Board of County Commissioners on 2025-08-19 9:00 AM

Let's get started on the August 19th, 2025 regular Board of County Commissioners meeting. Will everybody please stand for our implication? Remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Good morning. I would like to invite you all to pray with me. Heavenly Father, as we gather here today, we seek your wisdom, your clarity, and your peace. As we attend to the business of governance, we know you are with us and you are for us. Your word reminds us that the more we seek you, the more we will find you. Lead us today and always in the path of your wisdom and your peace. And I ask this in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen.

All right.

Let's get started. All right. President, I think we have Miss Katie Hayes, Executive Director, Keep Polk County Beautiful.

Good morning. I am Katie Hayes. I'm the Director of Keep Polk County Beautiful. And I'm here to present our Clean It Up to Green It Up 2024-2025 cleanup season. You guys can all see it? We're good? No? Okay. Is it there?

I can sing.

I can dance. We'll make this entertaining.

Okay.

So the first couple slides are a little full. I won't waste your time and read them. Just very quickly, this is a program introduction. Our program was established in 2011, and it is a curbside cleanup program where we pick up items that aren't generally picked up. So we're picking up your non-contractual trash like construction, remodeling, illegally dumped items, and we also host tire recycling events as well. We do select specific target areas based off of the community need, whatever you guys suggest, code enforcement. We work with the individual communities, and we pay close attention to what their needs are before we schedule these. The waste haulers in our county, FCC, GFL, Waste Management, and Scrap It, they all donate their services for these cleanup events. So they donate the curbside pickup as well as the dumpsters for tire recycling. This next slide is about how we distribute the information to the public. We do still speak at all the community meetings, and we coordinate with Polk County Sheriff's Office and code enforcement. We distribute bilingual flyers through the mail for any residents that have any open code violation cases. We send them out to elementary school students because parents still check folders. And we also send them to community associations as well as churches. And a lot of times we partner with code enforcement, and we walk throughout the community and hand deliver flyers to anyone that we can find that's out in the home. We also partner with the Polk County Sheriff's Office to send alert Polk notifications. And we still share using traditional media resources such as newspapers, radio, social media, and our website. Look at those wonderful pictures. I'm sure you see some familiar faces. Mr. Beasley, that's a good picture. So our first cleanup event this season was in October. It was the Bartow Tire Collection. Traditionally, we do partner this with a cleanup area. However, we were still cleaning up hurricane debris, so we didn't want to duplicate a service that was already being provided. So we just did a tire recycling event. And thanks to Commissioner Wilson for allowing us to use his property again for that. With this cleanup, it's held in conjunction with the Bartow Household Hazardous Waste event. And we collected 1,358 tires. The tire hauling services were donated by the City of Bartow Solid Waste and Scrap It. Our next cleanup was in December. And it's in the Inwood community. And we hosted the tire event at Lake Blue. With that, we collected 50,860 pounds of garbage curbside and 1,478 tires. And then, as you can see, the services were donated by FCC and Waste Management. That's a map of the Inwood community so that you guys can see the area that we provided for. In February, we visited Skyview, Eaton Park, Crystal Lake, and South Cumbie. And we held our tire recycling event in Lakeland in coordination with the Lakeland Household Hazardous Waste event. With that, we collected 76,040 pounds of garbage and 1,504 tires. Our services were donated by FCC and the City of Lakeland Solid Waste. And there's a map of the Skyview, Eaton Park, Crystal Lake, and South Cumbie. In March, we visited unincorporated Davenport and Loughman. And we hosted our event at the Eagle Ridge Mall. With that, we collected 111,220 pounds of garbage curbside and 1,192 tires. GFL and Waste Management donated their services. And I don't know if you guys remember, but last year when we did this, that event shut us down. We collected over 5,000 tires at that event. We had never seen an event like that before. There is a map of the communities. In April, we visited Eloise and Juanita, and we moved our tire event to the City of Eagle Lake. With that, we collected 64,160 pounds of garbage and 1,955 tires. Trash and tire hauling services were donated by GFL and Waste Management. And as you can see, people get pretty creative on how they bring us tires. We've had people bring us tires in their canoes. They use the old recycling bins and connect them to their bikes. I mean, they get pretty creative. There's a map of Eloise and Juanita. And in May, we visited Northeast Rockridge Road and Kathleen. So we haven't been in the Kathleen area to do a tire recycling event probably in about eight or nine years. So it had been a while since we had been in that area. And we wanted to focus specifically on Rockridge Road and the neighborhoods that flood off of Rockridge Road. So it was actually a very small area that we targeted. With that, we collected 86,580 pounds of trash curbside. And we collected. It was our largest event for the season, 2,625 tires. And FCC and Waste Management hauled for us on that event. And as you guys can see, the Northeast Rockridge Road, it's actually a very small area. So this was our final cleanup of the year. It was in Secret Cove. Polk County Sheriff's Office approached us following a homicide investigation out in that area. They had some concerns about the trash and the illegal dump sites that were going on in that community. So they approached us at the end of our cleanup season and asked if we could help. So we partnered with Polk County Code Enforcement and the Sheriff's Office to try and provide one additional cleanup. FCC did the hauling for that. And if you've ever been to Secret Cove, you guys all know it's one way in, one way out. It's a very, very small community. I think there are like 120 units in the community. They're duplexes. And with that, we collected 19,720 pounds of garbage. A lot of that was illegally dumped on some of the vacant properties that were out there. And with that, we collected 75 tires. And the Sheriff's Office helped us and hauled the tires to the landfill for us. So these are the totals for the 24-25 Clean It Up to Green It Up season. We collected 417,660 pounds of garbage curbside and 10,187 tires. I'm sure you guys can see the other numbers and the other totals from years before. Those tire numbers are pretty steady. They're continuing to grow. This is our proposed cleanup areas for this year. Wabash, Punxiana, Eloise, Juanita, North Cumbie, and Tenorock, Inwood, Janfill Village, Lake Gibson, and Polk City, Boggy Bottom, Florence Villa, Carefree Cove, Skyview, Eaton Park, South Cumbie, Crystal Lake, Gulfview Park, Washington Park, and the Ranchettes over in Lake Wales. And we're going to try to also squeeze in Medela as well. These are additional cleanup areas that we were able to visit with our Great American Clean Up and our other dumpster programs. So we don't just focus on the Clean It Up to Green It Up program. We actually have other programs that we run all year long. So these were other communities that we were able to provide services for. These next couple of slides, this year we had the honor of partnering with a few of your agencies and doing some out-of-the-box cleanups that we haven't done and programs. So I just wanted to bring them to you to show you them as well. We did the Highland Park cleanup where we provided dumpsters for them. Their community is very small. They don't have a lot of curbside problems, but they do have a lot of vacant lands that end up getting illegally dumped on. So with the help of the Sheriff's Office and their Weekend Work Release Program, we were able to clean up 9,080 pounds of trash that weekend. And then the Eloise CRA cleanup, which was a huge success. It was a wonderful time partnering. We had several county agencies that showed up. We had Commissioner Wilson came out. Mr. Beasley came out. We had several staff that came out to support that. We collected 52,400 pounds of trash and 269 tires just from that Eloise CRA area, which is a very, very small area, you guys. It's about 9, 10 streets. I'm really excited about this program. We did a recycling art contest in partnership with Polk County Solid Waste and Polk County Public Schools. We reached out to all the middle school art programs in the area, and we heard back from a couple of them that wanted to participate. When curbside recycling went away, the landfill wanted to promote still. If residents would like to dispose of their recycling, they can bring them to the landfill. So they approached us. We came up with a great program where we're going to be wrapping two dumpsters at the entrance of the landfill. They have been ordered. They're working on being wrapped. We're going to be doing a ribbon-cutting ceremony. It'll be great. But these are the two winners that won the recycling art contest, so they'll be larger than life on these dumpsters. We are going to be working on a couple other recycling art projects with the landfill and the school board, but we're super excited. This is the first one that we've done, and we're really proud of what the students have done. My final slide, you guys. It's a big thank you to the Board of County Commissioners, Roads and Drainage, Code Enforcement, Solid Waste. Of course, our waste hauling sponsors, Waste Management, GFL, FCC, Scrap It, the Sheriff's Office, Weekend Work Release, Environmental Crimes, Communications, the school board, City of Bartow, City of Lakeland. Without all of our amazing volunteers, without all of you guys out there, without the Weekend Work Release program, I'm just a staff of one. I can do nothing without all of you guys and all of our wonderful supporters out there that support what we do. So definitely thank you guys, thank your agencies, all of your staff are phenomenal to work with. So thank you guys.

Thank you, Katie. I'll say this right quick. You know, it's amazing what you do. This is a big county, and we have a lot of stuff that's probably where it is, shouldn't be. And you put together a great team. You know, you have a lot of great people that work with you. And you always, you know, manage to drag me into a lot of it, which I don't have a problem, which, you know, I don't see a lot of my other commissioners there, but that's okay. That's okay. I mean, I got big showers.

That's because you've been using the same picture.

I'm a little trashy. I'm a little trashy.

She's been using the same picture over four years. I've only used that. Yeah.

But thank you for what you do, and we definitely appreciate it, and the people of this county do also.

Thank you.

Okay, I just have a question, and this goes to something you and I talked about. Maybe we all discussed it Friday. Do you have green boxes around the county? No, you're just going to put two at the entrance to the landfill, right?

Yes, but a solid waste is, yes.

And then, okay, and then what we're going to look at doing that, or are we going to do that up in the northeast? We're going to talk to the board about what it would take, where one might be sited,

the logistics to support one of those facilities, some of the potential land use issues that might come, the costs associated with that. So we're going to have a detailed discussion a week from Friday about does the board want to pursue that option, at least at one location.

And that would be like going back to when I was growing up here, we had green boxes all over the county. You just kind of pull up, throw your crap out, and drive away.

The new generation of those convenience sites is more of a high-tech, a secure environment, a staffed environment, and for us to recoup our cost. It is their unique facilities in and of themselves. We know of them. You're right, Commissioner Braswell. 25 years ago, we used to have convenience centers all over the county, and we got out of that business when we formalized a way to implement residential curbside collection. And so there was no longer a need for those types of things when we formally implemented collection. But there is a legal dumping going on, but we want to share with the board some statistics about what we're seeing, where we're seeing it at, and the board will have an interesting dialogue about whether to move forward with those types of facilities.

We're not trying to take your business away. I think there's enough for everybody out there, but you do a great job.

No worries. I'm here to support whatever you guys choose to do and whatever you guys move towards doing. We will completely support and try to spread your message the best that we can.

Commissioner Santiago.

Katie, thank you so much. You and your team and everybody else, you do an outstanding job with the collection. I'm still amazed at the number of tires that you collect. I mean, it just flaws me to know that so many tires are out there and you're collecting them. For clarification, when you go to one of these sites, I imagine that they bring the tires to a specific site, and that's how you collect them. But as far as garbage is concerned, do you just go around the area and collect the garbage that you see outside on the curb, or do they have to bring it to a specific area or both?

No. So they'll receive notice of the event, and they just have to get it to the curb. So wherever they place their garbage normally, we'll come around and we'll pick it up. And we also pick up not just their trash, but if there's illegal dumping and it's in that right-of-way area, or if it's along the curb, we pick up those illegal dump sites as well. So we're not just picking up from the residents that are paying for garbage service. We are picking up from every property within those cleanup areas if we're able to reach where the garbage is.

Well, I appreciate that very much. And like Commissioner Braswell said, we have a huge problem with illegal dumping. So thank you for doing that. I wish we could do it even more so because it's just become such a big issue in Polk County. But what you do, we really appreciate it. So thank you, Katie.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Thank you, Katie. Appreciate everything that you do. All right. I think we have some employee recognitions.

Good morning, Commissioners, staff, and visitors. I'm Caitlin Hoverkamp, Public and Media Relations Officer for Polk County Government. Today we are recognizing two employees for their service to Polk County. I'd like to invite the employees to come to the front as their names are called, and then if the honorees will remain at the front while the commission return to the dais behind them, we'll take a group photo at the end. Brenda Connelly has worked for Polk County Solid Waste for 25 years as a customer care specialist for the division. Brenda is a member of First Born Church of the Living God in Mulberry. In her spare time, she enjoys reading, gardening, decorating, traveling, and spending time with her two beautiful children, her son Joe, her daughter Jasmine, and her four beautiful grandchildren. Brenda has no immediate plans to retire at this time, but looks forward to continuing to serve the residents and visitors of Polk County. Crystal Azarella has worked for Polk County Utilities for 30 years. She joined the division as an assistant permit and sampling coordinator and has held the positions of utilities compliance coordinator, environmental specialist 2, compliance project supervisor, and technical project supervisor before being promoted to her current role as the division's environmental affairs manager. Crystal obtained her bachelor's degree in botany environmental science from the University of South Florida. She is a certified Class C industrial pre-treatment inspector and a graduate of the county's 2018 Certified Public Manager program. In 2022, Crystal was introduced to the Big Brothers Big Sisters program through her position with the county and became a big sister. Because of the positive experience she had, Crystal continues participating in the program with her little sister, who is part of the Big Futures program. In her spare time, Crystal enjoys reading, historical fiction, and mystery novels, attending concerts, and singing karaoke at home. She also enjoys spending time with her husband Michael and their five sons, Christopher, Kiefer, who also works in IT for our county, Christian, Kyle, and Brandon. After retiring, she looks forward to possibly writing her own novel.

Not good, right?

All right. At this time, we have public comments, and we have Mr. Rankin lined up to speak. Do we have any other people that signed up?

That is the only one for the agenda items. We do have two people to speak for a public hearing, and we have three comments, four general comments.

Okay. Please state your name and address, and you've got three minutes, Mr. Rankin.

Thank you. David Dunn-Rankin. I'm with the Winter Haven Sun, the Four Corner Sun newspaper, and the exciting new Leesburg Sun newspaper. I'm here to talk about public notices. We are your partner in public notices and your public website partner, and when we started on this journey about a year ago, there was a big bucket of public notices. We thought that we could save the county money because staff could go into the website and enter them electronically, and there would be no charge. That hasn't always turned out to be that way because when they ask for our help and we do work for it, then we charge. So there's actually a fair amount of work where we're still charging, and the county's not saving money. And this proposal in front of you today would basically say to the staff and us, hey, no more help doing that work. They're going to have to do this on their own on the website, and that's fine by us. I wholly endorse that, and I think it's great because it'll save the taxpayers money. And I would just mention that I really appreciate this county manager and the county attorney being so professional and responsive to me and helping me figure this out. There's a second bucket which we would suggest to you that this proposal affects, which is there's a category that is what I would call redevelopment and rezoning. All those public notices are paid for by the applicant. It costs the county nothing. It's all a pass-through. And that gets published in the paper along with all the other things that development is required to do to give notice. If you pass this ordinance the way it's written, it will direct staff to say, do not publish those in the paper anymore. Only publish those on the county website. I would just suggest to you that that category of public notice is the kind of notice where the red shirts show up and the blue shirts show up. It's some of the most important and sometimes contentious stuff, and it deserves as much public notice as possible. And I would encourage you to break this proposal in half so that the things that are related to redevelopment and rezoning get as much public notice as possible, as much transparency as possible, and the things which we agree 100% with the staff, we'd like to see them do that electronically. And this vote would mandate staff to do that and save taxpayers' money we're 100% in favor of. It's just that the rezoning doesn't actually save taxpayers' money and gives less transparency. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Randy, you want to say something about that?

I think I would agree as far as there are a couple buckets. One is the first bucket is notices for, like, ordinances and several other items that we are currently publishing in the newspaper and online, and it's not required to be published in the newspaper. So that's the one bucket he's talking about. That's the one that deals with ordinances. I think that's originally what I had came to the board, and the board said, you know, get rid of all the requirements of publishing online or in the newspaper if it's not required. And that would include that second bucket, which is some land development cases, stuff that are currently being published in the newspaper that are not required by statute to be published. So currently the resolution, if the board adopts it, would now say that if it's not required by statute to be published, published in the newspaper, it can be published online only. So that is a decision of the board if we want to remove that second bucket if the board feels necessary. And the third bucket, there is the ones that are required by statute to be published online, are published in the newspaper. And on those, based on our agreement, we're not being charged for by the Sun. So we will continue, of course, by statute to publish those in the newspaper. We're in. Yes.

I was like.

Go ahead. Go ahead, Mike. Go ahead.

I was going to ask, are we able to pull that out and table that until our next agenda briefing for further discussion?

The reason, if you recall, the reason why I first brought this forward is because we have on the consent agenda sent public hearings for the vessel exclusion zones and stuff, and there's a pushback. If we don't do it correctly in the newspaper, then someone could challenge it. So we wanted that because it was being pushed quickly trying to take care of that issue. We wanted the flexibility to make changes as we went through that process and have the shortest required notice that's required. But because when newspapers have deadlines and you have to meet their deadlines to get something published, and that usually pushes everything back at least one board meeting because of that requirement. So that was the reason why I originally brought it to you all. If the board wishes, I would suggest if you want to discuss the land use ones, we could pull the item, and I can amend the ordinance that basically still requires the publication for land use items and allow everything else to be published online only, and then we can make a determination on the land development ones. Or the board can adopt it, and then we can look at it, and if you still want to require it, you can bring it back and say, well, we want to go ahead and reestablish the requirement to publish in the newspaper for those items. Those are your options.

I think from what I had understood from our agenda briefing is from the swim zone ordinance was our primary goal to be able to expedite that being modified, which by not having it published in the newspaper helps us by several weeks, potentially maybe two board meetings at most. So if there's a way in which we are to tackle just that topic, then I would support that. But to holistically change everything, I think it probably warrants more discussion. So I would, if there's a way to just help us out on the ordinance side for the boating exclusion zones and then allow us more conversation in time future, I think it's probably a better way to approach it.

I would agree with that because if we don't do it that way, Channel 8 and everybody else is going to say we're trying to hide these development issues, which we're not. And I know, Michael, part of the reason he's a county commissioner was because he felt some information about a development was being hidden from him. So the less of that we can do, the better off we are.

Correct.

So, yeah, go ahead, Randy.

So what I'll do, we'll pull that item. And then under my section, I will ask for board's approval to adopt a resolution that allows the board, repeals the requirement, or removes the requirement that notices for ordinances, non-land-use ordinances, to be allowed to be published online. So we'll pull it, and then when it gets to the county attorney, I'll ask for that permission, if that works for the board. And then we can workshop it, do a work session. Y'all can give me further direction at that point.

Okay, I like that. So just for saying it on record, everybody's good with that, right? Okay. All right. All right. Time to approve a consent agenda.

So before we go, let me find that item real quick.

R-37.

So R-37. So the motion would be to approve the consent agenda by removing R-37, and I believe that would be a proper motion.

So moved. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. All right. All right. At this time, we're going to recess as the Board of County Commissioners and convene as the Eloise Community Redevelopment Agency. We just voted on it. Where were you? I don't know.

Now what we do? I got a perfect consent agenda items for Eloise. Okay. C-R-A. Yes. Yes, sir.

Move to approve. Second.

Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carries. At this time, we are going to adjourn Eloise CRA, and we're going to convene as Hardin Parkway CRA.

Move to approve consent agenda.

Second.

Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor?

Aye. I do have some discussion on that. But I just want to point out, again, for public information, that by doing this, we are looking at moving up the sunset of this CRA by quite a few years. So I think when we're looking at what are we doing with the funds and the best for the county, that it's important to see that that has taken place and that that will be terminating sooner rather than later. All right.

All right. Anyone else?

All right.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. At this time, I will adjourn the Hardin Parkway CRA and reconvene as the Board of Polk County Commissioner. All right. Bill, are you going to take this one?

Yes, sir.

No. Oh, excuse me. I'm sorry. I'm going to jump right over. Stay with me. I apologize. Yes, you did.

I did. Yeah.

Thank you. Good morning. Thank you. We have for you to approve and ratify payroll checks number 04112 through 04137, the amount of $39,561.30. We have 2,967 direct deposits and the amount of $4,436,687.19, dated August 8, 2025. We have wire and electronic funds transfers of $16,637,121.20, dated August 5th through August 18th of 2025, and invoice checks 488424 through 489301, totaling $14,968,669.38, dated August 5th through August 18th of 2025 for you to approve and ratify, please.

Move for approval. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

We also request the approval of your minutes of your regular board meeting that was held on August the 5th of 2025, please.

Motion for approval.

Thank you. We've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Anything else?

Yes, sir. Last week, I had the opportunity to attend the United Way kickoff, which was last Thursday here in Bartow. It was a great event, but at the event, they always recognize and give awards for the previous year's campaign, and I wanted to congratulate the Board of County Commissioners and David Palmer. I think I saw him in the room for their achievement award last year. So, congratulations to the Board in supporting United Way. He put together a great campaign. I understand Mr. Beasley was a key component of being a participant in the various fundraising events.

We are ramping up for this year's event as well.

What did you do this time? Last time, I remember you were in a boxing suit.

I birthed the calf from a...

Okay, let's move on. Okay, good job, Bill.

But congratulations. It was great support for United Way. Thank you.

All right. Bill? Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board, members of the audience. Item E on the agenda is really a good news item. Let me add some context to that. About five months ago, five and a half months ago, you recall Dr. Jackson, who was the head of the Polk County Health Department, retired, and at that time, she introduced Aaron Kessler as the interim assignment coming from Lake County to do some part-time assignment here in Polk County as well as his full-time assignments in Lake County. Well, I'd like to think in the last five months, Polk County has worn off on Aaron, and I wanted Commander Aaron Otis, who is with the Department of Health. He's specifically the Deputy Secretary of County Health Systems in Tallahassee. I wanted Commander Otis to talk a little bit about what the state's asking of the county and the news the state wants to share with the county. So, Commander, please.

Thank you. Just to clarify, I'm the Assistant Deputy Secretary. My boss is the Deputy Secretary, so I'm here representing him today as well as our State Surgeon General, Dr. Latipo. So, we're seeking concurrence on Aaron to be your next health officer here in Polk County, and some of our reasons are pretty basic, talking with the Surgeon General. Aaron brings 18 years of health officer experience in the state of Florida to the table, which is unique and a lot, as well as more than 25 years of public health experience. But for Mark, who is my boss and myself, the reason we're excited about this is Aaron is one of our most dependable health officers, so we were excited when he said he was considering this appointment. As well as, you know, we use Aaron quite a bit on looking at strategic things for the future of public health in the state of Florida. So, he is one of our unique and great health officers, and so we're excited to bring him here today for your concurrence as your next health officer at Polk County, and I'm going to let him have a little comments as well.

Commander, just a quick notice. You can't take him. You can't take him for special assignments anymore.

So, fair, fair. It's usually phone calls about, hey, we're thinking about this. What do you think? So, we're not taking him anywhere.

Good morning, commissioners, and good to see you all again. As Mr. Beasley said, I've got a chance to see you all about five months ago, and I've been working here as your interim health officer for the last five months, and it's been a really great experience. Really enjoyed the team, so much so that I want to be your permanent health officer. And it's been a great opportunity to work with the community partners here, and Polk has some great things going for it. It is one of the fastest growing counties in the United States. It's strategically placed right between Tampa and Orlando. Such a great place for families and businesses to grow, and for the health department, too. So, definitely enjoyed working with the community partners here, the county, government, human services, emergency management, working with the county health insurance plan. It's been a great opportunity working with the school district and the sealant program and our school health. And another group that's been great to work with, too, is Polk Vision, where leaders from across the county gather together to look at problems and solve them, and also to look at opportunities to grow from. So, these unique opportunities in Polk make it such a great place, and I'm excited to be here today. I come to you with 26 years of public health experience. I've been the health officer for Lake County. I was the health officer before that in Gadsden County. And then I've been intern in Brevard, Volusia, Osceola, and Citrus. So, I hope to bring that experience, and that experience mixed with the opportunities that exist here, I think is a great opportunity to grow and to promote public health in Polk County. And I'm honored by the letter from Dr. Latipo, and I'm looking forward to working with y'all, and I'm hopeful for your concurrence. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do need a motion to concur with the appointment of Erin Kessler as the administrator of the Department of Health in Polk County.

We've got a motion and a second. Any further?

I have a question. I just want to make sure, when you came before the last time, you were in room here, and you also served Lake County.

Yes.

Okay. So, I want to make sure you're now permanently here and not being shared by Lake County.

Yes. Actually, my position is already being advertised as an anticipated vacancy for Lake County. So, I will be Polks.

Polks. I like that. All right. Thank you.

Anyone else? All right. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carries. Hey, look forward to working with you, and we will do anything that we can to help you, and congratulations.

Congratulations.

Thank you very much. Welcome to Polk. Thank you. You notice I said Polk.

Yes.

No help. Okay. All right. Randy, you got anything?

Yes, Mr. Chair. I'm in response to the board pulling item R-37 from the consent agenda. I'm on request of the board to adopt a resolution amending resolution 24-125 to remove the requirement to publish in the newspaper for non-land use notices when not required by statute.

I got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Nothing further. Yes, sir.

And can Randy explain Winterset and what's going on there? Yes. There's a lot of questions.

All right. Randy, can you do that for us?

So on the consent agenda, y'all did approve a set in a public hearing to adopt ordinances to create exclusion areas for, like Winterset, Lake Ariana, and Lake Clinch. As the board is familiar with, you adopted on May 20th, you adopted an ordinance amending the Waterway Protection Ordinance in which the county created vessel exclusion areas and adopted law rules that are required under the vessel exclusion areas. But you, and then you authorized to create the actual boundaries of the exclusion areas by resolution, which we felt was an efficient way to create these exclusion areas. We sent that ordinance to FWC. It was our understanding at that time when we sent it to FWC that they were okay with the ordinance. Then, as part of the process, the Sheriff's Office has to apply to, has to submit an application for the markers that they placed in the legs to outline the boundaries. When the Sheriff's Office submitted those, that application, FWC took the position that they could now review our ordinances, our ordinance again. And in that review, they now found, they found several areas that they had concerns with them, some dating back when the ordinance was first put in place over 20 years ago. The other concern was that with the exemption for those individuals accessing their docs, and then they took a position that the actual boundaries could not be created by resolution, had to be created by ordinance under the statute. We disagreed with many of those positions. They have now, the only concern that they have is that the boundaries have to be created by ordinance. So, that's what I have placed on the consent item to set that public hearing so we can actually create the boundaries by ordinance. Although we disagree with the interpretation of FWC, in order to move this along, we're doing that process to, so they will go ahead and improve our markers for the Sheriff's Office.

Well, you answered, so we'll go through this process, send it back up to them. The Sheriff will have to reapply for the markers.

You know, my understanding, they will go ahead and work on the application that's in front of them now. My understanding, once we adopt this, they are okay with everything, and they should approve the application pretty quickly after that.

And then, what's the deal on the markers? Are they going ahead and making those?

Yes, my understanding, Sheriff's Office already has them ordered, ready to go, has a vendor to take care of them. So, once we own September 2nd, I expect that FWC will approve this. We've been working with them very closely. They understand the issues and concerns that the county has, and I would expect it to be done, turned around pretty quickly.

Okay.

But I do want, we did send it to them. They originally told us they were okay with it, and then when the application for the markers came through, that's when they gave us these issues. But we have worked through them, and the only remaining concern they have is about establishing the boundaries by ordinance.

Okay.

All right.

Anyone else got anything?

I was just going to say, with respect to the public utilizing the beautiful resources and assets that we have throughout the county, we're going through this process because there's a few that can make good choices. And if you're going out on a boat, enjoy the time with your family, enjoy the environment, you're going to go and horseplay and be violent. There's no place for that at all in the county. And so this is our way to reaffirm our stance to keep the county safe and also to keep our residents, those that want to enjoy it peacefully, can do so. And so I appreciate your work, Randy, in getting this through and look forward to having those buoys and markers up so hopefully we don't have a viral video of people being foolish out on the lakes.

Again, and I would just like to say, you know, there's been some question about the public being limited in their access once this goes through. So everyone currently accesses these areas via boat that will, they can still, you know, boat in. It's just we are going to ensure that we have safety for our swimmers and families, that we are not going to have people who make bad choices and then get into a boat that could possibly go into a swim area. So I think, you know, when we look at the safety aspect of this, this has been greatly needed for many areas in our county. And I want to thank, you know, the attorney and also the sheriff for pushing this through to make sure that this can happen.

All right. Anyone else? Okay.

Seeing none, Mr. Beasley. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board, members of our viewing audience. The manager's office will have three items for board consideration this morning. Item number G1 is to request the board to approve a consultant services authorization with CONSOR engineers to provide construction, engineering, and inspection services in connection with the North Galloway Road and West 10th Street Intersection Improvements Project. This will be a one-time professional services expense not to exceed $446,183.88. Construction bid number 25494 in connection with the North Galloway and West 10th Street Intersection Improvements Project has been publicly advertised with bids expected in late August. In anticipation of that contract, county staff has completed negotiations with the consultant to provide construction, engineering, and inspection services to support this project. The estimated duration of the consultant services is nine months. Under the consultant services authorization, CONSOR, the consultant will provide Polk County with construction, engineering, and inspection services to monitor all planned construction improvements. Funding for these planned Northwest Lakeland Roadway improvements is included and budgeted and available in the Transportation Trust Fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, I think in keeping with the board's commitment to incremental roadway improvements across all of Polk County, I would request the board approve the proposed consultant services authorization number 22084-03 with CONSOR engineers at a cost not to exceed $446,183.88, all of which is in connection with North Galloway Road at 10th Street Intersection Improvements Project.

Second.

I motion and second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

Mr. Chair, members of the board, item number G2 is to request the board to approve two specific agreements with the Data Mark Technologies Company as follows. Number one agreement to provide technical software implementation services and annual support services for E911 GIS data management at a five-year cost not to exceed $381,731, and the second agreement is to provide a cloud-based solution to validate, edit, and provide GIS data following next-generation 911 standards and industry best practices at a five-year cost not to exceed $438,972. For the past two and a half years, Polk County has been a part of a nine-member county central region for next-generation 911 working group whose focus is to communicate and coordinate on next-generation 911-related matters and encourage collaboration between the public safety answering points and the GIS authorities in the development, maintenance, and sharing of critical GIS data needed to support the next-generation 911 services across the region and the state of Florida. Through a sole-source solicitation and technical evaluation, the Data Mark Technologies Company was selected by the Region 4 authorities with the objective to assess, develop, and correct existing 911 data sets for conformance with the next-generation 911 standards and provide a cloud-based solution to validate, edit, and promulgate public safety GIS data following next-generation 911 standards and GIS industry practices. The Technical Services Agreement with Data Mark Technologies provides for coordination and facilitation of workshops with Polk County Emergency Management's E-911 staff, Polk's four public safety answering points, and neighboring counties to assess, develop, and correct national emergency number association required, next-generation 911 boundary layers, and Polk County's E-911 GIS data sets for conformance with the next-generation 911 GIS data modeling. One-time implementation services cost not to exceed $264,425, and the five-year total annual support cost not to exceed $117,306 is associated with that technical service agreement. The second agreement, the software-as-a-service cloud-based agreement, will validate, edit, and promulgate public safety GIS data in conformance with next-generation 911 standards and GIS industry best practices, and will stipulate a one-time implementation cost not to exceed $7,000, and a five-year total annual support cost not to exceed $431,972. Funding for these 911 technology investments is budgeted in the Emergency Management E-911 fund for the upcoming fiscal year and will be budgeted in subsequent fiscal years consistent with the terms of the agreements. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, I think consistent with the board's priority commitments to public safety, inclusive of emergency communication systems and technology, I would request the board to approve two agreements with the Data Mark Technologies Company to reflect a five-year agreement to provide technical software implementation services, including annual support services for related E-911 GIS data management at a total cost not to exceed $381,731, and a second agreement, five-year agreement, to provide cloud-based solution to validate, edit, and provide GIS data following next-generation 911 standards and industry best practices, also inclusive of annual support services at a cost not to exceed $438,972. Board action today for both agreements will not exceed $820,703 over the five-year term proposed.

Move to approve agenda item G-2.

A motion to approve and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor?

Aye. Opposed? Motion to be. Final item, Mr. Chair, members of the board, item number G-3 is to request the board approve the Florida Department of Environmental Protection grant agreement number WRP-15 in partnership with Polk County for the restoration and creation of wetlands along Lake Hamilton and the Peace Creek Canal. This grant agreement stipulates receipt of state revenues totaling $850,000 contingent upon Polk's matching contribution totaling $850,000. Lake Hamilton is a key water body within the Peace River watershed as waters flow from Lake Hamilton into the north branch of the Peace Creek Canal and subsequently into the Peace River. Annually, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection evaluates water bodies that are not meeting water quality standards. In 2020, the FDEP identified Lake Hamilton and Middle Lake Hamilton as impaired water bodies. Water quality in these lakes is decreasing to the extent that it warrants the state to develop total maximum daily load pollutant limitations. Lake Hamilton is considered an impaired water body for chlorophyll, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus. In lieu of the Lake Hamilton chain of lakes being assigned total maximum daily load limitations, an alternative restoration plan allows for corrective actions to address excessive nutrient loading within the water bodies. In 2021, the Lake Hamilton chain of lakes pollutant reduction feasibility study was approved by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. A part of that plan is to implement restoration projects to decrease excessive nutrients getting into the water bodies. The county has worked with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in the past to conserve and manage the lands that have valuable water quality conservation and recreational components. To continue the successful relationship and partnership, Polk County did apply and has been granted $850,000 in support of those initiatives. This grant is to restore wetland habitat and improve water quality within the Peace Creek hydrologic basin by expanding on-site wetlands and constructing treatment wetlands to act as water quality improvement sites along the northwest side of Lake Hamilton. The project will divert excess surface water from the Peace Creek Canal to a Polk County owned parcel, restoring the hydrology of previously disturbed areas. Regrading and revegetating the land will restore historic wetlands and expand those wetland footprints with created wetlands to achieve maximum benefits of water quality treatment and stormwater from the surrounding areas. The funding for this project will cover phase one engineering and construction costs for the Lake Hamilton Water Quality Improvements Project. The project's main purpose again is to restore the historic wetlands and the creation of new wetlands to improve water quality. Once the county completes the proposed water quality improvements and treatment projects, appropriate passive outdoor recreational opportunities will exist for the public. This project comes to the board via a formal endorsement from the county's stormwater technical advisory committee. The terms of this agreement require that both the FDEP and the county provide a matching $850,000 for a total phase one project cost not to exceed $1,700,000. County funds are budgeted in the Parks and Natural Resources five-year community investment program within the special revenue grant fund, and the county's matching funds will be provided from the stormwater MSTU fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, I think consistent again with the board's commitment to environmental preservation and related water quality initiatives, I would request that the board approve the proposed Florida Department of Environmental Protection grant agreement in partnership with Polk County for the restoration and creation of wetlands along Lake Hamilton and the Peace Creek Canal with matching funds as stipulated to reflect a total project fund not to exceed $1,700,000.

Move for approval.

Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. That's it, Mr. Chair. All right. Commissioner Troutman, got anything? Nothing. All right. Commissioner Braswell?

Yes, I move to reappoint B. Hancock as a member of seat for the Polk County Historical Commission for the three-year term October 1, 2025 through September 30, 2028.

Need a second? There we go. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. That's all I have. All right. Commissioner Santiago?

Yes, I move to appoint Cindy Jan Tommaso as member of the Polk County Planning Commission. For the three-year term, October 1, 2025 to September 30, 2028.

Second. All right. We've got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed?

And I do want to say I think Ms. Jan Tommaso is here today, so thank you for your service to the county. Appreciate that. And I have nothing else. All right. Commissioner Scott?

Yes, sir. I'd like to move to appoint Larry Thompson to replace Jenna Sutton on the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee.

Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

And I'd also like to move to reappoint Stacey Campbell Dominick as a member of the Citizens' Health Care Oversight Committee representing workforce for the four-year term, October 1, 2025, through September 30, 2029.

Second.

Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. I have one. Mr. Brouswell is going to do it.

Oh, I'm sorry. I move to reappoint Denise Bode as a member of C3 of the Polk County Historical Commission for the three-year term, October 1, 2025, through September 30, 2028.

Second.

Got a motion and a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carries. All right. Moving along. Expedited hearings.

Yes, Mr. Chair. Before we do the expedited hearings, I will go over the public hearing general procedures. We ask that you please turn off your cell phones or other devices that may distract from the public hearing. Please adjust the microphone and state your full name and address for the record before you begin speaking on the topic. Individuals speaking during the public comment section of a matter will be strictly limited to three minutes. The board is experiencing these matters and able to discern what is legally relevant to an issue and what is not. Information that is relevant or repetitive only serves to frustrate and not necessarily prolong the day's business. The commission expects civility at all times during all public hearings. Speaking, I'll turn and shout out from the audience. This record sounds or utterances while another speaking are unacceptable and you'll be asked to leave the chambers for the remainder of the day. If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the board with respect to any matter considered here today, you will need a record of proceedings. And for such purpose, you may need to ensure that verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes a testimony, evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, which you must gather at your own expense. Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak and present testimony today must be sworn in and all testimony given during public hearings shall be deemed to be sworn. At this time, if you're going to address the commission or speak on any case today, please stand, raise your right hand, and answer out loud to the following question. Do you swear or affirm the testimony or evidence you provide to the commission today is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Mr. Chair, at this time, I'll go over the expedited hearing procedures. Expedited hearings are held pursuant to resolution number 2022-089. Expedited hearings are used when no opposition was present at the planning commission hearing. The applicant agrees to the expedited hearing, and the recommendation of the development review committee is for approval. Expedited procedures are the following. After staff briefly introduces a case, the hearing will be open for public comment. If anyone speaks during public comment, the applicant will be given the opportunity to respond. After public comment, the board will consider the land use case. At any time, full presentation from staff can be requested from a commissioner, the applicant, or a member of the public. All documents attached to the agenda item are deemed part of the record of the land use case. Unless removed from the list of experts by motion of the board, all individuals on the list of experts attached to the agenda item are deemed experts for the purpose of the land use case. At this time, I'll turn it over to Mr. Ziskell to present the expedited hearings.

Thank you, Mr. Mink. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, members of the audience. My name is Ben Ziskell. I'm the land development director. There are four items on today's expedited public hearing agenda. Item number N1 is an expedited public hearing for case LDC-PAL 2024-19, Minute Maid Ramp Road 1 CPA to consider a future land use designation change from residential high to tourism commercial center on 3.2 acres of a 13.47-acre parcel. The subject site is shown in a small L-shaped box on the screen. To the east of the site is existing tourism commercial center that faces U.S. 27. To the west and including our subject site is residential high. The request is to simply shift the tourism commercial center line to the west to facilitate non-residential development on this portion of U.S. 27 frontage. This item did appear before the planning commission and received a unanimous recommendation for approval. And as a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment, this was transmitted to the Department of Commerce. We received no comments. Today is the adoption hearing, and staff recommends adoption. All right.

Got any questions for you? All right. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. And we don't have anyone signed up for it, correct? No, I'd already... Thank you for reminding me of that. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the board for a motion. Motion for approval. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

Mr. Chairman, item N2 and N3 are companion items. Item N2 is an expedited public hearing for case LDC-PAS 2025-8, Lake Daisy CPA, to consider the future land use designation change from recreation open space to residential low on 3.9 acres. The subject site is the southeast shore of Lake Daisy, and when the comprehensive plan was adopted in 1991, this entire shoreline was designated as recreation and open space. However, it is a part of a residential community, and the land is owned privately by the individual homeowners. So this really amounts to a cleanup of a mapping error. The request is to change that designation from recreation open space to residential low. This will also put it in compliance with the land development code for the remainder of these residential parcels, so they'll have one land use on their parcel. This did appear before the Planning Commission, received unanimous recommendation for approval. As a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment, there is only one hearing, and that is today's adoption hearing, and staff recommends adoption.

Any questions? All right, ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the board for a motion.

Motion for approval?

Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

Mr. Chairman, item number N3 is the companion item, Expedited Public Hearing Case LDCD 2025-2 Lake Daisy Subdistrict to consider a change to the subdistrict of Residential Low RL1 to Residential Low RL4 on 3.9 acres. Again, it is the same subject piece of land that was part of N2. By code or by the comprehensive plan, when we change to a Residential Low, the designation defaults to RL1. The request is to change the subdistrict from RL1 to RL4 to match the existing residential properties. This item also appeared before the Planning Commission and received a unanimous recommendation of approval, and this is the adoption hearing, and staff also recommends approval.

Any further discussion? Any questions? All right, ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and bring it back to the board.

Second.

Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

And item number N4 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCD 2025-1 Stewart property subdistrict change to consider the change of a subdistrict from Residential Low RL1 to Residential Low RL4 on approximately 178 acres in the urban growth area. You may recall several months ago there was a land use change request on this portion of land that is south of Thornhill to the west of Spirit Lake Road, and you see that the property is bifurcated by the proposed Central Polk Parkway extension that's currently under construction. The request from the land use change was to change from Agricultural Residential Rural to Residential Low and a portion of Residential Medium. This board approved a change to Residential Low RL1 on the balance of the entire property. The request today is to change the subdistrict from RL1 to RL4 on the eastern portion of the property that is between the Central Polk Parkway extension and Spirit Lake Road. This did appear before the Planning Commission and received a recommendation for approval with a 4-3 vote, and this is the adoption hearing, and staff is recommending adoption.

All right.

All right, I've got some questions. Go ahead, Mike.

Yeah, just can you bring up the map, Mr. Ziskel, of what it was originally when we had the ARR that was on there? Do you have that? We can pull it up just before our transmittal.

Well, while he's doing that, Ben, I've got a question. Does this property, but right up to the east, is where they're going to build that church? It's a big, or are there houses in between there? Do you know?

Right. I think the church is further down the road, on Thornhill, closer to Spirit Lake.

Okay. So it's this property, some houses, and then the church property? Yeah. I think the church is down a ways, yeah.

Mr. Chair, so while you're looking, I'll ask another question. And so this is a property we all agreed on to change it to R, or was it? RL1. RL1. RL1. And now they want to change a portion of that RL1 to RL4?

Correct.

Is there, what's the reason that it didn't come up before?

Well, as, you want to take it in? Very similar to the item that we just had on Lake Daisy, when the land use is changed, the comp plan defaults to RL1. So the change from ARR to residential low automatically defaults to RL1, and then a subsequent sub-district change is required to change it to RL4.

But they're only requesting one side of that of the property for RL4. So I don't, why not all of it, or just all of it stay at RL1?

So the difference there is the lot size and the density they can obtain. The RL1 will limit them to 40,000 square foot lots, so just shy of one acre. Going to RL4 will allow more of the traditional quarter acre or smaller lot sizes. So the intent is to develop the east side with smaller lots and leave the west side at the one acre lots.

I know previously we had opposition for the, some adjacent homeowners to the west. They had concerns with the abutting land use being at a higher density. So that's where, I think the board's decision then was RL1 across of it. I know initially they were asking for that RM by the parkway on the east side. But in looking at this, when I looked at other maps, kind of at a further out view, it does appear that for the most part, RL1 dominates this area, correct, with respect to adjacent? I know the city of Artuba South, and we have an institutional to that. But while looking at the staff report, it appears that from a compatibility standpoint, the surrounding properties are predominantly RL1, not a RL4 or an RM, correct?

I would say the answer to that depends on how far you draw the radius. Certainly directly adjacent is RL1, which you can see the light yellow. As we zoom out, the closer we get to Spirit Lake Road, and you can even see the upper corner here that shows some RL2, there is some higher density residential as we move to the east. So that is part of the request, is the compatibility from a radius standpoint and future growth. The east side is certainly closer to those smaller lots and the higher density, where the west side is predominantly adjacent to the RL1.

Because how far to the east do we have to go before we hit RM or RL4? When I was looking at an aerial, it didn't look like too much was around that area.

Again, Mr. Ziskell, so because we have a default mechanism, is...

That's okay. I've done some preliminary work, so I'm okay. I just, for the board's information, I at least want them to be understanding of kind of what I was looking at.

We don't have that specific map, but if we can see the aerial tries to show that. You can see on the west side here, clearly more open space, less dense. As we look towards the east, neighborhoods that exist in that higher density neighborhood subdivision down to the southeast, you can see higher density as we move to the east towards that intersection. Right.

The thing that made it easier for me to understand that it's okay to separate them is the fact there's going to be a mountain between them, a major highway, and I doubt if one side will even be able to see the other side. It's like they're two completely different communities.

All right. Anyone else? Any more questions? All right. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address. Do we have anybody else that signed up for this? I've got two. Okay. All right. I have a Mr. Harrison.

My name is Mike Harrison. I live at 1871 Beth Lane. Last, not the last hearing, but the one before that in front of the commission, Ms. Troutman brought up a resolution to the stewards and their attorney. They were trying to go both ways on each side of the property, east and west, and it was multi-story. So at that time, she come up with a resolution if they would do away with the multi-story and it would be approved to as it is right now. Now we get here and they want to bring back the multi-story, what I understand. If I'm corrected, tell me now. But the multi-story, the other side is four acres per acre. This one, I understand you want to get smaller lots. And is the multi-story going to be brought back? Ben, can you answer that?

The request is for residential low, which would give the smaller quarter-acre lots. A single-family home could certainly be built as two stories. The request is not for residential medium or apartments or townhomes that would be more than two stories. But to say that a single-family home would only be one story, we can have two-story homes in any of our residential districts.

Well, Ben, maybe to help them clarify, too, from a ratcheting perspective or a stepwise movement, with us going from an RL1 to now a request for an RL4, what would be the future path? If they look at this in further development patterns or suggestions, from RL4, what's the next step? Because I think that's probably as concerned as we thought at last meeting, okay, we have this as RL1. That's kind of a meet in the middle. The board was okay with it. We're all good with it. We didn't want the RM because of the higher density and the multi-story for compatibility reasons. But now we're looking at considering an RL4, which is diverting from what we all unified and said, okay, we approved last time. So if we were to go RL4 this time, then what's next is probably to his point.

So the RL4 development standards would be a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. It would be a side yard setback of 7 feet and a rear yard of 10 feet. By approving this today, that's what they'd be entitled to. So any additional deviation would have to come in the form of either a variance or a plan development to deviate from those standards. But with this action, the next step of development without any other approvals would be 6,000 square feet, 5 units per acre, 7 foot side yards, and 10 foot rear yards.

And then any deviation would be what, level 2 or level 3?

It would either be a level 3 plan development between the Planning Commission or if any individual lot wanted a variance, that would go before the land use hearing officer. Those are paths that any property has.

I think just to clarify that a two-story home could be built on either side of this, and we're not looking at a multi-story, multi-family possibility in the RL4, correct?

That's a correct statement. I think, if I may add to that, Ms. Trillman, before there was actually consideration of townhouses and apartments. That's off the agenda still, correct? That's correct. Yes, sir.

Okay. But that's where, let me just, again, clarity-wise, because, again, as these get stepwise and they grow legs, if it goes from RL4 and they want to go and do either a townhome development, Ben, what would that entail for them to go from an RL4 to allow townhouses, and would they have to go back to an RM request?

That's correct. The land use RL4 only allows 5 units per acre, so that's not a townhome or apartment product. So to change and increase the density would require a land use change, which would then go back through the public hearing back before this board to change the land use from residential low up to a higher density land use.

But in framing this, what I'm looking at is if it goes from RL1 today to an RL4, then one could look at it and say, well, okay, well, now we have RL4 around this. Why don't we go ahead and go back to RM on that north sector because now it's surrounded by RL4. So I see it as potentially growing legs to keep asking for more and more and more, and we went from RL1 to now possibly something further that we didn't intend to begin with.

I'm just cautious that we are jumping, putting the cart before the horse here. I mean, we have to look at the proposal in front of us. If something else is going to change, then we have that discussion, and I think we're actually going down a possible scary legal path when we are bringing that into the discussion for this particular hearing.

I've seen this rare for something like this to just keep stepping and stepping, but it's up to the board to say enough is enough, and that's what our job is. If they want to come back again, I think we've already told them once, residential medium or whatever it was wasn't acceptable. I mean, it probably won't be the next go-around, but you have to decide on them. Yeah, yeah, I mean, it's what we do, so I'm good with RL4.

All right.

So can I just want to address, I forget your last name, sir.

Harrison.

Harrison. So I think, you know, from what you're hearing clearly from staff and the discussion is that there will not be the discussion of the apartments and such that obviously was agreed upon last time as well. So that is still factored in that will not be in this project as we vote on this today under this proposal.

So saying that, are we going to keep it as is now, or are we going to change the east side versus the west side?

I cannot, you know, look into the future. I can tell you that I'm here today, and I have to focus on the facts of what's in front of us for us to project out. It puts me in a very uncomfortable position because I am here today on this one particular hearing.

I think that's what he's asking, though. Are we going to go RL4 on the east side and keep the west side RL4? Okay, I'm sorry. We're going to vote on that in a minute.

Yeah, sorry, I misunderstood your question if that was that. Yes, sir. That is what we are looking at is RL4.

My next consideration, has there been any study on traffic? I understand sometimes they say, well, we can't bring that up right now. But in the morning time between 7 and 8 o'clock, it takes 25 minutes coming down Thornhill Road to get on 540. It is back to sometimes a mile. Has there been any consideration on the traffic?

Well, I'll see if I can answer that, Ben. And so you can always talk about it. We can talk about anything you want to on this project. I mean, we don't not talk about anything. But it's a frustrating process to me as well. But we don't get to the traffic until you figure out what they're going to do. So once they come up with a plan and they say, we want to put X amount of homes over here and X amount of homes over here, then the county looks at how bad is the traffic going to be? Are we going to need another turn lane? Are we going to need this or that? So to answer your question, that's not going to be even talked about until they figure out what they're going to do. And keep in mind, we approve these things all the time, and they never go anywhere. I mean, so the county is not going to spend any resources trying to figure out a problem that may not even ever come about. So that's how the timing goes on that. Right.

And that would be with the storm drainage also.

Yeah.

Correct.

All the environmental traffic, all of those components are looked at in greater detail.

I appreciate it. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Daniel Benz.

You've all talked about. Mr. Benz, how about give Mr. Address, please, sir. Oh, 1630 Beth Lane, Wonderhaven, Florida. Most of the concerns I have, y'all discussed. But the fact is, I thought this was decided the last time when it was both sides were going to be the same, and now you're going to change it so there's more, more people, more development. And you can talk about up the road, way up the road, there's more houses. But where we live, there's not. And the property that's there that's being discussed around it is not. And I've lived there 30 years. I've lived here my entire life. I'm 60 years old. And I look around at all the changes that's being made. And I know there's got to be development, but, you know, our way of life's being sold out. You're talking about Thornhill Road. You get on there. My sons have to drive that every day to go to work. And multiple, multiple times they almost get in accidents. I sat at my house, I'm retired, and I hear the ambulance up and down, up and down, wreck after wreck after wreck after wreck, up and down Thornhill and down at Winter Lake and Thornhill. And the more you let them develop that area, and the more units they're going to put, the more density, the worse all of this is going to be. I mean, if I wanted to live in Tampa or Orlando, I would move there. And I don't want to live there. And all of this land change that's being done in Polk County, not just where I live, but around. If you people lived out there, you would not okay any of this. I'll guarantee you that. And that's what I had to say. Thank you. And hopefully, you know, y'all won't change it. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir.

Did we have anyone else on that? Okay.

Here we go.

He didn't, we don't have anybody signed up. No, that's not, that's our new rule, sir. I mean, you were told, yeah. Okay. Well, who, are you wanting to come back? Come on up. Sir, you had your time. We're going to move on.

Good morning. For the record, Shelton Rice, I'm an attorney with the law firm of Peterson and Myers, address 225 East Lemon Street, Lakeland, Florida. I apologize. You're stuck with the B team today. Bart wasn't able to make it. But I recognize we're still under expedited proceedings. And so, you know, given that, this is our first opportunity to speak in accordance with those requirements and process. Having said that, there's been a lot of discussion, a lot of questions. I think it may make the most sense for us to just give our presentation briefly to make sure it's clear what we're asking for and to explain a little bit about how we got where we are today. Bear with me. Yeah. Is that, is that working?

Nope.

Yep. Here we go. Perfect. Thank you. So I'd be remiss if I didn't mention before I get into it, we have Ms. Stewart, Ms. Cosselin Stewart with us. Ms. Stewart and the Stewart family has been an agricultural family in Polk County for generations. They have been here for a long period of time. I know this commission is familiar with this site. You've seen it when we came through with the comp plan amendment. And then you've certainly aware of the concerns and the issues associated with this site. And it's been split in half. There's a roadway to service a lot of traffic for the community, a public purpose where they had property taken right through the middle of their ranch. And so really it bifurcated it into two pieces. So they do ag work, ag operations, cattle ranches. I grew up on a cattle ranch. Thinking of the complications associated with now having a site bifurcated with an elevated roadway through the center of it, it's untenable. And so that really precipitated our client coming in and saying, okay, let's analyze what are the appropriate entitlements for this site? What makes sense? Because frankly, our intended purpose for this site has been frustrated by this involuntary taking from the property owner. So that's a little bit of background to kind of go into this. The future land use has been covered. It's residential low. When we ask for a comp plan amendment, as has been mentioned by Mr. Ziscoll, that automatically defaults to a residential low one. We didn't ask for residential low one. That's just where it goes. We typically don't file for sub-district change or ask for a sub-district change concurrent with the future land use designation. Because as an example at the last hearing, some of those future land uses can change or be modified as late as at the adoption hearing. And so that sub-district typically comes at a later date afterward. The development area was also changed to urban growth, as has been mentioned. This is just a sub-district change. And it really shows the separation. The only thing in question today is the area in orange. This is on the eastern side of that turnpike. And so this zooms out a little bit to Commissioner Scott's comments about what's in the immediate vicinity. Before I get into that, I'm going to mention a little bit about RL. So the comprehensive plan for residential low allows up to a maximum density of five units per acre. That's what they're allowed to pursue in the comprehensive plan. And it's detailed in the staff report with chapter and verse from the comprehensive plan. The limitation really comes on these sub-districts based on minimum lot size and details associated with that. So our request is really, frankly, not to change anything different other than we're allowed to do these smaller lots by right. Our client is not a developer, right? They've never been a developer. They're not in the development business. They look at this. They look at the development that's occurred around them. You look at all of the colors as you go east on this site that's occurred. There's a lot of development happening. But then when you look specifically to the north of the site, you've got plan development approvals. You've got plan developments to the east. And so when I mentioned previously, you can go up to five units per acre with a plan development. RL 1, RL 2, 3, 4, and 5 are all eligible to pursue development up to five units per acre with the plan development. So that's really the limitation there. Residential low doesn't allow multifamily by right. It's a conditional use approval at a level three, so they would have to go through a public hearing to pursue multifamily development of the property. So we look at the area. There's been a lot of investment in infrastructure recognized. There may be limitations, and certainly those would be evaluated if and when we get to that point down the road, no pun intended, traffic studies, Thornhill Road, and issues that may be associated with that. The construction and the impacts to the Turnpike extension, that road's being built now, as we're all aware. It's there. This impact already exists. And so what we're looking at is large estate-sized lots, 40,000 minimum square foot lots adjacent to an elevated Turnpike facility. Is that where our estate lots go? Or is something smaller, more consistent with that, sandwiched between a high-intensity, high-traffic Turnpike road, a parkway extension, and frankly, a waste facility or a management facility for the utility department? So this is north up to the left of your screen. This property on the top of the screen is really what's in question today. And you can see there's an approved development kind of shown just to the east on Thornhill Road. And then you can see some of the other surrounding uses. This is the existing construction on Thornhill Road. This is a graphic created to show what that may look like down the road. Wetlands, we recognize there's going to be wetlands. There are wetlands on the site. That's all part of what would have to be evaluated. We're not asking for any deviation from the standard land development code provisions, the requirements of your comprehensive plan as it relates to any of those things. Stormwater design, all of that would have to meet your code requirements. So when we talk about compatibility, and I'll back up and show a map in just a second. When you look at the surrounding properties, where the existing vegetation is really separates this use, even where it is adjacent to other residential users, there's a lot of separation. So looking at the map, once again, the top piece is really what we're focused on. You can see the majority of that site is surrounded by a pretty intensive vegetative buffer, some of which may be in wetlands. So there'll be this continued separation, even where they're adjacent to some residential from a visual standpoint and potentially from a noise standpoint. So this just shows some of the development in the area. Number one, that was acquired by SwiftMUD, but it had entitlements for 391 units on 158 developable acres. Number two, 124 units on 35 developable acres, pretty consistent with what we're asking for an RL4, number three, 262 on 65 acres, and number four, 74 units on 28 acres. Just some additional comments. As you look more towards the bottom right of the screen, there's a number of projects, 60 foot lots by 110, 70 foot lots by 110, 45 by 110, 50 by 110. So it's not like this is something foreign to the area. This is pretty consistent with really what's coming from Spirit Lake Road and progressing to the west, recognizing we now have a line drawn. We didn't draw it with the roadway, but on the east side of that road, this is pretty consistent with certainly what we're looking at. This is just a bird's eye view of an approved development in close proximity to this site. So I'll summarize just briefly. We recognize there's been a transition in this area. There's investment in infrastructure, water, wastewater lines. The Development Review Committee, or DRC, has recommended approval of this request. We have a recommendation of approval from the Planning Commission. So with that, I'd be happy to answer any specific questions you have, but we respectfully request a favorable vote. Thank you.

All right. Any questions for him?

I have a follow-up for Ben, but not for him.

Say that again.

I just have a question for the school when he comes back up.

Okay. We're going to end the public hearing and bring it back to the board for further discussion.

That's a question. When it was in here before, and we had the ARR to RL1 request, and then a portion was RM on the northeast side by the Parkway extension, is it my understanding that the applicant at that time wouldn't have been able to ask for RL4 on that east side? It could only ask for RL1 and RM. Is that correct?

That's correct. So in line with what the applicant has just mentioned, when we went through the comprehensive plan amendment process, the request for RM to be modified by the board could go to RL only, but it wasn't advertised as a sub-district change. So the decision by the board at that time was RM or RL. And the request or the decision by the board was to modify that request to approve RL, and then once the entire thing was RL, the applicant was able to look at a sub-district change. But to Mr. McVeigh's point, they're not going to apply for a sub-district change until they know which land use they have on the property. So the sub-district never came in until the adoption of the land use was finalized by this board.

Okay.

Thank you. Anyone else?

I motion for approval.

I got a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. All right.

Moving into public hearings. That concludes the expedited portion of today's public hearings. I'll turn it over to Ms. Bennett for the regular public hearings.

Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, Shonda Bennett with the Land Development Division. The request is for adoption of a small-scale conferencing plan amendment, LDCPA-S 2025-9. It's a future land use map change on 5.45 acres. From Town Center X to Employment Center X. And it's also in the Transit Supportive Development Area. It's along US-98 on the east side between Lakeland and Varto. It's also in another overlay called the US-98 Selected Area Plan. And in terms of a few things for the record, the items submitted into the record are staff report and ordinance, impact assessment statement, demonstration of need, and the application per our Excel software. Also, for advertisement, 36 mailers were sent to area property owners on July 23rd. No response from the public was received. Four signs posted on June 23rd. And a legal ad was published in the Lakeland Winter Haven Sun on August 6th of this year. This is an aerial context for you to consider. You can see the site outlined in yellow. And you can see it's in the Highland City proper area along US-98. You can see the public's development to the northwest. And then along US-98 directly north of the site is the Panda Express, the McDonald's, and a gas station. More zoomed-in aerial, you can see the McDonald's here due north. This is Clubhouse Road. This is a Culver's fast food restaurant that opened up here. And then this is an old warehouse building today. This was a current land-use map, town center. As you can see, this town center is more narrow than the town center that's on the north side of Clubhouse. That's part of what's going on here. It's probably a factor for both sides of the road. When we did the 98 SAP, it's been several, what, 15 longer years that we've had this SAP now. So now that we're getting more development and we're seeing the depth of this commercial, that's part of the request is to change it to Employment Center. As Employment Center has different limitations than town center, so the depth is easier to implement with Employment Center than what the current designation is. This is standing on the property. You can see the Culver's on the north side of the property. This is looking south. You have Fort Frazier Trail, so the sites will not access US-98. They'll go directly access to the east. Another view of the site. Warehouse portion, and this is looking north on US-98. In terms of impact assessment, there is available capacity on the roadways. The sites didn't anticipate to generate any residential uses, although it allows it, but we don't really expect that to happen. Fire and EMS stations are very close by. They're just down the street on the other side of 98. So as a summary, our justification for approval is the Employment Center is more compatible with the size and shape of the parcel. They're surrounding non-residential uses on the north and to the south. We've got US-98 is an air arterial, and Clubhouse is a collector road. Staff recommends approval. The Planning Commission recommend approval, and I'll stand for any questions.

Mr. Commissioner, I mean Commissioner Brown. Yes. The property adjacent to the south, does the county own that? Is that some kind of access to the trail or parking for the trail?

To the south. Do you mean this?

Yeah, right, right. Well, yeah, who owns that? Is that just a county road? The reason I ask is I'm thinking there's like a little park there or something.

That's further down by the Sheriff's Command Center.

No, no one knows.

There's a trailhead here. And there's parking? Yeah, so people can drive down here, access, and park here. Oh, okay. And there's a little bathroom facility there.

That's owned by the county? Yeah, there's a public restroom there as well.

Okay, I'm just curious.

Anyone else? All right, ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to speak on this matter, please come forward, and you'll be given three minutes. State your name and address. Here comes Shelton.

Yes, sir. Thank you. For the record, Shelton Rice, attorney with the law firm of Peterson & Myers, address 225 East Lemon Street, Lakeland, Florida. I have with me in attendance today a representative from the applicant, Mr. Jacob Mossholder. Ms. Bennett did an excellent job summarizing this request. It's commercial to commercial. This is a little more consistent, frankly, with the land use criteria and designations in the comp plan for the future land uses. This is a little more consistent. We think it's appropriate. We're happy to answer any questions you have, but I'll spare you my presentation.

All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions for him before he gets gone? All right. Anyone else? All right. Seeing none, close the public hearing and bring it back for a motion.

Motion for approval.

I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Amber, do we have anyone else signed up? All right. We're going to public comments. And Ms. Richards.

Good morning. I'm Cassandra Richards, 2357 Freelander Road, Lake Wells. In these three minutes, I have many things to say. All right. First, I want to thank Ms. Katie Hayes. She does a wonderful job in Highland Park as well. We collect all of that stuff with dumpsters twice a year. We do have a problem with dumping of tires and everything way up on the other side of Lewis Griffin where they're not from Highland Park, but they come down and dump the stuff and code enforcement is aware. And they're handling that. The next thing I want to talk about is the speed bumps. I'm praying and hoping we quickly get that done. I know you're doing the best you can, and I know it takes time. I'm trying hard to be patient, but I'm anticipating on getting those speed bumps because-

And like Christmas, isn't it?

Oh, yes. Because we do have somebody, we have reported it to the deputy sheriff that comes to our community meeting. And there's a BMW that flies down 75, 80 miles, doesn't stop for the stop sign. He just keeps going. I think he's trying to test out his car before the speed bumps come. Well, as fast as he's going, I don't think we can get that. But we did get the type of vehicle he's traveling on. And the next thing I want to say is I'm surprised that the animal people are not here today. You have one, and- Yep, we got one. Well, they hear me, maybe they can take it back to their group. The one thing I have to say, TNR is good. But when you trap, neuter, release, who's going to be responsible when you release them and there's a flea festation? Who's going to be responsible for making sure that they have their shots when they're supposed to have their shots? I wonder about those things. Maybe if they can collaborate and let Grady Judd know who's going to be responsible for those things, maybe Grady will come through for them. I know Grady personally, and he's a fair person. All of this has to be addressed because when there's a flea festation from these animals, there's a problem in your neighborhood more than the trap, neuter, and release. So responsibility has to fall somewhere, and it has to be recorded and on record. Who's going to be responsible for the flea festation, for the shots when they're supposed to have shots, for the rabies, whatever it has to be, who's going to be responsible? I love my animals. I have two cats, and I do have to get those shots and stuff. It hurts my pocket. But I've had my three minutes. I hear you. I just want them to collaborate and come back and let us know who's going to be responsible for the flea festation and the shots.

Thank you, ma'am. Ms. Hicks.

I've done this enough now. I know to break down. Debbie Hicks, 236 Alderman Road, Latham, Florida. I'm here to hopefully finish my question about who owns animal control. I made, after the last meeting, I did go and make another written request for public records to see who owns it, and I wanted it in writing. So that afternoon, she was kind enough to send me an email from the property appraiser's office showing the site regarding animal control, which plainly says Polk County owns animal control. So then, in my research, I found this document. Do you guys have it? This document here that is on the web that is made from, it is a questionnaire that was given to the Polk County Sheriff's Office. As Miami-Dade County prepares for implementation of Amendment 10, the Board of County Commissioners has directed the Office of Policy and Budget Affairs to study the functions, responsibilities, and operations of the county sheriff for the 10 largest counties in Florida. So that's why the sheriff got this, was from Miami-Dade, the commissioners. And if you look on page three, there's the, it's only four pages, there's the operations and assets. The question is number of district, satellite, regional stations, and or offices. The Polk County Sheriff's Office occupies 20 buildings throughout the county. That's their answer. Explain, and then the question is explain the ownership of these facilities owned by the county, owned by the sheriff, or privately leased, and their uses. The answer is the county owns the buildings while the sheriff operates out of them. The breakdown of the 20 facilities the county owns are as follows, and there's 20 facilities and animal control sits right in the middle. Now, if you have anything else that you can show me that says that the sheriff owns that facility, I would love to see it. But it appears the county owns the facility. It was made in 1988. Our population has doubled. Animals are not looked at the way they were looked at in 1988. They're not. We treat them differently now. I would love to see a vision, a vision for you as happy as some of these other visions have made you. And I'm asking, again, advisory councils, animal-related items, and even something regarding how to either, you can't fix it. Fix it or make a new one. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am.

Mr. Abercrombie.

Mr. Abercrombie, for the record, this is those public records that I've been getting. I've been told. State your name and address. You know the deal. You've been here enough. James Abercrombie, for the record, 2737 Gibson-Galloway Road. I'm a permanent fixture here. Right here's all my emails, everything I've ever requested about this fence. Right here. This is my proof. This is my proof. Where's yours? You have no proof. You can accuse me of everything you want to, but you have no proof. May the 6th, I was standing right here before I stood here, pulled out 1,000 pages, 1,000 pages of public records that I got for the road, for the fence project at Duff Road. You should know this real well. This is the third time I've printed this out, folks. And you see what I did all night last night? There's nothing here about that fence. Nothing. I gave you 1,000 pages last month, or May 6th. Nobody's looked at them, but yet you can sit there and tell me that I'm getting everything of an escort. It doesn't make any good sense to me. I wish I could be treated with it the same way that everybody else in this building is treated. Everybody comes in this building. I come in here and I complain, and I have to get angry about it. Of course, you really do your best to do that. And the last trip I was in here, two weeks ago, I told everybody here I was going up to 5th floor to get some more public records. Guess who met me up there? The public records liaison. Well, Ms. Desiree. Of course, she has a sheriff sitting there with her. Right outside the door, though. He didn't let me see him. He was standing outside the door waiting for me to say something stupid or do something stupid. Trying to interrupt me, folks. And that's not the last time. That's not the first time. I'm sorry. Melody Bell had them come out of my house back in mid-2000 for the same purpose. To intimidate me. It's not going to happen. It's not going to happen. We need to get this changed. I've asked in front of here. I've asked up there. Once again, anybody wants to sit down with me, I'll sit down with you, and we'll go through every piece of paper I've got right here. And there's not a thing in there about that field. I also asked for public records in front of the board for the commissioner's meeting where they passed when they designated that as a park. I've never seen it. There's a lot more, too. We need to change this.

All right, sir. We hear you. Thank you. I believe that's it. We are adjourned.

Ended on the good news.