Board of County Commissioners: Regular Meeting - 06.17.26

Welcome to a meeting of your Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners. Representing District 1, Harry Cohen. Representing District 2, Ken Hagen. Representing District 3, Gwen Myers. Representing District 4, Christine Miller. Representing District 5, Donna Cameron Cepeda. Representing District 6, Chris Bowles. Representing District 7, Joshua Wostel. The county administrator is Bonnie Wise. The county attorney is Julia Mandel. Time is set aside at the beginning of each meeting for citizens to speak on any issue. So we have time for everyone. Speakers are asked to limit their comments to three minutes. Today's meeting is brought to you with closed captioning by Hillsborough Television. Welcome to the June 17, 2026 regularly scheduled board meeting of the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners. Would everyone please rise for the pledge and invocation given by our chaplain commissioner, Gwen Myers. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Oh, gracious heaven and father, I come to you again, asking you that you will continue to bless our meeting, bless our leadership, bless our administration, bless all our employees who deliver the services on behalf of our county. Go with our first responders and protect them as they service our constituents and businesses. In your holy name I pray, amen. Thank you, Commissioner Myers. This is a rare meeting in that we do not have any proclamations or accommodations. So, Bonnie, I'll pass things over to you for a review of changes to the agenda. Yes, good morning, Commissioners. So, we have one off the agenda item by Commissioner Bowles. This is item F-6, which is to direct the county administrator and county attorney's office to evaluate and return with options at the August 5, 2026 BOCC meeting for establishing a dedicated funding mechanism for Hillsborough County Fire Rescue within the unincorporated service area. We have one revision or correction to the agenda. This relates to item B-2, which is a 10-15 time certain. It is to receive a report regarding stormwater impact fees and update rate options and schedule a public hearing. This is related to item G-2, not item G-1. We have several items for time certain. The first one is item F-3 at 10 o'clock. This is by Commissioner Myers. This is to approve $45,000 in funds for the Corporation to Develop Communities of Tampa to support the 2026 Safe and Sound Hillsborough Summertime Violence Prevention Services Safe Summer Series, 2026. Item G-2 is at 10-15. This is to receive a report regarding workload impacts of countywide growth. This is related to item B-2. And then item B-2 at 10-15 related to item G-2 is to receive the report regarding stormwater impact fees and an updated rate options and to schedule a public hearing for September 2, 2026. Item B-1 is at 10-30. This is to accept the mobility fee program report performed by the county internal auditor's office. 11-45 is a recess for lunch. Those are the changes to the agenda. We have a motion for the changes. Moves the changes. Second. Motion Commissioner Cohen. Second Commissioner Myers. Please record your vote. Changes the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. Okay. The Board will go into public comment portion of the agenda. The Board welcomes comments from the citizens about any issue or concern. Your opinions are valued in terms of providing valuable input to Board members. However, at the same time, it is requested when you address the Board that comments are not made directly at staff or Board members, but rather the issues. We've set aside 45 minutes for public comment. The Chair will call on speakers by name in the order in which their request to speak have been received. When addressing the Board, please state your name and speak clearly into the microphone. Each person will be given three minutes. First three speakers are Denise Herndon, followed by Joe Bugle, and then Jason Kimball, who's virtual. Good morning. I'm Denise Herndon. I'm talking on A35, cybersecurity. I know there's so many different things that the county has concerning cybersecurity, whether it's Sheriff's Department, but the inverted T, that's a right-of-way at the end of my property and how I access my property. TECO had trimmed trees on the west side of the inverted T on 420, but they wouldn't do it on my side. They said we didn't have a work order. I had a work order. They told me that TECO would come out, drop the line, and the owner would have to pay for it. Well, then why did TECO pay for the west side of this right-of-way? I spoke to Joel Brown, the regional manager at the last town hall meeting I went to, and gave him the information on who I spoke to and everything. He still has not gotten back to me. I believe Sherlene Hammond is the one that hacked into your Hillsborough County property appraisers and changed this. It might have been a right-of-way between the two last properties at the end of Gorontoe Lake Road, but it didn't extend all the way down to where I live. And why would TECO only replace one of it and cut the limbs, I don't know. This here is a book that was written in 2025. If it wasn't for circumstantial evidence, Pearl Harbor could have been eliminated. Three adult German Nazis were in Hawaii, and they knew right from the get-go. Everything that I have with Sherlene Hammond being in the dark web and her being a Reeb, R-E-E-B, because my brother's name is Reb, so I couldn't use R-E-E-B. All my information is stolen. I will never give up. I will never back down. Our history books need to be changed. It wasn't just the Japanese. They were working with the Japanese, and a lot of innocent citizens that were of Japanese ascent were imprisoned. So this really needs to be a number one book worldwide, and all history books need to really know it was the Nazi Germans that worked with Japan to cause Pearl Harbor. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Herndon. Joe Bugle, followed by Jason Kimball, who's virtual, and then Ron Weaver. Mr. Bugle, present. Is Jason Kimball on the line? Good morning, Commissioners. Yeah, my name is Jason Kimball, and I wanted to address Commissioner Wastel's item on Kratom, but particularly, you know, when dealing with this subject, the thing that comes to mind for me is fentanyl contamination. And we're still having an issue, though it's not really in the headlines, of illegal or illicit substances being contaminated with fentanyl. So when the county considers this item, I would request that there's some consideration for a study on what we're dealing with in terms of the percentage or the prevalence of fentanyl contamination in our community. Because the one thing about purchasing substances that are regulated as food products is, you know, the company is a legal company. There's really not much regulation, but it really makes things difficult. Because things that should be simple, like keeping drugs out of the hands of children, for instance, it's complicated now when the illegal drugs that are in Hillbrook County high schools, for instance, are possibly contaminated with fentanyl, and then there's an alternative that might not be contaminated with fentanyl. So I guess I just, you know, as much purview as the State Department of Health and, like, the resources, like, they can commission studies, they can look at data, you know, I don't think that they're doing what they should be doing. So I just wanted to voice that concern with a government body, you know, that it would just be nice to know where we stand with fentanyl contamination in the community as we contemplate regulations that should be extremely simple, like, you know, when you're purchasing opioid-like products, they shouldn't be in a retail store that's accessible to children, that's really not regulated at all. I don't know if we have any county regulations that cover the stores that sell the Kratom. So it's, I guess I just wanted to voice my thoughts on that, and, you know, I hope that the county can, I hope that you guys can do whatever you can to try to protect the community. All right, thank you, sir. Once again, Joe Bugle, Joe Show, please come forward. Then we got Ron Weaver and then Tom Covert. All right, good morning, Chair and Commission, Commissioners. My name is Joe Bugle. I am a lifelong Hillsborough County resident, a veteran, and a small business owner, and I was, I was born here at St. Joseph's Hospital here in Tampa, attended public schools here, Hillsborough County, graduated University of South Florida, and then proudly served 21 years in the Florida Army National Guard, including disaster responses for hurricanes, 2004, I responded to five hurricanes alone, 2009, I went to Mosul, Iraq for a year, did route clearance with the engineer company. Then after my military service, I spent eight years at the Florida Army, at the Florida Department of Transportation, District 7, right here in Tampa. So I'm a Tampa guy, Hillsborough guy, Florida guy, all my life, you know. So I'm here today to express my appreciation for you guys, specifically, Commissioner Cepeda and Wollstil, for responding to a matter that I had requested for veteran-owned, service-disabled, veteran-owned small business encouragement in Hillsborough County contracts. Specifically, I looked at the wording for the initial request for encouraging small businesses that are veteran-owned, I think it's agenda item F4, if I'm not mistaken, but I think right now it's posted at one point extra for veterans-owned, or it's like six points total for veteran-owned, and five points for small business-owned businesses for county contracts. And I looked up some of the other jurisdictions in the state of Florida. You have Orange County, Miami-Dade County, City of Gainesville, City of Lake Worth, and then San Antonio, Texas, and even Cook County, Illinois, offer up to five points for service-disabled, veteran-owned businesses. And I think we can absolutely compete with them. I think it aligns with the Florida codes for veteran businesses that's already established. And I think, you know, we have MacDill Air Force Base here, right here in this area. We have a lot of veterans in this area. And for a long time, we have encouraged and promoted the small business enterprises for minorities and women, which I strongly encourage. But I think veterans should be included in that as well for those who have shown a commitment and a reliability to this area, to their community, and their actions have shown that. And I think they should be rewarded for it just the same. So I just want to encourage you guys on that and continue to drive on and move forward. And I appreciate the prompt response on it so far. I was encouraged to come here and speak, and I was thankful for that opportunity. And I know there would be a lot of veterans that would be very thankful. Thank you, sir. Appreciate the comments. Ron Weaver, and followed by Tom Cobert, and then Deanna Morris. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ron Weaver, 4403 Westdale. I rise on the occasion of G3 on your agenda regarding the reduction of what will be $30 or $40 billion in lost revenues if the property tax is reduced pursuant to a proposal that was passed by the state legislature. It's probably unconstitutional, but it is not deemed unconstitutional in time. And the reason it's unconstitutional is because it includes a five-year exemption that's unequal protection under numerous Florida and U.S. Supreme Court cases. But even if it were to come about and its unconstitutionality were not stopped, it would cost in the year 2031 the local governments of Florida $12 billion every single year. The first year it only loses $5 billion from local governments, but by the fifth year, the way it's structured, it would cost every single, the governments of Florida, in 2031, $12 billion, according to the state study. In addition, this property tax reduction would fall hardest on the people who most deserve to be given reasonable affordability. It's ironic. It is not an affordability measure. It is a counter-affordability measure because it disincentivizes the purchase of certain kinds of property by the way it skews the subject. For example, it reduces from 10% current cap on commercial and second homes down to a 5% cap, which means you're taking revenues away from social services, from police and fire. You're taking away the essential services for which we came to Hillsborough County and for which Hillsborough County has enjoyed a good reputation, but not if you destroy the ability to have folks pay property taxes. It would mean that fees would have to be reduced dramatically and scare people away. It would be unfair to those who need a permit in order just to fix their house and an ability to get these kind of a property approval without enormous fees or passing it on in other forms of taxes, all of which means that if this measure should pass by 60%, if not deemed unconstitutional, it would mean that the people of Florida would suffer a $12 billion a year loss of their essential basic services in 2031. And guess what? In this same horrendous measure passed by the Florida legislature, unconstitutional as it is, is a provision that says local governments can remove even the rest of the property tax exemption above the $250,000 over time. So it has three reasons that it must not pass, three reasons it must be deemed unconstitutional for it is, and that is that number one, it disincentivizes the purchase of certain kinds of property. It destroys the ability to pay for essential services, especially police and fire that would suffer most. And thirdly, quite frankly, it does not really achieve any real affordability. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Weaver. Appreciate your comments. Tom Cobert, followed by Deanna Morris and then Dwayne Zonowski. Good morning. Good morning. Mr. Chairman, commissioners, staff, and deputies, my name is Tom Cobert. RFK Jr. is the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The Kennedy family calls him a danger to the country with his unproven beliefs that are having severe impacts on the health of the nation. Measles, which had been declared eradicated in 2020, are on the verge of being labeled as a danger to the world. Children in America are dying from it, with many facing lifelong lingering effects. Since USAID has been dismantled, AIDS is again spreading in Africa. It is mutating, and when it arrives in America, which it will, we are not ready for it. The experts that could have dealt with it were dosed. Ebola is an airline flight away from arriving in America. The World Health Organization has been crippled by our government and is incapable of dealing with multiple health emergencies in Africa. America is also completely unprepared and incapable of dealing with a health emergency, much less many. Hillsborough County has a health care program with an almost $600 million surplus that some of you are thinking about using for other purposes. That must be left untouched for emergencies that are coming. FEMA has been gutted and will soon be eliminated as a functioning agency. We will then be one storm away from dealing with a disaster on our own. I learned growing up in Six Mile Creek, you can't count on outsiders. Hillsborough County better start preparing for diseases and storms. We are being led by the Keystone cops with nukes. Thank you for listening. Thank you, Mr. Cobert. Deanna Morris. Deanna here. Okay, followed by Dwayne Zelnowski and then Bruce Harker. Good morning. My name is Deanna Morris. I'm a resident of Hillsborough County, the unincorporated section. And before I read what I have prepared, I would just like to say you are going to hear this for the first time today, I'm assuming, but this is not the last you are going to hear of this over the next few weeks. As recently as the beginning of May of this year, the president has expressed a desire to have either ice border patrol or the National Guard sent to polling locations throughout the United States. I am demanding clear enforceable assurances that applicable election law will be upheld. Our request is not this request is not without precedent. In April, Lake County supervisor of election Alan Hayes met with a concerned candidate and made a commitment to enforce Florida statute 102.031, which establishes 150 foot protective zones surrounding polling locations. Only authorized personnel and voters are permitted within this zone. Mr. Hayes made it explicitly clear that no law enforcement personnel, federal agents or other individuals will be permitted within this protected area unless they are present solely for the purpose of casting their votes. Mr. Hayes further confirmed that he has the full support of Lake County Sheriff Peyton Grinnell in ensuring that voters are protected and that polling locations remain free from intimidation or interference. This position is consistent with both Florida and federal law under 52 USC 101-01-B as well as 18 USC 594 and any intent to attempt, threaten or coerce a person for the purpose of interfering with the right to vote is strictly prohibited. Accordingly, I am standing before you to ask that you ensure that this request is heard and recorded for the record as follows that Florida statute 102.031 will be strictly enforced. That no law enforcement personnel, federal agents or any branch of the military will be permitted within the 150 foot protective zone unless present solely to vote. That all personnel under your authority have received clear guidance prohibiting any conduct that would reasonably be perceived as voter intimidation. That proactive steps are being taken to communicate these protections to the public. I thank you for your time and for your consideration. Thank you, Miss Morris. Dwayne Zolnoski followed by Bruce Harker. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Dwayne Zolnoski. I'm from Temple Terrace, Florida. There are 22,000 residents in Temple Terrace that desperately need your help. The EPA changed the rules and wants forever chemicals taken out by 2030 or 31. Temple Terrace has come up with two ideas after talking to consultants. Spend 70, 80 million, 90 million dollars, it's a hundred million dollar bond they're talking about, to redo everything or connect directly to Hillsborough County. A hundred million dollar bond on 22,000 people is crushing. We got poor. We got people that can't pay now. Their water bill, their electric, their rent. There's a solution. If Hillsborough County agrees, either alone or with Tampa, you should do this connection for 40 million, not a hundred. They're talking about raising the water bill by 50 bucks. That may seem like very little to some, but to an awful lot of people that is crushing. Two choices. Spend a hundred million dollars on an unnecessary project. Tampa's spending a hundred million dollars to redo their water or connect to you guys for 40 million. It's just cheaper, simpler. The city is talking to you guys now, but they're talking to the water folks, of course. But if you guys engage, turn this into more of a project together. You can help people and be heroes to an awful lot of people are hurting. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Bruce Harker. And then last name Fernandez, who's virtual and then Alexander Stein. Good morning. I am. My name is Bruce Harker. I am a resident of district three Myers district. It's all for Springs. I'm here to talk about the fiber. I am also a member, a disabled member of the community. And over the last several years, I have had quite a bit of difficulty in accessing services, such as affordable housing, energy assistance, and even my food stamps have been drastically reduced. Meanwhile, so we are demanding that our tax dollars remain local and kept towards benefits for the citizens of the county. We're aware that all funding is being drastically reduced, and that is not the issue. The issue is supplying it to government and corporations that are profit from and contribute to war and genocide. The fiber hasn't created a substantial number of jobs for Hillsborough County, and they have mostly been AI jobs, which actually, you know, replace human workers with automation. We've instead asked that county money be used to benefit the citizens on things like affordable housing, libraries, youth programs, recreational centers, and, you know, other enrichment activities, you know, heating assistance and other forms of assistance, mental health services, for instance. People are struggling to live paycheck to paycheck right now, and they've been surveyed, and what they want their taxes to be allocated to, nowhere is Israel on that. So we would like to ask for you to keep, make our lives a bit easier by keeping the money within the county. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. We've got Alexander Stein, followed by Omar Sobo, and then Ahmaud Al County. Good morning, Queens. I just want to say it is Pride Month. Who is excited for Pride Month? I know that I'm excited for Pride Month, but I want to say Jane Castor makes all of us gays so proud because she is one of the first gay mayors of a major metropolitan city. So shout out Jane Castor, but the rest of Hillsborough County is not gay enough. And so I just want to call on this Pride Month should be a priority to make it where more drag kids can be free to be gay. So I wrote a little stanza for you, and it goes a little bit like this. It's okay to be gay, even if you want to play with an old man and his fun bags. It's okay to be gay, being gay shouldn't be cliche. It's okay to be gay, look at a penis on your phone today. It's okay to be gay, I don't care if you have monkey pox, as long as your body rocks. It's okay to be gay, all I want to do is say no way. If you're a girl, your body is nasty, I like the booty cause that goes fast-y. I like to be super gay, doing TikToks where I really slay. Slay queen, I like to be gay. And I love it every day. And I want to stick my tongue in your butt. Lick it deep, make it say what? Drag queen shows for eight years old. Don't be afraid to be really bold. We need pride flags in the classroom. Just cause I'm hanging kids, I don't need to groom them. They already are very gay. It's okay to be gay. I know it's vented by the CIA. It's okay to be gay. I just want to say that you always need to slay. It's okay to be gay. A gay man will save you than you could ever pray. Come to my house, eat these cookies. I hope you enjoy how they make you feel. Tell your parents they need to chill. We're gonna hang out all tonight. Let's not cause a gay fist fight. And I just want to say, I'm a proud gay man. We need to make drag shows for children more accessible. And I wore my favorite gay pride shirt. It's a Dallas Cowboys Dak Prescott t-shirt jersey. So if you guys want to get this, you can get it on Etsy or my TikTok shop. And it's primetime sign. And I just want to say Hillsborough County, you guys need to do better and be a little more gay. It's 2026, eight year olds should be able to go to Pride this year. Thank you. Sir, please state your name for the record. It's Alex Stein. Thank you. Omar Sobo, followed by Ahmad Al-County, and then Todd Randolph. Morning, sir. Good morning. County commissioners, as a concerned citizen, I stand here today to voice my displeasure with the proposed budgeting to the Florida Israeli Business Accelerator FIBA project. In the midst of continued political turmoil in the Middle East, which has led to massive human casualties, I find it highly troubling that my Hillsborough County taxpayer dollars are being taken away from local businesses and being used to fund and entangle business relationships, excuse me, with the foreign entities that have played a direct role in contributing to a severe humanitarian crisis. FIBA currently assists over 100 Israeli-based companies or startups ranging from various industries. Instead, why doesn't our county council use this grant funding to benefit its citizens through funding the thousands of local businesses who require greater assistance in this area? The grant itself mentions Israel 12 times, while Hillsborough is mentioned just under at 11. As a concerned citizen, this makes me wonder why Israeli interests are being placed above our own county. Not to mention, hidden among many seemingly harmless companies backed by FIBA are numerous defense technology startups that are actively used in Israeli warfare. The FIBA-backed defense startup, Extend, for instance, currently has multimillion-dollar contracts with Israel to provide them with lethal drones. However, their active mission statement is as follows. Extend's mission is to make the world safer by rapidly integrating AI-powered robotic platforms into high-risk operational environments where autonomy, speed, and human control must work together under real-world constraints. That's on their website. As a resident of this county, I don't think that it's our business to be involved in the, quote, high-risk operational environments, nor do I think that companies like Extend are making the world any safer through the rapid and unchecked integration of AI drone warfare. Another seemingly harmless startup backed by FIBA, BlazePod, looks like an innocent sports tech startup interested in assisting athletes with physical performance on the surface. But a closer look into the company reveals that the same technology designed for athletes is being used by the Israeli Defense Forces. This information is available on FIBA's main website. County Council members, please vote no to this segment of the budget approval and keep Hillsborough County from entangling itself in complex and costly foreign conflicts at the expense of its citizenry. Thank you. Sir, please state your name for the record. My name is Omar Sobo. All right. Thank you. Ahmad Alcone. Ahmad here. Followed by Todd Randolph and then Evan Fretwell. Good morning. My name is Ahmad Alcone. I am a resident of District 5 right here in West Tampa. I want to talk to you today about the FIBA budget, the Florida Israeli business accelerator. And I'm not here to talk to you all about Israel or Palestine or Iran. I just urge you to reconsider your use of Hillsborough County taxpayer dollars for foreign business accelerators in general. Our county government has a responsibility to serve the people who live, work, and pay taxes here. Economic development funds should be focused on supporting local entrepreneurs, small businesses, workforce deployment, and companies that create jobs for Hillsborough County residents. I had a gentleman earlier a few people ago talk about wanting to invest in veteran-owned businesses and contracts with the government. That's a very good example of where this budget should go. Regardless of anyone's view on international politics, foreign conflicts, foreign governments, I do not believe county government should be using taxpayer dollars to engage in matters that are outside of its core mission. Foreign policy is the responsibility of the federal government, not the local government. At a time where many local businesses face rising costs, workforce challenges, economic uncertainty, every single dollar should be working to strengthen our local community. Taxpayers expect accountability. They expect their money to produce measurable benefits in their own communities. Investments in local businesses create local jobs, generate local tax revenue, and keep the economic activity circulating within our county. I believe Hillsborough County should remain focused on its primary responsibility, which is serving its residents, its citizens, supporting local economic growth, and ensuring taxpayer dollars stay as close to home as possible. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Todd Randolph by Evan Fretwell and Lorenzo Almanzar. Hey, my name is Todd Randolph. I'm speaking to acknowledge the passing of David Coleman last week. My name is Todd Randolph, and I'm speaking to acknowledge the passing of Dave Coleman last week. Dave was a community advocate and regularly engaged in the civic activities. His regular participation in BOCC meetings strengthened the legitimacy of our civic processes. Dave Coleman commended me every time I spoke out against TECO rate hikes and their actions that consistently protect corporate profits by putting people in peril. He was a voice of truth that ingrained a culture of caring in our community. I first saw Dave here in this room, and I know that he would want me here today to continue to speak out about the continued exorbitant electric costs that TECO is charging us and how that impacts the community. Tampa Bay is always in the headlines for being high in foreclosures. Inflation has been widespread, but nowhere have the costs climbed so high as the electric bill, in which the average TECO bill has risen 82 percent since 2020. The Ginklio Institute released a comprehensive report this past year on the exorbitant rate increases of the major investor-owned utilities. And here I've highlighted how TECO's profits composing solely, comprising almost, the profits of their parent company, Amira, which shows Tampa Bay is propping up a Canadian company's balance sheet. TECO rates are some of the highest in the nation, and TECO overcharges customers to be able to contribute large amounts of money to our legislature. Rate increases have been necessary to boost TECO's profits and stock price. They're up 17 percent for the year, and their dividend is a high 4.2 percent. They've given out almost four million dollars in this 2026 election cycle, and it's just getting started. And counties in Florida have, county commissions have written letters to the PSC, proposing some of these rate hikes. TECO rate hikes have caused an increased financial burden on Hillsboro residents. And I'm here to say this the way that Dave Coleman always did, not so much for myself, but for my neighbors and my community. Thank you. Thank you. Next up we have Evan Fretwell, followed by Lorenzo Almanzar. My name is Evan John. I'm from Tampa, zip code 33613. I stand here today to address the serious issue of how our county's tax dollars are being allocated. For three years, significant public funds have been directed to FIBA, which stands for the Florida Israel Business Accelerator, a foreign business entity, despite numerous presentations outlining better alternatives that would directly benefit Hillsboro County residents. The concerns of taxpayers have been consistently dismissed, and their voices have gone unheard. This raises fundamental questions about fiscal responsibility and accountability to the constituents who elected you to serve. The decision to bring an Israeli drone factory to Ybor City is a disgrace. This facility manufactures AI murder drones that are being used to murder children in Gaza. This connection between our county's investment and the production of weapons used in genocide is a complete betrayal to your constituents. Commissioners swore an oath to serve this county and act as responsible stewards of public funds. The primary duty is to the people of Hillsborough County, not to foreign interests. When public money benefits foreign entities while local needs go unmet, that represents a betrayal of public trust. I am demanding that we suspend all taxpayer funding to FIBA. That annual $100,000 can be used towards literally anything else that will help people living here. Public transit, new park benches, more funds for Tampa Hope, the hope the homeless shelter that is literally just blocks away from this drone factory. $100,000 can be used to feed the homeless for years. And if we don't see change, there's going to be accountability. Florida's political landscape is evolving and people across the political spectrum are growing increasingly concerned about these financial decisions. This will impact campaign funding, voting patterns, and potentially the very composition of this commission. In a just administration, every commissioner in this room would be fired by now for dereliction of duty under Florida Constitution Article 4, Section 7. Your choice to prioritize foreign interests over constituents is not just ethically wrong. It is a violation of your constitutional duty regarding taxpayer money. While Hillsborough County residents struggle with economic challenges, public funds are supporting foreign nationals to establish weapons manufacturing in our state. If similar financial arrangements existed with any other country, it would provoke public outrage, national headlines, and likely legal consequences. My message today is not a request but a warning. The taxpayers of Hillsborough County are watching, they are angry, and they will exercise their democratic rights to ensure their tax dollars serve local interests first and foremost. Let me be crystal clear. Every single penny given to FIBA must be divested or you will be considered traitors to your constituents loyal to Israel before Hillsborough. And we will be coming for your jobs. Lord have mercy on us all. Christ is king. Thank you, sir. Lorenzo Almanzar, followed by Joey Catalano, and then Dr. James Davison. Good morning, everyone. My name is Lorenzo Almanzar. I live in Brandon. And I'm here to speak about the Florida-Israel Business Accelerator, a.k.a. FIBA. I and many others in Hillsborough County stand firmly against this nonprofit. Everyone can agree that American tax dollars should be for Americans. And that taxes in Hillsborough County should help those who live and work in our county. So why are tax dollars going to a foreign nation? A racist, ethnostate, apartheid nation that is committing one of the most infamous genocides in this century. While also at war with Iran and Lebanon. Why are my tax dollars and tax dollars of citizens in the Tampa Bay area going to the fascist nation? Here are a few things that we can use with our public funding. Affordable housing. According to 10 Tampa Bay, Tampa is considered among the 10 least affordable metros for renters. Better and faster public transits. Lots of our bus stops need some shade and a bench to protect from this extreme Florida weather. We can use a tram or more trolleys. Rail is becoming a very popular idea in Hillsborough County. Since our traffic is unbearable from Plant City to Citrus Park and everywhere in between. We can use our taxes to support local businesses. Kind of like the veterans local businesses that one of our speakers spoke about earlier. And there are a lot more I can ask for that we want here in Tampa. That has nothing to do with funding Israel or their companies and businesses. Who don't need any more funding from the United States. The 2.2 million requested in funds for the past three years from FIBA. Can do wonders if invested directly to our community. I demand that all funding for FIBA to be removed from the 2027 fiscal year budget. And gets allocated to public transportation or any of what I previously mentioned. This way you won't be seen as the commissioners who supported genocide. But as public servants who served the public. Thank you. Thank you sir. Joey Catalano followed by Dr. James Davison. Good morning. How are you? Give me a minute here to get organized here. My name is Joseph Samuel Catalano III. And first I want to thank each and every one of you for giving me a few minutes of your time to introduce myself. I live locally in Tampa. And I'm not a career politician. I'm not backed by any major political party. And I'm certainly not standing here claiming that I have all the answers for everything in life. What I am here is I'm an American citizen who woke up one day and asked a simple question. Why are so many good people feeling ignored? Over the last year I have traveled, listened, studied, and spoken with people from all walks of life. I've spoken to veterans, small business owners, working families, retirees, young people trying to build a future. And whether there are Republicans, Democrats, or independents, I keep hearing the same thing. We feel like nobody's listening. That's why I'm here. I'm running because I believe American people deserve another voice, another choice, another seat at the table. Not because I think I'm better than anyone, but because I care enough to step forward and try. A good leader must listen. A good leader must understand that people are important, even when they disagree with them. That's the kind of leadership I believe America needs more today. I know what struggle looks like. I know what setbacks look like. I know what it feels like to fall down and get back up, because I've had a lot of them in my life. The experience taught me something important. Never count people out. Never give up on people. And never stop believing that change is possible. America's greatest strength has never been government. America's greatest strength has always been the people. The workers, the parents, the veterans, the entrepreneurs, and the volunteers. The citizens who get up every morning and keep this country moving forward. My campaign is simple. I want to listen. I want to learn. I want to bring people together. And I want to fight for accountability, transparency, opportunity, respect for every American citizen. Now, I need your help. I'm a registered, independent candidate, but they put us through a lot of red tape. I need 150,000 signatures just to get on the ballot in Florida. So, I want to help this community and give all. I want to get to the White House, because I'm going to tell you, I don't know if you're aware of this. There's 24,000 veterans sleeping homeless every day. We've got a $680 million federal budget. What's wrong with that picture? I don't know. Tell me what's wrong. Veterans are out of hope. Why are they sleeping on the outside? This is crazy. They say I've got to act accordingly if you're going to run for president. No, I'm going to be myself, because you know what? I want to speak from my heart. Appreciate that. I want accountability. I want transparency. Thank you, sir. I don't want to hear lies. Yes, sir. Time's up. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Joseph Sammy Keller III, and thank you. God bless America. God bless you. Last speaker this morning is Dr. James Davison. Commissioner Jim Davison, New Tampa. And I'll tell you, people are kind of angry today. We'll be going over the property tax and what's going to happen in the county. And I wanted to put this into some perspective. The CIT tax is very important to this county. In February of this year, of 2024, they had a workshop on the CIT. And the assumptions for that tax were as follows. $200 million at a 3% growth rate. That was incorporated into the, was passed on April the 17th. The total amount of money that, that was supposed to bring in was about $3.8 billion. And there were two requirements in the ordinance. You had to have all the interlocal agreements done, and you had to have all the money appropriated, all the funds appropriated for the entire 15 years from every person who was going to receive the funds. That was advertised on the website. It's still up on the website. It says $3.8 billion, gives all the money that's being accounted for. And these are the capital improvement plans that had to be done. Otherwise, you couldn't place it on the ballot. And right down here, you'll see financial impact statement. Well, there was a financial impact statement before. It was right here on the ordinance. Using those same assumptions of 3% annual growth rate and $200 million. But when you click on this, this is what comes out. Completely different financial impact statement. The assumptions are $201 million for the first year, and $213.8 million the second year. For those who are mathematically challenged, that is a 6% growth rate. And the assumptions in that would bring in $5 billion. That was done at the meeting on August the 12th, after the deadline that was imposed by the ordinance to have the people contribute through those capital improvement program public hearings. You cheated the people out of a billion dollars. And you didn't give them any input at all where that money was to go. So you have two financial impact statements for one referendum. I showed that to a couple government lawyers. They were candid and said they'd never seen anything like that in their life. Thanks, Dr. Patterson. Have a good day and happy Father's Day to all the people out there. I appreciate your comments. Okay. That closes public comment. Can we have a motion to approve consent? Move to approve. Second. Second. Second. Commissioner Meyers. Second. Commissioner Cohen. Please record your vote on the consent agenda. Motion carried 7-0. Bonnie, I'll introduce the first item. Thank you. We have time before our 10 o'clock time is certain, so we'll move to the regular agenda, Item B3. This is to approve the – or to authorize the Tampa Sports Authority to negotiate for the final construction manager at risk for the indoor field house project at the MOSI site. Greg Horwadel, John Muller, and Eric Hart is available virtually. And this is Item B3. And Commissioner Hagan, I believe you wanted to say a few words to start. Sure. I want to – I'll introduce the item. For members, I think this is at least our seventh or eighth discussion and vote on this project going back to when we first authorized the initial feasibility study. And I know during each discussion I make similar comments. I apologize in advance for, again, repeating myself. But I think a development of this magnitude warrants it. The reality is a project of this scale, we should take our time and ensure that there's increased transparency and due diligence. And that certainly happened here. Today's field house agenda item is the catalyst that will accelerate the $2 billion MOSEY redevelopment project. And I think everyone associated with this project agrees. This transformative project along with USF's golf course redevelopment and new stadium will completely redefine USF's campus and surrounding area. As we know, MOSEY will be a mixed-use development, including a mix of commercial, entertainment, restaurant, retail, higher-end residential uses to appeal to a broad spectrum of visitors to the site amenities and attractions that, in addition to the field house, will have the existing MOSEY Planetarium, a black box theater and film studio, and hopefully an ice hockey rink that Commissioner Bowles is working on. But make no mistake, this redevelopment plan on what I've characterized as the county's most underutilized asset is centered around the 174,000 square foot indoor sports facility. It was October of 2012 when I first gave a presentation on the benefits of multi-sport tournament complexes. Six years later, in the fall of 2018, we opened the first of three that I presented in 2012, the Tournament Sportsplex. And through the years, we've received frequent updates from the Sports Commission on the Sportsplex's performance and how it has shattered all of the consultants' projections, which were fairly robust. I know this board's painfully aware of the uncertain economic climate with the potential for property tax reform, and I know later in this meeting we're going to receive an update. That's why I wanted to touch on a couple of important points. While this project is not cheap, it's primarily funded with BP dollars that years ago I directed to be used for this project, and CIT dollars where this project was specifically included in our project list during the CIT reauthorization. Now the Fieldhouse and overall development, economic and quality of life benefits are profound. But when you consider the property tax reform, this project, or a project similar to this, will be, should be, and will be a model for future developments this board should pursue because they generate significant non-homesteaded ad valorem revenue. The real challenge we've always faced when considering a new project is not the capital cost of constructing facilities, but it's the recurring operational cost of the projects. As Commissioner Bowles recently stated with the challenge we face building more fire stations. This is going to be even further exasperated should property tax reform pass in November. However, this Fieldhouse is unlike libraries, parks, and fire stations because tournament facilities are revenue generators through direct spending at the facility, and in the community and the room nights that generate tourist tax revenue. As our initial feasibility analysis indicated, our market is so strong that even with increased competing facilities, our market strength and opportunities present a real opportunity for the county. They identified strong market demand, our established reputation as a destination, all of our existing amenities, hotels, restaurants, bars, retail establishments and attractions, and the opportunity to increase sports tourism related room nights and economic activity. I want to stress this is not anecdotal or subject to debate because in addition to our consultants projections, we have real tangible evidence with our tournament sportsplex. The sportsplex opened in fall of 2018 and starting in 2022 the facility began to pay for itself operationally. The bears repeating, it pays for itself. How many government facilities can we say that about? Every year an analysis is performed using the most conservative model possible, and that not only are indirect and induced benefits not included, but we do not even capture all of the direct revenue this facility generates. The only revenue numbers that are included or reported are those that are associated with hotel room nights that are directly tracked from the tournament registration room blocks. I want to point out something I did in a previous discussion, is that from experience, being a travel ball dad for seven or eight years, the room blocks only capture roughly 75 to 80% of the hotel room nights that are generated. That's because for different reasons, either cost or brand loyalty, many parents do not book hotels that are included in the tournament package. That's just simply a fact, and those numbers aren't captured. Additionally, it's not capturing all the sales tax revenue that's generated both on the property and at all the restaurants and bars that teams go to during the tournaments. So using the most conservative numbers possible, the Sportsplex began paying for itself in year four and has every year. In 2025, the Sportsplex generated nearly 2.8 million in bed tax revenue alone. Again, not capturing the 20-25% room nights that actually generated. The same consultant performed both studies of the Sportsplex and of the Fieldhouse, and coincidentally, they estimate similar revenue projections with the Fieldhouse as they did with the Sportsplex. For example, the consultant estimated that in 2023, the Sportsplex would generate 43,000 room nights. It generated 74,606, while the same consultant has projected 44,000 in year three of the indoor. By year three, and I think it's actually year two, it's projected the Fieldhouse would begin to pay for itself operationally. I've got a couple questions before I ultimately move staff recommendations, but I guess I'll pause here, and Greg, I know you and John want to make, I think, a brief presentation, and I do have a couple questions for you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioners, for the record, my name is Greg Horwood. I'm Deputy County Administrator. You've had the effect of shortening my introduction, Commissioner, so thank you for that. I think that's why you wanted me to go first. So I will note that this is the next step on a journey that has taken a few years to get here. We are asking today simply to authorize TSA to negotiate with the first-ranked proposer on the construction side of this equation. I would also note that the choice of this specific location and what is being proposed today was very deliberate. By doing this, we saved about $15 million by linking it with MOSI and not having to build a complete standalone facility, and I think that's a very important point that we should be proud of, and I'm very thankful that TSA has worked with us on making that happen. The last point that I'd like to make before I turn it over to John is we have been working very closely with city staff. We are engaged in the rezoning and the comp plan amendment cycle that needs to occur for this to happen. This is but one of the catalysts that we see on this site. I believe the commissioner mentioned the ice rink. We're also working diligently with the master developer and other parties to potentially bring something for your consideration in the coming months. We have every opportunity here to make this the best possible project for this area. It's been a long time coming. We're very proud of where we are today. However, we need to be able to justify this project, and that's part of this next phase, being able to work with the contractor, come to the best guaranteed maximum price possible. We have not done any formal value engineering yet, although I will tell you the margins are very tight. So we will, of course, do our best. With that, I'll turn it over to John for more detail. Good morning, board for the record. John Muller, director of facilities management, real estate services. So just rehash what Greg said there. He walked through the steps, as the commissioner said, and we're at the point today. This is a key checkpoint for us. We're asking you to help us move forward with negotiating the construction manager at risk with Suffolk Construction. As a reminder, you had previously authorized the design work. And I will commend O Sports, who's really – that was back in October – who's really put the pedal to the metal. They're here today and in just a matter of months have gotten us to this point. So who is Suffolk? That was our selected construction manager at risk. I say ours because myself and another county staff member, Megan Nixon, were part of the selection committee with the TSA staff, which helped us understand this. Solid company. We were actually blessed in this RFP. We had, I would say, three very solid competitive companies to choose from. But I'd just note a couple things. They had not only had field house experience, but they've also worked on active sites, which was important to us, some of them actually being close to universities. They've done hotels, have 40 years experience in a Tampa presence. I do want to note the last point on the slide, though, that if for any reason that – your approval today, if for any reason the negotiations with Suffolk should not go to fruition, we would like to – we're authorizing TSA to go to the next bidder, Turner Construction, for the same terms and conditions and amount. So our next steps here, as Greg mentioned, we want to negotiate our guaranteed maximum price. Point out that we're getting a 178,000 square foot field house. That's 65 of it. And we also are getting a revitalized amazing building. I'll call it the hub. I want us to stop calling it Mosey West someday. That will be success on this project when we call it the hub building. So the hub building, those are a lot of deferred repairs that, quite frankly, we've been waiting for what is the final use of that large building. And so we appreciate that O Sports, without hesitation, took that in and worked with us as part of this project to do that. And then you can see there there's some of – as Greg mentioned, there's some of the other savings there that we identified with this site. I'll note, of course, that TSA's negotiated contract will be subject to your approval and funding. It will have to come back here for the board. And we're anticipating a construction start in late fall this year. 18-month schedule is a target. And we did put an interlocal draft. It's not necessary right now. It may change. But we wanted to show you that we intend to just go ahead and come back to you with the request for the funding with an interlocal to have TSA manage the project. Thank you. Okay. A couple of just quick questions. And actually you covered several of these. And I didn't mention Suffolk – the firm Suffolk Construction. They have an excellent reputation, track record, and I applaud the committee for selecting them. They have a great reputation. Again, recognizing what we've shared in the past that the master developer is moving at a – not saying it's right or wrong, but they're moving at a slower pace than we are. And so I've been adamant about making sure that we stay on target on our timeline. To Eric Hart's credit and to our architect O Sports credit, it appears that everything is either on schedule or maybe even being slightly ahead of schedule for fall opening and then roughly summer 28. Is that fair? That's correct. Okay. I've also been insistent about this quadrant of the property essentially creating an entertainment wing with the field house, black box, planetarium, studio. To do this, there needs to be – I think connectivity is essential. And so I want to ensure moving forward that it's going to connect – the field house will connect to the east, to the hotel, and then also to the west, to the hub, like you want to refer to it as. Is that still – Yes, we certainly have our field house ready for a connection. Tom, you should be nodding your head behind me. I didn't see Tom up there. And again, one of you mentioned – I think it was Greg – working closely with the city. We've got many partners on this – FDOT, USF, of course the city. And that's, again, critical for connectivity, for infrastructure, for roads. If I remember correctly, Commissioner Miller, previous meeting discussed, interested in the walkway over Fowler connecting. So I just want to make sure that all those discussions are taking place. Yes, sir, they are. Okay. You mentioned that we had already approved $5 million for design. How much of that have we already spent? Approximately $3 million of that's been spent. Okay. So I do want to add something that's very important because when we brought that $5 million to you, part of that was for construction management. So there is an additional $2 million that has not been spent. And if this project moves forward to construction, then we would have those funds available. And I will say, thanks to TSA negotiating, Osports did agree to those prices. And I will say, in my experience, that we got a very good deal. Well, I was going there. From my perspective, it looks like Eric and Tom at Osports need a couple of attaboys for holding the line. At least that's the way it appears to me. Lastly, and again, you covered this. This is essentially the next step. It authorizes negotiating with Suffolk on the CMR contract. If an agreement is reached, you come back in front of us to discuss and approve the funding and interlocal. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. All right. So with that, I'll pass the gavel and I'll move staff recommendations. Second. Thank you. Commissioner Wistel, you're recognized. Thank you. I agree with all of Commissioner Hagen's point of view, except for one, that's that I don't, I think that this should be treated clearly separate of the property tax overhaul. This was very pre-planned four years ago. Commissioner Owen was still here with us as well. And we all agreed and thoughtfully planned for it. And I believe that there's, there's no real operational impacts at risk to the county in this, right? The goal is that, which is why the property taxes I think are treated clear and separate. I'm just hopeful that we're still on a path to create some type of sustainable environment for Mosey. I think that that's an important agency for our children to have in Hillsborough. And I don't believe that, and I don't believe that an improvement like this revolves around the fake economic impact statements. This one's going to have a very clear revenue stream that's very easily proven around the nation when it comes to travel ball facilities. And I believe that it will easily sustain itself and supplement the property tax issue without having to do huge mental gymnastics on whether or not we're going to have a return on investment. And that's exactly why I second it today, true to why my same arguments were a little bit over two years ago. And I thought that this was a good item, Commissioner Hagen. Thank you. Commissioner Bowles. Thank you, Madam Chair. I absolutely echo the sentiments of both Commissioner Hagen and Commissioner Whistel on this, totally separate and aside from any property tax arguments that we have. This is going to generate revenue beyond certainly what I'm sure we're expecting to have. But I do have two questions, I suppose. We're talking about with O Sports and building the field house. But if we have the field house, we have the renovations to Mosey, West Building or whatever we're calling it, the hub now. The hub. The hub. And then maybe the Black Spock Theater, all that. We're going to generate a lot of more traffic in that area, which would more or less generate a lot more need for the hotel. So I hear what we're talking about with the field house. But I'm wondering, and as you know, I'm intimately been poking at you all about moving things along there. And again, echo the sentiments of Commissioner Hagen that not pleased with the kind of a snail's pace of sorts that have happened with some of the things there. And curious, where are we with the hotel with that? Because I would imagine that if we're having a 20-quart field house that we need. Is it 20? Anyway, we have the courts there. We're going to have somewhere for these people to stay. Is that going up concurrently with it? So it probably won't be concurrently, but it will be if we have our discussions bear fruit. We're deep in discussions now. It will be shortly thereafter. We do recognize that that is an important part of the overall development. I give a lot of kudos to the county attorney, Julia Mandel, did a great job in some of our discussions thus far. John has been instrumental in those conversations. I can tell you that we're very close to having an understanding as to what exactly the hotel load needs to be. But we'll be coming back to you with an interim progress report on the overall project. I think that's important. I know that there are several facets that all of you have mentioned and are interested in. And we want to make sure that we convey to you that we are working on every single aspect that you have asked us to. So it's probably timely. Sometime in the August timeframe, we'll have a much better handle. We're also going to have the zoning with the city of Tampa in that same timeframe. So it'd be timely to get an update at that point. Fantastic. And that's kind of what I'm looking forward to. Because in essence, to what Commissioner Wistle was just pointing out, those two things go hand in hand. That's going to help generate revenue that maybe acts as offsets for other things that we're considering now. Yes. So which has an impact on our future. The other thing is, we do have an active attraction there that generates, you know, revenue as well. It has employees that work there and visitors. How is this construction going to impact their ability to, one, come and go? Are we making some considerations for that? Yeah. You know, so I'd hate to see that we have cranes and bulldozers and backhoes tearing stuff up over here and people are having to navigate a minefield of ditches and piles of dirt to get to. Yeah. And I think John Smith is behind me. He showed up. But the, you know, and I'll tell you quite frankly, if you have time to look through Suffolk, one of the things that I thought was very well presented by them in the selection process was their recognition of keeping MOSI, you know, ongoing and not disrupting their activities. And some of their site layout plans actually show they were probably the only one who designated a separate parking area for them on the other side, temporary, which actually will go great along with the whole entire master development plan. Quite frankly, I'll tell you, Eric Hart and I are considering whether we need a temporary access to the west, you know, once we start. We'll look at that as we dive down into the negotiations with the CMAR, but just want to be clear, we intend for MOSI to operate and we don't intend for their, for their visitors to drive through a construction area. I understand, but you know how things can occur. So I just want to put that first and foremost, being a MOSI board member as well. Thank you very much, gentlemen. Thank you. Mr. Myers. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just want to say that this project would make a huge economic impact to our county. And also, Greg, you was mentioning you working on other items. So I hope one of the other items is my splash pad. We have not forgotten. Okay. Thank you all so much. It will be included in the update that I talked about. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Chair Hagen. I forgot to include splash pad in my list of amenities, Commissioner Myers. A couple of quick points, I know we're running behind. I thought the excellent points Commissioner Bowles made about the hotel. I know that you guys are working closely with the master developer on that. But like I said at our last meeting, for any reason, if they're unable to meet our deadline, don't hesitate for the county to take the lead. I mean, not to make any of their commitments responsible to go away, but don't hesitate if necessary. That's all. Message heard. Thank you. And secondly, to something that Commissioner Woelstel said, I did not in any way mean to minimize or ignore the importance of MOSI's presence and mission there. They're a critical part of this overall development. And frankly, I'm pleased years ago that there was an effort or discussion about moving MOSI downtown. And frankly, I'm pleased that, you know, we never went down that path. That we, even before we made any significant progress on this project, decision was made that we wanted MOSI to remain in that, on that property if possible. So I'm pleased that that ended up working out, so. So. Before I call for the vote, I just, very brief comments. I agree with my colleagues. I'm super excited about this project and I appreciate the great work that's gone into it. But I'm most pleased to hear that you're going to be taking care of MOSI. I think it's clear that organization has a soft spot for all of us and to make sure that we get them through this transition because I know that it's going to make them all the better. And I'm looking forward to seeing how much it impacts the development of that organization as well. So with that, we have a motion by Chair Hagan and a second by Commissioner Wustel. Please record your vote on B3. Motion carried 7-0. Thanks, guys. Thank you, Commissioners. Thank you. We can now move to our 10 o'clock time certain. Our item is F3. Commissioner Myers, this is your item regarding the Community Corporation to Develop Communities of Tampa to support their Safe Summer Series 2026. Commissioner Myers. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. I'd just like to say the Safe Summer Series is to address the ever-growing concerns regarding the recent teen takeover, which was on May 8th at Curtis Hickson Park. I'm going to ask Freddie Barton, would he come up and give us a quick, like, no more than four minutes and talk about this? Thank you so much, Freddie. Good morning, Commissioners. Freddie Barton, Executive Director for Safe and Sound Hillsboro. Thank you for your time and attention to a very serious matter. We know that the teen takeovers are not just a local concern. It's a national concern. Just here in the state of Florida, between the months of March and currently in June, there have been over 280 arrests of juveniles as a result of these teen takeovers. It's important to note that the teen takeover is not a new concept. I think it's fair to say that every adult in here, at least the Gen Xers, participated in senior skip day. The difference between senior skip day and the takeovers is when you had the senior skip days, you were confined to just those individuals that you knew. Those individuals at your school, in your local community, the teen takeovers are an issue because now you have hundreds of kids that don't know each other and they don't have the life skills, the anger management, the coping skills to navigate issues when tensions flare up. We understand that the prefrontal lobe is not developed until the age of 25. I think we can all agree we know some 45 and 50 year olds that probably aren't fully developed. So it's impossible to think that our kids are always going to make the right decisions. We also know that our kids like several things. They like being together. They like being outside. They like sports. They like arts. They like being connected. And most importantly, they like likes, shares and views. So it's important for us to know that we need to provide some construct for them to allow them to congregate, but with safety, security and structure. In order to do that, Safe and Sound Hills Boroughs partnered with Tampa Police Department, the Sheriff's Office, our community partners, Parks and Recs, both with the city and the county, to provide safe summer series all throughout the summer, creating a four program component. One, putting structured assemblies, not takeovers, assemblies together for youth. We just had our first one that we kicked off at the NFL Yet Center, where we had over 300 young people to come over and participate in a flag football tournament, boys and girls. We had over 300 youth from all over the Bay Area to come in and not one incident, not one arrest, not one fight occurred. We plan to do three more over the summer, not just in the East Tampa area. Our next one is focused in West Tampa. We are going in the university area and then certainly down in South County. Understanding that social media is the communication platform for our young people. And we know that there's so much negative stimuli out there. We have to combat it with positive stimuli. And so we have a social media campaign that we're driving for youth to put out positive messages and content. We're going to incentivize them to do so. We're going to track with analytics that are sharing reposts and connecting to other mediums. And we're going to celebrate those youth who are pushing out that positive content immediately after leaving here. I'm going to the Academy Prep Center of Tampa Bay, where we're going to be working with the seventh graders today and eighth graders tomorrow to start the launch of that social media campaign. We cannot ignore those youth who are involved, who are involved in these recent takeovers. Partnering with the state attorney's office, we've created our third component, which is the responsibility matters curriculum, where we have over half of the kids that were arrested at the Curtis Hickson incident active in programming as we speak right now. They're going to go through sessions as far as accountability and consequences, decision making and substance abuse, coping skills, anger management, violence prevention, community responsibility, restorative justice, and then future planning and growth. Understanding that over a six week period, they're going to be in intense programming so that we can get those charges mitigated or these youth diverted out of the system. Our fourth component is knowing that safe and sound Hillsborough or not one organization can do this work by ourselves. We're providing support funding for our faith based partners, our local nonprofits who do not have the capacity for grant driven opportunities. Some of our neighborhood associations all throughout the county to put on projects for their immediate community. Focusing on violence prevention and positive out of school time opportunities for kids. We know that we're asking for $45,000 from the county. It's important to note that no salaries are being paid out of this. No benefits are being paid out of this. No general administrative or indirect. This is direct services to our youth. We anticipate targeting over 1000 youth and families through this effort and we ask for your support and I'm here to answer any questions. I believe you should have copies of the proposal that was included as part of this. If not, I do have copies for you. Thank you, sir. Okay. Thank you, Freddie, for giving us the overview. I'd just like to also share with us that the children's board is providing $45,000 also toward this summer series program. So I'm going to move to approve item F3 as presented. Second. Got a motion by Commissioner Myers, second by Commissioner Cohen. Don't see anyone on the queue, so please record your vote. Motion carried 7-0. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Bonnie. Thank you. We can move to our 10-15 time certain. This is going to be item G2. This is to receive a report regarding workload impacts of countywide growth. This is related to item B2 and then Josh will stay up here as well to receive a report regarding stormwater impact fees and updated rate options. Josh. Hello. Good morning, Commissioners. Josh Bilotti, Engineering and Operations Department. This staff report on the impact of countywide growth on public works maintenance and operations workload and service level is being presented at the board's request. To evaluate options for addressing growth challenges, including burdens on the public works maintenance service units, particularly in the South County. Hillsborough County's population has grown by 19% over the last decade, including 100,000 new residents since 2020. And this has brought with it additional transportation and stormwater infrastructure and driven increasing demands for public works services and expansion of the county's urban service area. And projections are showing continuing growth into the future. Public works currently serves the county with three maintenance units. A west unit on Sheldon Road, east unit on Sydney Road and a south unit on Rodine Road. The unit locations are shown here on the map along with their color coded service areas. These service areas have been in place for the last 15 years. The facilities themselves are the consolidated hardened maintenance complexes that the county constructed and opened about five years ago. With public works operating alongside the water resources department and fleet services co-located on the sites as well. Historically, public works did have a fourth unit serving the central area of the county. However, during an economic downturn in a period of significant downsizing for the county, including reductions in forces, this oldest maintenance unit was shut down in 2011. And the former central service area was absorbed and incorporated into the other three based on workload balance and resource alignment. A couple of years ago, public works conducted a work order density analysis and recognition of the increasing service demands associated with growth and expansion. This analysis looked at work orders geographically over a 10 year period from 2014 through 2023. And the heat map on the right indicates some hot spots or concentrations of work orders by area, which can be driven by a number of contributing factors such as population centers, age of infrastructure, flood vulnerability and hurricane impacts. The map also helps illustrate the proximity of our maintenance units to these areas of work order concentration as we consider travel and response time from our units. This next slide shows an analysis of more recent work order data encompassing FY 20 through 25. And we've indicated here on the map the total work order number breakdown between each of the maintenance service units. The data shows on average about 40% of work requests occur in the south service area. Public works does have a larger footprint at the south facility, including additional staff and equipment. We've also shown here the distribution of the 180 employees among the three units, as well as the top maintenance activities, which encompass both transportation and stormwater maintenance and include things like pothole patching, ditch and pipe cleaning, mowing and tree trimming and removal. Continued growth will continue to place an additional strain on public works of service levels for both transportation and stormwater. As areas like South County continue to grow in population, there's an increase in service demands and expectations from those residents. And as areas move from rural to suburban, the maintenance expectations increase significantly. For example, mowing frequencies more than double. And this does place additional workload on all three existing service units. Another factor as the growth expands outward geographically is that it can contribute to additional travel time, which has an impact on efficiency. Staff was asked to provide strategies to help address these challenges. And so we've outlined a couple of approaches. One consideration would be the expansion of outsourced or contracted maintenance services. This is a strategy that public works has already been employing over the course of the last decade as a way to help balance increasing service demands within existing operating budget levels. For example, we have an urban right of way mowing contract that's been in place for more than 10 years. And a tree trimming and removal contract, as well as a contract for general stormwater maintenance and repairs. More recently, we've also added contracted maintenance services for canal and slope mowing, supplementing our in-house staff, which aided in the recovery following the 2024 hurricanes. Additional operating budget would be required in order to expand these contracted services, as well as to provide the contract management and administration. Part of the strategy, if additional funding were to be made available, would be to expand contracts for routinely scheduled maintenance, like right-of-way mowing. This contracted services strategy does provide the benefit of being scalable, both up and down, to align with the workload demands, as well as the funding levels. And it can also benefit local small businesses who provide the services. Another consideration is to expand public works' in-house capabilities by looking to reestablish a fourth maintenance unit serving the central area. And this could help to enhance service delivery and responsiveness, combined with the realignment of the service areas based on growth and workload distribution. The negatives are that it comes with a significant price tag, including high upfront capital costs at a time of budget uncertainty for the county. The initial capital costs are estimated at $40 million, based on recent experience with the consolidated hardened maintenance facilities. Another potential downside is that it may be vulnerable to another future economic downturn, which has happened in the past, could result in layoffs to the additional permanent staff. So in summary, either approach would require additional funding in order to address increased demand and additional service level expectations. Potential funding sources for that could include the stormwater assessment for stormwater-related maintenance and services, and we have some options for considering the rates for the upcoming tax year. There's an unincorporated general fund, which as an existing funding source is already in high demand and facing uncertainty with the property tax referendum. And then there may be new revenue options to consider, such as the local option gas tax. What you don't see here are mobility fees, since those are a restricted funding source, not eligible for operations and maintenance. We do want to point out and acknowledge that the additional investments the county is making on the capital side will have a positive impact on both transportation and stormwater infrastructure conditions across the county. In the south service area alone, $78 million of the surtax funds are being used for 53 repaving projects, and $32 million of the CDBG-DR funds are being used for 153 stormwater projects. Finally, while a long-term funding strategy will still need to be addressed, an immediate next step that Public Works will be taking is to evaluate the current boundaries of the service unit areas, updating our analysis, reexamining factors like the distribution of assets, age of infrastructure, accessibility, and drive time. And we'll look for opportunities to realign the service unit areas to help balance the workload across the three units and maximize efficiency working within the constraints of the existing resource levels. So with that, I'll close and offer to answer any questions that you have. Thanks, Josh. Commissioner Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, I want to thank you, Mr. Baladi, and Kim, and every member of your team who contributed to this report. I know it wasn't an easy lift, and I appreciate the professionalism and the patience and the transparency shown throughout this process. This report confirms the many calls, emails, and conversations our office has been having with our residents since I took office. Residents have been telling us that they're seeing longer wait times, increased workloads, and challenges keeping up with the pace of growth. And today we have the data to help explain why many of our communities are experiencing these. I appreciate that you didn't just identify the challenges but are already taking steps to address the areas where work and resources have become disproportionate to the needs of our growing county. This growth brings opportunities, but it also brings responsibilities. We owe it to our residents and to our employees to make sure our service levels keep pace. This request is and never was about pointing fingers. It's about understanding where we are today so that we can make informed decisions for tomorrow. I look forward to continuing this conversation and supporting practical solutions that improve service delivery to our residents, while ensuring that our staff have all the resources you need to be successful. With that, I want to say thank you again, and I move to accept this report. Again, a motion to accept the report by Commissioner Miller. Second Commissioner Willstuhl, Commissioner Cullen. Thank you very much. Also, I agree, very, very informative report, and I appreciated the accompanying briefing. And it was hard not to notice on the map, of course, the bright yellow areas where the service requests come from. And one of the brightest was town and country. And I wanted to ask you about the canal and slope mowing because after the hurricanes, one of the big concerns that was expressed, one of the after action items that was identified by our consultants, something that we talked about extensively, was the maintenance of the canals and the mowing that needed to take place to make sure that the water could run freely. And you mentioned that we actually contracted now for services to do that work. And that aligns with what we've heard from residents out there who have been informing us when their canals actually get treated. My question for you is, how has the canal and slope mowing program changed now that we have the vendor, as opposed to what it was prior to hiring, contracting out? It's been able to supplement our in-house staff. And so we were able to, you know, especially in the months following the hurricanes, make a lot more progress and address more areas that were in need all at the same time. So it really helped us get over a backlog that we had following the impacts of those hurricanes. So, you know, it can be a real positive to balance our resources between in-house capabilities and also the contracted maintenance. So, you know, we'll need to keep in mind, you know, we're currently operating within the constraints of our existing budget levels. And so if there's a desire to enhance or increase those services, we'll need to, you know, accommodate with the resources necessary. But do you – there clearly have been more resources expended post-Milton than prior. Do you feel as though we are in a better – I mean, we're coming into the beginning of hurricane season now, and one of the questions that we get is, you know, how well prepared are we and how are we working to make sure that we're sort of positioned in the best possible way going into this season? How is this affecting that, and do you feel like we're in a better place than we were a couple of years ago going into the storm season? I do feel like we're in a better place. I mean, we learn – we learn something new from each hurricane season and each event that we go through, and I think we improve a little bit each time. So I do feel like with the additional strategies that we've been able to implement since the last time that we are in a better place, both in terms of how we're operating on a day-to-day basis, but then also I think, you know, the federal grant dollars that are going to go towards restoration and enhancement of the stormwater system across the county will be really beneficial as well. I have one final question, and this may be for the county administrator. I know we're going to talk about the property tax proposal later in the meeting, but are the dollars that you're referring to here things that would be directly affected by the outcome of the property tax referendum or whatever it's going to be in November? Yes, to some extent, and also I think some of this you're going to hear in Item B2, which is related, because we do supplement the stormwater utility with general fund dollars, and so that would impact it as well. Okay, so when we get to that discussion, it'll be reasonable for this to come up again in terms of the services that may or may not be impacted by this change, but definitely something to be watching and to be concerned about. Thank you. All right, thank you very much. Commissioner Willstall? I was just going to signal support for the expanded contractual services for when you bring this back. Thanks. Okay, got a motion to accept the report. Commissioner Miller, second by Commissioner Willstall. Please record your vote. Motion carried seven to zero. All right, B2. Okay, thank you, commissioners. This item is asking the board to receive an updated report on stormwater requested at the April 15th meeting and to schedule the annual public hearing to set the stormwater assessment rates. As quick background, the stormwater management program is established by ordinance to maintain drainage infrastructure within public rights of way to reduce roadway flooding. And the stormwater fee is a non ad valorem assessment that's set annually via public hearing. Looking back to 2019 when the previous rate study was conducted, the board adopted a tiered rate structure, set the average annual assessment to $76, and planned a phased increase to $96 over the next five years. Now in those subsequent years due to economic hardships, the board did not fully implement that plan. And the last of the incremental increases was made in 2024, setting the average annual assessment to $86.49 where it currently stands today. No rate changes were made last year as the rate study was being updated, revisiting program needs and incorporating the black and beach comprehensive stormwater evaluation. Now that updated rate study was completed by the county's rate consultant, Raftelis, in February and delivered to the board in April. And it did incorporate the black and beach recommendations of focusing on capital needs as well as ongoing maintenance. On the capital side, Raftelis did include the federal grant funding to come from CDBGDR. However, back in February, it was still a projection. And since then, the board has approved several rounds of specific projects to be funded by CDBGDR. And it has amounted to more than was initially estimated. So based on the combined capital funding of the current CIP level and the additional CDBGDR funds, staff is not recommending any additional capital funding from a rate increase at this time. On the maintenance side, this was the other black and beach recommendation based on community feedback to increase the stormwater maintenance activities such as clearing ditches and pipes, mowing and cleaning canals and repairing structures. These activities are not eligible for CDBGDR funds. And as Bonnie mentioned, they're not fully supported by the stormwater assessment. $20 million of general funds are programmed annually in the operating budget to supplement stormwater maintenance. So to increase these activities by 15%, an additional $2.7 million in funding from the stormwater assessment would be needed. And that would go towards expanding outsourced maintenance services like we discussed in the previous presentation to address expectations for higher service, specifically contracted right-of-way mowing, canal slope mowing, ditch clearing and restoration, and pipe and inlet clearing. The maintenance funding level increase, that maintenance funding level increase, would take the medium residential assessment from $86.49 to $92.58 annually. So that's an annual increase of $6 or 50 cents a month. Now this one here is not a recommendation, but it's being shown as an option for the board's information and future consideration. As we discussed, currently the stormwater operations and maintenance budget is supplemented by $20 million annually of general funds. And so if that revenue source were to be reduced or eliminated, it would take an approximately $45 per year rate increase to make that up with the stormwater assessment. And then we show here on this next slide the impact of both of those items together, the additional maintenance as well as eliminating the general fund contribution. And we've plotted both of those rate scenarios on the chart here, comparing the annual assessments across other local cities and counties. Recall that the Black and Veatch study did note Hillsborough County's current stormwater assessment was in the bottom 25% across the state. So you can see near the bottom that the maintenance-only increase from $86 to $92 doesn't change Hillsborough's position very much. And then the two general fund elimination options move us up midway the chart to between $131 and $137, but still notably below the city of Tampa at $171. And as a reminder, the county does continue to have a hardship exemption program that can provide a full exemption from the assessment for qualifying low-income property owners. Now, after the previous stormwater presentation on April 15th, the board asked about stormwater impact fees. So we had our rate consultant, Raf, tell us review this and provide their response, which is that while they are legally permissible, stormwater impact fees are exceedingly rare, fewer than five in the state compared to 170 recurring assessments. And some of the reasons for that include that on-site retention requirements mitigate new development impacts, and stormwater capital expenditures benefit all properties, including existing neighborhoods, which are not eligible for impact fees. Recurring assessments, like the one that we currently have, are better aligned with the way stormwater systems actually operate, and that they cover all properties, not just new development, and generate recurring revenue that can fund operations, maintenance, and capital needs. Assessment revenue grows with the customer base as new development is added to the tax rolls. So ultimately, Raf Telus recommended against stormwater impact fees as not being worth the cost and legal risk, and concluded that our existing assessment, properly calibrated, is the most effective path. So to wrap up, upon your approval of this agenda item, the public hearing to adopt the stormwater assessment rates will be scheduled for September 2nd, and the direction that staff is seeking today is which of the rate options the board would like us to proceed with for the notices that will be mailed out to property owners in July. And so with that, I'm available along with our rate consultant to answer any questions that you have. Thank you. Thanks, Josh. Commissioner Bowles. Thank you, Josh. A couple questions for you. Great. So going back to 2019, your slide two or label number eight, we have a tiered rate kind of where we had looked at from, I'm looking at my computer, $76 going up to 96. And that was kind of, we're going to phase in an increase. Pandemic happened, everything got thrown out the door with that. There was a couple of increases since 23. It was a $5 increase from 76 to 81. 24 was from 81 to 86, where it is now. So we've seen this $4 or $5 increase, which was anticipated and or was thought about was going to happen to begin with. We didn't do anything last year because we knew that essentially three storms, two storms, kind of, kind of shone the spotlight on that we had some deficiencies out there. And we let Black and Beach go out there and point those and help us identify those, you know, succinctly and see how we can fix those. Coming in now, we would, at the very least, 19, I'm trying to do the math real quick. 2024, we would have been at least at 96 then and guessing that if we had been on that tier phased in rate, we would be at 96 plus probably another $10 this year if we go with that $4 or $5 increase. So we'd be at 106. Is that kind of fair to say that if looking at historically what we were going to do, what we probably would be doing? I think, yeah, generally. I'm not saying that. They weren't looking too much further than the five years at that time. So I think 96 was what was contemplated. Right. But you're right. Each year we come back and reevaluate. I'm just looking at what the. Yeah, so the facts are showing either $4 or $5 and at least they were contemplating that. So technically there's the thought that we could be at 106 now, right now. Along with that, we're looking at a potential of going down further $137, so we're 131 or 92. If we do the 92 and we find out we need more, that would then have to come from the avalorum budget, presumably. Is that correct, Madam Administrator? So we currently have 20. I think what staff is trying to show you, if we didn't have the 20, what that impact would be. But our recommendation is to still keep the 20 in there. Okay. For now. Even with the conversations that we will probably be having shortly, even today, what may come in November? The recommended budget does still include the 20 million. For next year? For fiscal year 27, correct. If we don't advertise the highest rate, we can never go above that for the public hearing. Isn't that correct, Madam Attorney? I'm busting everybody. That's okay. Yes. Once you advertise that rate as whatever your highest rate is, you can decrease it, but you can't go above it. We can go way below. You can go below as much. Never above. You can never go above. That is correct. And the last thing I'll ask, the exemption, we were talking about exemptions here in the last few meetings. Does that exemption have to be renewed every single year, or once you get it, you get it? No, applicants are required to reapply each year for that, to show the income level and the other eligibility requirements that are associated with it. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Commissioner Cohen. Thank you, Commissioner Wastel. Excuse me, Commissioner Bowles. You were exactly on the line of questions I was going to ask. I want to just ask one follow-up to what you were discussing. If we were to not advertise at the higher rate, is there, if this property tax proposal were to pass in November, would it affect our stormwater budget for the coming fiscal year? So, several things, and I just wanted to clarify, because this is an assessment and it goes on the tax bill, we have a timing issue. So, when this has to go on the tax bill is going to be before the November election. So, we can't do the higher, but it won't affect the fiscal year 27 budget as far as the 20 million. We can still keep that in for fiscal year 27. Okay. Got it. Thank you. The second question, a little bit unrelated, had – if you – it was in your presentation about the rate a consultant recommending a guess against stormwater impact fees, saying that most of the new development mitigated their stormwater impacts. And I just wanted to follow up with a question about that, because, you know, one of the major issues that comes up in our land use meetings is this new development that's being proposed is going to cause flooding. And it's been my experience that most of the flooding problems are actually caused by things that are older, that were built before the codes were more aggressive. Is that the reason that the rate consultants made that determination? Does the new stuff really generally handle its own water? Well, that is part of the consideration in their recommendations, that new developments have to meet our current floodplain and flood regulations, which are even higher in areas that are vulnerable to peak rainfall events. So, in addition, as new development and new properties and residents are added to the tax rolls, the assessment revenue increases as well. So, the stormwater program and the assessment is a county-wide benefit. So, it's shared by improving flooding or reducing flooding on the entirety of the roadway network, not just in one specific area versus another. Okay. Thank you. Just to close, you asked for our thoughts on what we should advertise, and after the line of questioning from Commissioner Bowles and the explanation, I would say that we should add in the maintenance assessment but not go to the higher amount as long as the $20 million is safe for this year. Commissioner Wilson. I just wanted to know the ratio of property taxes that are allocated from county-wide to unincorporated. Is it 100% one or the other? It's unincorporated. 100% unincorporated. Thank you. Okay. So, we need a motion to, I guess, accept the report and then unless there's pushback on the recommendation just to add in the maintenance assessment. I'll move that. Second. Second. Second. Okay. I've got a motion by Commissioner Cohen. Second. Commissioner Bowles and Myers. See no notes in the queue. Please record your vote. Motion carries six to one. Commissioner Cameron Cepeda voted no. Thanks, Josh. Next item. The next item is that you're 1030 time certain item B1. This is to accept the Mobility Fee Program Report. And Melinda Dicenzarly will present this item. Good morning. So sorry, Melinda. All good. Good morning, Commissioners. I'm here today to request the board to accept the Mobility Fee Program Audit Report 2026-07. The audit's objective was to determine the maturity of the program's management activities and was conducted in conformance with the global internal audit standards. Before today's meeting, I briefed the commissioners on the audit report's contents. I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have before requesting the board to accept the audit report. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Wilson. I just make a brief comment. I brought up my issues with the Mobility Fee Programs that I know that you didn't address. You just addressed that basically they were dotting their I's and crossing their T's. But there's seven Mobility Fee Maps, correct? Correct. That are servicing an 800 square mile about area for the unincorporated area. And my issues with that can continue to be that imagine that the geographical distance that a mobility impact fee collection could be spent away from a project that is creating impacts at certain intersections, et cetera. I think that it's way too malleable of a map system that allows impact fees to be shifted far away from where they're locally being spent. And I just wanted to make that point again that I think that that's something that we have to address at some point that this audit isn't auditing the effectiveness of the Mobility Fee Maps, correct? You're just auditing that they're operating in a way that's correct. Correct. We insured compliance with the Mobility Fee Ordinance, which there are certain spending requirements in there, you know, making sure that fees are being calculated correctly, folks are getting assessed correctly. Yes. So it was more so just making sure that there were really good controls in place to ensure we're adhering to that ordinance. Yes. And it's a 10-year timeframe that they're allowed to spend the money. I think that we need to at some point understand have an aging report of some of these mobility fees that they're collecting because we talk about all of our desperate backlog of needs. And then I think it was I don't think Commissioner Miller bulls were here yet, but we received a letter of a substantial amount of mobility fees that had been collected like $10 million. And it had been like five or six years that it hadn't still not been spent. And so we were being put on notice that after the 10-year mark, we have to reimburse that money, correct? That is correct. And, Commissioner, there is a report that highlights those funds and when they do need to be spent. And we did review that report, and that is one of the monitoring controls that are in place to ensure that we don't go past that 10-year mark. I think that that report that I didn't know existed should be being pulsed to us for our review at some type of semi-consistent level because I was very surprised to learn that so much money is essentially depreciating for basically government red tape. That's why so much of that money is depreciating or value that we're collecting and allowing public safety hazards to persist. So anyways, I don't know if you have the ability to audit things effectiveness, but there seems to be a lot of challenges that might exist on the actual effectiveness of the program. So thank you for the report. Commissioner Bowles. I see one of our directors sitting in the wings, but it's directly related to this. Mr. Gormley, if I may ask you a question, and it's loosely related to Commissioner Wistel's line of questions. With these zones that we've had, they used to be more expansive, or we used to have many more, correct? Yes, that's correct. We used to have 10 transportation impact fee benefit zones. And at some point, we squished those down to seven. Consolidated them initially to five, and then with the expansion of the service area, we created two additional sub areas. So maybe is there an opportunity for your two offices to work together to some degree along the same line of questioning that Commissioner Wistel was going with that? Is there maybe an opportunity as we see this continued growth to split those out? Along with the thought that if we make collected fees go along the same lines that, if I recall correctly, last year Commissioner Wistel made a motion to have those stay in a certain particular area within a quarter mile of where they were collected. If we kind of had that same thought process that we don't have them using, collecting them in Wild Mama and they're using them in Brandon, even though it's in the same zone, that they stay essentially in the communities that are being collected in. Is that something that could be at least explored? Certainly, yes, sir. It could be something that, and Adam Gormley, Development Services. Thank you. Yes, sir. That's certainly something that could be explored. We do have some flexibility in our zones now to spend them in areas that where an impact is being felt in a different zone. But I think where you're going is having them be focused and where Commissioner Wistel had gone is having them be focused proximate to the area where the development and growth is occurring. It's certainly something we can look at. We do have a consultant looking at our mobility fee study right now, and that's something that we can incorporate into that. Okay. Yeah. And again, I'm not trying to generate more work for you. We got we got I know you're probably one of the busiest in your department's busiest around. But if that's something that we just to keep it for at the front of the mind when you're looking at these things that maybe it's something that, again, you and the auditor can kind of collaborate on. Yes, absolutely, sir. All right. Thank you. Appreciate it. Commissioner Myers. I'm going to move to receive the report. Got a motion. Second. Received the report. Commissioner Myers. Second Commissioner Cohen. Please record your vote on B1. Motion carried seven to zero. Thanks, Linda. Thank you. Mr. Chair, we can go back to the regular agenda. We can go to item B4. This is a follow up to what you all approved last time regarding disaster debris management services. Scott Stromer will take us through this item. Good morning. Scott Stromer, Human Services. Again, this is the item that's from the board's last regular meeting. It's a follow up to that. This item deals with the debris management contractors. It is in three parts. Based on the board's direction, we're asking the board to approve and execute the ninth modification to an agreement with Ash Britt. And the tenth modification to the agreement with Phillips Heavy Incorporated for continued as needed disaster debris management services. And that was from the RFP in 2017. Go on an additional year. Second part is then to authorize staff to develop a new scope for approval by the board at a future meeting that allows for the award of four disaster debris management firms and four operational zones. And lastly, also ask the board to reject all proposals received in response to RFP 26-00036, which is the current disaster debris management services RFP that's on the street, that's under consideration, which only allowed for three disaster debris management firms and three operational zones. With that, I recommend approval. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Bowles. I have nothing really further to say. I think we said it all last meeting. Just move to accept the report. Okay. Got a motion to approve B-4 by commissioners. Excuse me. Move approval. Yep. Commissioner Bowles. Second Commissioner Wollstall. Don't see anyone else in the queue. Please record your vote. Motion carried six to zero. Thank you. Bonnie. Thank you. We can now move down to the commissioner sections. Commissioner Bowles. Your item F-1 is the first item regarding the soil and water conservation district. Commissioner Bowles. Thank you, Chair. Again. So going through the exercise that I think hopefully that all of us are doing at some degree in some different level that looking at our current budget and even before knowing exactly what was going to come out of Tallahassee. And, you know, I know we're in the free state of Florida, but it doesn't really feel like the free county of Hillsboro with the push down that comes here and our lack of local rule. But that being the case, one of the things that I brought forward to staff was to look at the soil water conservation district. And one of the things that kind of struck me as interesting was that they have no oversight from anybody on this board, but yet we're funding them and have been continue to fund them and increase the funding from 200,000 up to 600,000 over the last few years. While that's not a huge amount, it's these little bits that continue to stack up and create these watershed moments that we need to continue to look at as to where we're going to make and invest our time and energy. One of the things that I asked them to provide and requested from both staff and from the Water Management District was to give some objective information, performance measurements and funding the outcome comparisons. Has no judgment being passed on the department's mission or excuse me, the district's mission. It's not a department. And just to actually have that data kind of evaluate what kind of service they're providing to the community that may be redundant and overlapping with a number of other services that are being provided either by the state, by the county, or even the federal government. And again, this is strictly just to make sure that our taxpayer dollars are aligned with measurable results and truly distinct public benefits. Okay. Is that a motion? That is a motion. Yes, sir. Okay. We've got a motion by Commissioner Bowles. Second, Commissioner Cohen. Commissioner Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll just point out the fact about strawberry fields that most people don't know is that they use significantly more water than even residential four homes per acre. I'm talking about twice as many gallons per year as four homes density per acre. I know people talk about flooding, and they say, don't get rid of the strawberry field, which none of us wants to leave Hillsborough County. You're going to create flooding. You're going to create more drought issues that we're having over here, when in reality, unfortunately, the strawberry field uses significant more. In fact, the freeze that happened required swift mud to waive the normal draw rules and for them to go down into the reservoir water aquifer even more than they typically would have been allowed. And one of the missions of soil and water conservation is for them to continue the mission of preventing and lessening the amount of water impacts to our area. We all want ag to say, and we also don't want drought issues. So I just want, I appreciate this exercise. I just disagree with it being one agency. I think that months ago the county administrator should have provided a full list of all discretionary spending, which is difficult to ascertain because she intentionally rolls everything up into big beautiful budgets, and you can't see those different discretionary funds clearly. It's very complicated. I think that we should just have one list of all departments that have discretionary spending so that we can go through it with the fine-tooth comb, which is why I repeatedly ask for zero-based budgeting, which would hold the government much more accountable and make organizations like Hillsborough County Fire Rescue not have to beg every year for the appropriate amount of funding. That's my only concern is that it shouldn't just be one. We should have a list of all of the discretionary funding for us to go through. So keep in mind, though, that they, keeping the strawberry fields here is very important, but that if we don't continue to help them find ways to conserve water, which is one of this agency's mandates, then we're going to potentially lose more strawberry fields, which I know that nobody wants. So thank you. Commissioner Miller. I just had one quick comment. I wanted to compliment Commissioner Bowles on the preparation of this item. It was one of the most thorough commissioner items, and I really appreciated the background. I actually learned a lot from you bringing it forward. So I just wanted to thank you for that. Okay. We got a motion and a second. Please record your vote. Commissioner Miller. Motion carried seven to zero. Okay. Bonnie. Thank you. The next commissioner item is Commissioner Miller's item. This is item F2 regarding local firearm waiting period requirements. Commissioner Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This item is about ensuring Hillsborough County remains consistent with firearm purchase laws the state of Florida ultimately adopts. There's ongoing discussions and legal challenges at the state level regarding the Florida's waiting period requirements, and it's prudent that the county, for the county to monitor these developments. Our residents deserve clarity and consistency on this very important issue. If the state does change the law, the county should understand those changes and ensure ordinances and policies are aligned. This motion will ask the county attorney to do what they do best, and that's just monitor the law, advise the board, and ensure Hillsborough County remains legally compliant. I move to direct the county administrator and the county attorney to monitor ongoing legislative, judicial, and regulatory actions at the state level related to firearm purchase waiting periods and provide updates to the board as appropriate. Additionally, I request that the county attorney review Hillsborough County's existing ordinances, policies, and practices relating to firearm waiting periods and advise the board of any actions necessary to ensure the county remains consistent with Florida law, constitutional requirements, and any future changes adopted or ordered at the state level. We've got a motion by Commissioner Miller, second Commissioner Woestel. I don't see anyone in the queue. Please record your vote on F2. Motion carries, 7-0. Next item. Next item, Commissioner item, that's Commissioner Woestel's item. Item F4, regarding the county's small business encouragement program and service-disabled veterans-owned small businesses. Commissioner Woestel. Thank you. And for transparency, my private business did used to be a registered service-disabled veteran-owned business. I allowed that to expire a number of years ago, and I have no current intentions of renewing that. And I would in no way inure a public benefit if this were to pass. I just want to make that very clear for the record. I thought that we were already offering the same federal bonuses to our contracts that currently exist for federal contracts. When I received the request, my staff looked into it. I felt like it's something that this board should consider supporting. We do a lot of veteran services already. I don't believe that it would violate any of the federal executive orders that have come out and restricted some of our other bonus points. So, I'd like to have a conversation. If other people agree that we should be allowing more opportunities for these SDVOBs, then I think that it's something that we should ask procurement services to add in their contract policy. I don't see anybody in the queue. So, I will move to approval of item F4 as presented to incorporate service-disabled veteran-owned businesses in the procurement process. Second. Second. I got a motion by Commissioner Wollstall. Second Commissioner Cameron Cepeda. Don't see anyone in the queue. Please record your vote on F4. Motion carried 7-0. F5. And F5 is Commissioner Wollstall's item as well. This is regarding the Hillsborough County Synthetic Drug Ordinance. Commissioner Wollstall. Thank you. This is an old ordinance that we've not modified in a while. Not too far past. We approved fentanyl as being a state of emergency in Hillsborough County. We brought a big, long ordinance. The county attorney's office provided about a five-inch thick binder of research. And I was at a recent forum with the Attorney General of Florida. I don't remember if any other commissioners were there. Yeah, I don't. Okay. It was at Tiger Bay not too long ago. And the question was brought up about he has an emergency order in place right now that expires on June the 30th. I didn't know that it was in place, frankly. I wasn't familiar with this. This is not a ban or this is not a potential ban on kratom tea at a kava bar or a coffee shop. That's not what this item is addressing. There's a backup that I thought made it on the agenda. I didn't notice it didn't until yesterday. But it's been reported on in the past by Tampa Bay Times. This is specifically the 7-OH extract of the leaf that with chemistry has been turned into a concentrate. This has been widely reported on throughout the nation. UF has one of the most preeminent doctors that are studying the impacts of it. You can see the many potential overdoses that have been linked to or direct cause of this extract. Now, we could do nothing. My concern is that this 7-OH extract gets turned into gummies. Florida law almost passed a restriction. It was pulled at the last second for some, I don't know, legal reason. And now, I did hear the Attorney General say at the forum that he did have the intentions of renewing his emergency order. There was a legal exercise to try and say that his original emergency order issued last year was unconstitutional. He changed it and the petitioners lost in court. The courts agreed with the Attorney General and said that his legal maneuver was completely constitutional. So, it expires on June the 30th. He may or may not. My concern is that because it does get branded and sold towards children, I would hate for that to expire and something happen out of a coffee shop or out of a 7-Eleven or any other convenience store. You can see how much more potent it is than morphine, up to 13 times more powerful to typical opioid receptors, and the various different side effects and long-term harms that have been clearly studied. I believe that this item is just for us to start doing what we might have to do anyways if the state, the law, by the way, is to make it a Schedule I drug. That's why it was Senator Yarbrough, I believe, is the one leading the charge on it. We could do nothing and then the Attorney General could hopefully renew his emergency order after it expires on June the 30th. I think he has to re-initiate it or something. But it sounds like it's going to happen anyways and I do believe we have the ability to change our own synthetic drug ordinance. This has nothing to do with going after the coffee shops and we're actually working on an impact statement. The intent of this is to have a conversation with these industry leaders and so that they're not surprised. We did a similar thing with the pet stores. We banned the cell of rabbits. It was like my first motion. I didn't know I was getting elected to ban the cell of rabbits but it was like the first hot topic issue when we got elected in 2022. That was Commissioner Hagan's item. So I'm not looking to blindside any of the industries but the research seems to be pervasive and it does get turned into gummies that does look like children's candy. And since there's no restriction, it's on a convenience store shelf and it's not really clearly labeled if you look at them that this could literally potentially kill you and it's highly addictive. So the intent was just more to have a conversation today. If you guys are interested, it will take some legwork from the county attorney's office and more than just me doing it behind the scenes. So that's it. It looks like there's some other commissioners so I'll hear what they have to say. Commissioner Cameron Tepeda. Yes. Thank you. Yes. This is a crisis in our community and throughout our nation as well. And when we see these numbers, they're not just statistics. It's not just numbers. These are sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, you know, that their lives are costing. Just taking one pill can be like it can be a death sentence. And we really have to do something in our community about this. And also I'd like to add that the fentanyl and synthetic opioids have fundamentally changed the danger. It's just, I mean, like I mentioned, one pill can be a death sentence and we really do need to make a change in our community. Then it does require emergency response at times when we have emergency situations like this. And so I'm very glad that this has come before the board and really thank Commissioner Wastel for this as well. Thank you. Commissioner Cohen. I think you've made a compelling case that we should at least go to the next step and look at this. And I will be supportive of moving forward. Commissioner Bowles. Yeah. Having served on the front line with the daily deployed, having had to take rescue and emergency mitigation efforts to help people who have been addicted and or under the influence of some illicit drug. A lot of these designer drugs aren't even affected by some of the lifesaving measures that we perform with, for example, like Narcan or something like that, where you can have reversed the effects of opioids. So this type of thing where these designer drugs continue to morph and change and for trying to find ways to kind of counteract them, it's really important to kind of get ahead of that. And I think absolutely if there's a way to restrict and or, you know, eliminate the possibility of anybody, not just children, but certainly children, but anybody from getting this is something that we definitely need to more than consider is that we need to act upon. Thank you. Commissioner Wastel. Okay. Thank you very much. With the slight amendment to the proposed language that it says prohibits the cell of Kratom, I want to be very intentional and specific that it prohibits the cell of Kratom 7-OH that was provided as backup. I will move for approval of item F-5 as presented plus that one small amendment. Second. Again, motion by Commissioner Wastel. Second, Commissioner Cameron Cepeda. Please record your vote. Motion carried 7-0. Bonnie, next item. Thank you. The next item is Commissioner Bowles, item F-6. This is regarding the establishment establishing a directed funding source and mechanism for Hillsboro Fire Rescue within the unincorporated area. Commissioner Bowles. Thank you, Mr. Chair. As stated in the off agenda item and thank you guys for accepting that late item there. Essentially, as we come here into some unknown times and we're looking at these different ways of cutting services, considering services, discretionary items, these kind of things. I think we could all agree that police, fire, I would even go as far as to say some public works and those type of things. Our infrastructure is absolutely one of the core things that we need to continue to focus upon. It doesn't mean we shouldn't consider these library services or children services or aging services or those type of, but we have to take a hard focus. Because again, as I stated earlier, we are not the free county of Hillsboro because of the things that Tallahassee keeps imposing upon us. That being the case, I wanted to ensure that as we approach our budget, we're going into a slight lull in meeting times that at the same time that we're also moving into our budget talks that we have some considerations of different funding sources. This talk has come about in the past with administration before I served on this board and, you know, even in years prior and I'm pretty much well aware that there are other municipalities that are all considering the same thing given the current climate that we're under. So the idea is that we have administration look at this, evaluate what it would take to, you know, a couple of different options and when doing so that it is a direct budget neutral item so that it's not raising taxes at all. It would be taking whatever the millage would be out of the unincorporated component and moving those into its own MSTU, MSBU, or however we are determined. And I think at this current level it would be about 1.9 or something like that. But that being the case, that it would be a neutral item. Second. My goodness. I can make the motion. All right. Like we got a motion. That's a motion. Motion, motion by Commissioner Bolsan and Commissioner Cohen. Commissioner Woelstle . . Mr. Washington. I just wanted to say that we've, we talked about this with Commissioner Owen several years ago. I think that you wrote it very thoughtfully that you're just, you're just shaving it off and protecting the Agency's interests. that's one of the reasons my annual millage rate swap was so important is because you know I don't I don't talk about it much but that's a compounding annual new money to the unincorporated we're going into the third year of it now it's going to be over 30 million dollars a year of new reoccurring funds to the unincorporated area I talk about the roads and the sidewalks so much because they're just so bad as you know riding around in the past 25 years over there but once we catch the roads up the free the new money is still going to be there to pay for essential services and I think that this is something that should have been done years ago it's not about favoritism it's just that everybody believes that fire rescue is one of those core services that's one of those things where even as a libertarian I want highly qualified first responders showing up to my wife no disrespect to the other agencies in the private sector that's just not something I want to guess and game on I want them to have structured training when they show up to make sure that they're going to protect my family's life so I'll be fully supportive of this motion thank you Commissioner Cohen yeah just to follow up I mean I think that at this point we have to look at every single option that's available to us to protect the most important core services that we provide and there is definitely agreement on this board that Hillsborough County Fire Rescue is at the very top of the list with other public safety considerations we're going to hear I think in the report that's coming up that there's real threat to our general fund which is where a lot of this money comes from now so it's prudent for us to start looking immediately at how we're going to plug those holes it is important to point out though that just because we're making the commitment to people that we are going to make sure that that fire rescue is properly funded it does that doesn't negate the impacts of what this legislation might do the money is going to have to come from somewhere and it we're going to have to figure out where where that is but in terms of making making this analysis I think it's not a moment too soon and I certainly support moving forward thank you I'll just make a couple comments kind of piggyback with something Commissioner Cohen said as well first of all I fully support moving forward in this item as a stated we all agree fire rescue is a core service as I've stated dozens of times I've been on this board no one understands that more than me and then as a third or fourth grade woke up in the middle of the night with our house completely burnt down lucky to survive and so that's why I fought for fire stations all over all over my district this board's been sued because folks for some reason push back and they treat fire stations as if they're a jail or a borrow pit which is very frustrating so I want to move forward on this I think we should do everything we can to prepare for the potential for property tax reform oh actually as was stated we probably should have done this years ago even without property tax reform we have to acknowledge that my understanding from staff that any type of fire assessments do not happen overnight it takes time to study and review the information I do like the the way Commissioner Bowles presented it as a budget neutral uh goal but I think to kind of piggyback on what Commissioner Cohen said um if property tax reform happens and what we heard it earlier with stormwater I mean I think taxes and fees are not only going to increase but they're going to increase exponentially and so I like the goal like what we're trying to do but I guess we'll talk more about that in a couple items from now but money's got to come from somewhere so uh to fully support the item and uh appreciate Commissioner Bowles bringing this forward it's okay we've got a motion and a second please record your vote motion carried seven zero okay Bonnie next time thank you we can now move to the staff reports the first staff report is item g1 this is to receive a report regarding the board's legal authority to remove hillsborough county appointed tampa sports authority board member midterm and julia mandel county attorney will take this item good morning commission commissioners um you did receive okay you did receive from me a memorandum as it relates to this item we after researching the way that tampa sports authority has been created which is pursuant to a special act of the florida legislature as an independent special district the method of appointment authority and the method of removal authority would be contained within the entirety of that special act and in that special act specifically while it does provide for uh appointment authority from the bocc from the city of tampa and from the governor's office it does not provide specifically for removal therefore it does not default back to say your board policies it it just defaults then to florida statute as it relates to removal and there are florida statutory provisions which allow removal for cause specific cause by the governor if they're say for example malfeasance misfeasance drunkenness interestingly as part of that analysis a criminal violation but that is not something that is within the act that would allow you to proceed forward with removal i'm available for any questions all right thank you commissioner miller thank you mr chair thank you miss mandel for summarizing that i know we've talked on it in the last week i've spent a great deal of time thinking about how i would approach this item and not without prayer scouring legal documents unsolicited inputs from all walks anonymous texts from people too afraid to speak out publicly and even weighing if this fight was worth it because of the dire warnings of what speaking out would mean to my own future i'm going to summarize a brief timeline of how this unfolded because i would imagine there are people watching or here in person who are not privy to the information that the seven of commissioners have in our possession at the end of the june 3rd board excuse me board meeting i asked the county attorney if she would bring back the process and if any any related information for the removal of bocc appointed members to the tampa sports authority while i wasn't naive to the fact that i was asking questions that would raise a few eyebrows the resulting chaos was alarming to me and should be to anyone that values transparency in government on june 10th all bocc members received a letter from a concerned citizen outlying conflicts of interest for four members of the tampa sports authority board that he believed were so egregious that the actions warranted their resignations and referral to the florida commission on ethics there were 11 pages with citations and of all of the allegations on june 11th my office was informed by the county attorney that the tampa sports authority is an independent special district governed by the local act of state of florida chapter 96-520 and in short once appointed and qualified a tampa sports authority member can only be suspended or removed by the governor on june 14th a tsa letter was created by tsa general counsel in response to the june 10th letter by its own admission the tsa board does not have the authority to censor suspend or remove its own members and does not have the authority to refer a matter to the ethics commission so that should get everyone caught up i asked a simple question in the last meeting and i very much appreciate the county's attorney's response it's not that appointed members of the tsa cannot be removed it's that they can only be removed if the governor chooses to do so it is also clear that in the weeks since i opened pandora's box there are some serious ethical issues within the tsa by their attorney's own admission there have been no mechanisms to enforce ethics ethical rules or to punish members who may violate them the sports authority's own code of ethics in the first senate states that tampa sports authority representatives must act in a completely trustworthy manner and avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest if they are to gain and keep the public's confidence board we have a fiduciary responsibility to our taxpayers as a funding entity of the tampa sports authority to ensure that before we send them another dollar that they are acting in accordance with proper ethical standards and within the bounds of the law if nothing else my question about removing members has led to further questions that warrant deeper investigation and new measures of transparency mr chair i'd like to make a two-part motion a i move that this board direct our county attorney to gather meeting minutes members financial disclosure forms property and business records of the tampa sports authority members draft and bring back to the board for review a letter of transmittal to the governor and the state attorney for the 13th district asking them to take whatever appropriate action their offices are empowered by the state constitution and statutes we affirm today that this body isn't leveling accusations but we all agree the situation necessitates further review by constitutional officers who can take appropriate action if an action is deemed necessary and b the board directs our county attorney to draft and bring back to this board for review a response letter to the tampa sports authority outlining our concerns for potential ethical lapses and any absence of internal policies or rules and actions to correct them we ask that the letter in the entrance of transparency and as the funding entity of the tsa that they develop such rules and procedures to restore this board's trust and their ability to administer public funds okay we got a motion by commissioner miller do we have a second i'll second second commissioner bowles uh commissioner bowles you recognize attorney mandel raise your seat up i think i need to raise your seat up you used to serve as a tsa county or not the county tsa general counsel is that correct i served on behalf of gray robinson appointed general counsel did you have any ethical concerns uh rich issues that had come up during that time as your general counsel i am not sure i completely understand your question were there any issues raised you know like ethical concerns that were presented during your time as general counsel there was never a time that i was asked to investigate any form of ethical issues uh per se there were times and i think it's documented in the letter that came from tsa that there was a request to a decision to recuse in a particular vote that was taken that was documented okay but not really and there was no ethical issue that i ever investigated or was involved in so those concerns and internally again i think we talked about the removal of there really is no way to remove anybody you said that in the the certainly the uh memo that's come out from you that is that is after reviewing the way in which tsa was and i will tell you i hadn't ever been asked to review that issue before so i did have to spend some time on it and not just me so folks my staff uh we worked to spend some time on that that when you look at the way that the tampa sports authority was created as an independent special district and it was done by local law so there you know there are other agencies that are creative but they're definitely created through other mechanisms this particular agency was created pursuant to local local act of the legislature it created the the agency it created within the body of that the appointment authority but it did not have any specificity as to the mechanism from removal so as i've said that would then default to the provisions of florida statute on the removal of any public official which is as i said for cause malfeasance misfeasance and the other specified and then there's a process for that right and that essentially is taken care of on the in tallahassee that would be through an governor's office of the governor's general okay they take an action pursuant to executive order i believe is the process you know you know i know uh i know quite a few of these members on the board for some of them decades and uh the letter that came out uh from the concerned citizen certainly gave my some head scratching moments there and you know i'm not one to certainly speculate about any motives behind that or assigning blame anywhere but you know if there's an opportunity to have someone take a look at this from a third party 30 000 foot view where we're not emotionally involved we're not at any way involved i don't see any harm that either totally clears it or any of these questions that come up or has a you know another opportunity to see what comes out of this i i don't see any harm because it's not costing us anything and at the very least if we're transparent about what's going on or we have millions and millions of dollars that are invested that through our tsa board through our county that are we have to be good stewards with i just don't understand uh why there would be much pushback on this outside of let's just see what happens commissioner wilson their attorney already responded to us and researched the issue themselves look attorneys give bad legal advice all the time it happens every day commissioner miller you could go and research the fact that throughout the history of florida um they're taking a more conservative posture on your answer but you can go and clarifying clear attorney general's opinions from 1969 today that says it has been ruled on in court to support those attorney general's opinion that when there is authority granted for the appointment there is essentially de facto authority granted for the removal um since it's not clear in there they're making the assumption at the county attorney's office that the authority will then go back to the state's legislature but that's never really been tested but what has been tested throughout the course of history of florida is that when a legal body is granted authority to appoint they are there in fact granted the authority to remove same so i just want to be very you do not have to take or accept the county attorney's opinion attorneys again give bad legal advice all the time that being said um i think that this effort is wholly irresponsible i don't support it their own legal counsel has already said that hey we don't believe that there was um a conflict of interest people own property um i owned i owned a store right across from ground zero of the ray stadium whether or not i would have personally benefited i i mean i still own a banknote on that um that um business actually and i'm depending on the new business owners to be able to succeed so am i at a conflict of interest because some grandiose potential economic impact of that surrounding business is going to see benefit from this miss mandel well i would need a little bit more information but let me just go back to what the standard is and that i think was addressed in mr gibson's letter and the standard is what the standard is which is you have an obligation to vote on any matter that comes before you regardless of what that matter is i'm going to put aside quasi-judicial proceedings because there's a little bit of a difference there but any regular matter what the law what the statute says is you have to vote on it you're obligated to vote on it unless that action inures to your private gain or loss so when you analyze these things that's the conversation that say you think that there's an issue that's come up that you have some concerns about we would talk about it i would get some understanding of where where it is you see that personal financial gain or loss and advise whether or not in my opinion it would be prudent to go ahead and recuse yourself from that matter and if any of you have recused yourself from any matter you have to both make a statement on the record indicating what that personal financial gain or loss is you know to a certain extent and then you have to sign an actual document and i've prepared those documents over my career many times indicating what that is and then that is placed in the minutes of what um of any governmental body so that is the process that you go through whether or not any specific uh fact pattern would call for that is very much akin to what is the vote and what is it you're you're as a member of that body what it is your perceived financial uh interest or loss would be and then you just go through that analysis but i want to put one final point on it it is ultimately a decision of each individual because if there's an ethics issue that comes out of it that is personal to each individual i as your attorney here or any other attorney representing any other governmental entity just give you my best legal advice but if you make a decision no i'm not going to recuse myself or yes i'm going to recuse myself that's ultimately personal to each individual and something that would be reviewed if there was a complaint with the commission on ethics so so i i i hope that answered your question because getting into the specifics is very hard to analyze as it relates to specifically what a vote is that you would be taking yeah but i mean so then unless it's a direct i'm taking money from the tampa bay rays i could have the personal opinion that i think that they're going to be a negative impact on my old business that i own a banknote on so i won't have ignore any gain that again as as an attorney for a governmental entity in these factual situations i can give you my best legal advice but it is ultimately a personal decision sure i i think that i think that this is irresponsible for us to move forward the only thing is that we should be taking the position that we retain our authority which is clear throughout the history of florida that if we are granted the ability to appoint we are there by granted the ability to remove through a myriad of different instances that they could cite and i believe that you could argue one way or the other on that point thank you commissioner miller thank you mr chair uh mr wilson i do agree with you on the removal process i was honestly quite floored that we can um you know appoint to put somebody through this process we select them and we have no that should be shocking to everyone that we have no recourse per our attorney's advice to remove somebody from that board for any reason and then when i later found that they themselves as an entity do not have the authority or power to remove another member so somebody could be breaking the law and they do not have the ability to remove that member from their own board and and so what became alarming to me is i i asked a question and then when i said pandora's box opened it did because it wasn't about the specific vote and miss mandel you are focused on the vote that was taken about sending the letter that became lesser of an issue to me than the um the chaos that ensued following that and things like sir um commissioner whistle this isn't about this particular votes are being a waste of time they did not disclose things on their form which are required under the law to be and so for me we do not have the recourse to go and look at that we are not the body that does that so the only way for us to do it and as a body or as a concerned citizen is to send a letter to the governor i felt like it gave us another chance to put it before us that's why i asked that both of these letters be brought back to us so that we could have maybe we'll consider the taking our and exercising our right of removal at that time or we'll vote to send it on to the state as requested um so anyways i didn't want to get on the weeds on those items but it's been my years of experience and this is what's happened in the last two weeks that when there's smoke there's usually fire and i feel like that we have a fiduciary responsibility to send this on to a governing body to investigate it commissioner cohen thank you well it seems to me that your motion you made your motion in two parts and there's two issues here but neither of them require are to make to send a letter right now the the the motions i think related to working with the county attorney on the issues and then coming back i am not going to vote against allowing a commissioner as a professional courtesy the ability to work on something with the county attorney that does not mean uh that i'm going to ultimately support sending sending a letter uh but i do want to distinguish between these two issues for a minute um i have not seen anything yet in this correspondence between um the the related to the conflicts of interest and the response to that um that gave me the same level of concern that others have expressed but i think if there is concern you should look into it and you should have the ability to to do that and i can make my own judgment on whatever you come back with the second issue you raised though to me is a little more is actually the more compelling one i do think that given what's come to light at the very least it is not inappropriate for us to uh to write a letter to ask the sports authority to review their own policies and to make sure that their policies are in conformance with the way in which they want to govern themselves in today's in today's uh uh atmosphere so you know my my sense is that all you're really i'm not sure you even need a motion to work with the county attorney on this but assuming that you do uh i just want to be clear you know i'll i'll go for that but that is not to be read as being in favor of moving forward with the correspondence to the governor unless you have some something that that is compelling that that is is a matter that we take up here in public all together and make a decision on on its own merits again just to reiterate i think the second issue is a little easier i think that um an internal review of policies is not an unreasonable thing to ask them to undertake and uh you know we can we can when the letter is finally formulated we might be able to put some detail around what exact policies it is that we might have concerned about perhaps it isn't financial reporting or or conflicts of interest perhaps it's other things that that we want to that we want them to take a look at but um onto the third issue commissioner wastel i think you have a point on that on the removal and the um the appointment issue but i also think it's important when we get a legal opinion that that you know i am a lawyer but i make i make a real effort not to put on the lawyer hat when i'm sitting here because that's not my role on this board and i do think that we have to give some deference not just some but but a lot of deference when we ask for an opinion to to what that opinion comes back as whether we like it or not so uh that's all i have to say all right commissioner meyers and commissioner will still then i'll close with a few comments uh thank you mr chair i just have a couple of questions and uh to you um commissioner miller does this consider um term limits also a part of your your motion of them serving on the board for how long could that be included so when we asked the county attorneys to come back we're looking at how long has one has served uh on the board that if we're looking at a two year and then sit out one year with an option then you can reapply to the board have you considered that as i think you mean two term not i mean yeah two terms i absolutely think that's a great um we have members that have been on there for 20 something years a long time so i think that would be a great addition okay if you would consider that as a part of your motion yes i can consider that as part of the motion okay thank you all right commissioner wilson i just i just want to brief clarity then on what is being asked for because commissioner cohen said something different so are you because you included the comments about the letter to the governor um which again i don't think you need um and wouldn't support but that's not what you're asking for then so what are you asking for i'm not sure i am asking for that i'm asking for them to gather the information if we make the decision once the information is gathered to send it to the board the reason why i brought this to you all and didn't just work directly with julie because she was fantastic and working with us this week is because it does take staff hours to pull these items together and i think that that's a you know we're a responsible ask of this board so you're just asking to pull their financial disclosure statements which we see without getting in the weeds and forgive me sorry i didn't realize that not everybody had all of these letters um it states in there that the only way that this can even be reviewed is by a letter by a body or a concerned citizen directly to the governor that's how it's written and so this is our only course of action and i feel a very strong responsibility um that there are some potential concerns here and we don't have the ability to look at them and so we can just gather the information and send them to the governing body that can look at them that's what the request is the first part the second part is for us to be able to look at things like term limits and the governing bodies because even if they had an issue within their own board they don't have the authority to remove well yeah they're pretty archaic documents i want to make sure that they don't get the ability to remove our appointees i don't know if you've watched what's going on pinellas they're they kicked off a commissioner of one board and they had to put the same commissioner back over there i mean like nobody should have the authority to remove our appointees i just want to be very clear about that and by the way commissioner bowls the the public citizen is a paid lobbyist and that should be very clear um for the record with the mayor net group so i want to make that very clear thank you okay i'll close things out here um my thought primarily based on i think the underlying issue that drove this discussion and that's the raised ballpark i've read the letter from tsa's council and i personally do not believe a board member has done anything improper if we want to send a letter and i understand the way the motion is crafted that everything will come back to us but if we ultimately and be proving the motion today doesn't mean we're going to send a letter but if we get to that point that's fine i don't think anything will come of it particularly when you understand the underlying issues which are the raised ballpark with the governor's support and endorsement for the raised ballpark project i'm quite sure the tsa is already on his radar and knowing his willingness to remove folks from office he really doesn't need a letter from us to bring this to his attention so get the information if we send a letter that's fine but in the day i don't really think it it makes a difference now i do completely disagree with some of the tsa board members position on a new raised ballpark and i'm also tired of the the article after article restating the opposition's positions and roadblocks against the facility it's gotten old to me but that being said i haven't complained or pushed back or really said anything because i think what's lost in a lot of this is the reality is the tsa has no say or vote on the raised financial framework or definitive documents the only bodies that will determine whether a financial agreement is approved is this board the city council and city council sitting as a cra board that's it so regardless of what tsa board members have said or how they voted tsa cannot impact a potential deal now however where i do get concerned is in the eyes of some and apparently including some members of the legislature there is the perception that the tsa may need to tighten up some of their rules and policies what i'm afraid of is having been in this seat a long time some would say too long that if we just ignore the issue the legislature will address it and we all know when the legislature gets involved it's rarely good for local government and boards what very well could happen is the special act could be amended at the state changing tsa structure and making it similar to the aviation authority or port tampa bay where the governor whoever the governor is has control of the majority of the appointees yet the county and city are left paying the bills without adequate representation that's a real concern of mine so in my opinion even if it's more symbolic even if it's for the optics there's value in this board exploring if tsa's policies processes procedures can be strengthened and improved and then finally kind of piggyback on what commission cohen said i've probably always nearly always as minimum of courtesy to a board member supported asking the questions getting the information back and then we can decide at that point so um end of the day i'm going to support moving forward but feel very strongly on a lot of this because i think if we do nothing we're likely not going to like the alternative so okay we got a motion uh by commissioner miller second commissioner bowls uh please record your vote motion carried seven to zero thank you commissioners okay bonnie next item uh the final staff report is to receive a report regarding the state of florida proposed constitutional amendment regarding property tax reform and related legislation and tom fessler will take this through this item g3 morning commissioners tom fessler chief financial administrator this morning i just wanted to run through with you the proposed property tax reform legislation as everyone is aware the governor called a special session to address property tax reform from june 1st through june 3rd the legislature after they had met voted to put an initiative on the ballot or a constitutional amendment on the ballot and i just wanted to run through with you some of the provisions of of that first of all what it does is it creates a 150 000 homestead exemption in fiscal year 27 that will be effective for our fiscal year 28 budget and then that increases to 250 000 in fiscal year 28 which would affect our fiscal year 29 budget the current homestead exemption is 50 000 so that would be basically um a 200 000 increase by fiscal year 29 there are some provisions that that uh in the future that could actually uh additionally increase that um in addition to that it reduces the assessment cap that there currently is on non-homesteaded properties from 10 percent to five percent it requires a five-year florida residency period for someone to be eligible for the new exemption or the expanded exemption and in in the future it increases annually uh the exemptions by the cpi um inflation rate which would further limit um available growth in ad valorem revenue for the county i've got a separate slide that'll address this in a little bit more detail but it also changes the maximum millage rate calculation that's currently done um and it ties it more to the role it ties it to the rollback rate rather than the current formula and that would become actually effective for our fiscal year 27 budget um and i'll explain what that means in a few minutes um the other thing that it does is initially what was put to the in front of the legislature was uh limiting the use of ad valorem revenue for a list of uh core services or core service categories there were six of them um there was an amendment to the bill that added a final one because the initial list of seven categories would not have been able to fund a lot of the constitutional officers um so the final one that was added was operations and administration uh of any of the um officers within the state of florida that one is a little tricky because there's some confusion as to what um that actually does and what that would allow ad valorem revenue to fund so we're thinking that there might be some clarification that would be coming from the legislature on that one um it does not protect any category of expenditure so that would include let's say sheriff and fire and it applies to all levies except school levies initially the schools were included and were part of the legislation there was an amendment made to remove them it's going to go on the november 2026 general election ballot it requires 60 voter approval and the first impacts from the homestead exemptions that we would feel would be in fiscal year 28. as far as the maximum millage rate calculation this is a little bit different because this is already something that's been um when the bill was passed it was being done on a statutory basis so it would this would not be on on the constitutional amendment in november if the governor approves this bill it will go into effect for fiscular 27. what does that mean it means that under the this new legislation that our maximum millage rate would be tied to the rollback rate which is the rate that's necessary to collect the same amount of revenue in a current year as was collected in the previous year that would mean that if you have a simple majority vote of the board you would can only go up to the rollback rate in order to go above the rollback rate you would have to have a two-thirds vote or super majority vote of this of this commission in order to go up to 110 percent of the rollback rate and a unanimous vote to go above 110 percent when the legislature voted to put this on the ballot we had already kind of locked down our system for the recommended budget the county administrator will recommend to you in the month of july in order to adopt a rate a millage rate that's consistent with what will be proposed in that budget it would require a super majority vote of this board if there's a simple majority vote of this board then we would lose we estimate about 17 million dollars in avalan tax revenue for the fiscal year 27 budget you've seen some of these slides before just wanted to kind of add to them what the impacts would be for each of the funds we compared the impacts to the fiscal year 27 budget you can see in the countywide general fund that would be a 200 estimated to be a 213 million dollar impact on ad valorem revenues you can see that 66 percent of that fund and expenditures in that fund currently go to constitutional officers outside agencies and fire rescue and that would be inclusive also of the sheriff for the unincorporated area fund similar another 66 percent um that if you put in that that's associated with fire rescue and the sheriff so if you compare that 130 million dollars to everything that's left after fire rescue and sheriff you can see that it was very difficult to make that work without impacting public safety just to give you an idea of the revenue impact currently in the two general funds we collect um in fiscal year 26 1.47 billion dollars in property tax revenue um of that 80 if you took um our constitutional officers other elective officials fire rescue emergency management and sheriff that's 1.295 billion dollars so the property tax revenue currently um more than covers those services it's um those services represent 86 88 of the current avalan revenue after tax reform the avalan revenue would no longer cover those services and we would have to cover those with alternate revenues the impact on the library district currently advalorm revenues in the library district 96 million dollars the estimated impact would be 21 million dollars with adjusted advalorm revenues the library district of about 75 million dollars as you can see the current operating budget for the library district is 67 million dollars so the library district would probably be able to continue to fund its ongoing operations but the thing about the library district is that historically uh the avalan revenues associated the library district have been used to replace libraries and build new libraries and as you can see there would be very little room left to be able to accumulate revenues to be able to do that in the future if the legislation were to pass we would recommend that you adopt some guiding principles associated with how we approach adjusting to that we would like to you to maintain obviously public safety and county infrastructure to the extent possible continue to value um and investment in our employees that would remain after property tax reform continue to maintain strong reserves if we can in support of a triple a credit rating part of the backup that's associated with the item that you have today is a report from s p it will highlight some of the challenges that local governments would have in the state of florida and in maintaining their ratings um we would strive for a structurally balanced budget by fiscal year 30. what that means is balancing recurring revenues with recurring expenditures so if that were to go into effect we would probably recommend and do things in such a manner that may use some existing reserves to help spread the impacts out over multiple years versus just that two-year period and then use targeted approaches and when identifying reduction opportunities we across the board doesn't really work very well in a lot of cases some of the strategies for your consideration we're not necessarily recommending any of these at this point just some just some things to think about we have some with the recommended budget that'll be coming to you in fiscal year 27 uses some of the growth dollars for certain things we could go back and take a look at some of those things and see if some of those things are still priorities personnel related moving forward we can look at compensation in our freezes we've done that in the past when we address prior property tax reform back in the fiscal year 08 to fiscal year 12 time period along with the great recession hiring freezes reductions in force potential programs to incentivize drop participants to retire early we could utilize reserves to absorb the revenue loss over as i said several years evaluate discretionary programs that the county has further reduce or eliminate nonprofit funding we would consider establishing special assessment districts potentially fire as it's one of the items today parks and other reduce service hours we would obviously have communications with our constitutional officers and other outside agencies and request their participation there would likely be a necessity to consider revenue adjustments and increases in addition to expenditure reductions be able to continue to provide the core services that we are currently providing some of those things could be the five cent fuel tax it's not currently levied increased parks fees there's the public service tax as a for for instance the city of tampa levies the public service tax i believe it to the tune of about 10 percent on utility bills we have not done that that would be a source of revenue we estimate that could be about 80 to 90 million dollars of levity at the 10 percent level we could maximize the communication services tax we're not quite at the maximum on that right now and then there could be other fees that are adjusted in other departments there's some more options you know one of those being across the board possible elimination or reduction of various county services that could include parks aging children's services again the legislation is currently written has some uncertainty as whether we can even fund some of those things without alarm revenues at this point we could defer maintenance for a period of time we could approach the city of tampa and talk about whether or not we continue to fund the cras within the county we could consider millage increases and other things as you know and other things that might come up and with that i'm available for any questions thank you mr burkey uh we're going to go into board discussion commissioner bowles thank you i appreciate you uh it's not bricky that's mr it's okay his twins in the back somewhere probably i know we're similar that that being thank you very much for that um you know i kind of foreshadowed that this was coming and asked for this not that you guys weren't working on this but i wanted to ensure that we had this in a timely fashion again kind of going hand in hand with those conversations that we've had earlier today and certainly that we've had with our state legislators that about how they're going to impact the i'm using it the the free county of hillsborough which we're not uh certainly under this because this really kind of makes me think that tallahassee's turning into washington you know that you know we're we're not able to do what we need to do for our residents here in hillsborough county that does not mean that i don't think that we could use some tax property tax relief in summary in some fashion fashion or form but this is just i think uh just too much um certainly as it relates to you know what we're looking at for our future here and uh i think we're going to have some hard decisions coming forward i did want to ask you brought it up and i saw it in here the cst the communication service tax that's one of those taxes that back in the mid 2000 aughts was used to actually fund fire station building it was helped along with the cit dollars that was there and 2008 came and then it kind of got side barred and now we are still using it to some degree but isn't that a tax that is actually essentially based on today's technology being diminished so you're asking us to increase something that's actually going to be kind of going away to some degree yes commissioner that is a source that's challenged um if we were to maximize that tax that the additional room we have left may create an additional two million dollars a year that's not a significant item yeah so i mean we're not talking this is one of those we've got we've got to consider everything this that is truly a couch you know change in the couch type of looking around for something okay correct all right well thank you very much i appreciate it we got some tough decisions to make and uh certainly hoping that we have cooler heads prevail thank you commissioner cohen thank you very much thank you commissioner bowls uh for asking for this really important report um on page eight that is where you have a bar graph it seems to me just from giving this a cursory look you have you have unincorporated and and um countywide budgets both of which devote 66 roughly of their resources to our core public safety considerations sheriff fire rescue emergency management if you cut everything if you cut parks aging children services libraries pet resources sunshine line sell the vacant property do do you still would have to to dip into that in order to make this work starting in fiscal year 29 is that correct starting in fiscal year 28 starting in fiscal year 28. okay and it just it just compounds every year as as we go forward correct in fiscal year 29 it would go up to the 250. it's a little unclear um what happens after that but there i i think it would provide some discretion to further increase the exemptions up to and including potential elimination of homestead property taxes altogether so you know uh to to piggyback on something commissioner bowls said earlier we were all preparing for some property tax relief we we we were all in the mode of thinking that there was going to be some belt tightening coming up we've been looking for some opportunities but the fact is a restructuring of this size and this scope which essentially changes the way governments are funded more drastically than probably anything that's ever come down from tallahassee this was passed literally in 24 hours with no discussion and debate and was just simply imposed on on all of us as a fait accompli before there was really any chance to analyze what the impacts would be and to me the biggest problem that this creates is the problem of uncertainty it makes it very very difficult for us to make any decisions about how we move forward in a number of areas because there's such a drastic difference between what we have now and what might occur after november these are not small changes in the way that we do business this isn't an additional twenty five thousand dollar fifty thousand dollar homestead exemption this isn't some carefully targeted program this is something that will completely upend the way that governments are funded in our state and at the very at the very minimum it caused a lot of confusion and disruption on the way to to figuring out how to cope with it and i think as you've shown it's not all going to be revenue neutral there are going to have to be things that are going to have to be considered to be raised in order to make up for some of this lost revenue it's not you can't just cut things without looking at what to increase because you get so far down into the meat and the bone of of the services that we provide that i think the public and us would find the result the the results totally unacceptable totally unacceptable and um and that's the challenge that we find ourselves in from this i was flabbergasted by this report i was flabbergasted by how difficult it's going to make it for so many municipalities and counties that are smaller than us you know the city of tampa's ad valorem receipts do not even cover police and fire they they don't they they can't even get out of that so um you know as we move forward it's i know it's an extremely difficult thing to the budget for this year is already put together uh it's a very very difficult thing to anticipate but i just want to to really uh emphasize to the public that for all of us the the biggest challenge here is the uncertainty and the the the the cloud that hangs over us of just not knowing um really very very large chunks of of where we we get our our revenue so um i'll close with that i don't think there's much else to say about it today but it's certainly going to dominate our discussions in the weeks and months to come and um we're going to have to to prepare at least to make some very difficult decisions thank you commissioner westell you're recognized thank you madam vice chair um my message is to the general public i i warned last night and as you just heard you're going to hear extreme hyperbole about the situation some pretty flamboyant bombastic points of view um you know understand that this is also from people that over the past years every incremental increase has been justified well it's just 30 more dollars per home to you but now that there's an opportunity for relief to you then it's oh my god the world's going to end so you just have to take it with an extreme grain of salt you you have to expect that these reports are going to come out like this it's it's no disrespect to the county administrator she's a nice person she's good at bonds but she is in charge of the rolled up budget every year and it's like i liken it to asking the robber baron if you would like to keep less money in the vault that they intend to raid uh it's the same thing as asking the county administrator on whether or not there's some significant cuts we could make look this is part of the constitutional republic that we live in it's going to the ballot box for the voters to decide and you will make your decision how you see fit then tallahassee will probably have to react there will probably be some over adjustments that weren't predicted that they'll have to open up other lines of revenue for and change will be good though it probably won't be perfect if you vote yes on this and it will take the state to do some course correction but at the end of the day you're going to end up with relief that at this point is boxing out first time home buyers to the age of 40 years old and also taxing fixed income senior citizens out of their homes in their twilight years forcing them onto even more government reliance that's all things that we have to avoid i believe that you should vote for tax relief but you should do your own research and take the government's opinions with a huge grain of salt and vote for your wallet on november the third thank you madam vice chair commissioner myers thank you madam vice chair i'd like to make a motion uh first i want to thank uh commissioner bowles for putting this item on there tom and your staff for giving us an excellent overview of thoughts that we can commit begin to think about if the property tax pass and my motion is if property tax passes in november for us to hold a workshop in january or february in preparation of our budget so that we would know and have the opportunity to discuss all angles prior to the budget being approved come october 1. just in the preparation can we do that bonnie hold a workshop in january or february we can certainly have a workshop in january or february january yeah that's my motion thank you commissioner going yeah i just want to say i do not think it's hyperbolic or bombastic to point out to people that there is no possible way to make this work without making major cuts in public safety expenditures or funding them through another mechanism that will cost money that comes from somewhere i think that it is also not hyperbolic or bombastic to point out that uh yes it will be on the ballot for people to decide but they should know what it is that they're actually voting on and what it could mean to our local governments if people decide they want to do it that's up to them that's that's the american way but we um we have an obligation i think to be fully transparent about the types of choices that this board is going to have to make moving forward and to to dress it up and say that it that somehow it it's you know government government can just accommodate i don't think something this significant can be accommodated without the types of cuts that are going to impact people's lives drastically and i would also close by saying that while i do think this will help a lot of existing homeowners a lot of existing homeowners if you are not an existing homeowner if you are a rental a renter if if you own commercial property there are all kinds of impacts that are you're going to feel uh above and above and beyond this that are maybe not even anticipated at this point so uh i'll just close with that but yeah i support your motion commissioner myers i would just reiterate to the public that this board voted against me on in a majority not this board passport on allowing your property taxes to be spent through act blue which is being investigated for serious fraud by spending your property taxes to go watch joe biden campaign at an naacp national conference to spend your property taxes to give a hundred thousand dollars a year to a current elected state house official through a non-government organization this organization has money to cut you're just going to have to will it into existence thank you seeing no one else in the queue um first i want to say sorry again mr fessler for getting it wrong um i um want to just close by saying i agree commissioner cohen one of the hardest challenges in this has been that for the next several months we have to make decisions on what ifs and it pushes us very much like we deal in land use you end up making decisions based on what's the best option for what might happen in the future and it puts us in a really um challenging position and so um i i do appreciate that you asked for this report because it was very enlightening and i think it will help us as we navigate the months ahead so with that we have a motion on the floor to accept the report and if this passes to um to have a workshop at the beginning of the next calendar year um by commissioner myers seconded by commissioner cohen please record your vote motion carried six to zero next item the final item this future discussion items do you have one very good then we're adjourned