Good morning, everyone. If you would kindly find a place to sit, we'll get started with our board meeting. So welcome to January 20, 26 board meeting, and we'll start with the invocation by rescue, fire rescue chaplain, Mr. Hanley.
Good morning. I would invite you to pray with me. Heavenly Father, you alone can unite your people. You make hearts clean. You make broken things new. You lead divided nations to return to you. Help us remember your power to unite and your will for togetherness. Mend the divisions you see in us and mend the divisions you see in this world. And I ask this prayer in Jesus name. Amen.
I pledge you to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God. Good morning, commissioners, staff, and visitors. I'm Caitlin Hoverkamp, public and media relations officer for Polk County Government. Today, we are recognizing three 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 commissioners return to the dais behind them, we will take a group photo at the end. Dave Puran has worked for Polk County Information Technology Division for 25 years. He began his career with the department as a hardware technician before moving into the role of E911 Network Coordinator and then Senior Network Analyst before receiving a promotion to his current position as the division's database administrator. Dave obtained his associate's of science degree in computer engineering from Tampa Technical Institute and has obtained many cybersecurity certifications throughout his career. In addition to certifications, Dave has also received commendations throughout his time with the county. In 2005, Dave received a Silver Achievement Award for his contributions implementing the county's public safety network. And in 2012, he was honored as the 911 Professional of the Year by the Polk County Board of County Commissioners for exceptional service and dedication to public safety. Dave is a member of the Vishnu Mundir Tampa Hindi Temple. In his spare time, Dave enjoys watching NFL football and European soccer, playing cricket, traveling and exploring destinations around the world, and spending time with his wife, Gina, and their children, Kuldeep and Chundee. In the future, he looks forward to retiring and to continuing traveling around the world. Frank Wargo has worked for Polk County Information Technology Division for 25 years. He currently serves as the PC Coordinator for the Information Technology Division. Prior to joining the county, Frank served 24 years of faithful service in the U.S. Coast Guard. Frank is a member of the Parkway Baptist Church, where he serves on the church's safety, baptism, generosity, and compassion teams. In his spare time, Frank enjoys bowling, RC airplanes, and spending time with his wife, Anne, who works for the Polk County Roads and Drainage Division. In the future, Frank looks forward to his upcoming retirement from the county alongside his wife, and he looks forward to seeing what the Lord has in store for him and his family as they continue to serve him. Bobby Bone Jr. has worked for Polk County Fire Rescue for 30 years. Bobby began his career with the department as a volunteer firefighter in 1987, stationed in Medulla. Following six years of fire service, Bobby joined the department as a part-time firefighter in 1993 and was hired full-time in 1996. Throughout his time with the Polk County Fire Rescue Department, Bobby has served in a wide range of roles, including firefighter engineer, lieutenant training officer, company lieutenant, and battalion chief. He currently serves as the battalion chief of the special operations team. Bobby has an associate's of science degree in fire science from Kaiser University. He has received a number of commendations throughout his career, including a distinguished service award issued by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush for his assistance with the Central Florida Wildfire of 2000, a distinguished service award issued by the Florida Sheriff's Association for his assistance with multiple hurricanes impacted in Polk County in 2004, and two commendations from Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd. The first for a five-week Hurricane Katrina deployment he assisted with in 2004, and the second for his efforts to save a pediatric patient. Bobby has also received three Polk County Fire Rescue Unit Citation Awards throughout his time with the department. In his spare time, Bobby enjoys offshore fishing, skydiving, scuba diving, shooting sports, traveling, enjoying time at his home in the mountains, restoring cars, and spending time with his wife, Robin, their two sons, Robert and Joshua, their two daughter-in-laws, Amber and Marissa, their five grandchildren, and their dog, Mickey. In the future, Bobby looks forward to spending time at home in the mountains, traveling, and maybe even trying to understand why people enjoy playing golf.
Thank you, and congratulations to all of you. We will move on now to—I'll wait in a few minutes until everybody just kind of leaves. We will move on now to the approve of the consent agenda.
We'll approve. Madam Chair, before we do, we need to make sure we have no one here to put public comments concerning agenda items.
Oh, thank you.
No, no one present. Sorry, Madam Chair. No one's present, so we can go ahead and go consent now.
Okay. So we have a motion for the agenda, and I think I heard a second. Second? Okay, motion, a second. Any questions or discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Okay, we go now to county comptroller. Stacey's not here, but Tara Lee is here, so.
Good morning. We have for you to approve and ratify payroll check numbers 04375 through 04383 in the amount of $18,646.93. We have 2,979 direct deposits in the amount of $4,970,763.25. Those are dated January 9, 2026. We have wire and electronic funds transfers of $18,847,127.32. Those are dated January 6, 2026 through January 19, 2026. We also have invoice checks numbered 497, 312 through 498, 168, totaling $9,312,590.88, dated January 6, 2026 through January 19, 2026. For you to approve and ratify, please.
Second.
I have a motion and a second.
Any discussion or question? Hearing none, all in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries. We also request the approval of the minutes of your regular board meeting held on January 6, 2026. I have a motion and a second.
Any discussion or questions? Hearing none, all in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries. Anything else for us? No. That's it. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. We're going to go to Attorney Randy Mink.
Madam Chair.
Okay. Mr. Beasley, County Manager.
Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the board, members of the viewing audience. The manager's office will have four items for board consideration this morning. Item number G1, it's the heavy lift of the day, and it's associated with one of our larger, more complicated roadway projects that's in the design development and soon to be in construction. But item number G1 is to request the board to approve amendment number 3 to the existing professional services agreement with Kimley Horne and Associates to perform the requisite design and engineering services in connection with the phase 1, segment 2 portion of the Thompson Nursery Road Extension Project. This will be a one-time contract service expense not to exceed $4,119,689.30. Given the size and complexity of the planned four-lane Thompson Nursery Road corridor improvements, this project is being executed in multiple phases and segments as follows. Phase 1, segment 1, will begin at US-17 State Road 548 intersection, traverse eastward to County Road 655, the Rifle Range Road, at its intersection with Eloise Loop Road. Phase 1, segment 2, phase 1, segment 2, is from County Road 655, the Rifle Range Road, at its intersection with Eloise Loop Road, eastward to the CSX Railroad right-of-way. Phase 1, segment 3, is traversing east from the CSX right-of-way to the Eloise Loop Road. Phase 1, segment 4, is from the Eloise Loop Road eastward to West Lake Ruby Drive, along with the Eloise Loop Road. Along Thompson Nursery Road. And Phase 2, which has no segments, it's just a single Phase 2, is from West Lake Ruby Drive at Thompson Nursery Road, eastward to its intersection with US-27. In June of 2020, in June of 2022, the initial professional engineering services agreement with Kembley Horn was executed in a total amount of $5,088,870.83. That included design, permitting, right-of-way acquisition support, and bidding assistance for the Phase 1, segments 1, 3, and 4 portions of the project, and the PD&E alignment study for the Phase 1, segment 2 portion of the project. That initial agreement also included an option for the county to consider the Phase 1, segment 2, final design fees, and an option for the PD&E alignment study for the entire Phase 2 portion of the project. In August of 2023, Amendment No. 1 to the Kembley Horn agreement was approved in the total amount of $1,092,555.64 to complete the planned PD&E alignment study for the entire Phase 2 portion of the project. In May of 2025, the Board subsequently approved the Phase 2, recommended alignment of that portion of the project. In August of 2024, Amendment No. 2 to the Kembley Horn agreement was approved in the amount of $73,805.18 to include additional design services to address needed City of Eagle Lake utility relocations, for which full reimbursement by the City has been provided. And in July of 2025, the Board approved the recommended roadway alignment for the Phase 1, segment 2 portion of the project. The PD&E for this segment of the project is now complete, and the proposed Amendment 3 is to authorize all requisite professional services for the Phase 1, segment 2, final design portion of the project to include right-of-way acquisition support and bidding assistance at a cost not to exceed $4,119,689.30. Funding for these Amendment No. 3 professional services required in connection with the Phase 1, segment 2 portion of the project is available and budgeted within the Zone A impact fee fund. So, Madam Chair, members of the Board, I think consistent with the Board's commitments to the major roadway improvements identified for the entire Thompson Nursery Road corridor, I would request the Board approve Amendment No. 3 to the existing professional services agreement with Kembley Horn in connection with the engineering services specific to Phase 1, segment 2 of the project at a total cost not to exceed $4,119,689.30. Madam Chair, motion for approval.
Second. I have a motion and a second. Questions or discussions? Hearing none, all in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
Madam Chair, members of the Board, item No. G2 is to request the Board to approve a construction contract with Timmons Contracting Incorporated out of Bradenton, Florida, in connection with the Rock Ridge Road Bridge Replacement Project. This will be a one-time contract action for a one-time expense not to exceed $2,229,446. Polk County has completed the public process to solicit bids from qualified contractors who were interested in the construction of a new 40-foot geosynthetic reinforced soil-integrated bridge system along Rock Ridge Road in the northwest sector of Polk County. The project primarily consists of bridge construction, roadway construction, erosion control, clearing and grubbing, excavating, stabilization, construction of retaining walls, as well as the maintenance of traffic functions. Bid No. 26-003 was issued and seven contractors submitted bid, the lowest responsible bid being submitted by Timmons Contracting in the total amount of $2,123,282. A recommendation of award was issued and no protests were received. In accordance with Resolution No. 13066, $106,164, or 5%, is included in the total contract award to address allowance and contingency work conditions. The contract time for this project has been set at 180 calendar days for final completion. Funding for this project is available in the Transportation Trust Fund, and this is an approved project within the Roads and Drainage Adopted Community Investment Program. So, Madam Chair, members of the Board, I think in keeping with the Board's commitment to county-wide infrastructure improvements, I would request the Board approve a construction contract with Timmons Contracting Incorporated in the amount not to exceed $2,229,446 in connection with the Rock Ridge Road Bridge Replacement Project. Second.
I have a motion and a second. Any questions or discussion?
Madam Chair, if I may. Yes. Just wanted to circle back on that, and Mr. Jarvis, if you'd come up just for a moment. I know the graphic that we showed on this particular item was showing a rather lengthy detour per se on the map. It's really not that bad. But I know we talked about this in the agenda review as far as this is not the intended detour map that we would have, correct?
That is correct, yes. Because of all the potential truck traffic on the roadway, we would actually detour everyone down Moore Road all the way to Old Polk City Road and then back over to Markham Road to come back out to 98. That would be the proposed, even though we understand that more than likely local traffic will probably use the Tom Costine detour as they figure out their way around the area.
Perfect. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Lieutenant.
No, ma'am.
Anybody else? Okay, hearing none. All in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
Madam Chair, items number G3 and G4 are kind of companion items. They really are the same type of work being awarded to the same contractor. They just work at two different sites. Item number G3 is to request the board to approve a construction contract with Legacy Sports Construction, LLC, in connection with the Poinciana Park Artificial Turf Fields Project. This will be a contract action for a one-time expense not to exceed $2,843,863.97. The Poinciana community is located in the east side of Polk County and is a fully developed 28-acre park, which consists of a softball complex, basketball courts, dog park, soccer fields, walking trails, and a cricket pitch area. Since opening the park in 2013, the area has seen significant growth in population. This growth has created a high demand for use of the park's facilities, particularly in the soccer, multipurpose fields, and the cricket pitch area, which was added to the park after the park was initially built, based upon the sports popularity within the Poinciana community. In 2024, the board approved a consultant services authorization with Dewberry Engineers to design and permit the conversion of the three multipurpose fields, inclusive of the cricket pitch areas and surfaces, to those artificial surfaces. This request was the result of the increase in field uses, which makes it difficult to maintain proper field conditions for safe play. Converting the fields to artificial turf is an effective means to address maintenance needs, eliminating downtime for maintenance and turf recovery. Polk County has completed the public process to solicit bids from qualified contractors to construct the three multipurpose fields, including the cricket pitch area. Bid number 25667 was issued and six contractors submitted bids. The lowest responsive, responsible bid submitted by Legacy Sports Construction in a total amount of $2,708,441.97. A recommendation of award was issued and no protests were received. In accordance with resolution number 13066, $135,422, or 5%, is included in the total contract award to address contingency and allowance work conditions. The contract time for this project has been set at 240 calendar days for final completion. Funding for these field conversions is budgeted and available in the five-year Parks and Natural Resources Community Investment Program within the East Park Impact Fee District Fund. So, Madam Chair, members of the board, I think in keeping with the board's commitment to improve recreational venues within the county's active parks, I would request that the board approve the proposed construction contract with Legacy Sports Construction LLC in connection with the Poinciana Park Artificial Turf Fields Project in an amount not to exceed $2,843,863.97. Motion. Motion.
Second.
I have a motion and a second. Any questions, discussion? Seeing none, hearing none. All in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
Final item, Madam Chair, is the companion item to that G3 item. Item G4 is to request the board to approve a construction contract, again with Legacy Sports Construction LLC, this time in connection with the Hunt Fountain Artificial Turf Fields Project. This will be a contract action for a one-time expense not to exceed $2,510,707. The Hunt Fountain Park is a fully developed 60-plus acre complex located in the North Lakeland area of Polk County. It was constructed in the late 1970s, and the population growth in that area has created a high demand for use of the athletic fields in the park. Most notably, the Youth Soccer League at this facility has continued to grow. In 2024, the board approved a consultant services authorization with Chastine Skillman to design and permit the conversion of the four multipurpose fields to artificial turf surfaces. This request was the result of the increase in league soccer participants, expanded soccer seasons, and poor drainage in the soccer field area, which has contributed to the deterioration of the existing four natural turf soccer fields. Converting those soccer fields today to artificial turf is an effective means to address field issues and allows for expanded use of the fields by eliminating downtime for maintenance and turf recovery. Polk County has completed the public process to solicit bids from qualified contractors to convert those four multipurpose fields. Bid number 25635 was issued, and eight contractors submitted bids. The lowest responsible bid being submitted by, again, Legacy Sports Construction out of Melbourne, Florida, in the total amount of $2,391,150. A recommendation of award was issued, and no protests were received. In accordance with Resolution No. 13066, $119,557, or 5%, is included in the total contract award to address contingency and allowance work conditions. The contract time for this project has been set at 240 calendar days for final completion. Funding for these field conversions is budgeted and available within the five-year Parks and Natural Resources Community Investment Program within the General Capital Improvement Fund. So, Madam Chair, members of the Board, I think, again, in keeping with the Board's commitments to improve recreational venues within the county's active parks, I would request the Board to approve the proposed construction contract with Legacy Sports Construction, LLC, in connection with the Hunt Fountain Park Artificial Turf Fields Project, in an amount not to exceed $2,510,707.
Second.
I have a motion and a second. Any discussion, questions?
Madam Chair. Just a question, Manager Beasley, as far as the two parks, will they run in parallel on schedule for installation, or will one occur before the other?
Yes, sir. We believe the workforce, the pre-construction conferences, suggest that they're going to staff them both concurrent with one another. Very good. Thank you.
Madam Chair, my question, follow-up for that, do we have an idea of a start date?
Typically, it's 30 days from the Board's approval.
Thank you. Any other questions, discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
That's it, Madam Chair.
Thank you. We'll move on to Commissioner's report. This is Commissioner Troutman.
Nothing at this time.
Commissioner Wilson. Nope, nothing. Commissioner Braswell. Same, nothing. Commissioner Scott.
I am all set, thank you.
And I don't have anything either. So we'll move right into the expedited hearings.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Before we go to the expedited hearings, I'll go over to the public hearing. General, I'll remind everyone, if you wish to speak on any of the public hearings today, the public hearing items, you need to fill out a speaker card in the back and give it, the card to a member of the communication staff. We ask that you please turn off your cell phones or other devices that may distract from the public hearings. Please adjust the microphone and state your full name and address for the record before you begin speaking on topic. Individuals speaking during the public comment section of a matter will be strictly limited to three minutes. The board that is experiencing these matters is unable to discern what is legally relevant to an issue and what is not. Information that is relevant or repetitive only serves to frustrate and necessarily prolong the day's business. The commission expects civility at all times during all public hearings, speaking out of turn, shouting out from the audience. Desperate sounds or utterances while another is speaking are unacceptable and you will be asked to leave the chamber's 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 the proceedings and that for such purposes you may need to ensure a verbatim record of the proceedings that's made, which record includes a testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, which you must gather at your own expense. If anyone in the audience who wishes to speak or present the testimony today must be sworn in. 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. Madam Chair, now I will 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 recommendation of the Development Review Committee is for approval. Expedited procedures are the following. After staff briefly introduces the 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, a full presentation of 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 will turn it over to Ms. Ziskell to present the expedited hearings.
Thank you, Mr. Ming. Good morning, Madam Chair. Commissioners, for the record, Ben Ziskell, Land Development Director. There are five items on the expedited public hearing portion of today's agenda. Two of those are companion items, which I will present together and then ask for separate motions. Item number N1 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCU 2025-21, Stericycle Reconstruction, for consideration of an expansion of a non-conforming solid waste management facility. Stericycle has been in operation as a medical waste recovery facility since 1999, which predates the county's solid waste management regulations and siting ordinance. The intent is for this successful business to continue to grow within the county by demolishing the existing structure, which is approximately 17,000 square feet, and replacing it with a 30,000 square feet facility and 6,200 square foot transportation office. Again, the Land Development Code requires board approval for the expansion of any non-conforming use. This is a property that has existed, as I said, for almost 30 years within our county and is a successful business in appearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval, and following any questions or comments today, staff recommends approval.
Any questions for staff? Hearing none. Do we have anyone for... No. Okay, so let's bring it back to the board. Well, there's nobody for public hearing. Yeah. So, and... Does anybody else want to address the board on this subject? Okay. Hearing none, we'll bring it back to the board.
Motion for approval?
Second. I have a motion and a second. Any questions or discussion? Hearing none, all in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
Madam Chair, items number N2 and N3 are companion items. One involves a comprehensive plan map amendment, and the other includes a text amendment to the Land Development Code. So I'll present those together and ask for two separate motions. Item number N2 is an expedited public hearing for case LDC-PAS 2025-30, Lake Gibson Estates CPA. The request is to change the future land use designation from residential low to residential medium on approximately 2.55 acres on the north side of Daughtry Road. This subject parcel did appear before the board back in April and received a recommendation or a decision of denial. However, the request today is for the same future land use map designation change, but with a text amendment, which would specifically limit what is allowed to be built on the property. And that is in item number N3. Item number N3 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCT 2025-21, Lake Gibson Estates text amendment. And within the Land Development Code, the applicant is specifically proposing to restrict the parcel to 16 dwelling units. During our discussion two weeks ago at the first hearing, there was a question about some of the other uses that could be allowed on the property. The language in the staff report was a little bit confusing in that there is a chart of uses that are allowed by the different levels of review, administrative review, planning commission level three review, or board of county commissioners level four review. The ordinance specifically lists what you see on the screen here as prohibited uses, which means they would not be allowed at all with any level of review. And you can see those listed here from nursing homes to recreation to schools, et cetera. So I wanted to clarify that, that while the chart in the staff report did appear that there was a path to get some of these uses approved, the ordinance specifically makes them a prohibited use. Also, on Friday during our agenda review, there was discussion about the site plan and whether the site plan was binding or whether it would be limited to specifically it was on the site plan. While I mentioned that the site plan was not binding and that the structures and the overall design of the project could be moved, the applicant has agreed to provide additional clarification. And if you look at the red box on the screen, the ordinance right now specifically limits the development to 16 dwelling units. The applicant has specified that further to state the large text here on the bottom of the screen by adding that the 16 dwelling units may include no more than eight duplex buildings and no structure shall be higher than two stories. So they wanted to clarify that, that there was not an intent to provide any other type of dwelling units other than duplexes and the maximum height that would be contemplated on this site would be two stories or 25 feet. So with that, the Planning Commission did unanimously recommend approval of these items. And I would ask that we have separate motions going back to item N2 for adoption and then the text amendment corresponding that N3.
Okay, so now we'll go. You have questions?
Yes, Madam Chair, if I may. Mr. Zix, we'll just do...
N2 or N3 or both?
I guess technically... Well, I guess it's probably both. Just to make sure, as far as setback-wise, there's not any indication that we're... The site plan, Joan, I guess, fits within our setbacks as required, correct? There's no other exceptions made on setbacks?
So what is provided is not... It's a conceptual site plan. This is not a Level 2 engineered site plan. And at this point, we have no indication that they would be asking for relief from the setback. So during Level 2, they would comply with the provisions of the code. But that is conceptual and not a full engineered Level 2 at this point.
Understood. I just did want to see it come back and be five foot off the property line and be... Okay, very good. Thank you. That's all.
Any other question, discussion? Okay. Ms. Amber, do we have anybody speaking on this behalf? And we have the applicant or the... Sarah, do you want to speak on? Yes.
And just to make clear, Madam Chair, this is both public hearing for N2 and N3.
But we will vote on them separately. Good morning. For the record, Sarah Case. I'm with Next Level Planning and Permitting. My address is 3825 South Florida Avenue, and that is in Lakeland. And I just wanted to stand for any questions. As staff indicated, we worked after your agenda study on Friday just to give you that assurance. And we have agreed to limit 16 units, eight buildings, and no more than two stories. So that now is part of our land development code via this text amendment ordinance. And we are not asking for any deviation from the RM land use district, so standards when we go through the level two review. So I'll stand for any questions that you may have, and I appreciate your consideration.
Any questions for Sarah? Okay. Thank you, Sarah. Sarah, we have anyone wishing to speak on this topic on either N2 and N3? Are you coming with some names? Oh, okay. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the board. Let's do N2 first.
Motion for approval for LDC PAS 2025-30.
I have a first motion and a second. Any discussion, questions? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Now let's move on to N3. I have a motion and I have a second. Any questions or discussions? Madam Chair? Yes.
I just want to say, you know, I think it's important and I'm thankful that our land development division and the applicant have worked together to give the assurances that the community has expressed. So I appreciate you working through that.
Thank you. Anything else? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
Madam Chair, item number N4 is an expedited public hearing for case LD. CT 2025-23 alcohol separation requirements and hours land development code text amendment. This is the second reading in the adoption hearing of a proposed text amendment to change the hours of operation on Sunday for alcohol sales for both package sales of liquor and to move the time that consumption on premises can begin from 12 o'clock forward one hour to 11 o'clock. In addition, this amendment proposes to change the way that distance separations are measured from what we consider how a crow flies to a lawful pedestrian measurement, meaning that we would now measure from the front door as a pedestrian would walk down a sidewalk using a crosswalk and properly cross the street to get to the protected use of either a church or a school. And the third component would be reducing the measurements that we currently have for a distance separation. We believe that changing to the lawful pedestrian measurement would certainly provide the intended buffers and this amendment would put the county and the unincorporated portions of the county on par with what a number of our municipalities have as it relates to their alcohol sales hours, meaning that businesses within the unincorporated portion of the county are on an even playing field for that revenue. This is the adoption hearing. Your planning commission recommended approval six to one and following any questions or comments, staff recommends approval.
Any questions for staff? Okay. Hearing none. Amber, do we have anybody for this? Is anybody that wants to address the board on this subject? Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back to the board.
Motion for approval. Second.
I have a motion and a second. Any discussion questions? Hearing none. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
And Madam Chair, item number N5 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCT 2025-24, Power Line Landscape Buffers, Land Development Code Text Amendment. And this is intended to provide a new buffer type for power lines that exist. Currently, the buffer is the same whether a power line exists or does not exist. And as a result, when power lines are present, almost all of the applications must seek a waiver to provide the correct type of tree and the correct type of spacing to not interfere with those power lines. That provides uncertainty for an applicant and for an engineer to design a project. So, staff felt that a prescriptive buffer type would be in the benefit of both the electrical provider and the applicant in the county. It would also reduce that uncertainty and the unnecessary waiver process. So, your Planning Commission reviewed this and unanimously recommended approval. This is the second hearing in adoption. And following any questions or comments, staff recommends approval.
Any questions for staff? Seeing none. Amber, do we have anyone? And anybody wishing to speak or address the board on this topic? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the board.
Motion for approval.
Second. I have a motion and a second. Any further questions or discussions? Hearing none. All in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
That concludes the expedited portion. And I'll now turn it over to Mr. Peterson for our next.
Good morning, board members. We have before you a request for a community development district, Gardner Trails. It's for approximately 427 units. It's not part of the Point Siena DRI, but it is surrounded by it. It was approved by the board for a comprehensive plan amendment on April 16th. The Planning Commission approved a plan development on it on August 6th. It's in Toho, or Toho-Pico-Liga Water Authority's service area. As you can see, it's a piece missing out of the puzzle for Point Siena. It was changed to RL1 from ARR. And this is the plan development. Most important to this CDD application or petition is that the only road that the county will be maintaining is the connector road that goes through it. All other roads will be maintained by the CDD. And that is indicated in the revised petition. And as I mentioned before, Toho is the provider of water and wastewater to the area. With that, I'll state that it has met all the requirements for Section 190 of the Florida statutes. It's consistent with our comprehensive plan, has sufficient size, it's a good alternative source of funding, and it's compatible with service and facilities. And I'll stand for questions.
Any questions for staff? Thank you. Do we have the applicant, or? Yes. And then if you'll give me the people you have. Perfect. Thank you.
Good morning, Commissioners. Chris Loy of Klinsky-Van Wyke on behalf of the petitioner, Prince Point Siena, LLC. I have nothing extra to add, but I'm certainly happy to answer any questions that the commissioners have.
Any questions for Mr. Loy? Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the commission on this topic? Seeing none, I close the public hearing for this topic. And bring it back to the board. Motion for approval. I have a motion and a second. Any questions, discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners. For the record, Shonda Bennett with the Land Development Division. I'll be reviewing your last two public hearing items, 02 and 03, together, and asking for separate motions. This is a public hearing to adopt a large-scale comprehensive plan amendment, tax amendment, LDCPAL 2025-9, and a land development code, tax amendment, 2025-29. It's in both amendments to the 30% commercial cap in the Employment Center Future Land Use category in the U.S. 98 Selected Area Plan. And the outline of that SAP is on the left side of the screen. It's between Lakeland and Bartow. And in terms of the, for the public record, legal notice was published in the Winter Haven, Lakeland Sun on January 7th, and no response was received and submitted documents into the record to include application, justification, demonstration of need, impact assessment statement, staff report, ordinance, and the objections, recommendations, and comments report from Florida Commerce regarding the tax amendments. The comp plan is at the large scale, and we received no comments. A little bit of quick history. This SAP Selected Area Plan was first adopted in 2004, November. It was done with a working committee, and members of that committee had approached the Board of County Commissioners to request the Board to direct staff to complete the SAP as they were concerned about the growth that would happen between the two cities. The Employment Center, it provides a mix of uses of employment, professional office, and residential and commercial. There are these caps, though, to try to force that mixture of uses. But over time, there has been a concern with not enough commercial uses in Employment Center, which is the basis for the request. To go above that 30% with a conditional use, and we've had the discussion of whether it's a level 3 or a level 4, and that can provide some flexibility in terms of the mixture of uses. And a point is that this ability to go above the percent cap has already occurred in the Northridge Selected Area Plan, so it is consistent with another SAP within Polk County. Staff has had some good discussions with the applicant. The text that you see in the box on the top part of the slide, what's in yellow was what was first submitted to the board for your consideration, and what was transmitted was the language added in green, which is that the 30% cap can be exceeded with a conditional use. It's a level 4 review. And the land development code text amendment that you see below mirrored that language. But after transmittal, again, we talked to the applicant. So the request now is to remove the language in green from the comprehensive plan and have all the requirements for the different levels of review in the code, which are for parcels 10 or less. That's a level 3 review. For parcels that are above 10 are a level 4. And I circled the ECX districts that are above that acreage on the screen on the right. And then the other three are very small. They're smaller than 10 acres, as it is. Of course, anything in those circles, though, that are less than 10 acres that come in, they could come through with a level 3. But anything larger than 10 in those circled areas would come through with a level 4 review per the recommended language by the applicant. Staff does recommend approval of the request as well as the amendment. It inserts some flexibility. The comprehensive plan doesn't define level 4 or have level 4 anywhere else in the document, which is why staff is recommending that it stay with the land development code. The request of change allows some different levels of review based on intensity. And as I mentioned before, it is consistent with another selected area plan that we already have in the county in the northeast. And I'll stand for any questions.
Any questions?
Madam Chair?
Yes.
Just for clarity, so if you took ECX 5 that's a little over 25 acres and you had a project that was going to be only 9 acres of that 25, then it would not have to come for the level 4. Is that correct?
Right.
Right.
Or the language recommended by the applicant.
Right, which is why I don't like that language. That's why I recommended level 4 before. Okay, I just want to make sure because it's not beholden to the current acreage shown. We literally could take ECX 5 and split it up three different ways, all being less than 10 acres, and all of it would go under level 3. None of it would hit level 4, correct? If we went into suggested language, you could have three different projects in that 25-acre parcel, all of them being less than 10 acres. It would stay out of level 4. It would only be level 3 review, correct?
Yes, if that employment center has reached its 30% maximum.
Understood, right.
And none of those have.
Right, understood, okay.
Any other questions, comments? Okay. Amber, do we have anyone wishing to speak on this topic? Please move forward.
For the record, Shelton Rice, attorney with the law firm of Peterson & Myers, address 225 East Lemon Street, Lakeland, Florida. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. And Ms. Bennett did an excellent job of summarizing the case, the proposals, the changes, and how we got here. So I have the presentation. I could go through it just briefly, but I think instead I'll try to address Commissioner Scott's question directly. One proposal or change that could be made here that I think may address your concern is if we limited it to districts as opposed to acreage. The 10 acres that we came up with was really from the distinction between a large-scale and a small-scale comp plan amendment from days gone by and how that classification was done. Looking at this, if you changed it from parcels to districts, that would really limit it so that you couldn't have a piecemeal manipulation of this to keep it at a level 3. That was not the intent here. I think the intent is to make it so that significant changes that may have significant impacts would come as kind of a level 4 back to this county commission, but those smaller changes, relatively insignificant in size or smaller in size, could proceed without that. So we would propose it be maybe districts instead of parcels as is stated in the text. Otherwise, we respectfully request a favorable vote. Thank you.
Any questions?
Madam Chair. Ms. Bennett, if you could speak on just that topic of a district, so does that tie it to ECX 5? Like, as we're seeing it now, that would each one be the district is what he's referring to, or how is that?
Yes. I would recommend the language in green instead of saying four parcels, say four ECX districts less than 10 acres.
Okay. And there wouldn't be a way in the future to split. I'm not suggesting that they do this, but just again, looking at future ways to avoid a piecemeal situation and having adverse impacts at that point, there wouldn't be a way to split up an ECX or the district into sub-districts to circumvent this, correct?
I don't, and I can't see that right now, but to help answer that question, maybe I'll say that one of the ways that we've separated the districts, if you look between one, this one here, number one, and then this district here, number two, we did separate it with, you see the, that's Banana Creek going through the middle of it, we separate it by US-98, we separate it by collector roads, because that really separates those districts, so that's the way we've separated it at this point, that's how we would look at it, so based on that, I don't see that being a separate.
And the reason, no, go ahead. So, maybe that would still have to come to the board to separate the districts?
No, and, no, not, unless someone builds a creek or a collector road through it, but I don't see that happening, and actually, this, the first ECX district, that's, I think that's the one with the, no, yeah, that's the one with the car dealership in it, and the gas station, and the residential community, we consider the car dealership as employment, because it's got a significant employment base with a pretty high salary, the one south of Banana Creek, that's with several different uses in the middle, and there is, but not much of, so neither of those really have a lot of commercial district, they're well below the 30%, but this district tier, which is really the basis of what generated this request, perhaps it helps, before this SAP was adopted, that was linear commercial corridor, it was very narrow, and if you look at all the other ECX districts, a lot of the other ECX districts, they're much wider and have a lot more depth. This is difficult, I think, really, to provide a significant employment base for which employment center was intended.
Yes, I'm, and I get, for ECX6, I know that was the basis of this, and I don't have heartburn over that particular five and a half acres, what I do have potential heartburn over is like ECX4, it's off the highway by a significant distance, like those, even though it's a very small parcel, it could be an adverse impact, so that's why I was saying before, why don't we just do level four on all these, if we want to exempt ECX6 from it, then I'm not even opposed to that amendment, but again, looking at how impacts can be to communities that are not on the highway by commercial operations that's greater than 30% only to go to Plan Commission, the voice doesn't get heard the same at the Plan Commission as it does BOCC for people that are surrounding that community, and that's my concern.
I completely understand that. One more food for thought. ECX3 and 4, if you look at it, they're both at intersections of roads, which is what the comprehensive plan sets out where commercial is supposed to go based on activity centers. And they're quite small.
I get that. Every neighborhood and every community is different. So again, I have intersections by my house. I don't want to necessarily have a gas station at the corner. Some do. Some it's laid out for that, right? So it's looking at future-wise what's simplest for us to apply. I'm not looking to be administratively burdensome, but the same token, those in the community should have the best say for their communities if there is an opinion to be had. So that's, again, why I've gone to that level four. So is there a way that we can do ECX6 separate from the others and have everything else be at level four? Is there only options what we're presenting here for today? Again, trying to make it simple without overcomplicating. I'm just looking at...
Honestly, I struggle with that one because why we might get a request that ECX3 and 4 come to the board for an exemption. So I think the language proposed is consistent amongst all ECXs.
And that's where I've gone before, just to level four, and then you don't have to worry about the differentiation between them, is why I had suggested that before.
Have you opened and closed the public portion? We have not. We haven't. Okay. I just didn't know. I couldn't remember where we were.
So did you just ask a question and you're waiting for an answer?
Just more so do we... I wanted to keep this simple. I wasn't looking at making it complex, the same token, just to give it to where it's the people of the community have the most transparency and the BCC level four meeting gets that to a community where a level three at a playing commission does not get the same attention if it's something major that impacts the community. And the bigger parcels were the biggest concern. That's where I brought that up before.
Madam Chair. I think this is the second, if not third time, and I am just a bit frustrated in that we had this discussion, we came to another meeting, which has brought us here. There's been discussion prior to this, and now here we are at the meeting and we're asking for yet another change, which I don't think is fair to our staff or the applicant, because it just seems like we moved the ball only to say, oh, well, I want you to move the ball here now. So I would imagine it's very frustrating for the staff and the applicant at this point to be where we are.
My change was very... Madam Chair, for me, my change was requesting level four. The applicant submitted an alternate. So just be specific. I haven't asked for anything different. I was looking at if the applicant's asking for something different, if we can still work with them. But then I would stand firm. My former recommendation was a level four, and it's simple. That's level four for all of them. Same request I had before.
Well, let's see if there's anybody else, anybody else that wants to address the board on this topic. Seeing none, then I close the public hearing and bring it back to the board so we can have our discussion.
I just want to remind everybody that was for 02 and 03.
Yes, 02. But we're going to vote for them individually. Yes, ma'am. Okay.
Which piece is... Which one is it that you have concern about? Five? Well... No, no, no.
It was... This originated from...
The one that's off the road.
Right. Just the one... Because, again, a couple meetings prior, we had LCC that was up in the northern part of the county. We said we can't have commercial operations outside of those LCC corridors because we don't want it going and bleeding into residential areas. Commercial activities that are more intense. So, for that particular consistency, I was looking at, okay, how does that apply to 98 here? That was also 98 the other week. But it was... This is further off the highway without really that guardrail of where...
How far off the highway is it?
Well, the larger parcels go... What's the intersection then?
That's the entrance into the Highland City Town Center off Clubhouse.
Oh, okay. All right.
Not adjacent to residential.
Yes.
And if I may, Madam Chair, I think the first step is go through the comprehensive plan, whether or not the board's agreeable to just removing the level four out. And then the text amendment is the one we're really having an issue with that we're discussing. So, to take up O2, whether or not the board is agreeable just to remove that level four out. And then level... The next one would be the discussion regarding the different levels. Am I correct?
Commissioner Braswell, you wanted to... Okay. Go ahead.
Second.
Okay. So, I have a motion and a second on O2. Uh, any other discussion or questions? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries for LDCPAL 20259 EXCPA. I just want to make sure we have the right one for the approval. Okay. Now, we're going to move on to O3.
And kind of make a motion for approval for O3, but to exempt the 10 acres or less, leave it as a level four. So, we ought to remove... We added back... We added in this 10-acre deal, but again, we're saying that it's not a direct tie to what we have in our current plan. So, I'm going to say all these parcels would be a level four, as I suggested a few meetings ago.
So, I have a motion for O3. Second?
Okay. So... It will fail due to lack of a second at this time.
I make a motion for approval and change that, where it says parcels less than 10 acres refer to the ECX district numbers.
And that would be as proposed by the applicant?
As proposed by the applicant.
I'll second that.
Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any questions, discussion on that?
Just confirm. That goes to our districts. Just terminology-wise, ECX and districts would be that same reference, right? So, ECX-5 would stay, ECX-5 is a total area, is what we're talking about, right?
Yes.
Okay. Is that correct? My correct? Correct. Ms. Beginger. Okay.
Any other questions? All right. Hearing none, all in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I believe that's all the public hearings at this time.
Now, we open it up for general public and audience to be heard. So, do we have? Yes. I will go through the ones that I have, filled out the cards, and then after that, I'll ask if anybody else has anything to say. We'll start with Becky Bywater.
Ms. Becky Bywater, I live in South Lakeland, and thank you for your attention this morning. And you'll give me the whole address? We are on public television. I have a right to privacy, not to give my street.
She can be required to give her address.
Yeah. We're requiring you to give us the address.
Are you all going to introduce yourself and give your address?
Probably.
I live at 916 Brookwood Drive, Lakeland. Thank you. I would like to bring to your attention how long Polk County Animal Control has been in the radar of not just animal advocacy groups here today, but all of the ones that have here before us. A fellow advocate compiled a list of TV and newspaper reports going back to February 2019. I admit I was shocked and dismayed to think of how many animals have suffered in these past seven years and the eight years that the University of Florida has documented our animal control as the highest kill shelter in the state of Florida. Between 2019 and 24, there were four TV reports starting in 2019 with a desire to become a no-kill county. Well, we know how that did not work out. Beginning in 2025 and to date, I will give you the breakdown of the reports by journalists about the conditions at the Polk County Animal Control. I've emailed you a list with the links should you like to listen or read any of them, but I would suspect not because none of them are glowing accounts. From 19 to 24, there were four TV station reports. The ledger total to date has done seven articles, one of which on January 5 of 2026. Mid-Florida newspapers, two articles. Orlando Sentinel, one article. That was on 11-29-25. Tampa Bay 28 News, six reports, one on January 8 of 2026. Fox 13 News, two reports. That is a total of 22. This does not include the hundreds and probably thousands of social media posts. How can this not be embarrassing? That's not the first time I've asked you this. This is a new year and a new time for you to make a difference for our animal population. And for those who were caught on video saying that we, quote, people are frustrating, I just wanted to share with you that you have a whole new list that you can complain with frustrations. Thank you.
Thank you. Next, we have Kay Bork.
Good morning. My name is Kay Bork. I live at 1133 Brook Road in Fort Meade. I've given you a copy of this presentation that's showing, and on the back of it, you'll actually find some additional details about the different components of the plan. I want to share a roadmap with you that can be used for Polk County Animal Control to reform the shelter system. Slide two, please. Two decades ago, to think that a shelter could achieve a 90% live release rate was a little more than a dream. Yet today, hundreds of cities and towns across the U.S. have placement rates above 90% at open admission municipal shelters. A third of Florida counties have a 90% better rate. This can be reality in Polk County, too. Our journey forward begins with a decision by shelter leadership to replace the existing model with modern programs. In line with the humane, progressive values of Polk County residents. These programs are intended to, one, reduce birth rates, thereby reducing shelter intake. Two, increase placements, whether through adoptions, fosters, rescues, or transports to out-of-state partners. And provide resources so that responsible pet owners can keep their animals. Slide three, please. As these programs are implemented, we must recognize that our shelter facility is outdated and failing the most vulnerable lives in our care, as well as those who are trying to care for them. Just as Polk County has continued to update county buildings when it makes sense, or tear down and build new when it makes sense, we must give the same consideration to the almost 40-year-old animal shelter facility. Then, to fully provide a life-saving guarantee for all animals who are not irremediably suffering, we must put in place comprehensive vaccination, handling, cleaning, socialization, and care policies to prevent animals from getting sick. And for those that come to the shelter sick or injured, we must rehabilitate them. Next slide. The programs and services are identified in this diagram. I admit it looks a bit scary. Programs that have some start in the Polk County system are highlighted in the yellow-green mix. You can see that we have a ways to go, but the good news is that this is a roadmap that can be expanded with all the details of each of the programs as we move towards saving as many lives as we can. I'll highlight just a couple of these. Sterilization, absolutely imperative. High volume, low cost, dogs and community cats. This is key to reduce the number of animals entering the shelter system. And then rescue groups. We already have great partnerships with local groups, but it can be expanded to out-of-state transports. And adoptions, providing extended shelter hours, evening and weekends, and effective marketing for animals and adoption events can add to what's already started. Next slide. Finally, while shelter leadership drives the initiatives, it's the community that extends the safety net of care. Our Polk County shelter sees many of us as adversaries rather than valued partners. Yet there are many community members ready to partner to make Polk County shelter the best it can be. Thank you. Thank you.
Next we have Debbie Hicks.
Good morning. Debbie Hicks, 236 Alderman Road. I have so much to say. I'm going to ramble and I apologize. I appreciate everything you guys do. I've listened to a lot. I've listened to land who has come back in here, people coming back in here and getting more and more houses on land. A lot of the land is wooded. There's trees on this thing. You let them knock down all the mature trees to put up trees that are about two years old, three years old, whatever. Nothing can land in them. The bees can't make a home in them. You know, Polk County Animal Shelter, when you increase the amount of units on these lands, you've got more pets coming in these lands. You've got money you're putting into recreation facilities that aren't used, but I don't know what, maybe a third of the time, a third of the day in a 40-year-old facility is used 24-7. The animals don't get out. I volunteered there for four years, two days a week, four to seven hours, four to five hours. I watched rats run along the drainage system. It was just their little way of moving around and everything. It's not anybody's fault except that the facility is ancient. We need to get it done. An advisory committee. There's so many things the county would do. The people love the animals. They want to help. That's how these rescue. These rescues put in. I've got two rescues now. I've had 15 over the last 20 years. We put our money to keep them from going. We want to keep these animals from going to animal control. We want to do that. There's so many ways. We need an advisory committee. But I want to ask you something. If you do a... Well, when you do an advisory committee, can we talk to them? Is it like it is here where we just get to say something and we don't get anything back? If you... When you do an advisory committee, which will happen, you can only push it so far, I pray that we have somebody to talk to. Thank you.
Thank you. Next, I have Christine Allberg.
Good morning. My name is Kristen Allberg. I live at 633 Green Cove Terrace, Altamont Springs, Seminole County. Thank you. I want to first apologize to you, Madam Chairman, because I'm in rare form today. I got this letter from somebody. Her name is Linda Panoesa. It's dated May 7th, 2021. She's been writing to you guys for help with no answers. She wrote to the sheriff and she wrote to directly to Commissioner Broswell. And I do have the letters. I'm sure you can find them because they're public record. I was going to read her letter just to remind you, but a few things have come up. I don't know if you saw her on Fox 13 recently, Tampa Bay, right after Christmas time. There's a gentleman who adopted a six-week-old puppy from Polk County for his kids, gave it to them for Christmas, found out there was something wrong with the puppy. Long story short, they had to euthanize him because he had a massive lung infection. And I guarantee it, it has to do with that landfill. Something else came up with me. These ladies, this letter, it's been, what, five, six years now, and nothing has been done. And why has nothing been done? Because of our Commissioner Broswell. Why do I say that? Because I'm going to remind him of what he said. These people who frustrate our meetings, especially these animal people, I find very frustrating. They waste our time and accomplish nothing. Well, nothing gets accomplished. You can't even look at me. Nothing gets accomplished.
Are you accomplishing anything right now?
Oh, I sure am. I sure am. You know why? Because I'm not writing letters anymore. I've already contacted news stations. And they are happy to post your video on the news, along with our videos. And how long we've been begging for help. So I've accomplished something, Commissioner Broswell. You'll see it on the news. I've contacted every newspaper. And I've contacted every news station. And again, I do apologize to you. It's not directed towards anybody else in here but you. You shouldn't have said what you said. Because I did attach your video. And I did send it to all the news stations. And I'm not going to thank you for your time. No, not today.
Thank you. Next, I have Joanna Allende.
Good morning. My name is Joanna Mukai Allende, 109 Sandburg Lane, Winter Haven. So I've missed a few meetings. But I've been reflecting on how to present a compelling case for animal welfare in three minutes. So many of us have tried to appeal through compassion. We have given data, statistics, solutions that are feasible. I mean, other counties have shown success. And some of the things we're requesting. And, yes, there's always going to be a counterargument to anything. Take example, coffee. Coffee is good for you. Coffee is bad for you. Eggs. You know, anything like that will have a good and bad. But I guess, you know, we're all trying to just find balance. And, unfortunately, the scales currently tip heavily against animals in Polk County. You know, high euthanasia rate. You've heard it all. One that stood out to me was Miami-Dade has three times more, our population. Their population is three times more than ours. But in 2024 alone, our animal control killed 5,000 animals. That's 100 animals a week. That's kind of hard to swallow. We can agree there's something wrong there. So how do we find the balance? I know it's not going to happen overnight. But how can we start somewhere? You know, this is the year, 2026. I heard you guys say that this falls under the sheriff's jurisdiction, like animal control in particular. But as commissioners, is there a way that you guys can advocate for us? You guys have the power, the ability to, you know, allocate funds for affordable vouchers. You know, I spend my own money to trap, neuter, and vaccinate cats, lose cats. In my busy day, I work full-time. I took the time to be here because this is very important to me. So I'm just trying to figure out what steps can we take together. And I never, I've always loved animals, but I never really became so passionate until I started volunteering for Polk County Bully Project. And I just kind of saw how bad it is. And, you know, at this time, I'm happy to say I've planned a fundraiser that raised $40,000 for them in one fundraiser. Because that's how many people support us in this community. And then recently, I started trapping for a street cat project. So that's a thing now for me. But it almost feels like, you know, that gif where the flood is coming and there's this guy that has a bucket that's just trying to put it back into where the flood is coming. And that's just kind of how it feels. So we may be asking for, like, a dam for you guys to build. But maybe we can start with, like, a canal. Just something to help us out. You know, as we prayed earlier, let's work to bridge the division between each other. Thank you. Thank you.
Next, I have Taryn Wadley.
My name's Taryn Wadley, 3605 Avenue T, Northwest Winter Haven. I spoke to a few of y'all before. And some of y'all might want to show you these old pictures. This is not fish. They don't call it that no more. They do when they speak about gang fish. They call it phosphorus these days. This was two of 27 boatloads caught 100,000 pounds out of Lake Hancock back then. That right there is a seven-year-old body of water. We caught 20,000 pounds of placostomus then. That fish kill y'all had over there in Lake Hunter, I quit fishing that lake about 25 years ago because I caught 10,000 pounds of placostomus out of there. I've requested to do different types of any kind of study, you know, to comparisons. Since FWC hasn't targeted fish that's nothing but gang fish, and they use a shocking machine, and it only covers the top surface of the water, all these fish swim on the bottom column of the water, and they haven't targeted none of these species, shad, anything for 53 years. Now, whenever I went to the water district up there in St. John's and I talked to them about that, that also lets them know that they don't know how to catch these fish. They don't know nothing about them because they haven't targeted them for 53 years. Whenever you think of low dissolved oxygen creating a fish kill, well, of course it should. If you haven't been catching the fish out of there, the fish are going to just multiply and multiply until there's no oxygen, and then it creates a fish kill. My first day in the St. John's River, being as we, you know, we don't really want to do comparisons, but we caught 28,000 pounds of tilapia. You know how many gang fish we caught? We caught 100 pounds. Caught 100 pounds of shad, 100 pounds of gar. That's relative abundance, right? It took the water district two years to convince FWC to let us go in there to see if that's what's causing the problem with the water quality, creating blue-green algae and all this and all that. We went in Lake Florence, little old itty-bitty lake. My boys was tough that day. We fished ankle-deep water. I got them on video right here if you want to look at it. You know how many pounds we caught in ankle-deep water in 35 acres? 7,500 pounds of fish. Well, the water table came up after that. Came up to about this deep. You know what I caught the second day I went in that lake? 33,000 pounds of tilapia. Wasn't hardly no-game fish there. This is all recorded by the water district of the St. John's. You can talk to Randy Fink. He'll be more than happy to let you know it. Remember, Stephen Miller, he's also the guy that's over the water district that fights for us to go. He's trying to get a subsidy for us. A lot of these lakes that are suffering fish kills is because they're not getting fished. And I've pointed them out to Bill before, but, you know, I don't mind fishing the lakes, but I want to get paid for the fish that I catch. I don't want to have to catch 3,000 pounds of tilapia and catch 10,000 pounds of placostumus and got to throw them back, and it takes us six or eight hours to throw them back. We don't need a county that's going to use alum and rote none and all this other stuff. I'd like to invite y'all to go fishing.
Thank you. Appreciate your time.
I've got a representative going to be going with us.
Next is Onalda Maslin. I'm sorry. They don't say mine either. They don't say my name right either. Trust me.
You did it right. I appreciate that. Are you ready?
Yes. Go ahead and say it. I want to hear you say your name.
Onalda Maslin. Okay. I'm not fond of it, but I've got it. But anyways, I've been looking for... Let me hear your address, please. Oh. Yes. 3-4-7 Putter Circle, Winter Haven, Florida. Thank you. I've been looking for a doxy. Am I too loud? You're good. You're good. For a doxy, a dachshund, and a cat or kitty for a while, and I thought, what better place than to stop at Polk County Shelter, which I did the other day. Unfortunately, it was one of the coldest days of the year, but I stopped at the shelter, and I went into the office, which was heated, and there were officers sitting there, and they were all very professional, answered my questions, very pleasant, and I gave them my... They asked for an ID, which I don't know why, but then we proceeded to go look for a cat or a doxy, and before entering, there's a sign there, if you're aware of it, it says, in red, big bad dog, big bad dog, and I said, well, what does that mean, big bad dog? And they said, they just kind of laughed it off and said, well, there's a big bad dog in there, and I won't say what I thought about it, but I thought that was sort of unusual. So we proceeded to go inside and look at the kitties first, and the kitty I found was sick, very sickly, and I pointed that out and gave it to the inspector or officer, and I said, it's awfully cold in here. Do you have any heat? And she pointed out that they had infrared light heating above, and I says, well, the heat's going up, it's not coming down, and it's cold in here. Well, we also place towels where they can lie down. I thought, well, a towel doesn't keep you warm. So then we proceeded to walk around, and they had louvers there where cold air was coming in. I said, don't you cover that up at night? Well, we put cardboard down. I says, well, I won't see any cardboard. And then later on, we walked, looked at the dogs, and that was the same thing. It was awfully cold. So coming back, I said, all these louvers, that bothers me, because it's like leaving your windows open at night, and you're freezing, and all the dogs were shivering, the cats were cold. And I said, why don't you just close them? She says, we can't. I said, what do you mean you can't? Where's the crank? Well, we can't close them. So all that cold air is coming in, infrared light, and the place is cold and damp and miserable. And then I thought of my dogs, my little puppy dogs and my cat at home, sleeping under the blanket. And they're warm, and they're secure, and I couldn't get it out of my head. I'm speaking from my heart today. I can't get it out of my head. Those animals are suffering in the cold all night, shaking, and they're sick, and they're ill. And we can get together. We can do better. We can do so much better in Polk County if we can all get together and do something and change this and make it the top-notch shelter in not only Florida but the U.S. I know you can all do it, and I thank you for listening to me, and I apologize. But like I said, I'm speaking from the heart. And I thank you so much for your time and for getting my name right. Thank you. Thank you.
Next is James Abercrombie.
Good morning. James Abercrombie for the record. 27.37 gives me the only Galloway Road. The last meeting I was here, I didn't get to finish what I had to say, so I'm going to start over. It was the meeting for the sand mine and the controversies going on between the spokesperson, between the planning commissioners and Mr. Hall. Derek Hall? Bart Hall. Bart Allen. I'm sorry. Okay. He seemed to have come in here and taken over that meeting. He did his presentation, all that stuff. And once again, he argued with Mr. Smut. He also argued with the attorney on the staff. He basically tried to take over the meeting, but yet he still was able to do his rebuttal at the end of the program. I don't understand all that. I couldn't do that. I mean, I come up here for three minutes. That's all I get. I got to go. Then you can talk about me. That's the way it goes. I understand that. Now, not only did he try to run the meeting, he does a lot around here. He's involved in a lot of business in this building. I understand he's on a committee for the conference of plan. He's helping make the rules that you guys are supposed to enforce, but yet he stands here and defends his own rules. That sounds like conflict defenses to me, folks. He does a lot of that here. I've seen him in here quite often. I also saw another Peterson and Myers attorney this morning. They must be infested in this building. I don't understand. They're running this stuff. Mr. Mink is actually the one running the place. You know that. As of the meeting last week, let me think a minute. Yeah. Mr. Scott was the one that offered a grievance against Mr. Allen for bringing Mr. Peterson up to testify for him in this case. And that's what he did, brought him up to testify in the case. Mr. Scott objected to it. Mr. Mink sat right there and explained why Mr. Allen felt the way that he did, that he could bring him up there and do what he's supposed to do. These attorneys are running this place, folks, inside and out. Once again, they're on the committees. How's that happen? I can't get on one of them myself because I'm too stupid. I don't understand everything you guys are talking about, even though I won my case in 2004, 100%. 100% I won it, fighting four different attorneys on my own.
Thank you, Mr. Abakambi. That's all the ones that I have in the cards. Is there anybody else, excuse me, that wishes to address the board? Seeing none, then I closed the public hearing. And we are adjourned. Yes, ma'am.