County. But without doing that initial analysis during a moratorum, that's I mean that's why a moratorum is done is to is to allow the county the time to do the evaluation and to implement regulations whatever they may be um during that one-year period. Um that's that is the legal use of a moratorum. Okay. Again, thank you for letting me speak. All right. Thank you.

Okay. The next individual is Jeff Roberts.

Thank you for giving me a few moments. My name is Jeff Roberts. I'm a 6036 Japanica court, Newport Rescue, Florida. Uh I'm coming here as a retired United States Central Command portfolio manager. So I have some experience in this. I started back working with NASA and everything on the other. You just

I started working back with NASA and everything at the other coast. I'm used to speaking about I'm going to shorten mine up to already say that we currently have 100 data centers currently operational in the state of Florida. These are of different size and scope and scale. There are 12,000 active data data centers in the world and this already serves 95% of the users with no issues. Um, what I would say with based on the ordinance, um, again, it's my humble opinion that right now what we are experiencing is when you get the the Revco, Rexol, Kmart, all of those different corporations and companies fighting to see who's the best, there are over 1,000 large language models out there right now. Some of them are big, generic like Chad GPT and Grock. Some of them are little and specific like something that Moffett would use. um they're all in a fight to see who's going to get the ground. That's what we're experiencing here. And personally, I don't think that fight's going to be over for the next year. It's going to be three to five. So until they do that, that fight of who's going to win that capitalist thing, you need to hold off. And with that then it would be my humble opinion that due the size scope and scale of our current population we will need some kind of a data center whether it be Pulk County Pasco or whatever to both do Orlando and the Tampa region. I don't know where that's going to fall geopysically but there will need to be one on this side for hyperscaling. And when I say the hyperscaling people use it to buy space. Think about the average person doesn't need to buy a crane. the average person rents a crane. So that's what's going to be happening at these hyperscaled spaces. So you don't need to have one for every last little thing that's going to be doing on it. They buy time and space on there. Um, one thing that I'm unclear about the exact details of the um, the cutout for the it is we do need to make sure that with those um, provisions that the major developments that are going on in our area have the ability to put in um, the houses that aren't really a house, the T1, what used to be a T1 node, the fiber optic nodes and other things like that in those areas and those don't take up any more power than a normal house would. about an 18,800 foot house. So allowing for that to go in there to hypers scale the transmission of the data is going to be critical for the buildouts. So that's it. I

do you have that written down?

I have all of this. I I've put it in I submitted it to the other thing with a lot more, but I'm cutting it out because it's it's unnecessary. But that kind of data is out there. And if you if anybody has any other questions on the thing that it's the dealing with the terminology that we need to talk about versus dealing with the fear and the factors like

I've been in a few different data centers. I'm sorry I'm over my time. None of them have used water for it. The water that's been in there has been in toilets and sewers and like for the people. It's an ineffective cooling thing. You're going to use air conditioning type of systems. you're going to use ethylene glycol and some combination of those kind of things for closed loop cooling systems when you're talking about massive scale. Now, I would also say that we need to focus on making these places use solar.

Thank you, sir.

Back up. So, thank you.

All right. The next individual signed up is Christy Zimmer.

Hello, Christy Zimmer, 3615 Pine Court, Land Lakes. Thank you so much for all the work you guys have done to get it this far. Very much appreciated. Um I do have a concern if this covers the young man that was at the different meetings pumping his data center that he was going to be building without having to reszone it out at I75 and 52. He's not considered a mega or large. And he was talking about 19.9 megawatts which is under this allowable 2.5. And he was also talking about 350 million gallons of water and then this possible recooling system which will involve all the chemicals involved. Is this preventing him from being able to move forward and build his data center? And is there a way when you're in your planning that we can uh limit the type of users of these data centers? Because what they're doing is they're building a base then they have these buyers who come in and buy their space. for the data processing. If we can eliminate any and all ELPRs from being able to utilize those data centers, that would be a good thing to do when you're in that process of trying to create some guidelines. Please let me know if that eliminates him or not.

I believe it does.

Yeah.

David Engel, planning and economic development director. It does, sir. The proposal over at Double Branch is inside of this moratorum and cannot proceed.

Okay. Thank you.

All right.

Please, please, [applause] please don't clap. Thank you.

The next individual signed up is David Hammond.

And who's after David?

And then Michael Ptoic after that.

Good afternoon. [clears throat] My name is Dave Hammond. address is 300034 Vienna Woods Lane in Wesley Chapel. I'd just like to start saying as a Pasco County resident, I'm very interested in hearing that this moratorum is more than likely going to pass today. Um I did watch the June 16th meeting and I was very concerned um with the apparent lack of basic understanding of what the data center is, especially the ones that we're talking about here. and how we might need to define our terms on on blocking them or creating the moratorum for them. But I'm relieved to understand that you've um you apparently have done that homework and you seem to know although I think the general public still does not. And uh the term I think we all need to become familiar with as was just mentioned is hypers scale. And those are certainly the data centers that we would all be concerned with. As was previously mentioned through from my own little investigation, I found that there are more or less 120 the number that I heard data centers in operation in Florida already. 24 of them in Hillsboro County alone. That's you know 20% of all of the data centers in the in the state. And there isn't that big concern about those simply because they are primarily what are called enterprise collocation telecom edge. They are small facilities. One of them is sitting in downtown Tampa and uh they they are taking care of our day-to-day business. When you pick up your phone, when you log onto your computer, when you post out on Facebook, these are all primarily being done by these smaller ones. The hypers scale ones, however, are the ones that are going to be um they're going to need to be built. I just don't believe they necessarily need to be built here. I'm not sure if I understood what a previous statement about where they might be located. Orlando, you know, somewhere around Tampa, maybe in the Miami area, Jacksonville, who knows? But I don't think they need to be here. And um I appreciate uh you're taking the time to to agree and put this moratorium in place. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. Michael Povvic or

it is.

Okay.

And then after that it is unclear. R TL.

Okay. She knows who she is. Great. Okay. Michael Ptoic, my address [clears throat] is protected and I am a candidate for House District 54, by the way.

No, not an advertising platform, sir.

Sorry.

Not an advertising platform.

Yeah. Oh, my apologies. This gentleman from NASA just proved our point. Okay. The data centers that we may need can fit into 1,800 square feet.

These are not 150,000 square foot facilities that we need here. They pro they actually create their own security risks because we don't know who's inside of it or which China infiltrated companies and platforms are inside of those data centers. You heard from a young lady that worked for the government before that Google and Meta and Amazon, they don't need these hypers scale locations, but our tax dollars are being used to incentivize those to still come here right now. If a data center wants to come here, let them build a del plant so they're not using our aquifer. When they say they can use toilet water, we found out in the planning commission meeting with the engineers that they're talking about using reclaimed water. We don't have enough reclaimed water for us as it is. Even reclaimed water users are on restrictions right now. But there was a question asked in the last meeting that really got me thinking and it was about and I didn't pose the question but they asked if any of you had signed non-disclosure agreements and it got me thinking and here's the reason why. I believe in transparency and accountability from the government at all levels. Okay. There was a bill that went through the Senate this session, 484, Senate Bill 484, and it would have banned non-disclosure agreements between government officials and the data center developers. When it went to the House, that language was taken out before it was allowed to pass and go back to the Senate. So, they protected non-disclosure agreements at the state level. That's an issue. That is a transparency issue. That is a problem.

We're in the county, sir. I'm sorry.

We're in the county. We're not a We're not the state.

I understand. But I'm

We got different requirements. We have to disclose if we have a conflict.

I understand. But here's what my request is. Is at a county level when we're talking about the forever bill, the for the forever verbiage that you're going to use. We would ask for the sake of transparency and accountability at a county level for you not to allow any non-disclosure agreements between government and elected officials in these data centers. If it's a homeland security issue, NDAs not a question, but that's security.

Sir, we are bound for non-disclo to have to disclose any conflicts of interest. That would be that. So, we don't have So, it's already in it's in law. It's in law.

Awesome. Fantastic. We thank you for this moratorum. It's going to help out a lot because we want to see you get it done the right way. So we thank you for that. Okay. We do. We appreciate everything you guys do.

Thank you for doing this. [clears throat]

Okay.

Could I get a motion? Uh Mr. Hammond, who has spoke before, wants to receive and file those documents that he talked about.

Move to receive file. Second.

All in favor say I.

I. Okay.

Okay. Also,

your name and address for the record, please.

Rebecca Teft, N um 6155 Missouri Avenue, Newport Richie, Florida. Um I spoke at the last meeting. I left there feeling very optimistic that you guys were actually listening to what everybody had to say. So, thank you for your attention and conscientiousness about that. So actually what I wrote to today was about things to consider doing for the moratorum, some regulations and rules to look at. I copied a man out of Kentucky called Peter Lynch and a legislation he wrote for his area. Before I read that, I do want to mention that if we think that we need more data, AI is a whole different animal which is quite frightening and you all probably aware of that. But if we need the science and medicine, they can be built on already impermeable grounds such as universities or hospitals and serve that science and medicine need directly without taking our cherished and fragile ecosystem that we have left in Florida. We really don't have that much left. These planning and zoning people are covering up all of our green stuff. So, sorry about that. And one other thing, this this employment center in Brooksville, um that's for reasonzoning. I looked up the company and say, "What does this company do?" And it's private and they were having a reasoning for this farmland for a company who doesn't even tell you who they are or what they do. It felt AI data center sneaky stuff to me. All right, there's my rant. So, Peter Lynch in Kentucky um presented legislation that there's a three-year moratorum to look at AI data centers. There are 200 nonoperating centers already in the United States because technology advanced beyond the size of the center. So rather than refurbish it, build it up, they went and built a bigger one somewhere else. So three years is really uh we may find in five years we don't even need these mega structures particularly if they get quantum computing combined with AI quantum doesn't require data or generate all that heat um no NDAs you already talked about that ban all above 5,000 square feet restrict max utility connection to a peak of five megawws you two and a half today create distinct industrial subclassifications to limit the sound that comes out of these at three dB or less at property lines. So a limit of how far your your infrastructure sound goes as well as your audible sounds require DX cooling and cell power which has to be generated onsite. Okay. If you'd like to receive, we can receive and file that if you'd like and then we'll have it in the record.

Would Would you like us to receive and file that so we can put it in the record?

Would that be okay?

Okay. Motion.

Second. All in favor say I.

I.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Not part of the record.

Okay. The next person who has signed up is Margaret St. James followed by Chris Shaver. Uh, good afternoon. My name is Margaret St. James. I live at 372022 Sandra Avenue in Zephr Hills. I agree with uh most of what the previous speakers have stated, so there's no sense going over that. Um, as I understand it, the mor the moratorum is only um scheduled to be for one year. Um, that would give some time to gather, maybe enough time to gather information. While we don't want to talk politics, we have to admit that this is an election year and that some decisions may be made this year during an election season. Even though not everyone is up for reelection, but some are decisions may be made this year that there is less pressure to make next year, which I think is one reason that some people want an extended moratorum and not just during this election year. And while we're talking about moratoriums because of impacts on uh the community uh the c uh commission might want to think about moratoriums on development which also impacts the communities

not legal

especially especially in terms of water and some of these other concerns. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr. Schaefer

or who's next?

Uh, after it it's Angel Fletcher Chem Chem.

Hi, my name is Chris Shaver. I live at 37707 Pure Waterway, Upper Hills, Florida. On average, Florida springs have lost between 30 to 50% of their historical flow. Why? We know why. Zephr Hills is pumping out a bunch for their bottling plant of our water. Who's approving this? It's not me. It's you. I'm wondering why that in the few years that I've lived here, which is close to 20, I have seen dramatic change in the smell of the water, and the way the water interacts with anything I add to it. Why? Because people have approved things that are affecting us every day. I went to the Itchy Itchy Springs to go tubing with my daughter from Michigan. It was down over six feet. Six feet 30 to 60,000 gallons a day are not going back into our aquifer. Why? Because it was voted in. Nobody has any agenda, but we'll build a new house. We'll put in a lagoon, and that's okay. We don't care, [cough] right? We don't care that my child and their children are not going to have fresh water. But we will build another housing development and tear down the old housing, change that agricultural land into a housing development that people come in and buy up and rent at outrageous costs. Our senior citizens are being taken out of the area because conglomerates are coming down and buying the land and upping their rent so they can take over that long land. They have the long game. Do you have the long game? We need that long game to survive in Florida. You're having everybody move here because we don't have a state tax. We have beautiful land. We have affordable which is outpricing all of us who live here now on a fixed income. You are the ones who have to decide if that's worth saving.

Please don't clap. [applause] Please don't clap.

Name and address for the record.

Good afternoon. My name is Anel Fletcher Camuli and my address is 12350 US Highway 41. And I'll make this very brief. My family has a farm close to the the corner of 41 and 52 and um we are in talks about possibly selling it. That being said, I did have a realtor broker recently approach me very aggressively, almost demanding that I do more than consider selling his outfit, our farm for the explicit use of an AI data center. Why? because he said it was perfect location because of Moffett because of the airport that's closed us because of the other infrastructures that are being developed in our immediate area and that an AI data center would be a pivot point for the uses of those infrastructures. The demand is going to be there and it would be the right thing for me to do as a citizen and a land owner to consider allowing our farm to be used to that point. to which I met his aggressive yes with an extremely emphatic no. So I am very very happy to hear that we are now looking at having at least a one-year moratorum. Um, as a land owner and as a Pasco County citizen, I would have very much appreciate a consideration of three to fiveyear moratorum for this because if I as a single entity, my uncle and I are being that aggressively approached and pressured by local realtor developers, realtor brokers and developers for our land because it is it's 100 acres combined, continuous land to be used to this point. I don't think that we're safe with a mere one-year moratorum. So, I would appreciate a consideration of much longer than that, even despite the fact that this is a um this is this is y'all's year. Um potential turnover, potential new board of commission. Um I think that that should be something that is taken into stronger consideration than just one year.

Thank you very much,

Commissioner Mariana. Uh I just want to make sure everyone knows by law one year is our our our limit.

The Supreme Court has set a reasonable time period. One year is is what they have previously said. If there are reasons to go beyond that year, we've always advised the commission that they can go in incremental steps beyond that year. Usually it's another six months to finish up regulations. But no a three to fiveyear moratorum is not uh legal under federal law.

So after this year as it comes to the end if we think we need more time we can look to extend.

Thank you extended. One other thing that I did forget to mention um other areas that have these data centers that has already been established that um they are they are seeing in certain animals um effects of what is called the Havana syndrome. I don't know if that is a topic that has been discussed yet or if that's what you're going to be taking the year to talk about, but I do want to go on record saying that that is already an established problem in other areas where the AI data centers are it's affecting the livestock. I have a farm, so I literally have cows and pigs.

We did talk about wildlife etc. But if you want to submit that in an email,

sure would be fine.

I'd be happy to do that. Thank you.

Thank you,

sir. That's all who signed up in person. And there is someone online but if you want to take any.

Okay.

Anyone else in the audience would like to speak about the data centers.

Okay. We'll close it inside online.

We got hands.

Oh, okay.

You can give your name and address before you start.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

I'm trying to make sure because I'm a bit quiet. Sorry. Um Emerson Martin, 9330 Creedmore Lane, Newport Richie, Florida. Um, good afternoon, commissioners. Today, you will make a decision, and I trust in your intelligence to make the right one. Thus, we'll commence the next 12 months of you reviewing research. Last time I spoke to you all, I gave you some information on the personal accounts of those that live near data centers. Now, I would like to give you a head start with some peer-reviewed information from health implications of the rapid rise of data centers in Virginia, an exploratory assessment, my negore, Lewis Ortiz, and Dr. Edward Maybach of George Mason University. They first explained that gas and particle pollution from these centers can be linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, various cancers, neurological disorders, and conditions such as stroke, dementia, diabetes, and childhood asthma. They also call attention to the likelihood of power outages being especially dangerous during times of severe weather like heat waves. The dangers of heat are all too familiar to us here in Pasco. They then site for water. A medium-sized data center 15 megawws consumes as much water as three hospitals. This water is then polluted which leads to contamination in groundwater supplies. These increase the risks of water scarcity, waterborne diseases and poor maternal health and infant outcomes. And yes, noise pollution is a real thing. The health impacts of noise pollution include long-term risks such as heart disease, permanent hearing loss, tenitis, chronic effects such as hypertension, and endocrine disruption. They also lead to psychological issues such as increased stress related disorders and agitation as well as impact the cognitive development of children. My main concern is these centers for generative AI because that is what they are being built for and surveillance. We have Facebook and email for years before the AI that we know today. I think that anyone will tell you I think anyone will that will tell you that this AI has been around for as long as we can remember is forgetting that part. You are going to hear many people say that generative AI is inevitable, but it is not. We all are we sorry we are all participants in this ecosystem and we all have choices to make in it. We all have power and you have much more power than we do and we entrust this power in you. I understand that you cannot outright ban data centers due to state laws but you can certainly heavily regulate them even to an extent that would make their existence nearly impossible. I hope that at the end of these 12 months if you still decide to not regulate that you really do sit with yourself and consider who does and who does not deserve to live a happy and healthy life. Some people say, "Not in my backyard." Well, then in whose Which people do we sacrifice for the health? Which people

do we sacrifice the health for of the sake of the ugliest of graphic designs, brain rot, surveillance, misinformation, and millions of dollars lining the pockets of those who will never have to decide between their utility bills and having to get that cough checked out. All right. Thank you so much.

Okay. Thank you. And if you would like to send that by email, whatever, we can put that in the record, too, for you. Thank you. Anyone else in the audience would like to speak? Anyone else please come forward? Line up behind each other.

So, these two will be the last for public comment, then we'll go to the one online.

Okay.

Hi. Um, my legal name is Gabriel Quigley, but I prefer Marion, but I'm just gonna go and I'm gonna say

Can you give your address for the record?

Yeah. Can I add that to the record? M A R I A

No, no. Address for the record.

Oh, sorry.

That's okay.

17595 James Road, Dade City.

All right. Thank you.

Okay. So, this is an election year, and I'm not here to threaten y'all's jobs. I think you guys have been more than amicable with providing a one-year moratorum and you even said this is going to pass. You seem very confident this is going to pass. But I would like to say that you guys need to be thinking about the long game here because once y'all's time is up, if you decide to keep running for elected office, there will still be a community that lives here. And we [clears throat] need to decide if that community is going to belong to flock, hyper surveillance systems, Meta, Amazon, Tesla, data centers, or the people that live here, the farmers and the ranchers and the kids who go to school and the parents who want good lives for their children. Retailers, land brokers, and developers in this state are out of control. They are out of control. They are in a race to the bottom to divvy up as much land in Florida as possible. And if nothing changes, by the year 2070, 70% of this state will be paved over. And at that point, who is going to want to live here? We are just going to be red California. That's all. Thank you guys. Have a great day.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Britney Box. I live at um uh sorry 3484 no 8434 Trinity, Florida. Um I just moved there recently from Tampa. And actually I discovered that I lived not very far from a data center when I lived in Tampa um here recently. and I have breast cancer. Um I did not have any symptoms before I lived in that area. Um it it just I just found out after I had lived there for about four or five months. Um and we did not have adequate water filtration at the apartment complex I lived at. So I believe that could be a contributing factor as to why I've developed breast cancer. Um because I don't do not have it in my history of my family. Um, there's no one with breast cancer. Um, furthest back, probably great grandma is the the only one that had it. Um, they tested my genetics. There was nothing in in my genetics that showed that I should have gotten breast cancer. Um, anyways, I know that that is one of the side effects from the contamination from data centers. Um, and I just wanted to put that on record. But um also I believe our vi our rights are being violated by having these data centers in our communities and with the um advent of the the flock cameras and the um the potential um using these data centers to phase out regular workers and in the tech industry. Um my boyfriend also is a computer engineer which he is very fearful of the future when it comes to AI advancement and um I know I've seen a a lot of interviews with um say Elon Musk talking about how eventually we won't have to work and there's going to be AI implementation all all over the place and we're we're not it's going to be like a hobby to work but and that we're going to get a um a basic income. um possibly. That to me sounds very scary. It sounds a little bit like communism and I think that is not a good step for our country. And also um um I don't believe that giving up our liberty for a little bit of safety is a good thing. Um just we really need to think before we allow AI to take over everything. And um it's just a very scary time for my generation. We don't know what's going to happen and we already can't afford anything. So if we are no longer able to work, what are we going to do? What are we going to do?

And and that's all I have to say. Thank you. and he's online.

You got one guy standing up here and

don't know whether he's

Are you Are you going to speak, sir?

Speak.

Last one.

All right. Is there anyone else behind this gentleman because we're going to close it off firm? Okay. This will be the last speaker until the one person online. Go ahead, sir. Name and address for the record.

Logan Larry, 12309 Eagle Chase Way. So, I recently was informed about the July 7th workshop for the county. I'm sure you all remember I I came across a section and forgive me if this is already on the agenda. I didn't have time to go through it all the way, but it relates to the current issue in the sense of AI. So I actually had questions uh the planning and permitting plans for the AI and for building and yeah building and permitting processes. I was just curious as to what that entails.

It's not a question and answer. You got three minutes to talk.

Okay. Um if anyone from the

we're dealing with the data center issue right now.

I understand. Thank you. Okay. So, the individual who is online is Julia Bartunic. Julie, are you there?

Yes. Hello, Julia Bartunic. Uh, Meadowwood Tribe. Uh, I'll keep this short, sweet, and simple. Wula and Jackson counties have established precedents for a total impermanent ban on data centers. And my hopes is through uh this moratorum that Pasco County can do the same and that stakeholders and the public are allowed full sunshine uh within this moratorum process. Thank you so much.

Okay.

Thank you. That'll close public comment to the board.

Move to approve.

Second. All in favor of roll call vote. Okay.

Yes. Thank you. It is a roll call vote. District one. Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two. Commissioner Weightman. Hi.

District three. Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four. Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District 5. Chairman Mariano.

I. Passes unanimously. Thank you all.

Please vote. [applause]

All right. Item P80. Do we have proof?

P80. You want 79 first?

We going back to regular P79.

All right. P79 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March 25th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Good afternoon. Amy Tol with Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Item P79 is PTE26-000033. It's an ordinance amending the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan providing for a comprehensive plan text amendment to sub area policy flu 7.1.34 Palmetto Ridge, excuse me. [clears throat] and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency, providing for repealer, severability, and an effective date. This comes before you with as a continuence request to August 11th at 1:30 p.m. in Date City.

You have a motion.

Move to continue.

Second. All in favor say I. I.

Oppos. Okay. P80.

All right. P80 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March 4th, 2026. Item P80 is PDE26-0446. It's an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Land Development Code. Amending section 530.5 parking or storage of recreational vehicles. Renaming section 530.5 parking or storage of recreational land vehicles and recreational watercraft. Amending section 1001 docks and seaw walls. Section 1001.4 visibility appendix A definitions and any 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 compo comes before you as a continuence request to a date uncertain.

Motion approve.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I oppose. Okay. Item P81. P81 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times July 1st, 2026. There's somebody here from parks.

This is a

Where's Kathy?

This is an amendment to the to the parks MSTU. Um there is a there the ordinance is being amended to add language uh which would allow it to be u allow it to be imposed in the incorporated areas of Pasco County. Um I'll wait for the fire engine to go by. Um and so

Jeff, I'll I'll

we're adding it we're adding it to section two of the ordinance. Um the language and within incorporated areas subject to the consent of the appropriate municipality which is consistent with chapter 125 when a MSGU is optionally uh being created for cities to participate. Uh Mr. Carbala, did you have anything for

No, no, you hit the nail on the head. This is just uh enabling language in the ordinance to allow cities to participate. We would still work with them next year. Right now, the current consensus of the board appears to be to set a zero millillage. We'll discuss that at trim, of course, but we'll continue to work with the cities. Uh many of the cities that uh were considering it backed out right now just due to the referendum in November and were wanted to be cautious on how their upper limits of millage looked. So I think adding it is perfectly acceptable at this point in time. It's something we had planned to do. Um it's just something it'll be one less thing that we have to do next year. Does anyone would have questions?

No.

Anyone from the audience here to speak to item P81?

There's no one online.

No one online either. Okay.

But one person can

Christy Zimmer on record. I'm if I understand this correct, the you're creating an MSTU for the parks and recreation to be able to have the money that they need to operate on a regular basis instead of through the taxes that's going to possibly be eliminated by the bill on in November.

No, it's the MSTU is already created.

This would be affected by the state amendment as well. It's advalorum taxes. The only thing this amendment is doing is it's it allows it to be collected within the cities if they opt in.

Okay. Thank you.

Move to approve.

Second. Anyone else for public comment? Close public comment. We have a motion.

It's a roll call vote.

Roll call.

District one. Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner Weightman. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District five, Chairman Mariano. I motion pass 50. Item P82 to approve.

P82 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times, April 1st, 2026, and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Good afternoon. Amy Tol, Planning, Development, and Economic Growth. Item P82 is PTE26-0356. It's an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment text amendment to go flu 6 uh Pasadena Hills to amend tables PH2 VOP residential conversion chart and PH3 VOP residential conversion chart and a text amendment to GOL 6 land use classifications village M village mixuse 2 and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for a repealer severability and an effective date. This comes before you with a recommendation to adopt the proposed amendment by roll call vote. And we have staff here for a presentation if so desired.

Right. Do we want a presentation?

Okay.

Well, did you say VOP?

Yes, ma'am.

What's this got to do with VOP?

Uh, it's a text amendment to village 2.

Oh, I guess I'm on the wrong one.

82.

Oh, yeah. Now I was on 83.

Okay. Anyone here from the public to speak to item P82?

There is no one signed up.

No one online. No one here.

Second.

It is a roll vote. District one. Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Waitman. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District 4, Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District 5. Chairman Mariano.

I. Motion passes 50. Item P83. P83 was advertised in Tampa Bay Times April 1st, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P83 is PDE 26-0410 or 0414, excuse me, an ordinance amending the Pasco County comprehensive plan providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map. Map 2-15 and sheet five from res one residential one dwelling unit per gross acre res 3 residential three dwelling units per gross acre I industrial light con conservation lands and office of office excuse me to PD plan development on approximately 1,219 acres of real property located on the west side of US highway 41 approximately 2.75 miles north of the intersection of state road 52 and US41 and a text amendment to sub area policy flu 7.1.15 Mitchell US41 and an amendment to the future land use map 2-9 amending sub area map 2-915 Mitchell and providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency providing for repealer severability and an effective date this comes before you with the recommendation to adopt the proposed amendment by roll call vote Okay. Step on presentation.

No.

To the vote. No.

Move [clears throat] to approve.

I've worked. Still have a public hearing.

Spent a lot of time working with these guys.

Okay. Anyone here from the public?

There's no one signed up.

Somebody back here.

You got one standing up.

Okay.

Mr. Chairman, as the applicants represented, I'll try to be very brief here. I know we have one objector. I'll just point this out for the record. Uh this is Clark KBY on behalf of the applicant, the Mitchell family entities, James and Dorothy Mitchell Limited, uh and West Bay Homes, which is a contract purchaser. to make this a confusing matter. This project uh originally was approved with a change to RES3 and other comp plan designations in about 2010 before we had market areas and stuff like that. And it was during the DRRI area era and during the era where DCA was mandating a lot of the controls of land use in the county.

Good old days. [laughter] And and what happened was we had to to get the the comp plan amendment done in 2010, we had to adopt some what I believe are kind of screwy policies that required things such as saying that 65% of the units had to be multifamily. So we have basically a minimum of 934 multifamily units on this project now. And it's a big beautiful ranch and that's not the right use here. And so while on and and I'd also point out that there are 890 acres of res 3 already that but for those crazy multif family policies would have already yielded 2670 units. The comp plan amendment before you today seeks 2100 as a companion to the MPUD, but there's a lot of other positive stuff that I'll discuss later in the hearing on the MPUD. But all we are doing is fixing the mess that Tallahassee created in 2010 on this plan amendment. That's it.

Thank you. And do we have someone who wants to speak to item P83? There's somebody back there.

Somebody if you're going to speak, please come forward.

No. Okay. All right.

Okay. To the board.

Move approval.

Second.

Roll call.

All right. District one, Commissioner Oakley.

I.

District two, Commissioner Weightman.

Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

I.

District four, Commissioner Jerger.

Hi.

District five, Chairman Mariano.

Hi.

Okay. Item P85.

All right. P85 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times June 24th, 2026. Item P85 is PDE26-0817, an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners amending the Pasco County Code of Ordinances amending chapter 46 fire prevention and protection article 4 opening open burning section 46-72 definitions amending section 46-73 prohibited acts and other sections as necessary for internal consist consistency providing for applicability repealer providing for separability inclusion into the code of ordinances and an effective date. This comes before you with a recommendation to adopt by roll call vote and there's a presentation available if so desired.

Chair Commission W. Thank you Amy. I just want to thank staff and the folks that reached out to us when um what led to this change was were the uh what's the the the lanterns the sky lanterns that are lit during ceremonies and flowed across and

they were landing in people's on their houses and pastures and pool cages and what have you. So

grateful for the work and the speediness of this. It's been a a couple months, but it's uh uh in light of the dry season that we've had and and this is done multiple times a year. I I appreciate folks reaching out and and staff working diligently to amend this ordinance to protect people's uh property and and their homes. So, thank you.

Thank you.

That Okay, roll call vote.

Move approve.

Is there anyone here from the public like to speak to item P85? She's raising her hand.

Come forward, please.

And is there anyone else after this lady?

Okay. Sorry.

Cindy Buckle, 5938 Frontier Drive, Zapper Hills, Florida. talking about the flames and the uh I it brings me to all the pictures I see of the trees bulldozed down and huge flames coming from that. So what is the difference between those ashes and there are no hydrants where these trees are. There's no water where these trees are because I often go by these sites and I see it. So, I'm confused about somebody burning something in their backyard and landing on a pool cage when I had huge fires going on when it pulled down 27 trees at the beginning of my road on 54 Gateway. So, I'm confused about that because there was ash all over our neighborhood. So what's the difference? So developers can burn without fire being there to protect them and without water being there because it's a site that they just bulldozed all the trees down. So that's my concern. I don't understand the difference because I live on property where I can burn and I have a hose. I am a retired firefighter paramedic, so I know how to put fires out. And I'm really confused about the hoopla about this being such a big deal when developers can do it just like they can pump water, but we're on water restrictions. And that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

All right. And no one else online.

No one. No one else sign on to the board. Move approve.

Second.

Roll call vote.

All right. District one. Commissioner Oakley.

Hi.

District two, Commissioner Waitman. Hi.

District three, Commissioner Starky.

Hi.

District four, Commissioner Joerger.

Hi.

District 5, Chairman Mariano.

I.

Motion passes 5.

Now proceed to the public hearings. Will the county attorney please review the procedures for reasonzoning?

There are two reasonzoning agendas, regular and consent. Staff will present each application to the board of county commissioners. If staff or planning commission has recommended approval and there is 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 reasonzoning may at this time request that the petition be pulled from the consent agenda in which case that [laughter] 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 is that in Florida 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 reasonzoning. Madam clerk, would you like to swear in the public?

Uh yes, sir. If anyone is going to speak to the following items, will you please stand and raise your right hand?

Okay. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth so help you God?

All right. Thank you.

Okay. We'll start with item P86 from the continuence. We approve.

Yes. P86 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times March 25th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P86, PDE26-7877 is a zoning amendment for substantial modification in the name of Palmetto Ridge MPU, Pomemetto Ridge Cattle Company LLC, EPG, Pomemetto Ridge Holding LLC. It's a resoning request from an MPUD master plan unit development district to MPD master plan unit development district to allow for the development of 2,800 2,800 residential dwelling units and 100,000 square ft of commercial uses with associated infrastructure on approximately 3,536 acres located in north central Pasco County on the north side of State Road 52 approximately.5 miles east of the intersection of State Road 52 and Aaron Cutoff. This comes before you with a recommendation to [clears throat] continue the item to August 11th at 1:30 p.m. in Dane City.

Have a motion.

So move.

Second.

All in favor say I. I.

I.

Okay. P87.

P87 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times May 27th, 2026 and by affidavit as certified mailings and site postings. Item P87 is PDE26-7904. It's a zoning amendment in the name of Ravilio Ranch MPU, Clearwater Capital Partners USA LLC. It's a resoning request from an AR agricultural district to an MPUD master plan unit development district to allow for the development of 45,000 square feet of an assoc of an assisted living facility, 5,000 square ft of office and one single family detached dwelling and associated infrastructure within the villages of Pasadena Hills in village B on approximately 7.66 66 acres located on the north side of Prospect Road approximately 1 half mile east of Curly Road. This comes before you with a recommendation to approve with conditions.

Is there anyone in the audience in opposition to item P87?

Sir, there is someone signed up.

No, someone signed up. Okay, pull that from consent.

Item P88. Okay, so P88 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times April 1st, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P88 is PTE2-01 uh 93. It's a development agreement in the name of Highland Homes Clayton Properties Group, Inc. to design, permit, and construct portion of Hidden Creek Boulevard in exchange for transportation development free credits in the villages of Pasadena Hills located on Hidden Creek Boulevard spanning from the intersection of Hidden Creek Boulevard and Island Boulevard to the northern terminus of Hidden Creek Boulevard. This comes before you with a recommendation to approve.

Is there anyone here to speak against item P88? There was no one signed up. We'll keep that on consent. Item P89.

P89 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times May 27th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Item P89 is a conditional use request in the name of St. Joe Road LLC and BB Araurism LLC. It's a conditional use permit to combine two previously approved conditional use permits CU12-07 and CU19-01 into one unified conditional use permit for an amusement park in an AC agricultural district located in north central Pasco County approximately 840 ft east of the intersection of State Road or I'm sorry uh St. Joe Road and Bellamy Brothers Boulevard containing approximately 118 acres. This comes before you with a recommendation to approve with conditions.

So P9 is St. Joe Ranch LLC and BB Agra tourism LLC. Is there anyone here speaking in opposition to that?

And there is someone signed up.

All right. Consent.

Item P90.

P90 was advertised in Tampa Bay Times May 27th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P90 is PDE26- I'm going to assume there's going to be a

there are two people sign we're going to sign that we're just going to pull that

they're companions.

All right. So pull pull P90

91 we're 91

and that is the end of the consent agenda. Now 91

91 and

you got 91 92 it looks like we have two more at least on this.

Sorry. Sorry. All right. So P91

Oh me sorry. P91 [laughter] Tampa Bay uh advertised in Tampa Bay Times May 27, 2026. I apologize.

Thank you. Uh P91 is PTE26-0706. It's a development agreement in the name of Kenton Road commercial development agreement, Kenton Road Commercial LLC. It's a development agreement for the Kenton Road commercial mpud to design, permit, and construct Kenton Road from Elim Road to Overpass Road as a two-lane road inclusive of intersection improvements in exchange for cash reimbursement within connected city located in central Pasco County. This item comes before you with a recommendation to approve.

Okay. Anyone here to speak in opposition of P91?

I I do have a question on this one.

Pull it.

Ask it right now. Go ahead.

Um, since the orange belt trail is coming right beside this, what kind of driveways and uses are are happening here? I'm trying to remember what this one was that where the where we're protected or is it not right beside here?

Uh,

I don't know my map. I thought it was by Bellamy and

this is way south. This is it. Overpass. No doesn't anywhere near this.

That never.

All right. So, we'll leave it on. Okay. We'll leave that on consent.

No one signed up.

I was thinking that was the uh Amazon building.

Okay. All right. P92. Do we have proof?

P92 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times May 27th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

P92 is PTE26-7927. It's a zoning amendment in the name of 52 and Bellamy Investment Group LLC Bellamy Parcel Reszoning.

Did you?

I did ask I did think I did ask for public comment, right?

Public comment. No, for not on the one I believe so.

All right. So, let me stop here.

Did anyone here speak? Is anyone in opposition of P91?

So, I did ask that she's okay.

All right. No, we did we did cover that. Okay.

Okay. P92.

Okay. Um, so P92 is a change in zoning from an I1 light industrial park district to a C2 general commercial district located in central Pasco County at the southeast corner of the intersection of State Road 52 and Bellamy Brothers Boulevard containing approximately 1.51 acres. This one comes before you with a recommendation to approve.

Okay.

Okay. I think this is the one I I was on the wrong one. So I have that question on this. Let's see if there's public opposition while

Is there any opposition to P92?

Because

and I think you're right in the in this area there is.

Yeah, because they already constructed Belly with a sidewalk on the left side. So, the multi-use trail, there will be something on the east side. And where where is that? Where are we going from the west side of Bellamy, south of 52 to the east side of Bellamy before we cross 52?

It looks it's way above it.

No, you look at the map.

Got to cross

look at the map on the screen.

All right, Bell Trail.

No, no, we I wish we could go along the bottom, but right now we can't. One day I think we will, but right now we have to go up Bellamy. And all those high school kids are going to have to cross 52 that are riding their bikes to school and scooters. Cross 52, go down 52, and cross 52 again to get on Old Pasco Road. But for now, we're going up Bellamy and crossing. So, how is that happening with this parcel?

We're going up. So, let's pull this item and we'll we'll come back to it. So, stop and look at it while we wait for that. So,

this is 92.

All right. Can I have a motion for the rest of the consent agenda?

So, move

second.

All in favor say I.

I.

Okay. So, first one called

87. Good afternoon. Gavin Kobe plane development and economic growth. I think we're okay. So, it's a we're going to start with a zoning amendment reszoning from AC agricultural to MPD master plan unit development. And this is to develop uh 45,000 square ft or 64 beds of assisted living facility and the option for either 5,000 ft of office or a single single family detached resident. And this is located on the north side of Proic Road, approximately 1 half mile east of Curly Road. So, here's a location map within VOP. You can see it's within Village B located off of Prospect Road. Here is a site location map. Here's the current zoning map, which is AR. And then here is where it fits into the overall village B master plan. You can see it's going to be this parcel at the very bottom right here. So, this parcel was initially contemplated for residential development. Uh, but VOP does allow for commercial to be put into uh other areas outside the village center that are more neighborhood scale or uh community centered. So, here's the MPD master plan. Uh, you can see that there's a small designation right here uh as number two. This is where they can choose to either do that 5,000 square ft of office on the frontage or a single family detached residence. And the developer has to choose either or option prior to they prior to them submitting site plans to us. They have to write verbally which option they're going to choose. Um we also as staff negotiated a quarter acre for park space for the residents. Um we regul regulating this as commercial development. They're not required to provide open space, but since it was an assisted living facility, we wanted to make sure that these residents would have access to green space and parks.

That's important.

So, they are requesting a couple variations. Uh first is from section 905.2D5, uh site prime landscape buffering. We're going to have this uh everywhere as a type A. Again, this is in a residential area. It's going to be uh a residentially designed use the assisted living facility. It's intended to look like single family detached dwellings. We wanted to make sure that it was buffered from the other lower density residential, but we didn't want it to hinder the walkability in between parcels. Um same thing section 905.2D5 site perimeter landscape buffering and screening. This is to remove the internal landscape buffers if they choose to do um the office development with the assisted living facility. Again, this is to promote walkability, make sure that we're not buffering uses that that are compatible with one another. Uh section 9016D1, a continuation of existing street pattern and street access to adjoin property. They're not going to be providing a northern access point uh to the northern parcel uh because there's an existing wetland and lake. And then last uh section 805.6 restrictions on postdevelopment wetlands and upland buffers within residential lots and non-residential parcels. And this is to not convey common areas to a community development district or property owners group. Uh this is going to be maintained under common ownership. So they're going to be the maintenance entity responsible for the wetlands and common areas and maintaining those.

This comes over recommendation of approval from the villages of Passina Hills planning and policy committee and the planning and development economic growth department.

Okay. Thank you. Any questions for staff? Mr. Wayman,

you a betting man?

You can guess what question I'm about to ask.

Are we following the village B plan?

Well, no, that was close. That was

live local.

So, but that was part of it. That was a second one. Uh we have live local act provisions in here.

Correct. That's true. And um so within the structure of village B, just so we're on the record, this is in the spirit of fulfilling the structure of village B even with village B being wonied up the way that it is.

Correct. Yes. So this is an assisted living facility. The village allows for some commercial development to come outside the village center. Uh specifically for a use like this assisted living facility. You don't necessarily want that in a necessarily really intense urban environment. This is more on the periphery so people can walk to and from um the multiple village centers that they're going to be having.

And there's height restrictions on this product.

There is a maximum height. Yes. But I don't

height off my head.

You don't know the maximum height?

Off the top of my head now. I can do some research for you real quick.

So is it two stories, three stories? Just want to make sure we're not contradicting ourselves. Basim height of 35 ft.

So that's the same that be the height of a townhouse. So the neighboring properties would be with the feathering out of the map. If you go back to the color coordinated map, that would be the single family. It's in a brown, light brown, yellow.

So you go from yellow to

Yeah. So this is where the maximum of 10 dos per acre is up here.

Yeah. 52. transitioning down here to two units per acre adjacent to it.

The butt up to the wetland as well. So the yellow piece so that flows into so when it's transitioning down here what's the next village to the east you have a map

so let's see so the the portion that's in the

this is the what this is the transition zone what's the formal

yeah so the lighter yellow is going to be the two per acre and then you can kind of see a little bit better here this is uh in the darker orang-ish color is going to be um the maximum five billions per breaker.

Okay.

So, it's a range of 0 to five for the orangeer area and then a a range of zero to two for the yellow area.

Okay.

Thank you. Okay. Have public comment. We have one person.

Okay. Michaela Krauss.

Michaela Krauss 35920 Praise unit 102 Zephra Hills Florida 33541. I have sworn. Good afternoon, commissioners. I am here today to strongly urge this board to pull this item from the consent agenda and deny the resoning request for the Rivero Ranch MPUD. This applicant is requesting a shift from AR to an intensive MPU to shoehorn a 45,000 square foot assisted living facility and a 5,000 square ft of office space into a mere 7.66 66 acres along the north side of Prospect Road. This massive institutional and commercial footprint is deeply inconsistent with the core vision of the Pasco County comprehensive plan. This firstly um is intensely fundamentally it just violates chapter 2 objective FLU2.1 which explicitly mandates the preservation of rural lifestyles and characters. Inserting this into the seven small acre parcel just completely dismantles the progressive lowdensity transitional buffering that is supposed to protect East Pasco's heritage. Second, dropping a massive institutional structure and its necessary parking infrastructure on this parcel runs entirely um counter to policy FLU 2.1.5, the protection of existing topography. This policy strictly dictates that we limit topographic alterations to maintain and protect the natural rolling vistas and scenic watershed viewheds of our landscape. You cannot construct on a facility on this scale on 7.6 6 acres without severely altering the natural contours, grading away our native elevations and destroying the viewshed this board legally is bound to protect. Furthermore, the local protection of our scenic vistas is backed by state intent under Florida state statute section 335.093 093 and Florida Administrative Code Rule 404-15.016. The state explicitly establishes frameworks to preserve and maintain these natural beautiful scenic roadways. Um, commissioners, your highest duty is to protect the integrity of your own master plan. Please deny the Reillo Ranch MPUD resoning request. Thank you.

Thank you.

No clap.

Yes. No, I didn't [clears throat] have the applicant come up. Would the applicant like to address?

Make sure there's nobody else just so that we may.

All right. So, let me just address

if I could though before you go. Uh, is anyone else here from public comment for this item?

All right. Okay. Please come forward. And is there anyone else online?

There is no one signed up. Okay,

thank you.

Ava Larkin, 37814 Howard Avenue, Date City, Florida 33525. Um, I want to reiterate what actually she just said. We need to make uh we need to make it a priority that just because the uh Pasadena Hills planning committee has approved this does not necessarily mean that we need to approve it as county commissioners. Um, as we know, a lot of our Pasadena Hills uh, planning committee is comprised of people that have vested interests in these lands and have also had vested stakes in it. That being said, um, it does not it is not consistent with the uh, LLU and also with our um, with the um, master plan of this area in general. You guys, I just want you to think about what it is that you are voting on today. This is not just one unit. This is going to lead to creating uh a um a place where uh the the boundary the bounding lands are going to be able to um capitalize off of any kind of changes in the zoning that this one um property is going to have. Please keep in mind that every single thing that you vote on today is going to have a um sorry um it's going to have a domino effect um on any other surrounding properties in the areas in general. So when you open the door to this one, you're opening the door to future zoning uh changes and possibilities for future zoning changes to the lands that are surrounding it. Um, not to mention just the uh the general uh landscape of our community, which we definitely pride ourselves on having. So, always remember we're thinking of our our community first. Our community first. That's the most important thing we should be thinking about is our community first. Thank you.

Thank you. And we'll close public comment to the applicant. A little bit out of order. Sorry about that.

Can you give your name and address for the record?

Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Margaret Perez with Landanda Sevens and Partners on behalf of the applicant. My address is 3810 North Boulevard, Tampa, Florida. Thank you. And I have been sworn Can I ask our staff a question real quick?

Sure.

So, um, looking on the map here, I see a parcel to the east of this one that's a lighter brown and then there's a school site. Do we know what's going on between here and the school yet? that that parcel that's there.

I hate to do this to you, Gina. Can you can you put the map back up? [snorts]

Oh. Oh, it says same comments on here.

Let's come back to it. Let's have the come up. Don't come back.

Don't Yeah, don't stop her. I just

took too long to asking a question in the space while they were loading her thing up, but

this will give Kevin time to look it up. So um I think staff does a great job in their memo addressing the technical details of the MPD. So today I would like to share with you uh the planning considerations that will allow you to better understand who we are and the vision we are seeking to accomplish. Uh those considerations are the nature of Reilla Ranch,

our community character, community benefits and comprehensive plan consistency. Ravilla Ranch is located along Prospect Road within Village B of the village of Pasadena Hills. The site sits just east of the connected city area and as illustrated almost all of our neighbors within Village B have already received their entitlements. The applicant operating as Silver Elite intends to create Reilla Ranch, a community of boutique luxury residential assisted living homes that seamlessly blend into the residential neighborhoods planned for the surrounding area. Silverly is a highquality family-owned and operated assisted living provider who has reimagined what senior living will look and feel like. There is also an option for inclusion of a single family home or a modest office within Rea Ranch. With only 16 residents per house, our caregiver resident ratio is unparalleled in the industry at 1:5 rather than a standard of 1 to 20. Our philosophy is centered around family and promoting independence with a strong focus on vibrant social events, enriching wellness programs, creative expression, and beautifully designed outdoor spaces to enhance the lifestyle of our residents. Our residents also have a nutritionist and a private chef. Next, I'd like to share with you the characteristics of our community. First, our homes have been specifically designed by our architects to mimic modern homes. Um, these are only one story, 35 ft maximum, which is the building height that you'd see in a single family zoning district. Second, every detail has been considered, even down to our backyard patios and eyebrow driveways, which maintain the residential character and foster a neighborhood feel. Third, we ensure our residents will feel like they're on the ranch by designing our communities to optimize open space. Fourth, as a special addition to our community, we have incorporated a garden for our residents, which is the heart of our community. We have included the garden as a condition of approval. Fifth, our thoughtfully designed walkways promote a walkable lifestyle. Sixth, we have designed our community to optimize scenic views of the neighboring wetlands. And finally, in keeping with the VOP policies, we have avoided culde-sac design and embrace grid like a grid-like layout to prevent to provide interconnectivity to our neighbors. You can see our concept plan here on screen. Here are some photographs from our partners in Texas. This community opened last year. Shown here is our front door and exterior facades of our homes. Next, here are some interior photos. Shown here is the living room and dining area. These photos uh illustrate our library and kitchen. As you can see, these are high quality homes with extreme attention to detail.

I love it.

Recently,

I live there. It just needs trees.

Need some shade. So recently we've been collaborating with our architect to refine the facades and achieve a more modern aesthetic. Um I've included the renderings here to give you a look at the latest design concepts. Uh this is facade one.

Here is facade two.

Finally the use of the rear courtyard areas. Next, I will move on to the community benefits and uh I'll briefly touch upon the comprehensive plan consistency.

Can I stop you just for a second?

Yes.

I don't know what the board thinks, but again, we got a bit in the agenda. This looks like a very less intensive product that anything I've seen that could actually go in that area. I just spent about 10 days in a assisted living facility with my dad. The quality of what this is here is just like super high level. And for intensity, I I think can't think of anything less intensive that would probably be fit in that area.

Chair, I'm not I'm torn between on what's supposed to be at this stage in this village and what what this is. Um would you bind this plan?

We'd be happy to do so. Uh if you look at back to the concepts that Gavin showed on on the design of VOP, this this doesn't really fit it in my opinion.

All right. So, let me let let me let Yeah, let me let you continue then. We'll go on.

I'm not saying So, I'm not saying that this is bad like

what I'm saying is is it the the right product for this location within within VOP. That's what I'm getting at.

Okay. I I just didn't know if there was going to be objection. If it wasn't, I was going to go on because it was on consent. So, go ahead and finish your presentation. Oh, sorry.

I have a question on that.

We'll get to that out, but let her finish. Sorry.

Thank you. I'll be happy to touch upon your point, Commissioner Whiteman.

So, Reala Ranch will provide a benefit to the community. And as Pasco County enters the democratic shift, often referred to as the silver tsunami, it faces a significant shortage of assisted living and memory care options. This gap in available options is projected to grow substantially over the next five years. The figures shown here highlight an urgent need for new developments to keep up with the unmet and growing demand for senior care in the region. There is a 700 bed shortage in Pasco County and a projected 1,800 bed shortage over the next 5 years. With our community product, Pasco County residents will have to travel without our community product. Pasco County residents will have to travel greater distances to be with their family members. As this area continues to grow in population, families want to be near their loved ones who are transitioning to assisted living. Reilla Ranch will be situated central to connected cities and village of Pasadena Hills, making it easier to keep families together. Here I have listed the comprehensive plan policies that were consistent with. Um after I'm finished speaking um if it's okay with the board, I will call my expert land planner, Bruce Landis, uh to detail those for you. Um so just to summarize, you know, we have recommendation of approval from the VOP planning commission and staff um has found this uh request to be consistent. Um, Commissioner Weightman, to your point about the location, um, I just want to go back here for you. Going in the wrong direction. Thank you. This product does not belong at the corner of Curly Road and State Road 52. Um, the character, our community is residential and neighbor uh, in nature and we want to be plugged into the residential neighborhoods. you know, people are driving their golf carts, they're walking in these areas. We want them to be able to walk from their home to go see grandma. Um, it's a high-end product. It just doesn't belong at a commercial intersection. Um, and the policies in VOP allow for non-residential uses to be outside of the village B centers. So, um, if you don't have any questions for me, I could call Bruce Landis up.

Uh, Mr. Stark,

I I am very confused by the map that's in my agenda packet. Maybe I'm just a confused person and where this is because when I'm looking online at the map here, it has a circle on St. Leo Commons. That's what's under this number. Um, so can can am I looking at the wrong thing? And there's the school parcel. I don't know.

Are you on Prospect Road in that?

Where? This is this is Butts Prospect Road.

Well, what is this map?

I think you're top left of the the picture that they had on the screen.

Can you put up the map from the packet and just show me where it is on the

It's down here.

I know. So, why is this map here in our packet?

Scroll up. It's down here.

Keep scrolling right there.

Oh, see? [laughter]

Yeah. I might have been zoomed in too far. Okay. So, at the bottom of

at the bottom

village near village F, not near the school district,

the school.

Okay. On this map, can you show me where that's nowhere near? Oh, thank and look to where curly road is.

Okay. So, is it to the one which one is it? That that which parcel is it?

Move the arrow to the right

where that says Prospect Road on

to the right of the Prospect Road. Exactly.

Right here.

Yeah. That way.

Okay. Right there. And what's coming to the left of that? Do we know yet or not yet?

Yeah.

To the left of that is going to be a single family detached um community. It's going to be 50 foot wide lots and I think there's about 200

and across the street

across the street I think it's just an existing residence at at this time but it is within another village. You know, I love the project, but those people aren't aren't going to be able to walk to anything,

but someone who lives nearby.

Assisted living, they don't pretty much stay in there. I mean, people may go to them,

but a lot on premises.

Is is it assisted living or active living?

It's assisted living with

memory care kind of stuff.

Yes.

I mean, some of the people go in, they don't come back out. It's going to be ambulances, fire trucks.

No, I have family living in those. So,

residential.

But I also have one that's moving into an active living that transitions to assisted in Duneden. And she's picking that because she can walk to all the shops and restaurants. She doesn't have to drive um as she gets older. So, she can walk to places for entertainment.

But this isn't that.

This isn't that. But I love this project.

It's Yeah, it's it's not the project, it's the location. You get a lot of these sometimes they'll have their own bus and they load them up and they'll take them to the shop and to the activities to the movie theater etc.

But I mean to to me if you want to get something less intense and you go right to the side of Maradas right there it's it's pretty crowded. This is less dense than most most things you're going to be able to put in here.

Well in the VOP plan chair Gavin what's in the VOP plan? This allows for feathered out single fam or this is what you're saying

it didn't.

Yeah. So it allows for uh residential development at a maximum of two dwelling units per acre. Um and I will say it it is not that intense of a use. Uh it was found exempt from the timing and phasing because it was so low of a trip generator.

Um and if we would have had 15 single family detached homes here, they they would have had a higher trip generation rate. I mean, some of these people in here are not most of them probably aren't going to have cars. I mean, it's it's not if you if you want to cut down trips, this is the ideal one forward. And the more trips we can frankly cut down, I think the better.

Yeah. I Yeah,

it looks like a nice top quality project. And I I hope you come to the west side. Love to have you over there. We can we get demand over there, too. But that this looks fantastic to me. And it's And it butts up to the wetland, too. And they got a nice they got a big wet area in the back there. Quarter acre park. All right, let me let the applicant figure finish. Um, so with that, I'll call up uh Bruce Landis, my expert land planner, to speak to the comprehensive plan consistency, and after he's finished, I'll just say a few more words unless you have any additional questions for Abene.

Thank you. Well, I sure would like to see this kind of project all over the county. Personally, got to find more places for these.

Commissioners, good afternoon. For the record, my name is Bruce Landis with Landis Evansson Partners, 3810 Northdale Boulevard, Tampa, and I have been sworn. Um, I just wanted to briefly highlight the consistency with um at least four of the comprehensive plan um policy amendments. uh 6.1.1 for example, we are consistent with providing a variety of land uses and lifestyles to support residents of diverse ages, incomes, family sizes, including housing. We are consistent, excuse me, [clears throat] with policy um number 6.3.2. The county shall require new urban residential non-residential development within Pasco Pasadena Hills study area to be developed with connected roadway network and creates a grid of existing and new streets that provide local connectivity. And so the site plan that we're um will be bound to provides that that connectivity. [clears throat] We're consistent with uh policy 6.5.1 through the adoption of Pasco Pasadena Hills area plan [laughter] has established a policy development policy framework that enhances the livability of the county and preserves its natural, cultural, physical and other resources by creating planning and development policies and future land categories to address development issues. The new development pattern shall be formed around neighborhoods which are integrated with commercial office and civic uses. And finally, uh we're consistent with um policy 6.5.3 subsection C village centers so be designed with sufficient nonresidential uses to provide for the daily and weekly needs of residential uh residents. Thank you. I have one question, one more question.

Um, are we preparing for any kind of multi-use path in front of because we, you know, we messed up on Prospect, so we have to come back in and put it in.

So, Prospect Road is going to be constructed by Mike Galvin and his group. Uh he has obligations through the escrow agreement to construct Prospect from uh connecting Marada all the way across um

okay

and uh it will have 8 foot multi-purpose uh pass on east side.

Well I I think I'm going to be for the project. I think it's a really nice project.

So to be sure there will be a path in the front of this project.

That is correct. Yes.

Okay.

I was just just for clarity. Commission wait. Thank you, chair. I was apprehensive with villages on the green right around the corner and it won up the village and it turned out to be that if we could re if I could redo that vote today, I would. I've admitted that multiple times. And I've got the same suspicion here. And um I'm not I'm not going to uh feel the same way I did on the vote of the villages of Pasadena or the villages on the green in this village. So

can you tell me what happened to villages on

we So with the villages on the green it's right around the corner. It messed up the formula and we and and it was a a that it was used it was an old orange grove and the storm water pond was going to be used as a passive play park and it was we took single fam which is what this is where feathered out when you came south of 52 and you come in south of Curly on the east side and we bound that project. that project is seemingly not coming to fruition and it screwed up the whole dynamic of this villages partnered with DOT and its how it configured its storm water ponds on the intersection. So the gateway into VOP was it's had a rough start in my opinion and with it pushing the density to the further south with villages on the green which we bound and my understanding is it's not going to come to fruition where that should have been feathered into starting the less density portion of the village and if that continues true based on the formula and the design of the VOP map coming south and then coming east down Curly. This project is is is like another unicorn again just like villages of the villages on the green was in my opinion based on the formula and the map of the planning of the last 20 years of EOP. And so it's not this use and this product in this type. I think it's great. I'm just not completely sold that it's in this it's in the spirit. understand the density and the traffic and the uses all all of that. I'm just not convinced that you're you're going to have two dwelling units per acre and then this and then go on to the next. It's just kind of random when you look at planning and policies and walkability. I mean, you're going to have two dwelling units per acre and you're going to have fire trucks and ambulances coming however many times based on the nature of it in the middle of a residential neighborhood. with people calling to get help. I I just am not sold that that's the right location within the concept of this village based on the level of density and what's supposed to be there uh for this this this site.

So I mean I'm not saying it's bad. I'm just There you go, Gavin. Go ahead, chair. Sorry, chair. No,

you're supposed to be start here. So based on the map,

so let me if I could.

Yeah, I'm

so and I agree with you on the that that property down there. I didn't like that property from the get- go. Um and then if if that is not coming to fruition, I wish you'd come back and let's go work out something better and maybe we get DOT to the table because what they did that to that I mean they did the same thing at Bellamy, too.

Destroyed that entryway. That could have been a a good use of something. But I'm happy to bring these guys back for that later. But as far as this goes, so in in in I think it's probably like 10 12 days with my dad in the assisted living facility, I saw one medfleet truck move transporting someone. Even when I took my dad to see the doctor three times out of there, I we just took him out and brought him here to go. So it wasn't a big thing. And I didn't see a single siren going while I was there. And seldom have I ever seen one coming out of there. And I drive that road all the time. You can ask David Allen because I call him all the time when I see the panelists are rightaway violators out there all the time. So I drive that road many, many times. I've yet to see one coming out of there. And I've lived there for 20 years. So I I don't think that's going to be something that's going to be looked at. These people, they stay in there. Some of them, they get in there and they just don't come out. Others, like my dad, they go in there, they get therapy, etc., and they come back out. And I can see where they got two buildings set up, which makes a lot of sense to me because instead of integrating everybody who's in there that's not coming out, you can put the active people near where the clubhouse is and have them more active staying there because it looks like a great place to be. And that might even tense my my my own dad to not living this far away, but this type of thing would be a product I would be very comfortable to see him in from what I see here. I mean if this so chairman so just theoretically when we're talking about VOP this is on neighborhood edge residential this product definition seemingly would be neighborhood core residential which would fit better in the structure of VOP where villages on the green is which is closer to the main thoroughare and if something were to be needed, EMS or what have you, they could get there and get to the hospital or whatever quickly. I you kind of see the direction I'm going and I think I'm going to follow that direction and go go with my my gut on this one. I I'm not comfortable with it. Not after what's happened so far with with villages on the green and what's around the corner. So,

um it's the right use in the right spot within the village is is my concern. You realize prospect is four lane right by the property.

Prospect's being four lane.

Yes. But that doesn't

Can you have Gavin come back?

When you look at the uses, I don't don't

I'm just conflicted on on on the use based on the village and the type and what we're what we're doing here because we I've never been around one of these facilities a lot, but I don't know about sirens and all that going on at one of these facilities when it's like a

my my father-in-law and mother-in-law are in assisted living. My mother-in-law since passed, I go there all the time. I've never been there when there was an ambulance there ever.

Um on Duck Slooh. Um and it's big, two big buildings. res.

Can you go over the map here so I can

understand what's going on?

Sure.

It's quieter for the for the facility itself being in that neighborhood and that in that area, it's quieter for that those people that are in there makes it quieter for them.

If I could before you go.

Yeah.

When you look at what's right to the other side of it, the intensity there, I mean, leads all the way down overpass, connects to the highway, etc. But it's this is intense in the area. But again, this is as low as it gets. And if it's close to these all these people in this area,

it's going to make it safer for them to go and easier for them to go put their first person in the assisted living facility and make them feel comfortable knowing they're so close. I mean, it's a great quality of life and literally I I hope you come to the other side quickly.

I got I got spots for you.

Yeah, let's go.

Good afternoon. William Vermillion, Planning Development, Economic Growth. I think I'd like to add a little bit of color. to the VOP plan overall as it as it relates to neighborhood commercial. So in terms of an assisted living facility, it's not something that's categorized as residential in terms of density. So when we talk about density compatibility, it's not really applicable to an assisted living facility. What staff liked about this particular use is that it looks like single family detached in its form, but it's actually a commercial use. And in VOP, commercial uses, specifically neighborhood scale commercial uses are allowed within certain ranges to be located outside of the village center. So following that vein, staff felt that this specific commercial use needed to be located away from the busy road of State Road 52. this felt like an applicable area for it because the product type one blended into the development pattern that is currently going in because it looks like single family detach but it's not actually regulated by density like residential. It falls under the neighborhood scale commercial and then number two u just for a point of correction Prospect Road is a two-lane road not not a four-lane road in the village of Pasian Hills mass roadway plan.

Wait a minute. A question on the

they're designing commission prospect and handcart right now is being designed by Mike Galvin to build four lanes.

So year from now they going to start that. I know it's two-lane right now but it's supposed to turn into a fourlane building.

I'll let Steph look at that construction.

So So they have an option for an office building. Yes ma'am.

Or office something. It wasn't shown on the drawings. What What kind of office building?

Sure. The the way that staff regulated it since we didn't have an end user and it was most likely going to be the assisted living facility which the applicant showed, what we did was specify the specific uses and then have the the applicant come in for the site plan for that office and uh check the compatibility at that point since the most likely use is going to be the ALS.

All right. But if it if it is an office, since we're allowing them to have an office, is it also one story like the rest of this facility is? Is it matching what the complex looks like?

I'm going to let the the applicant just because

she's she's coming up now.

Okay.

I can feel her behind me.

All right. [laughter]

Docking.

So, to answer your question, yes. Um, the office is going to match the architecture and the character of the assisted living facility. It's all going to be developed by and operated by one person, which is Ryan, who's actually a Pasco County resident and lives nearby the property. But we were playing around with some of the graphics, so what the office might look like. And we're actually going to have a garage, too. So, it looks just like a home. Um, let's see. I have a clicker here. Uh, can we go backwards?

Those are one of the renderings that we're putting together right now for what the office might look like.

Yeah. So, there's there's an interesting um office building right in front of Fox Hollow. I was going to say the same thing in the middle of uh Trinity uh right before the golf course. And um it's actually the international headquarters of a door manufacturer. It's their association headquarters. It's an office and it looks great. They built it like a house and it just it looks wonderful. Um,

all right. Well, I'm I you know, the staff's worked hard on this and they know what we want out of VOP and um and so I'm going to be going with staff's recommendation. I do want to find out more of what's going on on the corner, what you're talking about over there, but that's not what we're talking about here today of the other one

village. So was that a motion you just made

or no?

Well, I will make that motion.

All right, hang on. Let me go to commission waving first. Okay.

So with your motion, so based on what we learned a second if that if that

Well, I'm going to ask her to modify her to consider

under discussion.

No, we have a motion to second based upon so we bound this board bound because we were suspect to villages on the green. We bound it in the architectural design standards and everything that's being shown just like it's being shown here. Yeah,

great pictures looking good

and we were unsure about it because it won up the core of that village. So, we bound it hasn't come to fruition. So, if depending on what you're approving, they could show us all these fancy pictures like folks have done before and it may not come out this way.

So, I'm just saying I'm I'm uneasy on this one.

Well, clearly.

Are we binding this architecture here? What's also applicant number

the applicant is happy to agree to binding the conceptual site plan that was fitted with the application and if it um places the board will also agree to have you know some sort of architectural standards that they'll be residential in character all the buildings.

So what would be shown today?

Yes.

So Mr. Chairman, what I would suggest is adding to 33 of the conditions of approval. Developer shall be bound by the elevations and concept plan that were made part of the record in this hearing.

Yeah. Is

that good for the motion maker?

Yes, I will. That's what I'm expecting.

I'm good with

Okay. Yeah.

Any further discussion?

All in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed?

I'll say I but I'm prove me wrong

because the builder and the owner is here.

Okay. Motion passes 50. But I do want to talk to staff about the other issues that he's talked about

and I I think it's a good idea. So let Commissioner W drive that one.

All right. Item P89 was pulled.

Mr. Chairman, so we don't forget it. Um there was an item PFBA 26-000063. Um, it was noticing a public hearing on the county's intent to acquire part of the system from FGOA. Um, that item is being withdrawn from this agenda. It was advertised. It is not on your agenda, but it in case there's anybody in the audience who is here for that item, it is being withdrawn by the administrator and it will become back as a regular item likely on August 11th.

It's not on your agenda. It was advertised for today.

Okay.

So, P89 was on consent, was pulled. We had a couple of people want to speak to it. So, let me let me take the public comment first.

Absolutely. So

P89

P89 you have Nancy Hazelwood who has signed up.

Okay.

Two for P90 just

right Hazwood 34110110 A nice place city Florida. Did I just hear you all say that it's what? Withdrawn or

FGA?

No, different.

Different item.

Not your item.

Okay. So, this doesn't mean if it comes back or something, I can't talk, right? Okay. So, there's a couple of things. That's

This is final approval of this item. So, yes, this is your opportunity to speak.

Yes, sir. Um, so the first thing I was wanting to know is they've got 118 acres, I believe. Um, but yet they say that they're going to do a pumpkin patch and a small Christmas walk. I was wondering why that took 118 acres.

That's one question. Number two, um, is I am concerned about them staying open till 100 a.m. and they're asking for more alcohol. But maybe this this part is too different because I'm concerned about kids from high school being left out till 1:00 a.m. and getting home at 2:00 a.m. I don't know. Is that something we do now? We let our kids stay out to 2 am if they're 17 years old, 18 years old, maybe 16, because if they're keeping it open till 1:00 a.m. and then the kids are going home, I don't not sure how responsible that is. So that that's another consideration. I believe that's on there. Am I mistaken, Mr. Steinstein?

Am I mistaken in that? I do believe that's on there that they want to change the times. I

it is but we don't get into that right.

Well you you know if it's part of the conditions of approval you can get into that but

I mean discussion

but it I'm not sure whether that's part of the

Friday and Saturday.

Okay.

Anyways that's that's my concern. And I'm not sure that's real responsible leaving something open till 1:00 a.m. and you've got kids in there that are still in high school, but maybe I'm wrong and things have changed. I'm I'm just an old person now. Thank y'all. [laughter]

Mr. Hobby,

Mr. Chairman Clark Hobby J Hobby and HobbyP PA 109 North Brush Street, Tampa, Florida. Ben Sworn uh to answer the questions and just to remind everyone, we are we have the same hours of operation on these two sites. All we're doing is combining the two sites and allowing them to operate at the same time so that if we have the Screamageddon event on the east side, we can have a pumpkin patch on the west side. Similarly, if we have the snowhill going on the west side, we can have a Christmas function on the other side. The only thing that changed is we added a little more time for people to get off of the site after we close the gates with regard to the alcohol. And I think she might have really been alluding to the next uh conditional use item. Uh we have been open since 2012. Um and we've been selling alcohol for a number of years and we've never had a drinking and driving uh issue. And the reason is the client has a very harsh uh drinking on-site series of rules for liability purposes and they maintain relationships with Uber andyft so that if anyone is cited as being, you know, drunk on site, they automatically pay for them to have a free ride home. They just call the person and said, "You're out of here and here's your ride home." Commissioner Starky,

I think this is going to be a great addition to the community. And as I said in the meeting that I was with you guys, please have your applicant get that um Harry Potter experience. [laughter]

And I don't think there's alcohol and butterbeer, but I don't know. I I didn't know that. Um but uh that was an amazing experience. I went to that in Virginia with my daughter and and my grandkids. You're walking through the woods at night and it's a Harry Potter village and it was amazing and I love that our community's maybe can be able to have something like that here. I

I won't belabor things but this is a real Pasco success story. Yeah. That we have 75 full-time equivalent employees out there and there were over 7,000 hotel night stays last year for this project.

Just wait till they get Harry Potter or whatever it's called.

Okay. No. And I say I've been out there several times with the family watching what he's done from tree hoppers on through and it's always been a tremendous experience. What he's done is just elevate entertainment in Pasco County to to the highest level. So I think he'll do a great job with it.

Do you have comment?

Um I had one public comment. They had no one else signed up.

Anyone else want to do public comment to this item?

No one signed up. I have a motion

to approve. [clears throat]

Second.

All in favor say I. I I

Any opposed? You unanimous. Okay, next one. P90

that one. You have two people.

I have two people speak. Please come forward.

Yep. So, Nancy Hazelwood followed by Christy Zimmer for P90.

What number?

90.

Yeah, this is the alcohol portion. Yeah,

I think um basic Nancy Hayeswood 34110110 a nice place. I pretty much have the same thing to say. This is in the northeast area plan. I did hear that they take good care of the alcohol. If anybody's watching, I talked to neighbors about it and that's on. I just have problems with the 1:00 a.m. thing and letting kids on our street at at that time. And um if you read through it, it sounds like they're actually closing their gates at 1. So if they're closing them earlier, I could take that into consideration. I wonder what time that would be. Also, um I wish y'all would quit making destinations in the northeast real area plan that don't really fit. We're trying to be rural. Save your natural resources in Pasco County and make it more like a state park that has areas in it to walk through. And I love their tree toppers where you go through the trees and everything that fits in perfectly. But the rest of this stuff and and they told us they were making small pumpkin patches and a small Christmas walk. Well, still 118 acres doesn't sound too small. Thank you.

Okay. Christy Zimmer, address on record, 7,000 hotel rooms because of their facility. I want proof of that. Um, I respectfully request that this conditional application be denied and continued until additional evidence is provided demonstrating compliance with the county's approval standards. This request is not simply a continuation of an existing approval. that represents a significant intensification of the current alcohol authorization by expanding from a 20p 2 cop beer and wine permit which is the alcohol they've been serving to a full 4 cop liquor license which is a lot different. It's a whole different concept of alcohol extending alcohol sales throughout a large 118 acre amusement and an entertainment complex. I I don't believe this is an agurism project. It sounds like a commercial tourism project. First, the applicant has not demonstrated compatibility with rural and architecture agricultural character of this area. The property is located within the northeast northeast Pasco rural area and carries an agricultural future land use designation. While recreational uses may be permitted, the burden remains on the applicant to demonstrate the full liquor sales and late night operations are compatible with the surrounding agricultural and residential uses, which I don't think that it is. The staff report contains little analysis supporting that conclusion. Second, the applicant has not provided significance addressing the public health, safety, and welfare impacts associated with the expanded alcohol consumption and type of alcohol and late night operations. The proposed hours would allow alcohol sales until 11:00 p.m. on weekends and alcohol sales until 1:00 a.m. on weekends. Rural roadways such as St. Joe Road and Bellamy Brothers Boulevard present unique safety concerns and the record contains no alcohol-related public safety analysis. We they say it but there's no record of it. Third environmental review appears incomplete. The staff reports acknowledges that detailed wildlife surveys and wetland delineation information are still required until those studies are complete and evaluated. The board does not possess all the information necessary to fully assess impacts associated with the intensified use of this property. Fourth, the transportation mitigation identified by the county staff has not yet been completed. The traffic review determined that a left turn lane is required on St. Joe Road with completion anticipated by fall of 27. Approval of an intensified alcohol-related use before required transportation improvements are in place is premature and dangerous. Finally, the applicant already possesses an approved alcohol permit for beer and wine sales associated with the amusement park. The record does not demonstrate why the existing authorization is inadequate or why expanded liquor sales are necessary. The burden of proof rest on the

applicant and I do not believe the burden has been met. A mixture of alcohol and late late night hours does not create a familyfriendly environment. Nothing good happens after midnight. For these reasons, I re I respectfully request denial of the application or at a minimum a continuence until outstanding environmental transportation and compatibility issues have been fully addressed. Thank you.

All right. Anyone want to hear from staff? Okay. Um I'm just ask one question as far as like a turn lane. Do you think it's needed um from the intersection going out to Bellamy?

I have the transportation team coming up to talk to discuss.

Good afternoon. Mohammed Hakshinas with the planning development and economic growth. Um I think a timing and phasing study has been uh provided to us and we reviewed that. Um those type of uh turn lanes their uh specifications will be more detailed provided at the time of cycling and with the access management analysis but they do provide some information about if turnings are warranted or not.

Okay.

Yep.

Thank you Mr. Hobby

Clark Hobby again. Uh, and we do have Mike Razer, our uh, our transportation planner here. I'll try to address a couple of these things. First of all, when it comes to the burden of proof, the staff report in and of itself is competent, substantial evidence to substantiate the approval of the application. So, I don't need to provide any further evidence. All you heard from the objector was argument. there was no expertise offered. Um the difference between uh selling beer and wine and liquor does not generate any additional trips um statistically and for that reason there's no differentiation in the IT code. There's no difference with the type of facility when it comes to selling beer and wine uh and selling alcohol in this area. I think most of you are probably aware that the Florida Cracker uh facility opened up in St. Joe just down the road on St. Joe Road uh a few months ago. It sells all kinds of alcohol including booze uh liquor I should say and it's wildly successful. Um even Disney and and facilities like that now sell liquor. So the days of just beer and wine and not liquor are kind of gone. And for that reason, when you go into a Circle K, maybe you'll I don't drink it, but there are a lot of the stuff that looks like beer now that actually has liquor in it. It's usually uh down at a lower percentage of alcohol by volume than if you were to go buy a Jack and Coke, but it's it's sold virtually everywhere now. So, um, and last thing I'd say, and I could give this to staff, but we have 10 letters of no objection for this application from almost all of our closest neighbors. So, the neighbors are fine with it. Florida Crackers selling booze right down the road. People want to get a drink when they're out. I'm sorry, times have changed.

All right. To the board.

Move to approve.

Second.

Any further discussion? All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed? Unanimous. And P92 got a question about the Orange Belt Trail. So, we did um find the answer and Gina's pulling it up right now. So, basically, finding a fact number 10 does describe this in detail. Um, but the aerial map will also show you as well. So, there is an existing 12oot multi-use path on the north side of State Road 52 from Bellamy Brothers over to Curly uh Curly Road. So, that's going to be your um east side along Bellamy Brothers. So, at the intersection south, um they are constructing a 10 foot wide multi-use pave uh path that is being done by the Amazon. Uh

so, I think that's built already,

right? And uh and it's on the west side.

West, correct?

Okay. So, you've got to get from the west side to the east side.

Uh so, they're going from it's going to go across the street to the north.

Which way? Which way across the street? Um,

where where are you crossing the street?

On the east side or the west side at that intersection?

State Road 54 off.

So, what I'm asking is how do you get

across the street?

And I just looked at a map of of uh the Orange Belt and it it goes north on Bellamy and cuts in through uh Clark's here because that that's his client. It cuts through that property on on the that's on the east side there and goes under the underpass for right now.

Right.

Roads and then roads.

Thank you. Um so there is a a sidewalk on the south side, multi-use path on the north side and they would have to cross the street tax.

So show just like physically walk me through that. There's no there's no refuge in the middle of that highway,

correct?

For a a a cyclist or a scooter or anyone.

Um, so how is someone going to safely cross that road? And is there a driveway? Are there driveways into whatever is coming here? Maybe a gas station. I don't know. Is it a drive-thru business?

Um, they were proposing a potential drive-thru.

Okay. So, I just I am very concerned.

Ice cream shop type. I just need you to tell me, someone tell me what's the engineering plan to cross the street safely.

They got two marks sidewalks there.

Yeah. Uh I don't have the details if there's an island being constructed.

So will they cross Bellamy south of 52 and then go north on the east side of that intersection? I just someone as that site plan's coming in some someone's got to pay attention to how this corner this intersection is safely navigated.

Yeah, it does look like they would have to cross.

Do you have any suggestions, Commissioner? I mean, if it's on the west side of Bellamy heading north, I would presume that it's it's easiest to to cross.

Well, there is a way to make a refuge over there maybe.

Uh, we can talk to FD. I know there is a widening project that's coming in at that

very poorly thought out this

and we can have those conversations. Yeah.

Um

it's got trails both sides.

You just can't get there safely.

No, but I'm saying but but I'm saying your your east west is like connected and actually even takes it on in front of this. It goes actually close to the roadway.

So what are you pointing to? This is a sidewalk on the south side, right? And that's the M that that is the standard now state 52 bicycle path on the north side. Um but the orange belt that is not part of the orange belt that from what I've seen it goes up

over until we get the the orange belt trail

to go over later on

cuz Yeah. This because this could actually go right down to where you want that overpass in 52.

Well, that's why that's there.

Yeah. So I mean

but but you have to cross the street,

right? You do got cross be right there.

A lot of these are going to be kids and so I just want to make sure we're creating a safe environment for them.

Environment to cross. I don't know what kind of I just want to make sure that whatever happens on this corner in the site plan approval that they're taken into account however anyone's crossing the street. And until I see a plan of how that's happening, I I have concerns. So, if you could tell me we could fix it somewhere or you can you're going to deal with it in this site plan approval. I don't know. Do we get another chance after this or are we done?

It's not on the same side as the applicant's property, is it?

Correct. So this is from what Miss Tull just said, Amazon is building building the 10 foot a 10 foot wide trail on the west side, which means the the crossing in order to get to the other side, you either cross Bellamy and then 52 or you just cross 52 straight forward. Okay.

But I'm hearing you. So I don't know if there's anything you can hold this applicant

to in terms of safely crossing it between us and FDOT and and our trail. You need to see someone needs to see if there's a landing place on the north

west corner corner. That's correct.

Of 52 in Bellamy for someone to cross the street there because I don't think they took that into consideration.

So there there is safety money with DOT. We'll get that grant a couple years ago after going to NO.

So this could be added to that and if they are going to redo that section and that intersection does need to get get redone anyway because that needs turn lanes anyway especially on the other side. So if they're looking at that right now, which I think they are,

the safety stuff can be incorporated.

I believe there is widening that's underway right now.

Yeah, both both sides west of this intersection. So that needs to be incorporated. The message received.

Yeah, because the multi-use path on Bellamy is going to be on the east side going north is what we've been told here. And so

it's said it's on what trail?

No, on the west side it's a sidewalk north of 52. I tried to get y'all to stop that, but I wasn't successful. So, the multi-use path,

according to these guys, is on the west side, east side of Bellamy, north of 52.

Oh, okay. My misunderstanding. I thought you said the west side.

No, it Yeah, the multi-use path is on the west side of Bellamy on the south.

South of 52.

On the southern edge,

where? On the north side of 52. It's on the east side.

That's what she said. So they So so now you have to make two dangerous crossings. That's

you have to cross. Yes. You'll have to cross once and then cross like like Starky.

Yes. Exactly. That's correct.

Or we just add a fatality.

There's going to be two crosses no matter what you do.

Correct.

It's a dangerous hobby and if that's what you choose to do, that's what you choose to do is your hobby.

All right.

It wouldn't be this applicant's problem to solve. That's that was my point.

Yeah. It just depends on where their driveway is.

That's

I see what you're saying.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right. To the board.

Move approval.

Second.

Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I.

We need to.

Okay. That takes care of the consent. We'll go to P93.

All right. So P93 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times April 1st, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. You're going to be got

Good afternoon, William Vermillion Planning, Development, Economic Growth. Somebody appears to have put my uh clicker in their pocket when they left. [laughter] Here we go.

We might have found who that is.

I could have done it telepathically, but I didn't want to show off like that.

This is the uh this is the companion zoning amendment to the to the previously approved CPA on the the ordinance section of the agenda. This is Mitchell 41 MPUD. What?

This is a reszoning from AC agricultural to MPUD master plan unit development

for the total of 2100 residential dwelling units, 880,000 square ft of light industrial, 99,000 square ft of office and associated infrastructure on roughly 1,219 acres. This is located in northwest Pasco County on the west side of US 41 just north of the intersection with 52.

Here's the location map within the county.

The current aerial you can see Cruz Lake and US41 [clears throat] there. The existing zoning reflecting agricultural. The current future land use map. Look, it looks like a a hodge podge, but back in 2008, each individual wetland had a had a con flu placed over it, which is why you see all that dotted areas of con. You can see some IIL and uh some the old office flu. Context map of the subject site there in blue, you can see US41 as well as the CSX railroad, which runs through the uh the area of what we called Panellis County for the for the water. Then you can see the Starky to Crossbar ecological corridor in yellow as well as in red the already acquired Elamp property and Cruz Lake Park there in pink. So a couple different things to discuss on the master plan that are that are pretty good planning thought. The first being that 98% of the on-site wetlands are being preserved by the applicant there in green. It's actually 98.6% just north of that. And even bigger than that, there's two areas specifically called out for tree preservation. Staff went out with the applicant with natural resources, the county arborist, and looked at the on-site oak canopies that exist. And this was well before the county adopted the tree ordinance. And uh the applicant and staff were able to work together to come up with two different preservation areas totaling roughly 47% of the on-site trees being preserved as a part of this application. You can see there in yellow that's the largely residential area and in red the non-residential area. As we move forward into the MPD connectivity plan, which gives us more detail than the master plan gave, the first things that are easy to point out is as big wins for the project outside of the tree preservation areas, both in the northwest corner and central to that roundabout is the trail that runs through the Starky crossbar. The first segment there is in blue and the second segment in yellow which takes you to the trail head within the tree preservation area on that northwest portion all the way to the center north of the property. The blue being the responsibility of the county to construct and the orange being the responsibility of the developer. This is the last one. You can see also in in blue there, the applicant is reserving a school site. And then there's also additionally there's multi-use paths throughout the project outside of that trail segment that runs through the Starky crossbar, both along uh roads A and C, which are the two access points to State Road 41. The southern of which is a four lane, the northern of which to serve the non-residential is a two-lane as it uh meanders through the property. Another another good thing to point out here is, you know, as the county and FDOT prepare for the four-lane widening of 41, which is contemplated in the long range transportation plan and the cost

affordable plan, what staff did is work with the applicant to go ahead and acquire all the all the rideway necessary for the ultimate 220 footlaning of 41 on the applicant side. Because if I was to go over here, uh, back to the master plan, if you look on the opposite side of 41, it's a bunch of tiny little single family parcels, and it would have taken the county a long time to go through the imminent domain process to get all that rightway for 41. So, what we've done here is be able to speed up the process with the help of the applicant to get the rightway dedication from the west side of the road. In this case, on the connectivity plan, we do have the typical sections which highlights the 10-ft multi-use paths that are going to be going on both sides of the road. Um, whenever this project came in, the board will remember the typical section for the county at that time was a 12oot multi-use path, a 5-ft sidewalk, and a bike lane. And before that was adopted, the applicant worked with staff to go ahead and implement the two 10- foot multi-use paths on either side of the road and eliminate the bike lane to decrease some of the conflict that happens with pedestrians.

Is the applicant putting a 10-ft path in front of the property

on 41? We have the rightway for um the F.ypical section. Uh if the board remembers when the mosquito property came in, we had a conversation about the pedestrian facilities on US 41 and FDOT is currently redoing their designs because of the old PD&E working with the county and the county engineer um that we have the rightway to accomplish a 10 or a 12ft multi-use path which the county is trying to get on both sides of the road.

Right. And I'm not worried about the other side of the road, but with all these homes coming in, we need at least their side of the road, I would think, done.

Absolutely. And that makes a lot of sense considering we're also doing a transit stop on the uh along 41 with this property that the multi-use path would make sense to work with. Yes, sir.

It would be interesting if we could get an equestrian path along one of the sides because this area is a big equestrian area and going to grow into a bigger equestrian area.

Certainly. And I think the last thing to highlight as a part of the connectivity plan is the maintenance easement that's shown there on the bottom. There's two different access points for our parks and rec natural resources folks to be able to get into what is going to be 180 acres of acquisition that the county

that the count let's see

let me back up here.

Yeah. So essentially that area in yellow outside of the subject site, it was a part of the original sub area. It was all under the same ownership, but what the county is doing as a with the parks and wreck and purchasing about 180 acres of purchasing that land where that trail is going to go. Um, and two access easements for the county to be able to get in there and maintain that and a good use of the land with the the passive trails going in for the public to use. This is just highlighting the uh the land use equivalency matrix showing the board that there's no non-residential conversions to residential and that as a part of this um I think that Clark touched on this before. The original mandate of the sub area policy was to have north of 900 multif family apartments. As a part of this, this is capped at 600. So, not only it's a 300 plus dwelling unit reduction of what would have been required under the current 2008 approval, as well as capping the town homes there under at 500, but still giving the applicant the option to do fully single family detach in this area at the 2100 as well as the industrial office and retail components that we that we saw in red. There are three different variations from the code. The first being 9016011 street access to adjoining property was to go back. The applicant cannot connect uh as we move to the west. That's a part of that that Elant property that the countyy's acquiring, but they are providing connections to 41 to the south and to the north of the subject site in compliance with the land development code. The second variation being from 8056 restrictions on postdevelopment wetlands and upland buffers. This is for parcels under single ownership only for commercial or multif family to maintain their own common areas instead of establishing a CDD or an HOA. And finally from LDC table 9013A which is the amount of access points um per ERU or estimated residential unit. Typically, the code requires two access points once you get north of 600 dwelling units. In this case, this variation is for the fourlaning of the southern access prior to be able to serve units up to,200 before constructing the additional road. So, the same volume capacity is being preserved by constructing road C up front as a four-lane road as two accesses would have been required by the code. Given that the planning, development, economic growth and the county engineer are in support of the variation from table 9013A and this comes with a recommendation of approval from PTE and the planning commission with conditions and I'm available for any questions.

Any questions?

Chair so under the existing or staff or Mr. Hobby, we're reduc so this project today we're reducing multif family by how many units? 301 what?

This is Clark Hobby for the record again. It's it would be a minimum of 334 but it's likely to be much much more commissioner. I mean, right now we're not even planning for any apartments on the project and it's really intended. I'll have a larger discussion, but this project, this if I might just get into my presentation and chief, so I'm here on behalf of the Mitchell family and their entities and and West Bay Homes who's the contract purchaser. We have been working for four years with county staff on this four uh took about 18 months for Angelene frame of reference. So an extreme amount of thought has gone into the planning of this site,

making sure the eco corridor uh conveyance is going to occur and when the SMPUD gets approved that will trigger the purchase and sale of the eco corridor provisions and that uh contract will be coming to you all in about a month or so and hopefully the closing will occur maybe in you know a month or so after that. But the project has had a great deal of care from the West Bay uh planning team, the folks uh with our engineering folks at Clear View Land Design. I will give the county staff great credit on this one. When we got the first round of comments, the county staff said to us, "We're having a problem with people taking down too many trees throughout uh the county and part of the development project projects that we see. can you guys help? So, what happened was our whole team worked together [clears throat] and spent countless hours to design this project to take advantage of this beautiful ranch that I grew up fishing on. My grandfather fished out there for many, many years with the Wolf family that used to own it. and we preserved a significant amount of oak trees on the site and we're using them as our entry feature and many other amenities throughout the site. We're also building a four-lane boulevard entrance that goes around and a big roundabout around the trees. So again, we're taking advantage of what nature's giving us and we're not trying to nuke a bunch of wetlands either. Again, we're we're the projects designed to create creations to the Morsani track and the eco corridors that lie to our west and to our north. There are folks who use the Mazart town uh canal which is to the north to ride horses. And so we've had our team out. They've been riding brought horses out to the site and we're trying to connect create connections through Morsani so that our residents can have an equestrian usage to also get out to the the banks of the Mazar town uh um canal and use it the way the existing residents are. The the lot of discussion about densities on this thing, but I would remind the board it's a large piece of property. It's basically 1,400 acres before the eco corridor uh transaction occurs. Even with all we're doing today, the the net density is less than 2.5 units per acre. And that's because West Bay's intent is not to jam as much density on there, but to build a high-end community that does the things that this has always been planned for. And and it's instructive to go back and read the comp plan because about the same time that Dewey and I first started working on this project in 20089, the county went through a visioning process for the whole county. And part of it was the creation of the central market area which includes this area. And the central market area is envisioned as a suburban area with concentrated development and activity nodes with emphasis on employment centers and town centers. And the comp plan specifically says that the area north of 52 between 41 and the Sun Coast shall encourage development in the in that area and that the development shall be in a form with

mixeduse land uses and nodes or clusters that promote higher density integrated with employment retail and mutually supportive uses. That is what you are seeing here. We have increased the amount of acreage for the employment on this site. We have provided in the NPUD conditions for the provision of the infrastructure for the employment. We've provided for a school site. We've provided for the retail areas. And we're making a great mixeduse community. So, this is one people can talk about Pasco County being overdeveloped, but this is a community we're going to be very proud of for generations, and I stand behind it 100%.

Thank you. Um, Clark, can you go to the next screen? We don't have these in our packet. Any of these?

You don't have what in our packet?

Any of these pictures? So, this one, um,

on the connectivity plan. Oh, let me I'm sorry. Let me let me speak to that. Uh, I was just speaking with Mr. Henry, our transportation engineer, before I came up here. They just had a meeting with DOT that on the, uh, frontage and the sidewalk and multi-use path. The chairman and and Commissioner Starky brought this issue up. right now. Uh we just had a meeting with DOT recently and they agreed that if they approve of it, we will be able to install and we will install a 10-ft multi-use uh trail on our side along the front edge. So, we just have to get DOT's approval for it. And we worked um a lot to uh work on this trail that is on the back side of this that is going up uh up the wildlife corridor on the edge

and they're all

that gets you from 52 up to Crossbar and Albar and or uh I guess no I guess it gets you to Cruise Lake and whatever's above here. Yeah, that's that's going into the cruise lake and the eco corridor. But again, a lot of work went into this with staff um and a lot of departments and there was a lot of give and take with the developer. At first, we were worried about having, you know, maybe too much of the public if this will come on. Try it again.

The blue where the blue

There we go. We were worried about having high-end homes out in some of these areas and having maybe a little bit too much uh members of the public out there, but I think our client finally found that that really wasn't going to be an issue. and having the ability to get out in this huge eco corridor that the county's already spent millions and millions of dollars of creating over time and getting through the Morsy track is more of an amenity to the community that we're going to build than a hindrance to the people who will be the homeowners on that side.

And we have an equestrian facility that we're working on on the other side of the wildlife corridor. Our entrance comes in off the other side. Um, but it's going to be great for these residents who if they market to an equestrian community. And I want to thank um Mr. Suggs, Mr. Matheni, and um and Jordan came on a different trip. We don't have Toxy out on a bike yet out on Starky Ranch. Um, but they're the I think Jordan was on my second tour. Um, but I've been taking developers and engineers, done three now, uh, for bike rides out on Starky to see how the trails work and integrate within the community and I just appreciate you guys riding with me and um, I think we had a nice ride. So,

all right,

we'll wait for public comment and answer any other questions you may have.

I want I I appreciate what you just said at the end there. That covered my my biggest point so that was cool. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

All right, time for public comment. We have one person signed up.

Yes, sir. Michaela Krauss. Michaela Krauss, 35920, Praise Place, Unit 102, Zepher Hills, Florida 33541. I have sworn. Good afternoon, commissioners. I am here today to urge this board to deny the reasonzoning request for the Mitchell 41 MPUD. I find great inconsistency with the Pasco County comprehensive plan. This development is completely incompatible with Northwest Pasco's environment and directly violates county's core com con um com comfort saving the land conver yep policies. Um first this proposal contradicts chapter 2 policy 22.1.6. Second it directly violates chapter 5 policy 1.9.1. This massive track serves as a critical wildlife corridor. It cannot simply be replaced or mitigated away once fragmented. Third, this intense overdevelopment severely undermines policy con 1.6.17. Running completely counter to the county's mandate to safeguard our vital water resources and regional hydrarology. This local disregard for environmental boundaries also directly conflicts with state intent under Florida statute section 379.2291 and Florida administrative code rule 68A-27. Commissioners, your legal responsibility is to ensure that comprehensive plan amendments remain consistent with our adopted conservation goals. Please deny this resoning request. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else like to address P93?

Anyone online?

Um, my name and address again?

Yes, please.

Yes.

Gabriel Quigley, 1759 James Road, Date City.

And you've been sworn.

Do I need to?

Yes.

Were you sworn?

This parting of the agenda, you had need to be sworn.

Right. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give? Is the truth. So help you God.

So help me God. Yes. I'm just going to keep it quick for you guys. When I said that the re the land brokers and the developers and the retail companies are out of control, this is what I was talking about. These are the people who are coming to you asking you for an excuse for permission to make more money. They don't deserve it. Frankly, I don't think any of them do. We have enough of this in Pasco County. We don't need to sell off every piece of empty land just because it is empty. I have lived here my entire life. These people are sharks. Thank you.

Okay. Anyone else from from the audience like to speak? I have a close closed public comment because there's no one online either. That's to the board.

Approval commissioner.

Discussion. No, I just want to state that this is a state transmitt and um essentially the board is seeking the state's input prior to the hearing of the comprehensive.

No, it's the other one.

This is the next one.

This is zoning.

Aren't we?

93 reszoning.

Oh, it's not this one. Sorry.

Okay. So, we have a first

We have a motion.

Motion a second.

Second.

I can second. Yeah.

Okay. All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed? Motion passes and now we'll go to the comprehensive plan regular.

All right. So,

rivers transmitt.

So, P94 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times April 22nd, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

Steph, good afternoon board. Robert Irving, Planning Development, Economic Growth. This is item P94. It's a comprehensive plan amendment CPA 2407 Catal Two Rivers providing for a transmitt of a comprehensive plan text amendment to sub area policy flu 7.1.11 Two Rivers PD. Oh yes, additionally, we have received uh letters of opposition that were submitted to the clerk's office after the posting of the agenda. All right. So again, this proposal is a comprehensive plan text amendment to policy flu 7.1.11 to Rivers PD to allow for an increase in residential dwelling units and non-residential entitlements on approximately 3,45 acres. And it's located on the north and south side of State Road 56 spanning from Morris Bridge Road to Gaul Boulevard, US 301. Again, there is the companion the sub area policy which is proposed to be amended in this text amendment. And then there is a companion reszoning RZ7856 Two Rivers MPUD. So here's the county location. The subject site is located in the South Market area and the urban concentration area. And here's the existing boundary of the overall Two Rivers PD. Now, here's a context map just kind of walking you through the various vision roads and collector roads throughout the overall development. So, you'll see on the western boundary there's Morris Bridge Road running through. As we go east, there's Two Rivers Boulevard, which runs north south. There's Colston Avenue that runs east. Then there's G Boulevard, US 301. And then in the northeast corner you'll see two dash lines. There's LGrass Boulevard and Coats Road. Those are not constructed at this point, but Lodgrass Boulevard PTE currently has site plans that we're reviewing to construct Lodgegrass Boulevard, which will provide access to both the county park and the school site. Now, these are the main changes proposed in the text amendment, and these are the maximum levels of development. So to just take a step back, the existing sub area was adopted in 2008 and there has been no changes since 2008. So the existing sub area policy allows for land use equivalency matrix to occur and several have several have occurred but the entitlements on the actual sub area tax have not been updated to reflect such. So, some of this is a cleanup and some of these are new additional requests that are new and non-trip neutral to the project. So, of the existing 1,125 age restricted dwelling units, previously 912 have been exchanged to increase the multif family by 200 and the single family residential to 4,047. So, of the there, sorry, run back here. So there's 209 age restricted units remaining. So of the requested 900 additional multif family, 133 are contri cons considered to be trip neutral. And then there the applicant is requesting to add an additional 767

which are non-trip neutral. The use of 300 assisted living facility beds, 480 hotel rooms, 705,000 ft of retail, and a water park not to exceed 35 acres. One last thing I'll note is when this sub area was adopted in 2008, it allowed for a maximum of 6,400 dwelling units. The proposal today is for 6,547 dwelling units.

What was that number? Sorry.

So the original was 6,400. Today they're asking for 6,547.

So the proposed amendment is consistent with the following comprehensive plan policies. Section flu A6 PD plan development policy flu 7.1.11 Two Rivers PD policy flu 8.1.2 South Market Area Establishment policy flu 1.8.7 economic development policy flu 1.8.10 preservation of capacity for employment generating uses and policy HSG 1.1.2 comprehensive plan amendments policy ED 1.7.2 to promote tourism expansion.

And this comes to you with a recommendation of approval to authorize transmitt of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. I'm available if you have any questions.

Any questions for staff?

I do.

M um for the

Was this area of the county in designated an opportunity zone in years past?

I believe it was.

Yeah. Do we know what what year it was? But it was in an operator. I think that's important to know that

only one

iteration

one iteration of it. So this so for history so this this whole area was in an opportunity zone and um

interesting

the opportunity came uh which is which is interesting as time time has gone on. So thought that was important to have on the record. Um because I I never thought that that would have ever happened to be quite honest with you, but times sure have changed.

So follow that up. Is it still because I think they just re reaffirmed all the opportunity zones again, didn't they?

No, no, they're they're getting picked. But

Clark Kabby and uh Mr. Chairman, I am I am not sure is is the answer. But but if I might just lead you all through this because there's been a lot of I believe uh intentional misconstruction of this application online to further certain narratives about what's going on here. As you just heard from staff, the comp plan already allowed for many years 6,400 residential units here. We're seeking 6547. I heard people in the other hearing, yeah, that's about 2% difference we're asking for on the residential. We are asking for more commercial. We're excited to be asking for the approval for the surf park and we're asking for some more hotels because we think the surf park will bring in the need for more hotel night stays there. Um, this is not the MPUD, but if you look at what's going on here, the scope of the residential entitlements is not material to the scope of this development. What's important to remember in the bigger picture about Two Rivers is that Two Rivers has been planned since at least 2010 to be the eastern anchor of the urban service area and the South Market area. Except for Wiregrass and now Angelene, it's probably going to be the most important economic driver of the county for the next 50 years. It is being built out by Eisenhower uh Property Group and Eisenhower Property Group is building a high-end community, particularly on the south side of 56. They will spend over $50 million in landscaping and hardscape improvements alone south of 56. We've already sold, I believe, 120 something million plus dollar houses south of that area. We've already worked with the county and gotten the park regional park soul. We worked for years to align that with where the school site was going to go. The school sites there. We built all of the utilities at our cost, no county cost to go to the site and through the site. We have built several miles of vision roads through the site with no fee credits. If we were in VOP, connected city and certain other projects, they would have been fee creditable. We haven't asked for a penny. We have also built and are building about 10 miles of multi-use paths within this project. It's a great project. It's something you should be really proud of. I have Tony Miller here who can talk about the surf park, which I'm personally really excited about. and we anticipate will be a major regional and national draw to the site. We felt like that was one thing we were missing. We knew that we were light on commercial and that's the big change that you see here. We need more commercial. All the studies show that there just isn't enough commercial on this stretch of 56. But again, the reason why this 6.13 mile uh state road 56 extension was built from Meadow Point to 301 was this project and two other ones. And this was the biggest one. This project paid for about 60% of lanes 3 and four. And even after that, it will contribute approximately $50 million in mobility fees to the county. There's a lot to like here. Is the surf park done? Has a

deal closed?

Tony Miller is here and what he has told me and I I'll just say this on the record. It's very important to his project that the surf park approvals proceed as part of this. His equity investors have been patiently waiting while we work through with staff and the board to get these uh the project to this point. It's taken us over two years since the MPUD modification was filed to get to this point and we're not voting on that today. Today is just the transmitt of the plan amendment. But Tony says his investors are ready to go. He plans on filing for site plan approvals within a couple of months after the zoning is done.

And as we talked, if that surf park does come together, you're not going to need as many apartments because you're going to want to have more commercial,

right? And that but that's in the MPUD portion of it. But that will be part of the NPUD condition and the discussion after the transmitt comes back to us.

Well, I think we're an important part of the conversation here because I

we will not be adding any more apartments if the surf park isn't built.

Okay. Very good.

Happy to answer any other questions. Otherwise,

the question our neighbors

Okay, we'll go to public comment.

All right. So, Michaela Krauss is the only person signed up in person and online, but since she's here, Please line up if anyone's else want to speak. Michaela Krauss, 35920, Praise Please, Unit 102, Zepher Hills, Florida 33541. I have sworn. Good afternoon, commissioners. I'm a resident here today to strongly urge urge you to deny the proposed comprehensive plan amendment affecting two rivers. After reviewing the Pasco County comprehensive plan, I find this proposal completely inconsistent with its adopted policies, chapter 5, policy 1.9.1. It is also highly inconsistent with chapter 5 policy 1.10.4, before which uh encourages um passive recreation within a neighborhood like this that has scattered conservation uh portion lots. Um it further violates chapter 2 policy 2.1.6. Um Indian Creek which sits within the water basin of and directly feeds into the Hillsboro River and outstanding Florida waterway. This directly risks degrading water quality that is already in a vulnerable state, running counter to Florida administrative code 62-302.30. Critically, this property provides irreplaceable habitat for state and federally endangered uh flora like the clasping warriia sand butter sand butterfly pee, Florida golden ashture, and the federally protected mkasuki gooseberry under Florida statutes title 35 chapter chapter 581 section 185 and Florida administrative code rule 5b-40 0001. Um I also have been in contact with the permitting facility and they did not find any permitting that allows two rivers um to remove these natural endangered flora. Furthermore, I asked the board to look closely at goal con 2 of chapter 3 of the Pasco County comprehensive plan. This applicant has already demonstrated a complete disregard for these standards and Florida administrative code rule 62-296 320 governing open burning. I have sworn and I can verify that this past January 3rd and 4th of 2026, a massive unpermitted open burn took place on this exact Two Rivers property on Grande Dominion Drive that you can see from Morris Bridge Road. And I was driving at 45 miles an hour and could not get a picture. But where this little line is right here, that that top of that little circle in the sand, top of the circle all the way down to the bottom of the circle. You see it's dark. This was a burn pile. And I contacted the district of with Luchi Forest Service, Cassie. Me and her have been chatting it up. She has sent me the recent peritting paperwork. They didn't have permitting Thank you.

Thank you.

Please deny this.

All right. Next person.

Okay. Cindy Buckle, 5938 Frontier Drive, Zephr Hills, Florida. And I am asking,

have you been sworn?

Yes, I have been sworn.

Thank you.

Okay. Okay. I'm talking about water. Chapter 403, section 852025, Municipalities in Florida are required to provide portable water through public water systems which must comply with the Florida Safe Water Drinking Act. Now, we are going through a 25 year drought. Okay? Have any of you ever run out of water when you're in your shower? Anybody? I'm asking the question. I have. Okay. And right now I'm on a well and our pressure is dropping. And I also travel throughout Florida and Georgia and measure the springs myself. I have had conversations with Governor Kemp in Georgia regarding the water issues and I've let him know what's happening here in Florida in Pasco County is developers can pump 33 million gallons a day for a lagoon. Now you want to build a 35 acre water park.

Okay. So when I run out of water, what's going to happen? I'm not going to pay for city water to run down my road. I have horses. Right now, my water's testing with mercury in it. Okay? So, it's got to stop. At some point, you all have to stop. And the fires, they're not accidents. These there's no way these fires are accidents. I know for a fact someone on the board here personally had certain plants weeds burned because they didn't like them. That started a horrific fire. We are very dry right now. We are not getting the rain. Our aquafer is there's there's no way we can recoup the rain. So you keep pumping the 33 million gallon lagoons now a 35 acre water surf park. We don't need an adventure island out here. We have one that's not very far away. We don't need a 380 room hotel. This is going to cause thousands and thousands of more traffic on two-lane roads. 301 Morris Bridge Road. I can tell you the number of fatalities that happen on these roads every weekend. At least two to three people die on these roads. Whether they're on the Pasco side or the Hillsboro County side, it does not matter. When you put all those homes in, you're putting people on two lane roads because those roads aren't going to be widened for a long time. It took 25 years for 54 to get done up to Morris Bridge because I watched it happen. So I'm just praying to deny this. Okay. Thank you to the board. It's a submitt approval.

Second.

Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I.

Any opposed?

Okay. Item P95, conditional use.

P95 was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times May 27th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified millings and site postings.

Good afternoon. Amy Tol with planning, development, and economic growth. Item before you is PTE 26-C3. additional use request. Um, and a

Amy, do we have to do we have to have the whole presentation?

It's up to you.

No. Uh, can we find out? We Commissioner Mariano is going to miss his plane.

Absolutely.

Um, I just can we see if there's anyone here in opposition?

Yep.

Do you mind that?

No, I think it's a good idea.

You have an individual signed up.

Okay. And who's that?

This is Michaela. Michaela Krauss.

Okay. I'm going to public comment.

Michaela Kra. Michaela Krauss 35920 Praise Place Unit 102 Zephr Hills, Florida 33541. I have sworn. Good afternoon, commissioners. I am here today on behalf of myself and my neighbors to urge you to deny the application for the proposed cell tower on the west side of Laner Road, approximately 2,300 ft south of Chansy Road. Our objection is grounded strictly in land use compatibility and public safety under Pasco County's own rules. According to Pasco County Land Development Code section 10002, a wireless tower adjacent to a residential zone must meet strict setback requirements to protect our homes. Specifically, unmitigated towers require a setback equal to two times the tower height from residential property lines. This proposed tower sits directly against our backyards. It completely fails to meet these mandatory safety buffers, placing a massive commercial structure directly inside the structural fall zone of our residential homesteads. Furthermore, Florida statute title 27, chapters 365, section 172 and Pasco County Code explicitly state that a new tower should only be built as a last resort. The applicant has a legal burden to prove that they cannot collocate their equipment on existing towers, utility poles, or commercial rooftops nearby. The applicant has not presented exhausting exhaustive engineering proof that has a brand new intrusive tower is the only solution for their coverage gap. We ask the board to hold the applicant to the strict letter of the law and reject this application for failing to exhaust nearby commercial alternatives. Finally, the Pasco County comprehensive plans future land use element mandates neighborhood stabilization and land use compatibility, placing a massive industriallooking tower directly towering over our beautiful backyards and establish generational family homesteads completely destroys the aesthetic integrity and character of our neighborhood. It is entirely incompatible with the surrounding residential zone. Commissioners, the rules in the land development code are there to protect the citizens and the homeowners who invest their lives into Pasco County. This application violates those protections. We ask you to enforce our local codes, uphold the comprehensive plan, and deny this application. And I know every single resident in that area that land they want to put it on has peacocks on it. And I can tell you right now, none of them know that this is happening. And that's why I'm here. I'm trying to stop this. Please listen to us.

Can I Can I get your address again?

35920 Praise unit 102 Zephr Hills, Florida. And I swam in this Doc Holmes pool that is right right on Laner Road. Thank you.

Thank you.

There's no one else.

All right. Any questions? Any Anyone else here for public comment for this item?

Gabriel Quigley, 17595 James Road, Dade City.

I don't know my code as well as Miss Krauss here,

but she is right. No, that's

And now I just would like to say for the record because I'm standing in front of people that my tax dollars pay that I don't care if these LLC's get everything above board. I don't care if they make it all pretty and accessible. I don't want to drive by it. The difference between listening to us and them is that they have money. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else for public comment? Anyone online?

No, sir. Okay, back to the board.

I cannot I cannot find Grace Place. Did you say Grace Place?

We're done with public comment.

No, but she answered her question.

I want to see if it's going to fall in our backyard like she said. What What's your address?

My address is 35920 Praise Place as in

The tower is right down here. Tower's going down here.

Hey, good afternoon. James Johnston with Shutzen, 300 South Orange Avenue, uh, representing the applicant. Um, you know, we're in agreement with the staff report, which we think supports this application along with the county's outside consultant and the planning commission. Um, as far as um, fall zone, I think we provided a fall zone letter, but I do note that it's 149 foot tower and it's set back over that, well over that from all property owns.

But I'm here to answer any questions if you have one.

Chair, I assume every all the proper noticing requirements and everybody in the area was notified with the mail and know that this is

a potential. Okay. She lives here.

Yep. I mean, we we followed all the county,

right? So, everybody was notified.

Yeah.

Amy told Planning and Development, I can confirm that. Um, so at the beginning of this application, we did receive various letters of objection. Um, through that process, we actually worked with the applicant to um reduce the height and enhance the landscape buffering. And as a result, those uh letters of opposition, people who did previously have opposition are aren't here. So, we've worked with them to resolve those issues.

Okay. Thank you.

Okay. To the board.

Yeah. It's not going to fall on her backyard. It's not falling on anyone's backyard. So, I just wanted to be sure because that would not be good.

Well, cell towers are a critical piece of our infrastructure. They're not pretty, but we all have cell phones and computers and iPads and just the way our world communicates and

they're just part of our world for now. So with that, I move approve.

Second.

All in favor say I.

I. Any opposed?

Okay, we're going to move back to our our items.

And if we could, I'd like to go right to R78 first.

Yep. Hello, Amy Frell, budget director with the Office of Management and Budget. I'm here with item R78 or OM 260056. They were supposed to be there. So while the presentation is being pulled up um so high level the purpose of this item is for the board to approve proposed millage rates for the trim millages that will go out on property tax notices and also set the date time and location for our first public hearing. We did u two very indepth workshops one in June and one in July. So the content for today is going to be a highle summary and recap of those meetings and then moving to the meat and potatoes of the presentation which is setting those millage rates. And again when we set the millage rates today we are setting the ceiling on those millage rates. When we come back in September for the first and final public hearings those u millage rates can come down. They just can't come up from what the board sets today. All right. So, I'm going to move us through. Um, so we have had a pretty extensive budget cycle up to this point. In January, we looked at strategic plan prioritization and officially kicked off our budget cycle internally. In February, we did updates on major revenue projections. Um, and we briefed the board on all of the Advil Valorum funded services and resource allocations. March through May, we were refining our budgets with all of our departments internally. In June and July, again, we did some thorough workshops. It included constitutional officer budget workshops and then the boardside operating capital and we reviewed our debt portfolio. Today, we'll be setting trim and then in September, we're going to come back for the first and final public hearings to adopt the budget. concerns.

And here you can see the budget that we that the county administrator is proposing is based on board direction and is responsive to executing the board strategic plan while also ensuring strong fiscal stewardship.

Oh no, no, we have building.

All right. So the underlying pinnings and assumptions of this budget, we are assuming no change in the operating mill rate in the fire MSTU mill rate in the road rehabilitation MSTU mill rate or the parks mill rate. Also no change in the storm water assessment and no change in the solid waste rates and the water and wastewater rates are increased per the approved rate study. And there are some pressures um that are impacting the budget that's in front of you right now. We've got property tax reform pending in November on how that ballot initiative shakes out. Um we are looking at addressing structural imbalance in the general fund, making sure that our recurring revenue um can sustain our recurring expenses while also maintaining our reserve levels. We've got public safety staffing wage and benefits. That's always kind of a pressure that's out there. General inflation, we have public facilities that we must maintain. We've got um Wesley Chapel Library coming online soon. We've got Villages of Pasadena Hills Nature and Bike Park. And then of course um Medicaid rates that come from the state each year. All right. So in June we got preliminary taxable assessed values and you can see for the general fund we were looking at 6.3% increase and then the final numbers did come in for July and it's at 6.8%. To put this into some context, our growth last year was at 11.2. 2% and then this year you see how that growth is um it's coming down and we're at 6.8%. So now let's talk a little bit about that structural balance in the general fund. So here's the general fund at the 50,000 ft view. So we've got a starting um estimated beginning fund balance of next year of just under 89 million with 5 almost 83 million in revenue coming in and 586 million going out in expenses. our recurring revenue is a little bit above our recurring expenses and you can see from the non-recurring line that um we're putting some of that recurring revenue back into reserves and we are able to meet the GFOA recommendation of 60 days by doing that. All right, so here's a pie chart that just illustrates how the general fund expenses are allocated with more than 50% going to public safety. That includes the sheriff, corrections, um, emergency management, juvenile detention, the medical examiner, things like that. If we just follow clockwise, then you see that reserves, again, we're hovering around that 60-day target. And then if you keep going, we're looking at mandated and internal support service. So mandated support um when we start talking about services that the state mandates for us to provide and maybe it comes with a funding source and maybe it doesn't having open meetings like this today that's a state mandate we're mandated to do it but there is no funding associated how we fund that is through advalorum taxes our 911 call center um that also gets a subsidy out of the general fund that's a mandated service and the funding tied to that is not enough to cover um and then

maintaining our public facilities. You can see here in that blue, that's roughly $35 million for us to maintain beautiful buildings like this. And if we keep coming, that red chart, that's our other constitutionals minus the sheriff and our six judicial circuit partners. And then if you keep moving to that green bit, that's our outward facing. And then you can see over in the table, that's our parks, community services, libraries, misdemeanor probation. We had a resolution with them here this morning. um our veteran services also falls into that piece of the pie chart. All right. So, what are some of the things that um we need to be funding out of our general fund? So, we're looking at 3% wage increase. We've got retirement rates back from the state. We are expanding the jail. Um Wesley Chapel Library, we're looking at some operational expenses, onetime startup costs in 27 and then fully funding the personnel in 28. Um Medicaid, you can see here, was a 6% increase over last year. We've got some one-time operating costs to stand up the VOP, nature, and bike park ops. And then the union wages are still in negotiation, so we don't know what that's going to end up shaking out to be. All right. So, um, last week we did a really deep dive into the change in our major fund. So, I'm just going to hit some highlights here today. So, general fund, um, some of the major increases there. We've got sheriff's budget, corrections for the expansion staffing, contracts for inmate health care and food services, and then we also have some decreases in there where we're taking the rescue related services out of the general fund and moving those into the fire MSTU fund. So you can see how that one is increasing. And also embedded in that increase is staffing for station four and an additional fire fire truck at station 24. I think I got those numbers right. All right. We spent a lot of time last also talking about

Is that echoing? I'm sorry that

that was weird.

I know. Okay. That was a glitch in the matrix. All right. Getting back to task. [laughter] All right. So, we spent a lot of time last week doing a deep dive into our five-year capital plan. And so, again, I'll hit some highlights just as a friendly reminder today. So, looking at the um the fire bit, we've got two stations that they're planning to build in the next 5 years, station 31 and 42. Um for parks, one of the major projects there is uh the Conerton District Park. If you move down a little bit with me to public works, that line right there is the capital plan funded by the road MSTU. Um, moving down for solid waste. One of the big components of their CIP is maintaining their waste to energy plant. Um, and utilities, they've got things like wastewater treatment plant expansions, the east and west maintenance facilities, and then lake bridge transmission transmission lines. All right. All right. So then if we look at the big summary of our transportation capital plan, we're looking at roughly 376 million of capacity projects, 68 million in sidewalks and trails, about 39 million in signal projects over the next five years. All right, so now we're at our millage rate slide. And so this is really the I'll call it the meat and potatoes of what the board's taking action on today. And it is setting those proposed millage rates. And again, those are the millage rates that are going to go out on property tax notices next month. It is the ceiling um of of what the millage rates will end up being. We can always come down at the final public hearings. We just cannot come up. And so this table represents the county administrator's proposed millage rates compared to our current year actual adopted millage. And so you can see right now there's no change being proposed. Now when you look at the general obligation bonds, um so these are these mill rates are set to generate just enough revenue to pay annual debt service for those different obligations. And so you can see that the growth in the county that we're experiencing translates into lower payments per parcel to end up accumulating the same revenue we need to for debt service. Now this um next slide and it's my I think it's my second to last slide. Um, this is how property tax notices would go out with these proposed millages. The state requires us to compare those to the rolled back rate. All right. So, board discussion around our proposed military.

I think your next slide is a big one. Oh, we have another one after that.

I thought we had the addendum.

I didn't bring my notes from my meeting.

I have an exciting proposal for Commissioner Mariana. [clears throat]

I'm interested. Go ahead, Commissioner.

Shall we pull up supplemental slides?

Yes.

Yeah. Thank you, Gina. All right. Do we have it? So based on the fire STU, so parks is out of it. And as you know, I've been advocating and we've been incrementally restructuring our budget where MSTUs at zero take five votes. With an MSTU that's existing, you can move it with four votes. But I don't necessarily want to get into a a squabble. But if we do an incremental uh reduction, so for the fire MSTU moving rescue, we can move essentially 50% like the like for like discussion, the like for like move. So if we were to move, what's the full millage rate for rescue that we were talking about before that we had in our It's changed a little bit from your briefings with the final calculations. It was around.3, but I think right now it's about.199.

So point this is this is what

so this would assume the maximum amount that we would need the fire MSTU millage rate to be to fully absorb rescue without any half cent sales tax subsidy from the general fund. And so based off our July final taxable assessed value, that millage rate would shake out to be 2.3224, which is an increase of.1 9999 mills, which would require five votes at the final public hearing in September.

So irregardless, we'll have to do this exercise for the fire. But if if if the concern um to incrementally get us there, we can move about half or 50% of that millage and cut that 50% from the general operating which would show a decrease in the general operating like like for like for the fire MSTU and then move 50% and show an increase in the firearm MSTU even though it's a wash. It's just a restructuring of the budget like

but you and I know it's a wash but will the public know it's a wash? Either way, we're going to have to go through this exercise, whether it's today or next year. So, if we do it now, my opinion is is it locks in at least even 50% of that full millage rate and it cuts the difference of of what we're doing, whether property whether the property tax issue passes or not, what it does is it helps to codify that funding. It helps to grow that fund by what was it, Mike? because it compounds over the next 12 months. It'll help grow that fund and pad the fire fund for those services versus the general operating fund being padded growing by with interest. I'm probably using the wrong vernacular here, but the compounding interest effect will go into the fire fund versus the general operating fund which will benefit the fire MSTU. And so I know the concern based on the parks knows that commission being sensitive to Commissioner Mariano's point was too much movement in the general operating millillage. But I viewed this as if we were able to do 50% hypothetically, which you can do that with four votes instead of five, that it would it would help get the fire fund to work need to to get rescue and then do the other the remaining balance next year. Either way, we're going to have to go through this. But if we do it sooner than later, betting, if you're betting or planning that the property tax issue passes, you're padding that fire rescue fund, which my opinion builds it, and then it's less that potentially have to worry about for next budget cycle. Now, this is just all Seth theory here. Um Amy and Mike could probably help articulate it a little bit better, but I was just looking at ways of compounding funds and interest while still working to try to do lifelike and restructure the budget without getting too complicated. But no matter what, this is the exercise that this board is going to have to follow whether it's this budget cycle or next budget cycle. So

you mean next year?

Yes.

Yeah.

So it doesn't really matter. I mean whether people are going to see a decrease in general operating mills and an increase in the fire rescue MSTU these are the the mechanisms and the methodologies we have to follow. So it doesn't matter when they see it they're going to see it no matter what. So, but I'm I'm of the mindset of let's keep increment increment incrementally restructuring the budget and at least going through and getting the the fire MSTU work done that we don't have to worry about it. We're

going to be half of it.

Well, that's with four votes. If Commissioner Mariano comes on and supports it, that's five votes. So, I'm saying with four votes because

you're only saying to move half of it,

right? That's that's if Commissioner Mariano says no, I don't want to do anything with the MSTU because MSTU is funded. If a fund if an MSTU is funded, the board can make a millage rate adjustment with four votes and it's roughly 50% of what it would get to with the five votes.

But are are you suggesting to move half of it or a section of it over this year and the other section

essent essentially half of it, but I want to pitch it out there. Commissioner Mariano because he was uncomfortable with a number of different things. Um

you can go to 110% with four votes under the new law.

Well, we don't need to do that.

Yeah. But I'd like to see the board be unified and if make sure everybody's get comfortable as we're going through this exercise because

110% of roll back

of roll back, right? Which is why the numbers are a little wonky. They're they're a little lower actually than what we did. So actually you're moving it

a little more than 50%. What the commissioner is suggesting here is is an incremental approach to it. I mean, this was the path that the board was on prior to workshop discussions um and then property tax reform which which kind of complicated things. The path was was to take go to scenario go to motion. Let me just walk through this real

because no matter what we're funding rescue out the general fund budget. We're going to have to do that again. So it it's a story. It's contrary to what the fire rescue MSTU is for.

So,

let me let me walk through it real quick just some options because we've kind of laid laid this out in a way that hopefully will be easier for the board to consider. Amy, next slide. So, motion one would be no change to the operating millillage. This is what we took away from from the workshop, right? After after all the conversations that were had, this is this was the direction that uh that we took from that and this is what's been presented to you today. Motion two is the path that we were on prior really prior to the workshop. At the beginning of the year, we were looking less less a parks MSTU, right? Parks is still set at zero under this scenario, but the original board direction was let's let's move rescue out of the general fund into the fire fund. And so that's actually the number uh that that is is the right number.1999. It's that's much it's lower than what we had originally anticipated. Um you'll see that parks is zero but the originally we were looking at cutting parks by a like amount. At the end of our workshop it was discussed that this is this year there's a lot going on and and maybe that's that's complicated and so if you start showing a cut and a reduction in different places on the uh on the trim notice that could create confusion motion. Now the difference here is that we are showing this now in in the context of the voting requirements that are needed for each of these at the final public hearing. This hearing for TRIM only requires simple majority vote, but when we get to the final public hearing, this this motion, especially for the fire and rescue MSTU, would require uh unanimous consent to the board in order to do that. the operating millillage would require four consenting votes in order to to make that happen. Motion three is is sort of the hybrid of what what Commissioner Weightman is is referring to. It's in line uh and it's in line with what we've discussed previously. Um but provides consideration for a four vote requirement. Um so basically as as Commissioner Weman says, you're you're sort of taking a bite at the apple. Um but you would have to take another bite at the apple next year as well. And so I I think the point he's trying to make is well we're we're going to make some incremental pro progress. Um ultimately it's a policy call. We've solved the technical issues related to the budget with with it this year with half cent sales tax. So we've been able to it's we've been able to balance it. I would say that next year regardless of what you do here you would either need to finish the job or do the whole job next year.

Yes. So,

so Commissioner, I I think I'm in agreement with you.

Thank you. That feels good.

Um I I think it does

there's something wrong with it.

It does take a little more conversation with the public to let them know that we're building our MSUs in important arenas where the growth will stay with them and kind of protect them in the future. And I think that's the way that what we want to do and that's how we explain it. Um, and I on the big picture, I'll tell you where I am. So, you know, I if we weren't having this debate on property tax craziness like we are, I would even today want to say let's just roll that mills back just a little bit like we have done for the last three years, four years.

Last three years.

Yeah. And so, um, today I think we need to stay where we are, but maybe do that fire MSTU and, um, I mean rescue. But I think, um, at our final budget here, a board, you know, when we have to do our final one, is that October?

So, at the end of September, you would have your final your final budget uh, your budget adoption hearing, and that is where you will vote on the final on the final mill. So if you reduce village to 7.2593,

we will need four votes in the affirmative to solidify that. Or

I would not do that to us.

If you wanted to cut it, you you could do that, too. But you would also need four votes in the affirmative to make the 2.2674. If you had less than that, then you would be stuck at 2.1225 or some other number in between. So my suggestion is is is I wish it was October and not September, but I guess yeah, we start October 1st and um but we need to see where the polling is because I on the amendment passing and then we have to make a then we you know then we say hail Mary. Uh you know um

I have one poll to do right now though.

What?

I want to do one poll right now.

Okay,

Commissioner Jagger.

[laughter]

Um I'm

that's where I am.

I'm for I'm for the 72593.

Is that the roll back rate?

Oh, that's the fire.

No, that would be the reduction in the general operating on number three. Yeah. Right. So, you are increasing the fire rescue MSTU by a like amount,

right? So, but you were saying that you were keeping you want to keep it same, which would be 7.

Well, no. I I would I would do what Seth is talking about today. Um but it keeps us the same amount of money right now. It's just as a a little bit has moved into a different category. So the PE people will see on the total it's the same. It's just that part of that millillage has moved into the rescue MSTU. Um, so if so then if we look so in September if it looks like that amendment isn't isn't going to pass I would continue our slight roll back in our military that we have been doing for the last 3 four years just just incremental just a little bit

you know we get an argument here

I know well I've I've said that every year

sometimes you just want too big you want to go bald and I just want a little haircut

all right so [laughter] so commissioner Jerger this this one here would taking the millillage back down from the operating, we're adding into the fire rescue. The bottom line number the people are going to pay is the same.

It's the same. Yeah.

You okay with that?

Stay the same. And I'm going to say part of my thing from the workshop that we had is I just didn't want to make this too complex where I depended on someone with five votes

when I may not get it and all of a sudden it changes and now we're putting ourselves in a bad position.

So with that, I'm okay with this motion three. Yeah, it's a it's it's continu it's a good little our three years

I think we can tell the story

of restructuring and it's look we've moved rescue in this is your designated money and when people understand look this fund can't be robbed and your fire and rescue services are protected

rescue

I've not come across anybody who opposes it in fact they prefer it because they can see it

I think you may I normally stay out of the policy discussions but since it's my last board meeting [laughter]

wait a minute I I think I think you're going to you'll do a putting the money into the fire and rescue is an easier cell should be an easier cell to the public with the corresponding cut to the general operating.

Yeah.

I mean, if the board's I'd rather I mean I' I'd do the whole thing now. I mean, either way, we're going to have to go through this exercise. So, this is 50% of what needs to happen. I'd be willing to do the 400% then that that fire rescue MSCU is done. It is done. It's no more parts next year

and then it's no more work to be done and it's the same premise whether you do 50% or the 50 and do the full and then that restructuring of that fund is finished.

What's that number

like we are we are we are there and then we can go and work.

But I but I just don't want to put because you never know what's going to happen. I don't put anything on where I have to have five votes for any part of it. This four, this four is a great idea. I'm sensitive to that.

Great. And it's a and I and I'm very pleased that you come up with this idea. It's I think it's brilliant.

So, I think that works good. We get the millage cut we want, but there's still protected fire rescue. We only need four votes. And I feel very strongly that we're going to get that done. I don't want to go through one of the first year battling. This here, I think, is something that's it's good for everybody. I think it's uh it it shows well for the commission cutting again at the same time protecting fire and rescue which is what we need to do to keep the service up where people want it

because now let's talk let's talk about the overall polling with the property tax. So from everything that's out there and I guess the last three have failed but this is a different time. This is affordability time. So, I think when people see what we've done here and people look at what the county actually does, when when they look at the parks, uh, when they look at the libraries, when they look at the public safety things around it, when they look at social services, I think people are going to look to say, you know what, we're not changing the public safety benefit. We're protecting schools. That's 75%. So, all this big haoo is all about 25%. And what we saw today from Sean, I think they said, matter of fact, I got the numbers here. From 2021 to 2025, the state government budget went up 50%.

Yeah.

What was our number? I don't think we're much different. So, they're going to tell us how to go cut, how to go run the county when they just did the same thing in the state and they couldn't even get a cut on on their sales tax. They talk about a quarter percent. And when I look at Florida Tax Watch, where they got to they would have to go to offset all these things that are out there. They got to go from 6% to 15% in the sales tax. That would kill the panhandle and all those small counties. And with the declining revenues coming, I mean, I think they're open up a can of worms. I think people are going to wake up and say, you know what, we don't like this idea. We like the way Florida's running. We like what we're doing. We like what quality of life is. And I think this board can be proud of everything we've done over the years and and where we're going for direction-wise. So I I I think that number at 64% the first polls I saw is going down and I and I saw USA Today who did a poll they used 3% more Democrats and Republicans but that number showed it dropping and losing at 54%. And I mean 54% supported not not doing it so they only got 46. So I I think you know between protecting schools protecting public safety I think people protect are going to want to protect their quality of life. That's important.

I think we got a good first step. We We got something that looks good to the public and I think that when they look at the numbers at the bottom of the line of the tax bill, I think they're going to be happy.

Okay. Is that a motion?

Yeah.

Also, I want to clarify be I want to clarify. So, there's two things that um we'll be making a motion on. And so it sounds like it would be motion three for the proposed millage rates and then also setting the first public hearing for Wednesday, September 9th, 2026 at 5:15 p.m. here in Date City in this room.

So question chair. So we would so the maximum general operating mills on the trim notice would go out as 7.2593.

Yes. Okay,

do I have a motion?

Uh, the motion that everybody seemed to like,

which we motion number three.

We have a motion or second

with Amy's date

for the first public.

All in favor say I.

I.

Any opposed?

Okay.

All right.

Um, can we can we point out um that I just just asked why is Mr. Monopoly um sitting in the audience? [laughter]

Today's the day.

So, he lost a bed. I just just want everyone to know

or he's winning a bet. One of the ways

that's a monopoly man.

So

it's a cross between a bet and a dare. [laughter]

All right. So I'm going to pass the gabble to Commissioner Waitman. I'm going to I've got a flight I got to connect to go to Nico. So I'm leaving a little bit early for the presentations.

Yeah.

Thank you all very much.

All right.

Thank you, Jack.

Have a safe trip.

Be safe.

Give Seth the hammer. Yeah.

I don't really need it, but All right. Committee reports. Commissioner Oakley,

actually, sir, we have one more regular item still.

Oh, see, already messing up.

What's wrong with you?

I mean, how can you not

uh R76 JP?

Thank you.

Um, for the record, JP Murphy, director of building construction services. I have been sworn in.

You're welcome, Mike. So, um, earlier in the morning session, we talked about the effects of House Bill 803. There are six big effects that affect the building construction services department. Three of them are tackled through this resolution. And the primary business of the resolution is to change our fee structure for those commercial fee types and other fee chart types that were based on valuation and converting them to a per square foot charge. Uh let's see what was this.

So uh I will not follow this agenda because it is late in the evening. But real quick, we haven't talked to you about building fees since 2008, if you can believe it. We've not changed the building fees since that time frame. There have been some additions of a technology fee and some unlicensed contracting fee, but by and large, we not talked about fee increases or structures since that time frame. So, BCS fund is special revenue fund. We operate like a business. We are not at all tax supported. So, we don't get uh involved in a lot of the tax amendment conversations that we just had. Uh it should be understood though that all of the funds that BCF BCS collects is for the use of the Florida building code and is very limited in the the expenditures that it can be spent on. Um we do have five principal ser fee types. We have general base fee, a site review fee, planning um plan review fee, and then what we will call building permitting fees. That's going to cover your structural, your mechanical, your electrical, and your plumbing fees. And then finally, some ancillary um service fees. Just just to be clear, our 21104 fund or building services fund may not fund planning, zoning, other governmental uh activities um not related to obtaining a permit. You can't fund permits not related to um activities not related to enforcement of the Florida building code or any other ordinance. So that that is to say that you can't take some money out of the BCS fund to go do some other fun stuff

without a legal opinion.

What's that?

Without a legal opinion.

That's correct. You know, we'll we'll miss having your legal opinion on these things. We love asking that question. Um so I mentioned House Bill 803, the the the key driver of why we're before you today. The top three things, the elimination of valuebased inspection fees. There are some new permit exemptions I will briefly discuss. And then we have some additional fee reductions for thirdparty inspections, also known as private provider inspections. Couple other things you should know about is there's some expanded timelines for single family permit expirations. It's either one year or three years depending on when that permit comes in. Um we all we've already discussed the manufactured homes and there will be a uniform building application. in our Asella program is going to be handling the programming of that for us because they have so many customers in the state it's not really a concern for us. Some fee considerations I talked about we we've not uh significantly increased the fees and that's not what we're doing here. Um we are simply changing one structure from another. We've used the term that this is a band-aid fix. We have engaged Stantech to do a full fee study to look at what it costs to provide the services that that the building construction services uh provides. We expect that study to be complete and in front of you by the end of quarter 4. So there may be some short-term upset with how the structure works if you compared some projects prior to to this structure change, but it will be short-lived because a full fee study is going to come to you in the fourth quarter of the year. Um, most of our projects, particularly on the residential side, are already charged a flat fee or per square foot fee. But on your commercial projects, you know, m from mild to wild, they were always charged on evaluation basis. And this isn't a problem that's unique to Tabas Pasco County. Uh, of our neighboring counties, four of the five were still using evaluationbased systems. So, they're faced with this problem as well. So, for comparison purposes to provide you, well, what will it cost? That data wasn't really available because it's all over the place. So, I mentioned the five fees. We're only going to touch the two fees, the our admin fee and our permit inspection fees. Um, the methodology here is I took three years worth of commercial data particular because commercial is mostly what this affects. Took three years of data. I looked at not only the the straight line averages, we looked at where projects fell and we kind of we did some weighted average based on the number of overall permits in those and kind of tried to find the best fit number that recovered just the revenue we would have recovered if we charged it under a square foot basis. So what that um what that led us to is our residential permits. We already had language in the current resolution that just says charge it per square foot. And so, Commissioner Starky, to your

comments earlier this this morning when Sean Foster was talking about that $3 million home wouldn't get charged based on $3 million of value. It would have gotten charged on the three I believe you said it was 3,000 square foot or whatever the size of the home was. So, it would have get get charged the per square foot for that. So, similarly, so you only

they got charged they got charged on the value of the home.

Correct. And that's what we're we're we're fixing on the commercial side and eliminating on the residential side. We are

we don't do that, do we? We do.

Oh, you're kidding me.

Yeah. So, we don't need more if you pass this resolution.

Okay. No, we shouldn't be doing that.

We need less regulation.

I I mean, it it's just by the time, not by the value.

Correct. Yeah. So, our one of the things that our fee study is going to look at is how long do does plan review inspections, you know, there's 27 inspections on a residential home walking through the door. what does that time cost Pasco County to to be able to provide those services and look at that holistically. So when we bring that back in quarter four, we'll have a better understanding of what that looks like and charge those fees accordingly. So it'll be more of a cost recovery um fee instead of just based on the size and scope of the project. We've always used size and scope as a as a corollary for how to charge on. I can see size because that's time but value um I I don't see it.

Yeah, we totally agree with you. You know, and the example I like to use is when you look at a residential uh new home, if you have a 2500 or 2500 square foot home um that may be builder grade versus a custom builder grade, it's the same 2500 square foot. Our plan review doesn't differ whether you have marble floors and marble countertops or just you know LVP and coran. So that doesn't change the types of fixtures doesn't change but that value could wildly move a permit value. So we we seek to eliminate that in our fee study by looking at what are those task elements that the county provides just cost. [laughter] Um so for commercial kind of kind of same example. Um, in Pasco County, we have basically three major occupancy types that we see. Um, those are going to be your How do you do those? There we go. Institutional occupancies, which are think of your hotel or your your hospitals, your ERs, the mafets of the world. We have uh commercial alterations, commercial, new, and then we have business and mercantile. And so when we talk about occupancy classes for purposes of this study, one of the things that we wanted to focus on was we understood that those in institutional classes are going to come in, those are the big dollar permits. Over 50% of our institutional permits that came in came in above $2. The bottom 50% is below $2, but still hover be between $150 and two bucks per square foot on a valuation basis. Again, we're not trying to increase fees. we're just trying to recover the same rate during the time frame until we get the fee study fixed. So that is being charged specifically at $181 per square. Um however on our business and merkantile what we would call an alteration, a move in move out, right? So a business owner buys um is going into a retail space or they buy they buy a building and they want to go move into it. Rather than charging them a the full $1.7 per square foot a new construction would cost, we we're looking at a 65 cent per square foot, so roughly 40% cut to that so that it's more affordable. we're not dinging smaller projects that may be occupying a larger square foot space because that's where the the inongruency comes in when you move from a u a valuation base to square foot because as your size of your project goes up that's where your your permit fees go up but valuation doesn't always go up in the in accordance with the size and scope of the project. So we were sensitive to that when we made those modifications and you can see that in in this chart. Um and and these were actual projects. We had some car washes. I do apologize. There is one error on this that we that I caught while I was viewing this. This new um square foot base fee for the assembly of the restaurant should be about $5,300. So you can see versus our old fee and our new fee. There are some projects that would be would come in at a much lower rate, but then some projects that are going to break even or maybe come in just a little higher. And that's just

the nature of how moving to an averaging will work while we're studying that the the full effects of the fee study will cost. But by and large, we were we were sensitive and didn't want to run into situ situation where we're overcharging a permit that may have come in a few months earlier. And that's one of the things that we were controlling for. And again, just as just as point out kind of based on the dollar where we were that business and mercantile is targeted to small business commercial alterations, your businesses uh and your retail operations, anything that's coming in as occupancy of business or mercantile, that alteration will come in at 65 and your institutional rather being the $4. So for example, we had one commercial project that came in with a $400,000 permit value just on the building permit fee. That's not including plan review or the trades or anything else. That's the single line fee that you know fixing that situation I think was was the intent of the Florida legislature when they they included that language in 803 and that's how we're this is how we're going to be responsive to that. Any questions on the commercial and valuation fees before I move on. That's kind of the meat and potatoes of what what's happening. There are some other flat fee fixes because of the nature of you don't have square footages on windows. So, we put some flat fees in there to just just to fix that. Um, moving on to administrative fees and exemptions. We already have a third a third party provider fee that if you're building a new home and you're using a private provider, it's $600. If you're building a new business or an alteration, uh it's $980 if you're using a private provider. One of the um the requirements of 803 is that commercial projects need to um reduce down 25% per trade whether they're doing a plan review or whether they're doing inspections. When we're doing 100% we're doing away with the building permitting fee for those projects and just charging them a flat permitting administration fee. What a lot of folks don't [clears throat] take into consideration is the whole life cycle of the permit when they think about it. It's not just plan review and inspections. It's everything from our intake. We have a custom private provider team to make sure all those documents are correct. They have to review everything. They also look at some of we have the DCR team that's going to look at the code requirements. If it's in a flood zone, they got to look at the flood requirements. But a lot of stuff that's got to get looked at. That's just before it gets approved. Then once it's approved, we still have the full life cycle of public records and everything else that has to happen after that. So recovering a reasonable administrative administration fee is what we aim to do here. And basically what we've done is for those projects that are going to be less than those 6980 thresholds per trade, it's basically $45 a general base fee for each of those those trades that

come in that cover our administrative costs. That is based off of a of a 2021 study that didn't ever get published, but we did do the time study on that. So those numbers are grounded in some actual data on how long it takes us to to administer those programs for private providers. So including those three additional new lines in the resolution is there so we can be compliant with 803. And then finally the big one um any questions on private provider? Okay, I'm trying to go quick because I know it's uh it's getting late. Um the the finally the big the big one and one I just want to dispel rumors on is the $7,500 permit exemption. There is a $7500 permit exemption where an owner or an owner's contractor can do work as long as it doesn't touch structural, mechanical, electrical, or plumbing. If you think about all the permit stuff, there's not a whole lot that's left over after that. Drywall isn't a gray area, you know, particularly over a certain amount of drywall. It becomes part of the structure of the home. Windows, doors are still structural. Um, we're basically talking about flat work. You're talking about stucco. You're talking about kitchen renovations that don't touch the plumbing or the electrical. You want to do your cabinets. Um, so we don't expect to see a whole lot of these exemptions coming in. They are an applicant is required to request an exemption to us. That is going to be done by a simple PDF. It's available on our website. They send it to us. We have a team that's going to look at an email and go yes, no, it requires a permit. If a home is in a a single family dwelling is in a flood zone, it is not eligible for the $7,500 exemption. Um, work has to be done still by a licensed contractor. So, if somebody's doing unlicensed work for value less than $7,500, it's still a violation. Um, the sheriff's office may pursue charges on that. We will not be doing that. Um, and then finally, splitting projects is not allowed. So, you can't do, you know, I want to do $15,000 worth of of of work in a kitchen and I'm only going to do the front half of the kitchen this on this permit and the back half and that doesn't work that way. [snorts] So, but the odd one of the oddities is we're not allowed to ask for copies of contracts when requesting building permits. It's not it's not legal. However, they have to provide a copy of the contract or the cost of materials when requesting the exemption. So, that language is included in this resolution as well. So, other than that, I'm good. Any questions?

I I have some questions. Um, not necessarily on this.

Um, but um Okay. Well, where does a driveway permit come in here? Rightway use permit come in.

Rightway use permits if it's with a new build. So, if it's a new construction home, that rightway use permit will come in together with the new permit. And BCS facilitates that. But the planning, development, economic growth department facilitates rightaway use permits.

So I've had new homes built in my community and they have paved the whole front yard, brand new homes. Um, and so I I I just almost think you should just throw that right away use permit out the window because there's no enforcement of it. The only people that get caught up in it are the people who are trying to do it legally and then you say, "Oh, you can't have two driveway cuts. You're only allowed to have one." And so the people who are honest get stopped and the people who don't care just do it. So that's number one. Number two, we we have this problem that that someone in the county thinks that paper blocks are permeable.

Um

pvious surface

pvious.

Yeah, I can tell you where he lives, you cannot have paper block in the first sevent. Well, at least Sarasota County and and are you in

Manatee?

Sarasota County could be in Manatee, too.

You have to do a poured apron in that first se seven or feet or whatever and then you can do the paper blocks. And because I've seen it in Gulf Harbors when I first moved in there, the county had to go in and do some work on someone's paper block driveway. I'm not sure if it it was it was FGA back then and they were very upset at the re the way they had to put it when they put it back together and they said they were going to sue and I had FGA out there and they said there's nothing we can do about it, you know, and they may take the break the bricks when they take it out to do the work, but you're in the easement area and they don't have to replace your whole driveway uh if there's no more matching brick there. So, what are you going to what are what is your department doing about these driveways and these yards that are bricked over because you guys consider impervious from end to end, front to back.

Well, thank you for that question. I will start by saying uh my department is going to work with the planning development economic growth department who is the department that has the authority over the youth the pavers and the use of the driveways that we're going to be use permit. I will tell you that we have been on several calls. How How is it the planners that have it when they're not the ones that go out and

under the land development code?

Huh?

Under the land development code, I think.

Yeah. Papers are not a

So, the rightway use permit is with the planners,

correct?

Yes.

They issue the rightway use permit.

Yes, ma'am.

The planner.

It goes through that department. It's

development review services would be the would be the division of the planning department that that handles

it's falling apart. It's not working.

Public site inspections. Every day I send y'all pictures of

bonding. It's

not working.

All that kind of stuff.

It's not working.

Well, we're having conversations on on enforcement because that's really what this amounts to is is enforcement. Um

I just had

if they were here, they would

they poured the whole front yard of concrete [snorts] two weeks ago and I I let I let people know that it was formed up

and um [snorts]

and those are code complaints. If you do see them, you could

Those are code complaints. They're not

I'm not turning in my whole neighborhood,

but that's not part of that's part not part of the fee schedule either.

I think this would be I think this would be good for a a meeting.

I'm good with your fees.

So, this is this this is an action item and requires motion in a vote. Is there any other comment on this item?

I make a motion.

Chair G.

Second.

We have a motion to second. All in favor?

I.

No. It passes. All right.

All in favor of uh skipping uh committee reports.

Yes. I'll do mine next time.

Okay. Well, before we do that,

Mr. Stein Snider.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, I didn't know this was your last meeting cuz you're coming back for

or wait, does Mike do you have something?

No, this is uh this is why I was just gonna say that uh it was Jeff's last meeting, so I promised to make him earn his paycheck today. So we we made sure that the agenda was was heavy.

We added a few items to the agenda just to make things

just for insurance.

Mr. Stein Snder, we will

give you the mic.

Oh, to yield. [laughter]

Yeah. Yeah. No, I I I said most of what I wanted to say at the last meeting with a resolution, but I thank you for Thank you for approving David's contract today.

Yeah.

Um he will

Oh, wait. Did we do that?

You did that. [laughter] Um, he will be a great attorney for you in the future. Um, and I've enjoyed my 17 years of

representing 17 years

representing you all most days.

Most [laughter] remember that's a very fair statement.

Parse that out.

Well, the partying there's two events still coming up for him.

Am I supposed to say that?

Well, you can. Yeah, I

I don't know.

Um, yeah. So, I am

I know nothing.

I am working till the 31st, but this is my last board meeting because you only have one board meeting in July.

Yeah.

So, but thank you very much,

Mr. Dutter.

It's been fun sitting next to

Thank you for 17 years,

right? 17 years.

Yeah.

Well done. [applause]

[cheering] [applause]

Jeff, I always forget my pen and today I forgot my pen again and you walked up to me and gave me this pen.

And he gave me this.

He gave me too.

He gave me his really nice pen. Then he switched to this. Nope.

[laughter]

Ladies and gentlemen,

get ready. David, you have to come with a whole bunch of pens.

We will [laughter] we will adjourn this meeting.

All done. Thank you.

I wish we'll fix We'll add your name.

[laughter]

I will need it. I want you to keep that

my favorite color in the whole world. Rose down.

All of them.

Yeah. Oh, that's I'm going to try.

I know. I have to keep I have to I'm going to try and not lose it. If I still have it in six months,