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

Yeah. Good. Okay. Okay. I had my team. I'm like, "Hey, please tell me." Cuz if before it started, they hear me, they can hear all [laughter] everyone talking. Yeah. We just need that. You did?

[laughter]

It's blue, right? Yeah. That just one? Okay. All right. Thanks. I thought it was here. I just want to know if you had ever gotten it. We'll now resume the Board of County Commissioners meeting for 1:30. Um and just for the board to know, um Commissioner Yeager had called up uh her son is not feeling well and uh she's going to be staying home taking care of him. She can come back in later if someone can watch whatever, but I told her to take care of her family and she's going to do that. So, she may or may not even call in. We'll see. Okay. First ordinance is P34. Mr. Chairman Yes.

Um you from your morning agenda, you have uh R32, which is a workshop on mobility fees that you have to do before you take up the ordinance. And so, you might want to start with start your afternoon with that. Okay. Let's move to R32. Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. County Attorney. Good afternoon.

explain that to Nick, but

[laughter]

We're all good. Um Well, good afternoon, Commissioners. Nick Yuran, County Engineer. Uh we're going to be talking about mobility fees and we're only going to be talking about mobility fees this afternoon. As context, the uh workshop item is an item that is mandated by state law anytime that a local government is attempting to or endeavoring to increase their mobility fees above statutory limits. This is the second extraordinary workshop devoted to the proposed mobility fee rate increases. And I'm going to walk through the agenda with you as well as the content for the workshop and then we can touch on the proposed ordinance that has the actual fee tables in it and the language the code language changes for the land development code. So, the um agenda is very simple. We're going to cover the statutory limitations on the fee increases. We're going to cover the four extraordinary circumstances that are present in Pasco County justifying increases that exceed those statutory limits. And then we're going to turn it back to you and members of the public for any discussion. So, statutory limitations, we are permitted to um propose fee increases based upon a plan to impose, collect, and use those fees. We are allowed to increase fees if they are less than 25% in two annual increments. If you increase by between 25 and 50%, you need to do it over four annual increments. Some of the proposed increases in our ordinance presented to you this afternoon are increasing of between 25 and 50%, but in two annual increments. So, that triggers the requirement for the extraordinary circumstances workshop. And any increases that go above 50% of your current fee also trigger the obligation for the extraordinary circumstances workshop. And we are proposing some fee increases above that 50% threshold. Statute also says you can't increase it any more often than every four years. It has been more than four years since we've increased our fees, so we're in compliance with that criteria. The four tests for a local government to exceed the statutory limits are perform a recent study, hold those two extraordinary circumstance workshops, make sure that your fee increase is approved by unanimous vote. And that will be very important. We'll come back to that point once more later this afternoon. And last, um make sure your fee increases are implemented in at least two equal annual installments. And we are proposing to do that in compliance with the law. So, four extraordinary circumstances. The first one, we are growing faster than our last fee update anticipated. Last fee update uh talked about a population growth of 230,000 people. We are now projecting 330,000 people to

grow into that seven-figure number. We're looking at a potential of a million people and I've given you an example. This is the Sun Lake Boulevard corridor within Angeline. The first aerial photo is from 2020. And [clears throat] when we click forward to 2026, you see all those homes that have been now platted and are coming out of the ground like mushrooms. They're growing rapidly in Pasco County. And it's our job to ensure that our mobility fees are adequate to provide the roadway infrastructure, the transportation network needed to support that rapid growth. Our second extraordinary um circumstance is higher trip generation. There is an Institute of Transportation Engineers manual that publishes that gets published periodically that looks at how many trips different types of land uses make on a regular basis. That Institute recently published an update and showed that several of our common land uses generate more traffic than we thought they would, than they previously were. And so, as we get more data, we are responsive um responsible to adapt to that new data set and we're saying people are making more trips. Our third extraordinary circumstance is that infrastructure costs more than we had anticipated in our 2021 study. We are looking at 31% increases in capital costs for the same materials that we were planning to use in 2021. That means that we need more money to build the same road network.

Why you have put in ours up there? Why don't you put Ridge Road up there instead of

[laughter]

Well, I wanted to show it it it there's meaningful There this is actually the overpass intersection with Old Pasco Road. And what I'm what I'm intending to show is this was also a 2020 photograph before we had begun construction. But in order to take that into the four-lane road that it is intended to be, and this is a more current photograph of that same intersection where we're going to widen it out to a four-lane median divided road. We need that additional revenue. And and Commissioner, your point is well taken. We're spending a lot of money at Ridge Road. We're also spending a lot of money widening um Wesley Chapel Boulevard right now. And those projects we got in on previous fee rates because those bids were taken a couple of years ago, three years ago. Uh the projects that we're looking at now are coming in at a higher number. Okay. And then number four, now our fourth extraordinary circumstance is a radical decline in other revenues and particularly I want to emphasize the decline in state and federal revenues predicted to be available for our projects in Pasco County. In 2021, state and federal gas taxes and um documentary stamps and vehicle registration fees combined to cover 38% of our infrastructure needs. In this update, they are only covering 11% of the needs. All that combines to say in an extraordinary that more people are coming to Pasco, they're going to travel more, it's going to cost more to build the facilities to support them, and we have less other revenue to pay for those costs. So, those are our four extraordinary circumstances that we're presenting to you as part of this workshop. Pursuant to state law, it is a workshop that is intended to allow for public comment. That's atypical to workshops that you would normally conduct. Normally, you don't accept public comment, but presuming the um statutory intent or legislative intent of that segment of the law, we are suggesting that you accept public comment and then conduct any board discussion as you see fit. And I do have a separate presentation for the first reading of the ordinance, but I'm intending to defer that until after public comment on this item and board discussion, Mr. Chair. Any questions for Nick? No. Okay. So, this this is a public hearing. We're going to allow the public to comment. Would anyone like to in the audience like to come forward to speak to this item? Okay. I'm assuming there's no one online.

advertised?

Chairman. Is that Was this advertised? This was advertised as a public workshop with the opportunity to comment on these extraordinary circumstances. So, we can't let anyone come in. Is there anyone online that wanted to speak to this item? There's no one online for this item. Okay. This is just presentation only we can't do a workshop anyway. That's correct. Mr. County Attorney, should we go to the next item to follow up with it? You might [clears throat] as well go to 36 and do the first first hearing on the ordinance. Okay. Mr. Chairman, can you do publication? Please. Item P36 was published in the Tampa Times on March 4th, 2026. Thank you. All right. Now, we're going to run through a brief presentation summarizing the changes that are proposed to the ordinance including those extraordinary circumstance fee increases that we just discussed. Am I ready to go? Okay. So, this is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners. Can I skip that one? Okay. All right. Let me give you the overview. The The overview is that mobility fees pay for only new transportation facilities. They pay for facilities that are needed to accommodate growth and development, not existing demands. The revenue generated by mobility fees, this is all a reminder to the board, but the revenue generated by the mobility fees is also supplemented by gas taxes. In Pasco County, we are fortunate to have a penny sales tax, a portion of which goes to transportation capital projects. And we also allocated portion of property tax revenue to transportation capital projects through the tax increment fund. As I mentioned earlier, mobility fees can be updated no more often than every 4 years. And I want to emphasize again that the proposed increases in this ordinance will require a unanimous vote of the commission to implement them. We want to remind you that our projected need for transportation facilities is nearly $7 billion because because we will add 330,000 new residents and we will require an additional 950 lane miles to support the demand for those 330,000 new residents. Our projected revenues even with the current rates are short of that need by around with the current rates that are not adjusted by this proposed increase will be short of that funding that need by about $2.9 billion. And that's why we came to you in November, we presented increases, we got your feedback at a workshop and we are now showing you the proposed fee rates for mobility fees for various land uses in this ordinance consistent with the

following slides in the November workshop. So, highlights from the workshop. You told us by all means keep the 100% subsidy or discount for hotel, office, and industrial uses. This is available to us as a Pasco County distinctive. We can use it for economic development purposes to attract these major employers to our area and entice them to locate their businesses here. You told us to retain the the discount for single family and accessory dwelling units on five acre or more lots, rural lots. You directed us to increase the local owned small business discount, which we have done. We've added increased it by 25%. You've directed us to create a new discount for long-term Pasco residents who are constructing new homes as owner builders and the the land development code allows for that. It's a new discount. We are also proposing to update the map showing the benefit districts where the fees can be spent once they've been collected. We're proposing as part of this amendment to simplify the surcharge tables for our two special districts, the Connected City and Villages of Pasadena Hills. And lastly, we're trying to simplify the language as much as possible without altering the regulatory substance of it to make it a little more readable and user-friendly to the people it's regulating. Question, Chair. Mr. Oakley. Nick, go back, please. Indeed.

So, the the discount for the uh Remind me how we got to the five acre lots. We just approved a number of uh essentially rural lots. Mr. Oakley talks about it. They're two and a half acres in minor rural subdivisions. Should that pertain more to the what's considered a minor rural subdivision instead of at the five acre limit? How do we get to the five acre or more? So, I'm going to I'm going to defer to our chief assistant county attorney because the the five acre

minor rural subdivisions.

I understand your question. This needs to complement that ambition. I want to acknowledge this is an existing code provision. It It actually

ask Mr. Goldstein to reply?

based on the minor rural subdivisions. It's actually It was something that's in the existing mobility fee and it originated, I think, in 2014 and it it occurred because we had there was some concern that the rural fees were higher than the suburban fees and we didn't want to penalize somebody who was building in the rural area and they were building consistent with our rural vision. And so, um in our rural vision, we basically said, well, if somebody's building on a lot that's five acres or greater, that's consistent with our rural vision

[cough]

and so we shouldn't want to penalize somebody for building consistent with our rural vision. So, we said they should be able to pay the same fees as if as if they were in the suburban area. Um so, we had to come up with a lot size that would be consistent with that rural vision. That's how we came up with the five acre lots. Um not saying we couldn't come up with a smaller lot size, but that was what we came up with at the time as the lot size that was consistent with the rural vision.

Well, the rural hit northeast rural is comprised of multiple lot sizes for the rural vision in east Pasco. So, and and it is true and I agree with you that if you want to live a more rural life, you're being penalized by paying more for less services. It costs more to deliver them. Hang on. He said there's four The people who live in the urban areas require 10 times as much service than the folks who want to live more of a rural life. Therefore, I think it should be opposite and they should pay more because there's a higher demand on everything. But, whatever, that's a different conversation for a different day. But, if we want to encourage the minor rural subdivision life and rural living, land's a luxury item today. It wasn't back in 2014. When did you say 14? There was a whole lot more land that was undeveloped then than it is today. And so, if we want to encourage the more rural lifestyle, I think number two needs to align with today's market. Land's a luxury item today and it's highly expensive. And so, for someone to buy an acre or two acres of land, that's a pile of money. They're going to pay the highest impact fees, that's a pile of money. They're going to build a custom semi-custom home and then they're sitting on taxable value of probably a million plus on the low end. In that range in the northeast rural area and based on real estate markets. So, because of that and if we want to encourage that, I think this five acres needs to come down and more align with the lot sizes that are allowed throughout the definition of what northeast rural is, but I'll digress to Commissioner Oakley on that. Um that way we try to encourage that type of living. It's It's up to the board. I mean, really this goes to what lot sizes do you want to encourage in the northeast rural area because that was the goal of this is is we're reducing the rate for these lot sizes in the rural area so we're trying to encourage this type of lot in the rural areas, which we're basically doing. So, we basically we're trying to send a message that we were trying to encourage five acre lots and higher in the rural area. That was the goal of this. If you want if the board wants to set it at two and a half acres and that's what we want to encourage in the rural area, that's up to the board. It's really trying to send a message of what lot sizes you want to encourage in the rural area. I don't necessarily think it's an encouraging of a lot size more or less than than more of an encouraging of the lifestyle, which is what minor rural living is. Well, lot sizes or lifestyle, I it's if you if you reduce the fee for this size lot, you are effectively sending a

message that that you're encouraging that lot size. Well, yeah, we we you want executive housing on acre Chair brought it up acre or more lots, but if we set two and a half acres, look at that. This is just being flexible to the way the market shifted, right? It's incredibly expensive to live here in Pasco County. So, if you want to encourage and not have people come in and subdividing their property, they're going to try to come and get more than five acres. We just saw it a couple months ago. People are going to continue continually push and push and push to get as much density on their lot sizes as possible. So, you know, they may not do that

[clears throat]

if we're a little more flexible on the five-acre lot size. I just sent her an email. And it's down to the two and a half-acre lot size. my opinion, but I Commissioner Starkey I got my hand up. I'm just starting out. No, I'm going to go to you. Let me finish. I love How long did you saw me? Just one minute. I got you. We can't finish with Commissioner Starkey. Um I'm not saying I'm against the two and a half-acre lot, but you just have to understand the facts of the cost of suburban versus rural infrastructure. I sent Gina an email, if you could put that up, and I just did AI, which and I said, "Which costs less to deliver services, rural" and it came out last. But, it's supposed to be land, but they knew what I was talking about. Or suburban. Um and so, you'll you'll see there that rural costs more. And but just thinking on the road side, think of how much it's going to cost to pay Bayhead versus the amount of people living on Bayhead versus a road here, you know, how many taxpayers we have on I don't know. Pick a road. Darlington or whatever versus Bayhead, it's all we're subsidizing. Um you know, the costs per capita are much higher in the rural area to deliver services. We've We've had a couple uh meetings here. I don't know if it was Glading Jackson or who that taught us all about these things. And that Those are some of the things you learn when you go to ULI conference or the C and U conference about these kind of numbers. Um and I I don't know where Terry is, but Right behind Nick. You If you want to You're You're smarter on this than I am. I just know what I've learned. Um I'm not I'm not saying I'm against the two and a half-acre, but I I don't know if I want to subsidize it even more than we are already. But, do you want to espouse on what I'm trying to say? Sure. Mr. Starkey's veto is planning development economic growth. What I think Commissioner Starkey is uh referring to is the fact that when you have more people, more density, in other words, you have um more ability to spread the cost of the infrastructure.

I understand it all. I get all that. [clears throat] I disagree with that paradigm. I think it's hogwash, and I think when you go to these conferences, there's a level of brainwashing that goes on to fulfill the urban agenda [clears throat] and the high-density development agenda. We're specifically here trying to encourage a certain way of living that's really expensive now. Land is a luxury item in Florida and especially in Pasco County. So, if in the comp plan, we want to encourage a more rural style living when they're already going to pay the highest level of impact fees, they're going to require the less services. Go look at the fire 911 call log. You know what I'm saying? You see where I'm getting at. I don't need to go We kind of debated this in the other workshop. I'm just saying if we want to encourage that and we want to have that type of buyer come into our county, you know, this is one of the ways we can do it because it's not cheap anymore. It's expensive. And if we want to have executive style housing come in, that's is one way to do it. I mean, there'll be a little bit on Wiregrass and others, but again, it's those folks aren't choosing to necessarily want to live in the more urban areas of this county. Right. So, that's that's my point to this. I don't need a lecture on this. I don't think [clears throat] that from a planning perspective Um All right, Mr. Starkey. With the East Pasco rural protection ordinance, is it five acres that you're supposed to have or is it two and a half? Or do we have to change those What What is the minimum that we set for that there? Right now in the northeast rural area, according to the comprehensive plan, one acre is the minimum rural acreage. Okay, so two and a half acres would fit already in East Pasco rural.

Okay. All right, so I'm going to jump in. I'm just going to Hopefully you don't have to go away. Okay. So, and and we talked about executive housing is is what we want. If we want to get businesses to move here, they got to have right places to go. Um continually it's a it's a problem when you only have, you know, 60 ft 70 ft lots at best, where you going to go? Um between all that stuff. I think that it is more expensive to have the services when you're more rural. However, you brought up a really good point. I thought you'd jump on it again. When they're paying a million dollars base taxes based upon a million dollar home compared to one that's 400 to 500, where are you going? There's money coming from that. The demographics are better. The The whole attributing to to the value of the the land um gets better and better the more affluent the people are, it's going to drive the better service. To get your um fancy restaurants that you want to see in here that want to come in, they got to be a demographic. You look You look at Hudson area. When Wesley Chapel was coming out of the ground, Gulf View Mall was cracking. And I talked to a jewelry guy that was there. He said, "I do about 70% of my business at the time." It was like 15 years ago, from people from Wesley Chapel. Now that Wesley Chapel's got all their retail, guess what? The mall's not surviving. Now I'm wondering how what we're going to do with that mall. It's not cuz it's old. It's just demographics have changed. And I mean, you I I see CVS's and Walgreens is going out of business. Guess what's coming in? Dollar Tree. What does that tell you? You want the affluent. I'm comfortable, frankly, to go look to really put a strong push out there to go make these this discount go from the five acres, not even the two and a half. I don't care if it goes for a grand then. I don't care where we put it in the county. Because I want to see those better demographics to get things going. I've seen enough of my educational folks out here telling me how great density is. Go to Wesley Chapel. Go to Trinity Boulevard. Drive around in that traffic and tell me that's what people really want. I'm going to say I see a completely different world. There's a great hearing we just had at the planning commission up on Denton, and people were pushing back about they don't want to see these small lots coming in, especially when you get larger ones beside it, to go forward. So, I think I want to definitely incentivize that forward. And I'm comfortable going down to an acre. Nick. Uh Mr. Chair, I just want to echo our uh

Chief Assistant County Attorney's position that it is a board discretion item. And then I also want to remind you that I'm seeking a unanimous approval of the proposed fee rate tables. So, if you could make sure that I understand what the unanimous consensus of this board is, that will help me make the right presentation in May. I think we're still in dialogue. I think I was insulted so I'm pissed. I don't I don't need to be insulted up here. I'm about to pack up and leave. This is the second time today, and I'm not taking it. So, my recommendation to you would be to to do a two and a half. Um I recognize that Terry did say an acre is allowed in northeast rural, but the comp plan also defines that as a rural. So, I think two and a half is a good compromise for now. Um cuz I don't think the comp plan defines that as rural. I think the comp plan still defines two and a half as a rural level of density. That would be my recommendation is to go to two and a half. Do you want to keep going or is that pretty much done?

[snorts]

I'm prepared to continue. All right, good. Our proposed rate table, I'm showing you a column for These are common land uses, and the The rates that I'm showing you in this table are in the suburban area in a standard style or type of development. So, not a traditional neighborhood development, not a TOD, just a standard form of development. Uh showing you a column for the current rates that we are charging for these different land uses, and then it based on the proposed fee tables, the rate that will become effective on July 1st of this year, and the rate increase that will occur 1 year from now on July 1st of 2027. Again, these fees are proposed to be introduced in two equal annual installments, but we will not be able to increase the fees for another 4 years. So, the intent would be the fee established in July of '27 would be the fee that remains in place for the following 3 years. Uh highlights on here, we've talked about the single-family home rate. I did want to highlight the proposed discount in this um code amendment for the single-family home by a long-term resident as an owner-builder. You can see that the proposed discount is substantial, recognizing the desire to attract and retain those folks who have resided here in Pasco, grown up here. We want them to to make this their long-term home. Uh multi-family apartments, eliminating any subsidy as per the board's direction in November workshop, we are proposing to take that fee to the uh amount that the mobility fee study supports, and do that over that uh 2-year period. Small retail goes up a a moderate amount. This is one of those in between 25% and 50%. The medium retail, these are the corner shopping centers that tend to locate on two on your arterial intersections or arterial and collector intersections. These are the real heavy traffic generators, and the fees associated with them reflect the trip-making characteristics and the demand that they put on our road network. So, we're proposing those to increase. I I to mention that we are bifurcating restaurants into only two categories based on their physical construction. You either have a drive-thru and you are oriented towards automotive customers or you don't have a drive-thru and you pay a lot less in mobility fees because you have less of a traffic impact. Very simple way to look at the restaurant our neighboring counties have done this. I think it was one of Commissioner Yeager's points in the November workshop was let's make sure that we're implementing things in a simple and consistent way to our neighboring counties and this was something we borrowed from them and I think it's a good approach. We talked about convenience stores with gas pumps recognizing again they're driving a lot of the demand so we're charging them appropriately and then we are

introducing only for this use the high cube warehouse / distribution. We are introducing a mobility fee for this use where it is currently subsidized at 100% because we are recognizing that these types of uses are not bringing in the high paying jobs that we're seeking to attract to Pasco County. And frankly a lot of these uses are using our roadway network as inventory storage for their products. And so we think it's appropriate and we heard from you in November that it was supportable to introduce a fee on this type of use only while retaining a 100% reduction on traditional industrial uses because of their employment generation. Uh we talked about rate comparisons with our neighboring counties and I've provided a summary of the same land uses suburban area standard form of development. What are we proposing to charge and then what is Orange County charging? What is Osceola charging? What is Hillsborough County charging? And I'm intending to demonstrate with this slide that we are right in line with our neighbors. We are appropriately assessing new development for the impacts that they're putting on our system and asking them to pay for those impacts through their fees. Do want to highlight this item. We are proposing to change the boundaries of the benefit districts. We currently have a map that shows three benefit districts west, central and east. And we are proposing two changes to this. First we're showing the two special areas the connected city and VOPH areas because the fees and the um the intention in the code already is to retain the fees generated within those areas for development and infrastructure inside those areas and we think this map should reflect that. We're also changing the boundary lines between the zones and we're essentially proposing to use county roadways as the bounty as the boundary line between zones one and two and zones two and three because that's a good way to predict travel shed. It allows for us to say people on the west side of the road are tending to be attracted to one one area and people on the east side are tending to be attracted to another area. And so that's that's the intent of that map update. Could you go back to that map? I can. So difference from one and two is it So in in the current code one and the boundary between one and two follows a power line easement which really affects travel not at all. And the proposed map follows Shady Hills Boulevard, Shady Hills Road and then it comes down to Sun Lake Boulevard follows Range Line and then goes down Livingston. So those are the four county roads that do a better job of bifurcating travel on a local level. So Shady Hills Road if it's on both sides of it how does it affect That means that fees generated in zone one or zone two could be allocated to a capacity investment on Shady Hills Road. Okay. I have a question for the chair. So the chair in your district on the north side

of your district on 52 as you get further up in the Hudson and headed towards Hernando they're still very similar properties to kind of what's in northeast rural with equestrian and whatnot in there. Would would this with his area and the folks that live that lifestyle with kind of the northeast rural type that's up in chair's area with what he was saying earlier would there be we could tie in the benefit if there's consensus on the one to two and a half acre or whatever we land on this for people in the in the chair's area if there was Remember you bought down rural to suburban. If chair's area is already designated suburban they're already paying those rates. Yeah. So the rural and equestrian community are paying these rates. That's up off of Hayes. David can weigh in but but if that's if that was the rationale for that exempt that exemption that it was we were subsidizing the those large lot rural into a more suburban impact or mobility fee rate

[snorts]

it would depend on whether that the chair's area that we're talking about is designated rural or suburban. If it was already suburban it would already be paying suburban rates. If it was rural then the lot size issue would matter. Would be covered. But but it would be covered by that exemption wouldn't it? Yeah but these are not the right maps to discuss that issue. These are the maps where the government where we spend the money and not how much they pay pay us. Okay. All right so we covered that we'll get that upcoming. That's a different that's a different set of maps. Will that be upcoming in this presentation?

Well he's not I don't think Nick is proposing to change those maps. Unfortunately we're answering based on the principle not based on another slide showing the boundaries. Okay. But I I just want to echo what both of your attorneys have said that the fee rate that someone pays is based on whether they the development is within a suburban designated area or a rural area. The only reason the reduction would apply is if a home was being constructed within the rural area and then we would defer to lot size to determine whether it was eligible to pay the reduced suburban fee or it would be obligated to pay the rural fee. I mean I'm going to say just would it be rural suburban if I get someone wants to build a project and have one acre lots no matter where it is I'm comfortable getting them the lower rate because just like I said the density I've seen we're not keeping up and we talk about growth is never going to keep up. But if I can get those better demographics with the people with larger properties with the increased taxes they're going to generate year to year and I don't know what other benefits they bring by having their higher incomes I'm okay with that type of scenario. Commissioner Oakley. When you look at the rural area itself at the five acre lots if you change that the reason reason they pay more is they have more mileage to travel on the roads because they're in a rural area to get to the services they're going to get to. And I was always told by mobility that's that's why they pay more is because it costs more on that to provide that road because they're less dense than what a suburban area is. So you got more in a suburban area you got more people paying toward that road. And in the rural area you got less people paying for it. However part of the money that we get from these people is in the property taxes we're taking another chunk of that for for mobility. You've also got when these people are driving that much further are we put are we gallon of gas are using the does money fall back to us as well? And if it's sales tax benefit even a penny you're getting some money back from other things as well. So I just it's it's not just all one thing or not. It's like I'm I'm looking at the whole big picture of it. And again with all the density I've seen we keep on pushing density density we keep on getting more and more backed up. I don't mind the approach to say look at I want to see some larger homes and maybe you get some different type of developers who aren't going to compete with the guy who's going to stick in 40s and 50s and 60s on let's say 50s 60s. 70 lots in size not right? So go compete with that. I mean that's why we have so many apartment people coming in because they get so

many more lots and units they can generate more money they can pay more money for the land and that's why we get the apartment push coming on us. I don't mind us shifting back a bit to say I mean let's give it a let's give it a run for a few years.

problem is though you don't want to get rural so that that they feel like they're paying I mean they're paying less but the fact of it you don't want it to become dense. The rural way of life in Pasco County in in the northeast [snorts] with the rural ordinance and all that you got to be careful or you'll you'll end up with everything in the rural area looking like suburban. I don't I don't think I don't think our citizens want that. All right so what I'm and don't get me wrong. There's people out there and there's projects and I know are coming our way in in this rural area that are going to be 10 acre lots or better and large homes two three million dollar homes on those lots. But there's a certain amount of people that want that kind of lifestyle and they don't want to lessen the density so it be or make it more density where they're like they're living in town. They don't want to live in town. They want out out and have bigger lots. So you got to divide it some way. So you don't want to just do away with rural area. I don't I don't think that you guarantee the assumption that you're going to get a million dollar home on a one acre piece of ground is not necessarily what I think will end up happening. At one acre you're at that sort of as Oh yeah I mean one acre yeah. It's it that's sprawl that's defined as being sprawl. you're going to get some large homes, but you're going to get some small homes, too. And you know, they mobile mobiles would be in a different category, Corey, but but there's But I don't think I don't necessarily think it equates that that if you buy encouraging 1-acre lots, you're going to get higher property value homes. You may. But I'm not I I just don't want you to make that assumption. Well, I know I know for a fact there's some projects coming in that are 10 going to be 10 or acre home sites, and the homes are planned to be 2 3 million dollar homes. And there's only 45 in this rural project, but that's covers over 450 acres. And you're going to have all these nice homes on that. They don't want the density. They want more room. But not everybody is like that. Just like they in a suburban area, there's many people that are right up next to people. And the fact of it is, would they rather have an acre lot? Yeah, they'd rather have an acre lot. But there's a cost to that. So, the cost will be when you're paying your taxes, it's not just on the property, it's not just on the building, it's up it's the property, too. Right. The The key is you're going to minimize

the amount of trips they're going to go because of being a 1-acre lot.

[snorts]

Now, when I look at the the upper part of Hudson, do they like to see all these dense units next to their rural stuff? I'm going to tell you they don't.

How do you know they don't?

Right. If you have any doubts, watch the last planning commission meeting we just had. And there's a big push for that. So, and then some of those are in the rural area. Are you pulling it up? Good. We did. You want to talk to that a little bit?

I I was just going to mention that we have the map on the screen, so now you can know where the rural, the suburban, and the urban area boundaries are in order to determine where someone might be paying a rural fee unless they qualify for the discount, the 5-acre lot discount. So, that would only be within area C on this map, the salmon-colored portion of the map. The boundary between B and C in the in the Hudson area there, is that Denton Ave there? What's that road going across?

I should know this. But Well, they So, the east-west road at between B and C at the west end, that's State Road 52. But then as you go north and it zigzags, the the you're zigzagging up to up to Hudson. Yeah, the the red line is Hudson.

Hudson, okay. All right. So, so up in that area, you got some rural that's been there for many many years. Now, there's the influx coming in. Uh Denton Place, I think it was the project that was that would that came in. Um that place, Summerchase, came in years ago. So, people around there with these giant lots are dealing with these smaller influx. And when we don't have when we get these two-lane roads without sidewalks, without other infrastructure around it, it makes it crowded, and it's going to get even more crowded as they come. Do I think I'd like to see an incentive for these people to go, you know, even if you got to trying to go to a larger lot, a 70-ft size lot, if I could get you to go to an acre lot, that would take a lot of stress off that whole area. Cuz otherwise, I got to rebuild. And if I got to trying to go rebuild and trying to make those two-lane roads four-lane roads, that's going to be a lot more money. So, as much as it's Yeah. less impact the fees we're going to collect, it's also a lot less road I'm going to have to build, too. That could possibly work with everything else around it. I think they're all good ideas. It's a matter of where we land to get to unanimous vote. I I think I'm confident we'll land somewhere. It's just a matter of where. I don't think there's any adversarialness, Nick. I think we just got to Well, we got a couple weeks to gel on to think about it, talk about it, and um I think the presentation was good.

Nick, correct me if I'm wrong, this is literally one word in the code, right? It's one sentence.

Right now, it's just 5 acres, right?

That's right.

Yeah, just pick a number.

It's not changing any of the fee schedules. It's It's literally one word in the code.

That's correct. This is a text element in the proposed update. It's not hard to change 5 acres to something else, but we just need board direction. Can we make that decision in 2 weeks? If it's just that one It's It's one word, so yes, we could easily make that change. All right. So, anyone else want to add anything else more to the conversation? It's been a good conversation. I appreciate it. Cuz there are definitely different perspectives, different thoughts, and different ideas about how it all works. Very good. All right. Thank you, sir.

My last slide was the recommendation slide, which is accept public comment and reminding you that no action is required today. Um the second hearing, the adoption hearing, is scheduled for May 5th in Dade City. Okay. All right. Is there anyone else in the in the audience uh from the public that would like to speak to this item? Okay, we'll close public comment. Is there anyone online? There's no one on WebEx, and no one has signed up either. Okay. Okay. David Allen? Chair, if I may, then um you know, following uh Mr. Erens' presentation, what we'll do, um we'll follow up with each of the board members um individually between now and the next reading and get a gauge in terms of where we're at, so that when we come back on May 5th with the updated um ordinance, then I'm hoping that we'll be at a place where we get unanimous decision as as Nick uh had indicated that we need for this item. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So, we're on item number public hearing number P34. Item P34 was published in the Tampa Bay Times That's on. Okay. Try that again. Item P34 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on March 4th, 2026. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nick Kario Speetos, Planning Development and Economic Growth. And item P34 is PDE 26-0446. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners to amend the Land Development Code, amending section 530.5, parking or storing of recreational vehicles, and other sections of the Land Development Code. Um this recommendation is to continue the item to the May 19th, 2026 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard in New Port Richey. Presentation or It's a continuance So, motion. Move. All in favor say aye. Engineer Times certain. Item P35. Item P35 was published in the Tampa Bay Times on February 4th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site posting. The item was continued from the March 24th, 2026 BCC meeting to today. Uh item P35 is PDE 26-0006. This is an ordinance amending the Pasco County Comprehensive Plan, providing for a comprehensive plan amendment to the future land use map, map to dash 15 and sheet 20, from COM commercial to RES 24, residential 24 dwelling units per gross acre, on approximately 4.93 acres of real property located on Grand Via Boulevard, approximately 0.3 mile east of the intersection of Caliente Boulevard and Land O' Lakes Boulevard, providing for additional text amendments as necessary for internal consistency, providing for repeal or severability, and effective date. Uh right before the

I know. It's a unique order here. I This might be the one of the first of these I've seen that I can remember. I'll do publication. Item P38 was published in the Tampa Times on March 22nd, 2026. Amy Farrell, budget director with the Office of Management and Budget. Um P38 or OMB 260038 is a grant application and public hearing for the Pasco County Sheriff's Office for an Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program Local Formula. Um so, I ask the board to accept public comment. Okay. Anyone here from the public like to speak to item P38? So, no one here or anyone on on line? No one's on line. No one signed up. And staff recommendation is that the board approve the Sheriff's ability to apply for this grant. I move. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Um the motion also should include authorizing the chairman to execute two original certifications of assurance attached. Who was the motion maker? Okay. And the second? Yep. Okay. Thanks, Jeff.

[laughter]

All right. So, item P39 comprehensive comprehensive plan amendments says on consent. Item P39 was published in the Tampa Times on March 4th, 2026. Item P39 is PD 26-0435. This is a comprehensive plan amendment in the name of CPA 26-01 West Market Area ROR retail office residential future land use density text amendment providing for transmittal of the text amendment to the future land use element appendix section FLU A-6. This comes with a recommendation [clears throat] to authorize the transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan text amendment to the Department of Commerce, Florida Commerce, and other reviewing agencies. And there's a presentation if so desired. Okay, for a presentation? Okay. All right. So, public hearing. Is anyone here to speak in uh to comment on item P39? Anyone on line? No one's on line. Okay. So, back to the board. Move to approve. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Item P40. Item P40 was published in the Tampa Times on March 25th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. Item P40 is PDE 26-0110. This is a development agreement in the name of Morris Bridge Road and State Road 56 MB56 LLC to design, permit, and construct a portion of Morris Bridge Road for cash reimbursement in South Central Pasco County south of the intersection of Morris Bridge Road and State Road 56. The This comes with the recommendation to approve the development agreement and authorize the chairman to execute originals of the agreement and direct board records to distribute as set forth under the distribution section uh identified in the in the agenda memo. There's a presentation if so desired. Okay. So, would we wish for a presentation? No? Okay. This is a public hearing. Is anyone here in the public to speak to item P40? Is anyone on line? No one is on line. Move to approve. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. And item P41. Item P41 was published in the Tampa Times on February 4th, 2026 and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings. The item was continued from the March 24th, 2026 BCC meeting to today. Uh this item is PDE 26-7857. This is a zoning amendment for a substantial modification to the Caliente Resorts MPUD by LOL Properties Incorporated. It's a rezoning request from master plan unit development uh to MPUD master plan unit development to allow for

the development of 96 condominium units in the Caliente Resorts. Um like the comprehensive plan before this before the public hearing, the applicant requested this item be continued to date uncertain in order to discuss the recreational facilities within Caliente Resorts. Okay. Convenience was advertised. Is anyone here from the public that would like to speak to this item? Is there anyone on line that wanted to speak to this item? No one's on line. Okay. So, we'll be back to the board to vote on.

To give them time to bear all their thoughts. I move to continue. Can I get a simplified motion?

[laughter]

Do we have a second?

Yeah, you can move it. Second. Bear in mind. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Okay. Go back to committee reports. Commissioner Oakley. On Saturday, there was a uh monarch butterfly festival there in Dade City. Uh you see Senator there with uh Secretary of Ag, Wilton Simpson, and also uh Jim Shive of the City of Dade City uh commission. Um very nice event. Um a lot of people out and a lot of people love the beautiful butterflies we get to see every now and then, but it's it's amazing that a monarch butterfly can travel uh up to about 3,000 miles. And uh it does that through several generations of of the butterfly itself. And otherwise, it don't just hatch out of the cocoon and fly out 3,000 miles. It actually takes it time over eight or 10 generations for that butterfly to make it to the south. So, there's a lot of work they I guess they're born with instinct when they come, they move on to the south and have this. But, it was very well attended. A lot of people there. Uh absolutely Chamber of Commerce Day in Dade City. Uh just just a great event. Basically, that's all I have. Okay. Commissioner Whitman. Good. Couple of uh policy ideas here that I've been chewing on and talking through with um Carballo. So, based on it was it was good we had the mobility discussion because this goes along with that is Nick pointed out, we have you know, houses popping up like mushrooms all over the place. And um so, there's been some challenges there, especially on the way here. And you travel 52 going east or west, it's bogged down. We've all done We've all been stuck in traffic, whether it's there's construction on collectors, arterials, county roads. There's congestion on even dirt roads going east to west, wherever you go. And as we know, the growth is going to continue to come. People are going to continue to choose to move to Pasco. But, we need to come up with with a series, in my opinion, a series of good neighbor policies for the existing residents in this town and in ensure that the development and the developers are being good neighbors to those who who are being impacted and to those who are traveling to get to and from where they go. And so, I don't have any

recommendations for what those good neighbors policies will be. The county administrator uh has some level of experience with this, but I think part of it needs to be um surrounding MOT. Currently, the county kind of gives a blank stamp on MOT on how long road work can be done. If If If the work plan says the contractor can get the work done in 30 days, then you don't need to have a 60- or 90-day permit. They need to get on it, get their work done, open the lane, and be as least disruptive as possible for people to get to and from and where they need to go, pick kids up from schools. So, I think that needs to be encompassed into these good neighbor policies. That way, it makes traveling around this county uh a little bit more pleasant as people continue to move here. So, I bring that up for folks to to to chew on and think about and I didn't put on or the county administrator to opine on his experience with good neighbor policies. It's a great topic. Commissioner Carballo. Yeah, I I just, you know, thank you, Commissioner Whitman, for bringing this up and being a fierce advocate for the citizens on this. I think we've all experienced that in some form or fashion. One of the things that we talked about with the team is how do we become a good neighbor, not just in our own uh our own capital projects. And And that then encompasses all government projects, right, to include FDOT, but also developer projects. And so, when we see lane closures or we see requests to uh to do things that are going to disrupt the normal way of life, there's probably ways that we can do better. If you'll indulge me for just a couple minutes, I can I can ask our two assistant county administrators over infrastructure and development services just to give you a quick idea of some things that we're doing as a first move, but then we'd like to kind of come back with just some more more formal actions of of what we would like to do. It it it could incur additional cost on projects as well as development costs, but I I I think they're minimal when you consider the overall cost of of business and commerce within and and just delay for the traveling public when we talk about these things. Uh David Branford? Sure. Thank you, Mr. Carballo. Um uh you know, on the development services side, we're we have several initiatives that are in the works that will support this good neighbor policy, and and just one quick example that we've seen um cropping up as issues within our communities is construction routes. Um we have not historically defined construction routes, and as we continue to grow and see this development, we are seeing impacts in heavy equipment, trucks, um you know, that that construction traffic not only impacting um the residents within the communities, but also, you know, school uh morning peak rush hours and those types of things. So, we're we're taking a look at

that more closely. Another thing that we're looking at, and this is just probably broader and kind of stepping away a little bit from the traffic side, is is really looking at our buffers between varying land uses, and how do we minimize those impacts in terms of what we're approving for growth. And then, uh just real quickly, as as we are reviewing the plans, um myself along with Mr. Ingle and his staff have been um having conversations with our team about really taking a broader look of these projects beyond just the four corners of the projects. Taking a look and seeing what's in the surrounding areas surrounding communities, and really ta- kind of taking a look and seeing how those communities will fit in with the existing environment and what we could do to minimize those. Um Mr. um Adumuah, I have already had conversations on MOT, and that falls under kind of the traffic responsibility, so I'll hand it over to him to expand upon some of the things that we're thinking about from that front as well. Robert? Yes, um uh commissioners, uh we are taking this very seriously, and I would like to thank you, Commissioner Whitman, uh for bringing this making this an awareness issue. Uh we are including this in our written SOPs for our key three departments, public works, uh transportation engineering, as well as utilities. Um also, we are looking at uh possibly having a discussion with uh with purchasing uh to see if we can include some languages in our agreements and contracts, because um honestly, contractors are uh really not aware or take it as serious as we do uh to pay attention to the impact of our projects, even if it's a temporary project, uh on our citizens who are customers. So, um we are bringing this to the forefront, also training for the team our teams, for the project managers, project engineers to look out for this. Uh and also, as well as our construction engineering inspection consultants, who usually manage uh manage our projects, and we also manage them. So, they are aware, and uh the key thing is documenting the process involved uh where their attention should be. I think you and I had some discussions on one of these issues that um we should be aware and we should be following up with our contractors. Uh contractors work for us, uh and therefore, any engagement uh with our citizens, we must make sure that they are addressing their concerns while they are building the projects. And this just represents some of the some of the things these are kind of low-hanging fruit, and and we'll come back to the board if it pleases the board to kind of enumerate some of the actions that we've taken. There may be other things that the board wants to look at as well. I'll throw open burning out there as another as another issue that that I see with with infill development coming along. Um that may be something

we we discuss. I don't know to what what level that regulation is possible, but those are the I'll take ideas at this point of of things that you may see with the public um in terms of the the inconveniences surrounding growth and development and infill of of areas in our county. I'll just add in a couple of things, too. You know, when you're talking about the traffic routes, and um you know, these years ago, the Links Golf Course Estates, we had a a thing where we had a route set up where they were going to drive on Buffalo Drive. And somehow, we changed the law that allowed staff to go change what board had voted on. I was waiting to see, and I don't think we had it back come back to us yet to actually take that authority back. Where if if the board had made a decision on where a traffic route was going to be, or some development conditions, if it was going to change, it had to come back before another board to make that decision, rather than internal staff. That led to a lot of heartache that didn't have to happen, but we put ourselves in a position where it couldn't go. Is that something you brought back to us, or going to bring back to us? I I just think we've probably been wiser to not even execute that authority at this point. I I'll talk to David about about what to do with that specifically, but

[snorts]

I think we got the message loud and clear as far as overriding any of that. Right, but let's see It was an anomaly, but I And I don't I don't want to see it go on let's say let's say 10, 15 years from now, something that was put in Maybe some developments don't come forward, they're going to come later, and all of a sudden, they go back to do it again, then someone else is going to be burdened with that. So, I would like to see that change made uh in in print that puts the authority back if if you're going to have a public hearing that a decision was made in front of the people that are sitting here, that they know that if the change is going to happen again, it's going to come to another public meeting, and have a public discussion before a change is made. I I think David can look at that with the whole routes. Yeah, and and if I may, Chair, um you know, uh another thing that we're looking to implement within the branch, too, as well, is just more utilization of GIS and computer systems and mapping, because in that particular case that which I'm we're both very well aware of.

Right. You know, decisions were made in the past, and I think the challenge is as we have staff turnover, things like that, um those records may not have been considered as part of the review. And one of the goals that we want to have is to start capturing um decisions, whether it's on MPUD or or other zoning changes, so that when the staff does go in and start those reviews, they have [cough] a centralized location that they can utilize as a reference, and then be able to see those, and then, you know, uh if there are past um requirements for those projects that that they're carried forward or evaluated appropriately. So, I don't know if I'm still getting what I want.

[laughter]

But again, if a board made a decision, I don't want staff to be able to go I'm going to make a different decision, cuz I I think I want to. But David, the board gave that authority up. I want to bring it back. I I think, David, what we just need to do is deconstruct what happened with Buffalo Drive, and and make sure that whatever mechanism allowed staff at the time to do what they did can't happen again. Right. We'll bring that back. Okay. Well, I I mean I I don't know what it is. That That's I There's a way to do what I think the chair is is seeking to do. It may be limiting staff's ability to change specific conditions of approval. But my recollection is what the change was, and David can can rescue me as I go down this path.

[laughter]

Um is that it was secondary approvals that no longer were going to come to the board. Like preliminaries, is that or DRC or back in the day, DRC. Yeah, it was really the elimination of DRC that caused the issue, because it was a it was actually a DRC-imposed condition that was then sort of cemented in place by the board, cuz the board funded what DRC approved. And then, staff basically overrode both DRC and the board. And then, they And they couldn't go back to DRC, because DRC didn't exist. But I don't And I don't know that the board wants to undertake the volume of approvals that used to go to the DRC. So, there there's There should be a happy What I'm saying is there should be a happy medium to get to where you're you're concerned, and not bring everything forward that Right. And I'm not going to bring everything forward, but I'm what I'm saying is if something's already been decided, been voted on through a public hearing process, staff should not be overriding that unless it comes back to a public hearing process. I I I agree with that. I understand. All right. And again, again, we did the best we could with what we had after that point, but I just want to make sure it doesn't go. And I appreciate this conversation, because I've had probably more calls in the past 2 years with new developments with between where they're driving, what they're doing, how they're constructing, uh times they're getting started, and all those things. I want you guys [clears throat] to have the tools to go pick up the phone to somebody, which which may be part of this area, to say, "Stop construction until you fix this. Stop until you start that." And have the authority to do that. I want to give you guys the power to say, "You're not doing the the way this is supposed to be. You violated the law. You We're going to put a stop work order until you finish." Cuz I don't want to hear the thing, "Well, we can't stop them, cuz we're going to be liable." I want to clearly lay it out as we're doing these things that they have to follow certain things, certain rules that if they're going to violate and then disturb the public, then they're going to wait until it gets resolved without penalty of of us being in jeopardy for that. Okay. Any Miss Weiman? No, I I talked with DOT about this also Kelly Justice Secretary Hall's um um person in in and she agreed about, you know, trying to come up with good neighbor policies and them trying to complement whatever the county does within their their projects on on their roads. The next we had we had Tampa Bay Water Board meeting yesterday and um obviously the the big topic is

you know, conserving water. And so we had an update on uh cooperative funding initiative and part of that what dealt with uh water wise. The The goal's to save up 3.8 million gallons per day by 2030 of water being used. And for FY26, the goal in water savings is 567,560 uh but the minimum goal is 200,000 gallons per day. And so they went through the type of, you know, the rebate program that the water management district has and they have uh with their low flows and there's a chart here and I'll give this to the administrator. So in 2025, the rebate for low flow toilets and sinks and what have you um for multi-family were 13. And in 2026, the com- uh completed and projected number of multi-family projects is 21. And it goes down to hotel, commercial, residential toilets and then we had, you know, zero water star uh which is disappointing to see in 2025, but in 2026 we're projected to see 19 of them. I thought, well, if we want to save water and we're trying to conserve water as best we can, what if we come up with a policy that requires at least multi-family projects to put in all uh water wise uh utilities within the building. And was brainstorming with Carballa about the idea, you know, more and more multi-family is going to converge on our county and the chair you've brought it up in the past thinking you're on Tampa Bay Water about trying to figure out how to at least get the most efficient use of water from multi-family projects. And so it just wheels started turning with the drought and trying to save gallons. Low hanging fruit I think is our multi-family product and and either setting a policy or a requirement or a goal that they put maximum efficiency flow toilets and uh sink heads and and what have you. So I just throw that out there. I'll submit this this update to Carballa that he can scan it and email to to everyone to think about. So I just figured I'd bring it up for discussion or residential development in general. I I don't know, but um we've got to try. More and more people are going to be coming onto the system. We're not going to run out of water. The water Tampa Bay Water assures us that we have plenty of potable drinking water, but it is going to become more expensive. Water will become more expensive because of the infrastructure cost to move water places. So in order to keep rates down um obviously we we need to start thinking

about how we're going to going to do that. Um so I just open it up for thoughts on that matter and I'll submit the presentation and Carballa can mail it out to folks. Any comments? All right, you can read it read up on it. Anything else, sir? I'm done. Thank you. All right, Miss Starkey. Okay. Um I attended the CSW luncheon. We had another sold out waiting list event. We did have some men there. Um so it's not only for the ladies. We had a great speaker um whose topic really hit home with some of my friends um who were in a friendship blow up and um I took the book on a girls trip and set it out for them to read, but no one picked it up. So their friendship blow up will continue. But anyway, uh it was a great luncheon and um thank you to everyone who participated. Um over the weekend of April 11th and 12th, uh Starkey Ranch District Park uh staff um with DMO hosted an NSA softball tournament and the Florida Premier Spring Soccer Showcase. We had 30 softball teams and 300 soccer teams participating. Um um it was just we just got accolades into my office on how great everything went and how how nice the fields were. And um so I just want to thank thank the staff for that. Um we got we all got this nice letter from Novi about uh thanking Keith Wiley and Brian Taylor entire team for the incredible job they did getting the fields ready. They had 312 teams from around the country here in Pasco County. I mean, that's a bunch. And so it went it went very well. So um uh Jenny and Katie attended the 1050 home dedication in Holiday um for Habitat and went to a single mom mother and her son. And um they said that she actually put more work in than required. So congratulations to them. Look at Senator Hooper's there. So um thank you to Habitat. Um I attended the Goat Kitchen and Bar uh opening at Saddlebrook. And um happy to see them moving on. I don't understand it, but all their palm trees around the pool were dead. I don't know if you noticed that. Frost. Oh, the frost. Okay. So that that wasn't looking so hot. Um Six days of cold weather. I attended the TMA meeting. Um I wish I still had it, but apparently we threw away the paper. Um we had a very in-depth discussion about the proport- apportionment that they ended up with. And um I wish I I had the paper with me, but I'll try I don't remember how to do the math, but I think we'll be changing this. There's

25 total MPO board voting seats. And no there was not a lot of support for the layout because we've always said if Pasco, Pinellas together have to equal more than Hillsborough. And um and the way it's set up, some people think that the airport and the port should be counted as Hillsborough. Um both the the CEO of the airport and the number two guy at the port were there to say, "Hey, they vote and vote independently." But I think where we've left it is we are asking Hillsborough to give up one of their seats and give it to Pasco so we have five. And then Hillsborough County can decide with their remaining seats how they divide it up between the the Hillsborough County and the City of Tampa and the airport and the port. Um there was discussion that they are non-voting, there's discussion if they could rotate a seat, um but that it should be part of Hills- the Hillsborough allotment. [snorts] So um we had to postpone the vote and they may be adding another very important TMA meeting over the summer. Um cuz we we have certain deadlines. And I have invited and I believe they're coming in the not too distant future um Michael from the airport and uh the port to come up and talk to us as well. Um let's see if I have something else here. Um fire. Well, you brought it up, but I wanted to talk about builders being able to have fi- burn right now. I It makes no sense to me. Especially if it's windy. We we've had three scares now in Starkey Starkey Ranch District Park. I mean, I wondered if I needed to stand behind my house with the hose. Um So I don't think they should be allowed to burn right now. If there's a burn ban, why are they exempt? Well, I I really want to know why.

are handled under Division of Forestry rules, um but I'm happy to sit with Jeff, his team, fire rescue and fire marshal uh to see if there's a solution we can bring back to the board.

If they're going to burn, maybe they have to pay to have some of our fire trucks sitting there. I I know we observe some things and I know we inspect them um on a on a regular basis. So Okay. Um the next thing is yesterday we had a big meeting on cogongrass. Um and uh David Allen was there among other staff. So I do want to hear how you ended up cuz I had to leave for another meeting, but uh and it's because I was contacted by gentleman who's doing some work for the state um on cogongrass and they and exactly from Pasco County. And so they brought in their lidar equipment and their drones and was very interesting. Um In the meantime, he called me when when I talked to him, he said he they were watching the property on Mitchell get cleared with the St. John's property project and they were clearing the cogongrass in a in an inappropriate way and they warned them and they said, "We don't care." Basically. So I thought we put steps in place that developers and land owners or whomever had to be notified and and clear their property correctly before they could start of cogongrass. But apparently we're not doing that. Um they said that if a cogongrass catches on fire and you're standing in a field of cogongrass, you will burn because you cannot outrun the spread of co- a cogongrass fire. It's like gasoline. So um Um can you say how how the meeting went? Um I see Mr. Mickle coming up because I did have to step out, but I think I think the next steps are to look at a pilot for identifying, you know, the the uh effectiveness of our treatments on cogongrass particular on the right-of-way. I do want to mention the development services side just real briefly is because um I did have a conversation with Keith and our um the development review team and we do have um requirements for initial assessments to identify where cogongrass is within the disturbed areas. And in the case with the Mitchell St. John property, um not sure what happened there, but we do have that as part of our uh parks recreation and natural resources assessment of the sites particularly when they're looking at other environmental factors like the tortoises and delineating where they have those and they're required to um eliminate the cogongrass.

Okay, then can you let me know what we did on the Cocolalla property at Central Pasco Employment Center that's now clear because it was full, 100% full of cogongrass. Mr. I I think too the commissioner points out enforcement. I mean, are we able to We can

[snorts]

put the requirements in on the review. Is there an enforcement arm to that or are we we lacking that capability? No, we would have that uh enforcement capability through our code compliance then just just similar to like say a tree uh tree removal that would fall under the same same authority. Have we ever asked a developer or a developer to stop because of cogongrass? To your knowledge? I am not aware of any. Yeah, neither, but it's not my world. Okay. Um I think that's it for me. County Administrator. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a couple of items. Uh first and foremost, I wanted to recognize our fleet department. Um there's an organization of of national fleet management um professionals, the world's largest not-for-profit organization for professionals who manage vehicle fleets. I'm happy to say that uh our fleet department was recognized in as one of the top 100 best fleets in America contest, so for North, Central, and South America. Uh number 38 actually, I think uh on on that list. So it just again it it recognizes the good practices that our fleet department utilizes, our ability to to keep costs down and and maintain reliability and operational effectiveness in our fleet. The uh other thing I wanted to mention is on April 24th at 4:00 p.m. I don't know if this is on your calendars or not, but uh I would like to invite you to Starkey Wilderness Park uh for a Tree of Life Memorial Program. In in 2025 uh we lost 16 members and um for for various reasons, but to honor their legacy and their memories, uh we will be um holding a memorial ceremony where we'd like to institute a new tradition of having a paver placed in their memory at a county park. And so that'll be at 4:00 p.m. in Starkey Wilderness Park. It's just a memorial to to those

4:00 p.m. uh on April 24th. That is Friday. Yes. And um that's all I have. Okay. Um Mr. County Attorney. Mr. Chairman, I do have stuff today. Is it important?

[cough]

Uh maybe. Um I did want to inform the board that we have been notified that we will be getting a settlement on the PFAS litigation, at least an initial settlement. Um that's the forever uh chemical that is uh infiltrating um water supply systems. Um it's not a whole lot of money, but um Tyco and BAF uh based on my rough math of looking at they issued settlement check or settlements for each of the water systems that we had done an analysis of. And so it amounts to about $150,000, which is doesn't seem to be a whole lot of money, but

you're going to do much with that. Yeah, um but that's the, you know, multi-district litigation. Um it's not something that we are in a position to say no, we're not going to settle because we can't undertake the litigation, you know, that is that is ongoing. Um and so

[cough]

um

[clears throat]

it is what it is. Uh I believe we have a secondary claim for um the fire facility um which is not covered by this group. Um and there may be other other settlements that are coming down the pike, but there is a small amount of money that is coming in under that litigation. Um The second thing is uh in front of you I have placed uh a memo to you all um announcing my retirement. I've talked to you individually before before this. Um It just appeared, you know, it it as I said in the first line in the the memo, there's never a good time. Um but in after 17 years, I'm thinking it may be the right time now. Um and I've had, you know, it's been a play- and I'll be here so my um my plan is to stay through July 31st. Uh um so my retirement would be effective on August 1st. Uh my contract requires a 90-day notice provision, which is what I'm giving you. Um um and I, you know, as far as succession planning goes, um Mr. Goldstein has been here longer than I have. Um after some uh testing out, well, let's say, um I didn't immediately appoint David as my chief assistant when I got here. I made him sweat a little bit. Um and saw whether we did whether we'd have a working relationship or not. Um but he's been with the county since uh 2001. Um He became my chief assistant 8, 10 months after I got here, something like that. Um and has been my right-hand man during that entire time period. Um as I've said in in the memo and to you privately, um I'm not sure that I could have done it without David. There is no even as a land use attorney that wanted to continue to do land use, it is overwhelming to consider trying to do planning commission and this board um on a daily basis and keep 14 lawyers um happy and doing their jobs. Um and so you know, David has has been there for me through this time period. Um you know, we'd live local with all of those sort of special projects in addition to assisting planning and development with their agendas. Um so I would encourage the Board of County Commissioners to to not do a search for their next county attorney, but to hire from within and to uh upon my retirement appoint Mr.

Goldstein as your next county attorney. Well, Jeff, 17 years, you've done a phenomenal job across the board. I want to say that I think David has been as you say, his expertise uh able to get things done to go through it has been phenomenal every step of the way. You know, when we had the chance to make the county administrator appointment going forward, it was looking outside we had like multiple people going. Um once it simplified us, it was real easy to bring Mike in. And I think that continuation has been phenomenal. And I I get the same feeling, we get the same results with David. Commissioner Oakley. I just wanted to ask something. I I'm very much in support of uh David Goldstein to be able to take over after Jeff retires. I did make him promise me that if I was chair again and I asked him how I would straighten out the meeting to get it going in the right direction for him not to tell me that he was not chair. Somebody did that to him.

[laughter]

Which was Jeff. But it was very good. I've never forgotten it.

[laughter]

But the fact of it is uh Jeff, you've done a great job. I've I've enjoyed working with you and um really appreciate all you've done for Pasco County and the citizens of Pasco County. And I'm very much uh in full agreement that David Gaultier should be stepping in your footsteps so in the future. Okay. It's not goodbye yet. No, it's not the I'm just I'm just giving Jeff a chance to comment if he'd like to comment. Well, I I won't. I know it's not goodbye but I certainly miss sitting next to you and borrowing borrowing your pens and your cords and uh asking you all my questions and make sure you have your Robert's Rules of Order rules with you. And I I also support David in in the stepping up in that role. Nothing else, right? No? Okay. Anything else, sir? That's it. All right. Well, David, we'll see how it goes but I think um we can probably put an agenda item together if we need it or whatever but I think it'll be a good formal conversation for us. And I will support you as well. I appreciate the board's support and uh I got some big shoes to fill. Um I think I'm up to size 11 now so I think [laughter] uh I'm up up to the task so I appreciate the board's support and I think it'll be a very smooth transition. Thank you. Okay. Anything else, sir? Nope, that's it. Thank you. I I do have one item. Um well, congratulations, Jeff, on the decision. That's pretty fantastic. Um this weekend is Operation Stand Down and that is a 3-day event to help veterans in Pasco County. The event is fantastic community the partners come together to provide all sorts of services to our veterans. On Friday, um my office participates in Veterans Court so I just wanted to make that public announcement. So on on Friday, it runs from 10:00 a.m. till 2:00 p.m. So if a veteran um has um a a court case an old court case, let's say, and they um owe a court obligation and uh that obligation is in default and now they don't have a driver's license, we help them get back on their feet through this event through Veterans Court. Um for instance, last year we helped 19 veterans wave $45,000 in court obligations and allowed them to be able to um qualify to get their driver's license back. We partner with the Tax Collector's office so Mike Fasano's office is there. So they go from the court the the courtroom at um Safety Town and they walk across the hall and they go and they get their driver's license. Um so when they leave, they are ready um with their their new identification. Um it's a it's a partnership with the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court, the State Attorney and the Public Defender in addition to my office. So I just wanted to make

everybody aware of that. 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the Concourse at Rotary Pavilion um at Safety Town this weekend, Friday, Saturday, Sunday. And thank you, Nikki, and Tax Collector as well for being so involved with this because this has started out with a small program. Wasn't even sure what it was years ago but we started out at Veterans Park and it's just gotten better and better every year for all that you're doing so we appreciate you. Yeah, thank you. Okay. All right. Um I'll go to my items so I I've got one picture, I think. That's not it. So I was over to Saddlebrook, too, with uh Commissioner Starkey and and I want to tell you what they did in that uh bar area was a true dramatic improvement. They freshened it up. They have big screen TV, separate location and it's welcoming when you get in there and um the food choices were awesome as well. That's Doug MacLean who's now the director of promotions so I got a picture with Doug but it was a it was a great event. That's all I've got for pictures. Um I do want to talk quickly about the TMA as well, that meeting. Um what I learned as well was with the airport let's talk specifically is they have a me a representative from the city and a representative from Hillsborough County. So it's pretty strongly represented from electeds. Um and I brought up the conversation at multiple MPOs how we should take a look at trying to possibly use that land at Ridge Road on the turnpike to make it a park and ride. Asked Tony to try to try to set a meeting up. At one point, HART was like on the program as well. They were listed there as far as like this is someone who should would be involved with it and I never got a meeting. And I I told them I said, "Yeah, part of my uh concern is if you're not going to respond to me as an outside commissioner from a different county, um you know, what kind of response do I need for someone who's going to be on that board?" So they said they're going to meet with us and talk about it. I'm excited about that. It could be a great benefit for them and I even said it could even connect to the port so hopefully we got a voice now that's going to be heard as opposed to just being let go but I think they'll listen to us better now which I think will be helpful. Um Can I can I ask? Yes, go ahead. Um and I texted this to you but um well, have one copy here. Take a look at these percentages. One of the suggestions that we brought up and it was first voiced by um I think she was the St.

Petersburg councilwoman was that they consider if they're truly regional, then Pinellas and Pasco County maybe should be represented on their board. And so one of the thoughts was that maybe we rotate one on the port, one on the board. Um you know, we have to talk to our legis legislators about that because it their makeup is set by Tallahassee. Um but when they come up here to talk to us, that's something that I think we should bring up because if it's they're not funded by the city or the or the county. So um if they're truly regional, well, their representation is not regional unless one of the governor appointments is from Pasco or Pinellas. But right now all three of their representatives are from Hillsborough County on both of them that are governor appointed. So I get dialogue going on but It was a good discussion. It was. It was. Um all right, as far as um we had a person from Hudson speaking today. She lives a little bit south of Sea Ranch in the Hoffman Lane area that was Del Mar right below Sea Ranch. And she talked about all the um RVs that are parked in areas that may not. And when we set that up, um JP and his team went out there and go and they went I think with code and they checked to make sure that every RV that was out there was from a storm damaged home which most of them were. But they also made sure that every one of them was hooked up to a system to collect their sewage. So I think we need to go back and do the follow-up to that. Go check that out and then as we go there, I think we should put some type of sticker or something on there that shows a name and a date as far as when was looked at, when it was inspected so people in the neighborhood will know that, okay, this is a legitimate thing as opposed to others that have may have just dropped one off, brought one in there, etc. So I think that would be a a very helpful thing to do in the area. So I'm I'm comfortable with a sweep in that. I will say this as far as like and I mean we had a little quick dialogue about sweeps themselves. I want to be and I'm I'm sure you guys may feel the same way but I I want to hear. If a commissioner wants to see a sweep or code wants to do a sweep in a commissioner's district, you should get the level of respect, I think, to get a presentation about what we want to do and why we want to go do it. Not just to go out there on their own to just go make it happen. I've got other issues that I've been talking about with homeless going up and down. Um you know, fire up on Sea Pines. Don't know if it was a camp but it was a camp that we talked about that is right in that local area. Fire with we had over in Leisure Beach.

Camp homeless camp that was up in that area a few years back cost us 32 grand. I don't know what this last one cost but we continually have that problem. We can't It is still the biggest thing I've got. I mean, the other day I've I've I'm driving down. There's a person sleeping right in front of Walmart on the sidewalk. Um I see him continually. They've gone from even just being woods in in the Walmart. They're out in CVS in Hudson. Continually out there sitting in the parking lot with the red sign going in there. It's not good for the businesses that are there, either. They deserve some help. Because if you got people that are out there that are being hassled by coming in, you're not going to want to go there. If you got people out there charging their phones on, you know, some businesses' thing, it's going to hurt that business. We've got to take care of our businesses, too, and not let this stuff go on. I saw one in front of I see one continually in front of Wawa's. Right on Little Road as you're coming down. Sitting right out front. So this is something in my district, the biggest thing I've got is these homeless people that are out disrupting and causing causing different issues. They're violating the law which we've and our attorney shows is several different violations. The lady defecating out there shouldn't be going on but they go and go. The post office was cleared out very well but there's still much more to be done. So as far as I'm going to say with code enforcement and and getting in and things done, I want to see what the focus of what what the people are being bothered by rather than just having them just going to decide to go do different things. It takes a lot of resources to do a sweep. It better be coordinated, better be set up but if I've got only so much thing things that are going to get done, I'm going to tell you my my people are most concerned with the homeless population, destruction, trash, etc. that's being caused. I mean, look what I'm doing with the Great American Cleanup. The presentation was done by the done at Old Dixie Highway and Old Dixie, and while I'm there, the lady who was giving the presentation, who I've known from Habitat for Humanity years ago, she said, "Don't go by across from the the CVS store up on Hudson Avenue, there's a big homeless population, it's dangerous, so don't go up there." Now, we if we know they're there, and everybody knows that they're we need to try to take care of that stuff. You hear a funny story, Chair? Commissioner Whitman. So, in the last week,

[clears throat]

coming off Fairway Cutoff going south on 41, when you go on 50 54 and 41, homeless guy had a hammock set up and tied between two power poles. You've seen it? Oh, yeah. I saw it. Just chilling, living his greatest life, sun tanning. And it was like the perfect definition of what we have going on. Um, had his things set up, hammock right on right of way. How many thousands of cars go through 54 and 41? And people are seeing that. It's right there in front of Tibbetts. Yep. It it just There was a picture that defined the whole problem. And I thought it was pretty bold. Um, but that was the first. That was a a first seeing a a hammock tied up between two power poles. And he just had his sunglasses on, just hanging out. So, someone going to say anything? We moved we sent we we made a call, and then of course they couldn't find him, so he obviously moved on. All right, continue. And and then it's going to take us as the person said, 9:00 to 5:00 doesn't cut it. Because guess when they're going to go work work. And especially summer time's coming now, they're going to be out from 5:00 to 8:00 or 5:00 to dusk continually. And I know we got to protect them, but those are the issues, the weekends, it's going to keep on going on as well. So, somehow, and I've talked about this years ago, when we're bringing the new hires in, we got to kind of say, "You may have to work some weekends if we're going to have some situations to go forward." And I don't I don't know if we're doing that, but I think it's something that needs to be brought and looked at, and I wanted to bring it out here. Uh, that's right. I mean, the so the challenge you have is we have a body of ordinances that require enforcement, and and of course limited resources with which with which to do that. I know typically when we do sweeps, uh, often times they are at requests of community members, folks that are in there that are drawing complaints as well. Um, and so this is this is a balancing act because I can't necessarily discriminate as to how and where we enforce your ordinances. Um, I get homelessness is a problem, and I know, you know, we've tackled that. Um, you know, Kathy's team and and code is intimately involved in that, and so we're going to we're going to continue to press on that. Um, and then these these other these other code violations are they're they're they're problems, but we do take we do take, uh, input from the community as well. Um,

so it it it can be challenging. Uh, so I David and I are actually going to meet and talk a little bit more about this topic. Um, but, you know, we we it's um it's very difficult to be the enforcement arm, but but having to, you know, um, you know, enforce here or enforce there, we it's it's tough for code to really figure that out. And so, um, you know, I get priorities, and I think that that's important. We should have priorities because we have limited resources. And so, how you use those resources matters as well. Um, so I want to try to balance that with the board, but but at the same time recognize that well, we we can't be discriminatory against that as well. No, you can't, but I mean, there's if someone's got complaints, they file them file them, etc. They get they can get looked at, right? Every single one of them can be. For to go out into a neighborhood, okay, when again, that takes a lot of time. Is it a warning you got to back, etc.? That takes a lot of time coordinate, and I'm telling you just the day-to-day stuff I can't get done, never mind these special projects that want to get done. And I was as we're elected from the people, the people will call us continually, and let me tell you when the fires at Leisure Beach are going on, it's a big problem. When you have all the homeless people in front of their businesses because now people don't want to go in because of that, and it happens for a lot of other businesses I haven't mentioned yet, but those out there are affecting everything. So, for code to go out and decide what they want to go do, when they want to go do it, without even consulting to say, "Hey, we're going to go do this," there's something wrong. Who's running the operation? It should be the Board of County Commissioners. And I'm telling you as a commissioner who's got a district, and I've asked for this up and down, give me a code portion for up and down 19, take it to Little Road, and let me have one guy just go deal with this one issue. And I can't get that done because they have segmented stuff. It's not right, it's not what the people want. So, I'm saying as an elected official, as someone who knows what the problem is with the people, my priority should not be sweeps that they want to go do here and there. Like today was a legitimate one, I back that. That needs to get done. That's water quality and safety, it's abusing the code. But if someone's not going to put a complaint in to go to a specific property, that's what it takes. The state said that. The state said if we're going to put a complaint someone's got to put a complaint in, they got to register themselves to go do it. Do I do I think that's right? No. But if I'm going to go deal with my bigger issues, it's people sleeping on the sidewalk, defecating on the sidewalk in the

neighborhood, causing that grief. That's a bigger problem to me than doing a sweep in a neighborhood because somebody wants you to do a sweep. Chair Chair, if I may. Yeah. Um, I hear you 100%. I think I think the homelessness the the the homelessness piece is a challenge here in in Pasco County, and and I think that working with Kathy and her team, you know, we're continuing to to work on partnerships and those types of things to be able to address that. And and certainly we have a lot of work to do there. Um, in in regards to the sweep itself, um, we we did get, um, requests from the community members themselves, and and certainly we can brief, um, the commissioners whenever we have plans for those, um, sweeps, um, within the communities. Um, just just to get a better understanding of, you know, where it's originating from and and what the plan is to do those sweeps. And again, the state said if you want to put a complaint in, put the complaint in. What these people don't want to do is put a complaint in to put their name out there, and I respect that. But let them go work with the state that we can do these things where they can just go out there. That's where the law needs to change, not to go without talking to a commissioner what's going on in this district. Because I'm going to tell you, I get it all the time where the biggest problems are. So, just because you've got a loud person that may want to talk to you about they want to sweep out there, it's not the way it should work. I think we have to be careful though on allowing commissioners to to make the call. And then the threat is is, you know, staff will come in and let you know we're going to do a sweep, and then feel the pressure to call off a sweep. We we need to be careful there with that.

That's why we discuss it ahead of time. Let's go find out what's a priority in the community. And I'm going to tell you right now, let's go have that conversation, maybe set another meeting up, and let's go see where the code enforcement officers are, and let's go look at where the biggest problems I face are because they're not getting handled. And code enforcement violations are code enforcement violations, and I can tell you where they are. And just give us a lift all these violations for all these camps, they are true violations just like the other ones. So, I think I I do think that there is probably room in in you know, if I look at the county as a giant house, I guess if you will, each district is a room of that house. We've got areas, we've got things that are problems in in various districts, but we've also got corridors and things that are commonalities. Is there is there a room to have discussion, uh, with the board on again, it's becomes areas of focus? You know, got it. We we have homelessness in in in some of the areas in your district, Commissioner. Um, but there's also neighborhoods, and maybe there's other areas that we that we should look at with code, and and, you know, in these David, I I don't know, um, if if there's room to have discussion on that. Because again, the the the the major issue that we have with code is trying to we we can't just be discriminating on how we enforce, and that's that is that's a problem. It can be a problem. It can get us into legal trouble, too, because now we're picking and choosing. Um, and we have to be careful about that. Mr. Starkey. Um, I I would love for the code enforcement head to come up. Uh, but it's my understanding that when I don't want to speak for you and how you operate, but it's my understanding that when we're doing a sweep, it's because there's been a lot of calls in a certain area, and that's what generates, um, a sweep, which is a much more efficient use of our code enforcement time because if they when they get called to one specific instance, and then there's they can only look at a 20 I think a 360 radius of what they're touching to see if they see any other violations. Um, so sweeps, they don't do them very often. I wish I wish they'd do more often, um, but I believe it's a very efficient use of the code enforcement time. Um, I have worked very hard to clean up Holiday and that area. We don't have as much homeless as we used to. Um, I think we still have code violations, but uh, going on, but we have certainly cleaned up the area and I am very grateful to code for going in there and working with me and helping keep up people's property values

and people don't want to live next door to someone who has uh, moved trailers onto their property and opened up businesses illegally like it's happening up in some other districts or homes that weren't, you know, they built all kinds of stuff on their property that's not legal, but there's no code enforcement looking at it. I showed you the picture of someone who put a sign up next to Hudson High School that said, "Park your boats and RVs and all your stuff here." in a residential community. So, I think we I think they do a great job. I wish that the code enforcements were complaints were anonymous. Um, but I think it's a good use of time to do the sweeps, so. I'm Denise Anderson, director of code compliance. So, when it comes to conducting sweeps, there are really two ways in which sweeps come onto our radar. One is officer-driven, they'll identify an area where they believe there is criteria that that we evaluate that is um, really kind of in need of a sweep for a defined geographic area. And so, an officer-initiated request. And then of course, from the public. And so, regardless of how that request comes to us, we go out and evaluate the area, we identify the geography in which we believe a code sweep is warranted. We implemented new protocols last year. We're working with media relations and with public works. So, we go out and get a variable message board or two, whatever we can get our hands on and attempt to place those in a public area um, 10 days in advance or typically over the period of two weekends where the neighborhood has an opportunity to look around themselves and identify self-identify issues that may be addressed in a code sweep. We find that to be very effective notifying them in advance that all code identified issues will be addressed during the sweep and we give them the date on which that sweep will occur. Media relations also sends out via social media targeted, um, usually through Nextdoor to that neighborhood to let them know as well that the week will be coming through. And we do notify the commission office prior to that sweep being conducted. And so, those we have done those, um, for the last year that has been our protocol. There have been some limited exceptions where we haven't used a variable message board um, because we've been able it's a smaller area and we've gone out and door-to-door notified the neighborhood that we'll be coming through on a specific date. But typically, um, there's two forms of communication that we have with the community that we'll be coming through. That's And I'll say, you know, years ago we had the head of code enforcement east and west representatives. I got much better service talking to those people. They would go with me, we'd go talk to the neighbors, etc. They would tell me what they wanted to

do, we'd come up with ideas to solve to solve things. When we put the panhandling

[cough]

in first in place, we worked with it together. And I'm telling you now, I continuously say the same things over and over again. I've sent pictures, I've sent details, and my people tell me, their elected official, that they're not happy with the homeless situation. They're not happy to have a big camp that caused a fire a couple years ago that's still there. They're not happy with the one that we saw up in Hudson by Sea Pines, don't know if that was caused by them, but a homeless camp that's right there causes another fire. I don't need to have my people in jeopardy. They don't need to be in in worry about what's going to go on in their area. Uh, we cleaned up Leisure Beach, did a great job down there. But, literally, those spots are out there, they're known, and they haven't been acted on. And I'm going to tell you continually, you can keep everybody 9:00 to 5:00, but if you're not even taking care of what's going on during 9:00 to 5:00, it's going to get worse and worse and it keeps on getting that way. And literally, I should not have to see people in my district defecating out there. Those are the people. They should be laying on the side of the streets. It's happening all the time up and down 19. And I'm going to say the way you have the district set up, I'd be happy to sit down with you guys again to go look at what we can do to change what's going on because the representation my people tell me when I go talk to them is they're not getting the service they want. So, you may think you're doing a good job with all your notification, etc. I'm telling you my people aren't happy. I think it's with the sweeps piece and forget That was the sweeps. That was the sweeps, but on the homeless piece, let me let Yeah, I I I think on on the homeless piece, I'm sorry here what you're saying because it's not a 9:00 to 5:00 issue, right? We've we've discussed panhandling, it'll happen at 7:00 p.m. or during rush hour traffic. And and we'll sit down and try to figure out what the resource loading needs to be if that's something that we we need to do in conjunction with Kathy's team to address this because you're right. I I see it on the weekends even in my own neighborhood. Um, you know, so things the problem is is is spurring out. And so, that that could be a resource-dependent issue in which case we'll we'll come back to the board and and talk to about it. If it's a priority, it's it's part of our strategic plan, so I'm I'm good with with having those discussions uh, to to put more resources into that if those extended hours are are are required. I mean, Denise, anything to add and I I would I would add but as it relates to panhandling specifically, we do not have the legal authority to detain an individual or a driver. And so, the responsibility for panhandling really does fall on our law enforcement agencies, not our code enforcement agencies. And we provide to those agencies. Similarly, when it as it relates to homeless encampments,

we cannot just enter property without a trespass agreement. There are certain limited circumstances with vacant unimproved property where we may be able to enter, but those are very very limited. And so, that requires and we do coordinate with the sheriff's office to gain entry if a trespass agreement is on site. Again, we cannot enter that property without the escort of sheriff's deputy. So, it it is a very complex issue. It's one I'm very very familiar with because of 12 years experience um, navigating that with the city of Clearwater. Um, but the authority does not ally within code compliance. We are we enforce on the land development code and homelessness, homeless encampments. As it relates to the land development code, it's strictly trash and junk and permitted use violations. And so, I cannot go on and remove um, uh, Assistant County Administrator Kathy Pearson described how we're utilizing our homeless initiative under James Walters to coordinate with partner agencies and we're a part of that. And so, I think it as that um, that outreach effort grows with partner agencies and of course, funding is always a challenge. Um, those efforts will expand and grow and be more successful. And we're working with James on a campaign of four panhandling to really encourage people to invest to not give that money out the window, but rather give it to an organization that will take those funds, not take an administrative fee from that. I believe is the plan and to invest that with organizations that are providing direct services. So, panhandling for the driver on the on the street or those that are faced with those that um, are being solicited, they either give out of fear or out of a sense of dopamine hit they're doing something good. We'd like to take that and redirect those funds to organizations that actually can do good. Take the incentive away, if you will, for those that are panhandling because they won't be successful. That's the the goal. And so, James and I are working with media relations and communications to develop that program. And the fiduciary agent is United Way that will be handling and I'm sure James will brief you further at an appropriate time. Um, Mr. Walters, I got to set up first. Yeah. Mr. Walters is still a duly sworn licensed law enforcement officer, correct? That's my understanding.

does not carry normal law enforcement tools on his hip. I believe that's correct.

the ability to do more than a code enforcement officer, correct? I mean, I believe he's still sworn. I believe the sheriff does hold his his LE cert. If I'm not mistaken. We'd have to verify.

Yeah, I understand. We have the tools. We develop the tools. Put the tools to work when it's necessary. And uh, hearing some of the graphic details from the customer today and what Mr. Merialdo deals with, I mean, we've seen similar things on uh, State Road 52. Person on all fours in front of 4G Ranch. All fours, pants down, defecating in the middle of the day. On 52. Brian Holmes and I on our way west. It's everywhere. Code enforcement can't handle it. There's ability to handle it. We have someone on staff who can, if given the opportunity to enforce this public health hazard, which is what it is, and a safety hazard to the taxpaying public that are working their butts off in this tough economy in this expensive environment that we're in to make a life here, and we have ne'er-do-wells coming in destroying it, wasting the sheriff's office time, wasting code enforcement's time who can't do anything. As code enforcement's spinning their tail, it's time to double down. Time to double down. And play hardball with this and eradicate it. There's no right answer. It's tough. You're going to have people who are upset on each side of the pendulum, but our obligation is to the taxpayer to provide for them and give them a good life. I say we triage the situation with the folks who are doing these things, triage them, clean them up, give them a shower, ship them to their next of kin. It's a familiar problem. It's not our taxpayer's problem. The long-term problem needs to go to their family, and it's not the obligation and the burden of this board, this board's budget, and the taxpayer who funds this budget every single day to take care of these people. It's a waste of time starting fires on with the fire department. I can tell you when I worked in the garbage business, we did dozens and dozens and dozens of these cleanups and donated tens of thousands of dollars for cleanups. We'd put dumpsters on site for these folks to use. They didn't use them. Right next to them in their camp. What they would do, they would set the dumpsters on fire, or they would float them out into the the Gulf because they're so hot. Sorry, Adam Clark. And then, the company who donated that asset has to pay tens of thousands of dollars for a barge to go get it back. Get their equipment back trying to help the problem. These people don't want help. Government can't be superhero, can't be all things to all people. We do the best we can, round them up, clean them up, and figure out and put them on their way because it's just going to be a distraction and a strain on the

resources, and resources are limited. Our sheriff's office is resource, our code enforcement officer's resources, this board's resources. So, Chairman, I agree with you. Slam the hammer down and really address the problem, rip the band-aid off, quit playing patty-cake with it, and just be bold. Just be bold and start cleaning up. That's the expectation of every citizen across this county from the swamp to the coast. It's the same sentiment. The homeless problem east of 41 is greater than it's ever been. Michelle and I are lifetime generational residents of East Pasco County, and we've never seen the level of homelessness that we have. In the city of Dade City, when we go to work, they're getting pennies out of the fountain. They're defecating around the bushes of the historic courthouse. It's a beautiful place for the public to come. They charge their phones. There's enabling going on all over when there's internet and whatnot in the parks. However, they're getting their phones and they're charging their their things. They're laying on park benches. It's horrible. It hurts our businesses. It It discourages patrons from coming in to buying product from people. I've no love for this cohort. Their intentions aren't good. The enabling needs to stop. So, I'm done. Mr. Starkey.

Mr. Starkey.

Um I am curious if the homeless camp by Green Key is gone because we have had people come in here many times talk about that one. And we had that homeless camp on US 19 in my district right there on US 19 entering Pasco County. Tens of thousands of people passing it every day. And our staff couldn't do anything because the garbage only went up to the sidewalk, and the tents were on private property. And we had to subpoena someone in Texas before we could go on there and evict them and clean them up. But, it took us almost a year to clean up that homeless camp. That did not There was no trees hiding these people. They were right there living there. Um but, we did get it cleaned up, and we we lean we we forced that gentleman to sell, and someone else bought it, and there's a fence around that property now. We don't have that homeless problem there anymore. So, I want to know if that one that's on private property in his district is gone, and can we use the same tools that we used to get rid of it in my district there? Still there. That's not okay. That's not okay. What's going on there?

So, Cathy Pearson, assistant county administrator of public services. I am proud to say that James Walters partnered with um Chief Gwynne in the fire. These have made two visits in the last four or five days out to Green Key. Um there were no homeless, but there were signs of it. So, two trips already. Um this is with partnering with Chief Gwynne because they got this new

right? I believe this was our the property that I'm I'm not positive. This is the property that Chief Gwynne have gotten a whole bunch of Maybe, Joanne, do you know? The new the new um They got new state equipment, and they were going to test it out.

that guy until he has to give up the property? He can't have a homeless camp. Can't we go after the landowner? It depends. That would be

It's a It's The answer's complicated. If they have I mean, if

Then we need to change the law if we can't go after the homeowner. No, just this week. I know, but if it happens over and over again, it's a lot of resources that we're putting out that we shouldn't have to. They set up a station there.

Just be in my ear. You can't, Colleen. Sorry, Cathy. Sorry. Colleen Weaver, I'm with Commissioner Jack Mariano's office. Um they did clear that out. Actually, we sent I sent pictures to Gina yesterday, and they're setting up a station there, and they will be there on a all week for the next several weeks just to ensure that Green Key. And the reason I know is Wanda Chasnoff from that neighborhood that backs up onto that property called and let me know. So, we It It's the first time she was thrilled. I had encouraged her to come this morning to um tell the board thank you for the hard work on that Green Key property, but that is private property.

Who paid for this cleanup? I I do not know.

If this is If this is what I believe it is, Commissioner, this is a training exercise by our special fire rescue. We received a equipment an equipment grant from the state for heavy rescue, and our public works team is training our fire rescue staff on on the use and and management of that law.

got permission from the landowner to do that? Uh presumably, yes.

Okay, but I I think that landowner, what do you guys think, needs to be on the on the hook if someone who's back on his property either has to fence it or sell it. Sell it to us, give it to or we take it, you know, eventually. I think that's what we were doing with the property 19. We were taking that gentleman to court. Um I'll work with Jason and Branford cuz we looked at this before about using for a stormwater area cuz, you know, that area floods like crazy. Uh they're willing to sell it. We didn't want to pay the money, but I'll I'll bring that back up, and I'll bring Branford maybe Let's bring it an agenda item back up to the board with a full description, and then uh see what the board wants to do.

But, he can get fined per day for running a homeless camp on his property.

Cuz no, he can't get fined for running a homeless camp. There There are violations of the code that a homeless camp triggers. Yes. But, it's it's a violation of your land development code. It's not your code does not make homelessness illegal.

Okay, but the result is that they have to do something. So, they they have been working with us to go through this. Matter of fact, they gave us I think everything we needed for paperwork. They gave us permission to go in there and clear it out so that the homeless can't hide in the woods. This is going to clear it out all all of that brush, Brazilian peppers go away. All the trash gets cleaned up, and our team is getting experience, which they need for the machine they're they're breaking down. This could This can be replicated elsewhere as well, and I got another place for them, too. But, literally, if you look at the trash that's on the ground like the lower scene right there, try to imagine Let's say this now a hurricane comes in, storm comes in. Where's that all all that plastic going to go? So, this type of thing, it's why I'm saying I've got so many of these things in my district to get them done to get done. So,

one on our property. Now that we know that Mr. Walters is a sworn law enforcement officer, the reason of we can't do it cuz we have to coordinate with the sheriff is now bunk. Now we have We're not necessarily sure that that was

Well, if it is true, we now have something to work with.

Yeah, we'll report back on that on that status and how that can be leveraged. I appreciate it. All right. Anything else to go to the board? All right. Thank you all. We're adjourned. Is he in I understand. I I will get an answer to I will get an answer to that. I'm not sure. We have two more to go. Two more months to